Penn & Teller - The Bible Myth

Necrosis

It wasn't my intention to say you were talking about the total elimination of religion. I just made the statement that if were totally removed that it would not matter that much.

It's a misconception that Hitler only targeted Jews. The fact is anyone who was against his ideals was thrown into concentration camps.

http://www.holocaustforgotten.com/fivmil.htm

Maddogg6

yesh - um does ANYONE here bother even try to comprehend simple statements.

I didn't say 'eliminate' religion.

And I said hitler 'targeted' - I made no mention of exclusivity.

Thats 3 time now I had to explain my point that my 12 year old niece comprehended the original statement...
pfff... you guys are impossible to have a rational debate with... Seems more like trolling.

Necrosis

Like you being unable to comprehend referencing a color for an example?

par·tic·u·lar

• 1. of or pertaining to a single or specific person, thing, group, class, occasion, etc., rather than to others or all; special rather than general: one's particular interests in books.
• 2. immediately present or under consideration; in this specific instance or place: Look at this particular clause in the contract.
• 3. distinguished or different from others or from the ordinary; noteworthy; marked; unusual: She sang with particular warmth at last evening's concert.
• 4. exceptional or especial: Take particular pains with this job.
• 5. being such in an exceptional degree: a particular friend of mine.
• 6. dealing with or giving details, as an account or description, of a person; detailed; minute.
• 7. exceptionally selective, attentive, or exacting; fastidious; fussy: to be particular about one's food.
• 8. Logic. a. not general; referring to an indefinite part of a whole class.
  b. (of a proposition) containing only existential quantifiers. c. partaking of the nature of an individual as opposed to a class.
• 9. Law. a. noting an estate that precedes a future or ultimate ownership, as lands devised to a widow during her lifetime and after that to her children.
  b. noting the tenant of such an estate.
• 10. an individual or distinct part, as an item of a list or enumeration.
• 11. Usually, particulars. specific points, details, or circumstances: to give an investigator the particulars of a case.
• 12. Logic. an individual or a specific group within a general class.
• 13. in particular, particularly; specifically; especially: There is one book in particular that may help you.

I DID say eliminate in relation to your reduction goal of the high passion for religion. Meaning your goal is pointless. However, you are too dense to comprehend what I tell you or even remotely consider what I say.

You knit-pick on other people's wording, but you don't have to be held to the same standards? That is what I call the pot calling the kettle black.

Maddogg6

In the spirit of something you posted - 'the kettles black if I say it is'.

I knit pick words - because they were relevant to the discussion.
I ,on the other hand - have had to re-state a simple point because you obviously (by your response) didnt get it.

And I already know the definition of particular (a link would have been better btw) - like
'This guy in particular is trolling'. - correct right?

Now... back on topic. I'll ask again...

If there are false statements made in the bible - WHY is it not possible there are more of the same in the bible we cant prove?

BWX

Here's a better question:

Why are you so condescending, rude, and angry? It almost sounds like something bad happened at your church... and you hate all things having to do with religion of any kind because of it. There's definitely some underlying issues there.. Even on the anti-God forum that is DH I've only seen a few as miserable as you are when you start talking about God or religion. I'm not sure if you know this or not but you are completely transparent.

There is a lot of pent up hostility that comes out in the form of rambling unorganized mini anti-religious hate speeches targeted at anyone you think has any respect for people who believe in ANY god. My question is WHY? What in the world happened to you that you hate anything that has anything to do with church or God or religion? It's completely irrational.

Spending your time trying to insult people you don't even know, so as you can- as you say "make people less passionate about religion or religious views by making them doubt their beliefs" or whatever crazy thing you said..... That is totally messed up.


EDIT- and don't think for a second I am just trying to flame or troll, I am seriously curios about what happened because I've come to the conclusion that SOMETHING had to have happened. I have heard those nuns can be really nasty at times.. maybe they got to you?

Maddogg6

No thats an off topic question - to avoid MY legitimate ON TOPIC one ??..

And again with assumptions this time Im angry - when I'm not.
Somewhat frustrated that my points get twisted and my posts get edited to change context. But no, not angry.

And I'm only condescending to those who are condescending, generalizing (aka prejudice) - and/or presumptuous first. Otherwise, read my other responses to 'RATIONAL' posts that make a legitimate point. I return in kind. With few exceptions, I treat people the way they treat me. Pretty simple and common concept of inter-human behavior - but I AM human and not infallible, thus the exceptions. I'm big enough to admit I'm capable of mistakes.

Now, Ill supply an answer to your rather rude toned, off topic and long winded question.

I assume what your really asking why do I believe the way I do.?
(why I am angry?? - I cant answer , because I am not angry)

well, why do you believe the way you do?

Heres my GUESS (and no, I didn't have abusive nuns btw)
Your beliefs were pushed onto you since birth, much like catholicism was onto me.

My answer is:

I simply got disgusted with the multitudes of ridiculous answers I got - when it was obviously (even as a pre-teen) something they did not know. (I add - they weren't easy questions - 'Why do Asians have different eyes? why are Africans black?, why is the sky blue?) Many of which, science has responded with a much more humble and logical 'WE THINK/EVIDENCE POINTS TO... because.....' - instead of the staunch religious based response like 'IT IS ...., and to question it is blasphemous' I had gotten so many times.

Then, over time I learned things like - how con artists operate and manipulate others - and started noticing frightening parallels with ideas preached in church/study. Things like 'guilt' and 'fear' started looking more and more like such mechanisms for manipulation.

Then, also learning more about the LONG history of killing/violence for religion/god - just seems like SUCH hypocrisy.. that still goes on today.

Then, as an adult - and after more and more life experiences, conversations with those of other faiths, I started coming up with my own ideas that just made more sense TO ME - than much of what was preached to me in church.

Now - Hitler's 'science research' - well - thats was as much about science, as Warren Jeffs is about mormonism.

Those that die in the name of science - More often, the intent is to gain knowledge and MANY MANY times we did/do gain knowledge, and in many cases, that new knowledge is used to help more people than it harmed. - what do we gain from a holy war?

Abortion - is another debate I wont touch on much here. Other than, typically its NOT in the name of science - but more in the name of:
economics: 'I cant afford a baby'
ignorance: 'I didnt know I could get pregnant'
maturity: 'Im too young to have a baby'.
All the above are also selfish IMO.

Yes, sometimes abortion IS a matter of science - like to save the mother from death or a baby made from rape - but is much more rare than all those irresponsible people who simply didn't think before they had sex.

But Ill add my opinion - its a shame a baby gets aborted when, willing and able 'would be good parents' are waiting on a long list to adopt.

Bottom line - if religious ideas are kept private and personal - they would never be argued - and thus, fewer people would die over these differences in 'belief' (aka things that are not provable either way) - how is that idea crazy?

edit>
and non-sense like this would not happen either.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/12/21/ki...rss_topstories
Where a mother killed her 3 children - to get her kids into heaven.
<end edit


Again - who argues over 'love thy neighbor' ? Very few Im sure.
But how many people argue, and sometimes die, over the opinions of 'what happens after we die'? Historically - millions - and STILL counting.

PS - my use of caps - is NOT a sign of anger - BUT TO HIGHLIGHT A POINT.
Which you seem to be mis-interpreting for anger.

Also, shelf the rude tone and assumptions, and we can have a civil conversation.

Necrosis

OT: Ha nice one, but you don't decide what I think is relevant. If you say it is black then to YOU it is. BTW, you really need to learn when some one is testing you or when your example for your logic is flawed. Never assume you know what some one else is thinking.

Maddogg6

Make a rational, understandable and relative point - and I'll address it.
Did you have one?

SFOSOK

blah blah blah

I rule you

SFOSOK

woohoo sweet! over 6,000 posts!

Necrosis

Yes, when a statement is made you can't knock down easily you say it's not relevant to the debate. How convenient.

Necrosis

New topic.

If there is books removed from the bible. Should those books now be added back in?

Maddogg6

Ok - try again and make a understandable, rational and relevant point.

Or do you have one - besides criticizing my debating ability??

Things like - 'Its relevant if I say is relevant' - instead of backing it up with something - is NOT rational - as well as childish.

Necrosis

In all this time I've been waiting on you to make an understandable, rational, and relevant point. I wasn't criticizing you prior but if any one says any thing that goes against what you say you dismiss it. Don't cite people for the very same actions/reactions you do. You don't show the flaw in their logic but look for insignificant points to try to derail them. Think about the statement or suggestions some one makes. Remember the color deal? You didn't think about the question, you simply said color is a measurement. All I was trying show you was using the simple logic if:

A. Some one says there is a god.
B. Some one asks to prove there is a god.
C. Person A can not prove there is a god.
D. Person B thus god does not exist.

There are too many anomalies to the issue to use such simple logic. I then revise my reply with an appropriate example. You then state how science is open-minded, and berate religion. Yet you don't answer the question but say it's a "theory" so it’s excused.

You state all people who have religion do not question any thing in their faith. Isn’t the whole point to studying the bible is to learn why you should believe? If you can't find your own reasons to believe then you don't. It's really that simple, and is the same thing you did.

It’s a sad fact but the reason why there is so much violence is human nature. You can blame satan or say it’s our evolved ape brains, but the out come would still be the same. It would be like saying to stop the deaths from AIDS; you just round up all the people with HIV and shoot them in the back of the head.

My point always has been not that god exists but there is a lack of evidence either way. What I will say is science has an edge because more of it can be proven but not all.

SFOSOK

Man, I'm so awesome.



I rock!

Maddogg6

You say that like ALL i did was point out stupid grammar or spelling mistakes.
I pointed out significant points - posted words ARE ALL I can go by, if its not clear... well, I cant read minds. And, you continued to argue a ridiculous point that you made.

I DID think about it - I seen it WAS irrelevant and I stated why - not JUST it was irrelevant... I backed it up with facts. Color IS measurable - and dark matter isn't referred to a 'fact', but 'theory' - And that no one kills over colors or dark matter either. And yes- the repercussions/implications are VERY significant.

I hope you do you see a difference there? - petty - I know, but I want to make sure were saying the same thing here, which I DO think we are. It also demonstrates how your NOT always clear with your ideas.

And - and thats exactly the same idea I said with;
Right? - ok - so we can move on.....

True... BUT, Why should we NOT use the simple 'burden of proof' system as is our legal system? - its THE best system we have to convict, at times sentence to death with - when a lot of evidence is not 100% provable, but ONLY provable 'beyond reasonable doubt' in court.

My position: if its the best thing to use to put someone to death or in jail - its good enough for me to base my beliefs on. As, there isn't any better system.
And thats not just MY opinion, but much of the free worlds as well. Right?

Me, I believe everything as a '% of probability'.

Now, imagine our court system based on 'faith'...
(truncated to save space)
Me: 'I accuse necrosis of murder'
Judge: 'What proof do you have of this'
Me: 'My priest says god told him so'
Judge: 'Ok I sentence necrosis to death for murder'

Would you prescribe to such a system????
So why would I use the SAME system for my beliefs?
Remember - beliefs are things that are not provable like; The ark, the red sea, adam and eve, sodom and gamorah (spelling??) etc..
When its the moral message thats most important anyway.

I don't think I said 'all' in that sense - I rarely use such absolute terms like that... but ok - I'll rephrase - Most people that I have met, that are passionate in their religious views, don't question their beliefs.

AND yes - I firmly believe - That, if one question their beliefs - they would not kill over them - Please explain the fault in my logic there?
Can you imagine someone killing in the name of god if he 'sort of' believes in god? - I don't. And, thats my WHOLE point right there.

OK - I'll agree ... BUT I'll interject that; science claims that which is not yet proven, is a 'theory' and is open to changes.

Consider:
Does it say in the bible - 'we think moses made an ark' - no, its stated as an actual event / fact. (people are looking for the ark right?)
When my position is: Who cares about the damn ark, what about the lesson that story teaches'?

- just curious - Do you know what that lesson is?

Now, If your saying that; if not for religion, people will just find a new reason to kill - well, I dis agree - We should at least try it and see - what would we loose if we tried? - we have more to gain.
Sure - people would still kill, but I propose - less.

And again - if there are false statements in the bible- WHY is it so impossible that more of the same exists in the bible we cant, or have not proven yet?

(*wonders why theres no takers on that yet*)

Maddogg6

Um...
http://www.driverheaven.net/showpost...3&postcount=64

SFOSOK

Ok ok, I'll let ya'll continue with your bickering without my meager attempts to slow and defuse it.

But I just want to let you know, I'm not learning anything from this thread.