Penn & Teller - The Bible Myth

jp306

I had all of 3 rep points before I posted this video and someone that just said Penn and Teller are jerks in the comment box took them all from me.

EDIT: Thank you Necrosis and others for giving me my rep points back.

Esaz666

God does not exist in the way people exist,
trying to disprove god with our arguments or prove god is allways going to go in a futile circle.
Belief is a creation of mans mind,
You can only become aware of god you cannot make god real or test for the presence of god and if the god in question is a creation of belief then that is all it will be,just a consolation.
Is god mind created or real?
God is just the ultimate being.
We can try to understand but it is impossible, blessed are those who fail to understand!
but it is allways good to talk about these things,try not to get upset with each other, friends!

Tinkerhell

Wow.
9 pages of posts and only 3 solitary posts that I held any relevance in my opinion (one of which was SFOSOK's "interruption" posts).
I sometimes like arguing but you guys must LOVE arguing.

Continue on.

SFOSOK

Thats amazing, I gave up shortly after I saw we were discussing something other than topic, which was pretty much after we wre all the way through. I totally forget what your opinion was on this and I will probably state something later tonight if I'm not too damn tired.

Esaz666

Heh,
everyone loves a good argument about this kind of thing!,
Its good to hear what different people think,it has gone well off the topic of
penn and tellers bible bashin( I thought it was a bit rough, myself ).

Maddogg6

eh... I gave up when no one seems to be able to, or want to, answer my on topic question of:
Seems most (with opposition to my views) would rather edit/mis-quote/take out of context my posts - and display inability to comprehend simple ideas/words - or simply post how the discussion is not on topic... so... as others pointed out - whats the point ??

Esaz666

I say there are inconsistencies and downright contractictory parts of the bible,
but that doesn't mean that the whole thing is a con.
The bible doesn`t tell the whole story about christ ,it is as good as a historical
document possible for the time it was collected together,also dont forget the climate of the time and these are the parts deemed acceptable by the church leaders of that time period.
Anyone who thinks that the bible is infallable is in my opinion mistaken.

Sandok

I doubt any of it was real but moreover, if as you say, it's based on the possible documents of the time, then that makes it even less credible...

Meh, the bible is a great teacher for religion, nothing more (imho)

Maddogg6

If we know there are inaccuracies and contradictions - its value as a 'historical account' drops significantly (to me - practically - zero).

The logic of 'well, Its the best we have' - should not be accepted, as the consequences are that, people die because of things that are not provable/unproven.

Now - about the 'con' part (I never said the whole bible was a 'con' btw) - But, as a matter of fact, many con-artists use MUCH truths - or common wide spread fallacy, to convince their victim that they are genuine.

Esaz666

LoL,
it was a long time ago !, its history as the people who compiled it ,saw it
There are some good greek writings and josephus and suchlike but i am not an expert on history,just take an interest.
I am rubbish at defending the bible also, as to me it is just theology (Theories about god).There are many ways to find this consciousness that is called god,all i can say is that if you happened upon this, you would not worry about if certain parts of the bible are wrong or right.

Esaz666

It is healthy to have a sceptical mind , as this is the whole viewpoint of our science and society, it is true people do die because of the problems of interpreting the writing's but these action's more reflect on the people that commit the act's than on the text itself.The bible itself is view of the winners of the arguments between the different christians of the time but was compiled over several centuries.

The people who seek power/control are not to be confused with the bible or christ, also many people take the moral line over the top ,it is just the excuse for their own action, people`s actions are a reflection of themselves,religion is just the excuse.
The real Jesus was a revolutionery, How many men have split history before?

OmegaRED

I was watching some program on Atheists and one of guests, who was well read in the Bible, said he couldn't recall any parts of the Bible that valued intelligence. I thought that was rather remarkable and furthered my hypothesis that religion wants people to be obedient sheep rather than critical thinkers.

Esaz666

Critical thinking is a very good thing,following a good life is great but
our foolish views need to be challenged.
we are so arrogent to think that we have all the answers, i think it is unwise to
be just following something which is non-evolving, such as dogma
but value the culture of humanity, moral teaching and others view's on God.

To me religion should be about personal experience
and each person should make up their own mind, some
religious movements are more open to this than other's, one religion
is to me about the same as another,no wrong or right - just another view, it differs in the way people view the creator/original cause and the rituals they perform, that are the symbols of that view and its traditional ways.

I am no expert but love to talk about this, I can understand why communities needed to be guided at the time the bible was written and maybe we still could do with help in life to live in a less harmful way.

It is foolish to believe in anything blindly, just keep learning is the best advice i could give ( to myself also ), evolution is a beautiful thing!.

OmegaRED

I agree but that wouldn't make it a religion then would it? A religion has to have one explanation and that's the complete opposite of personal experience.

PS. I'll dig up old threads all I want! I missed out on all these jewels.

Esaz666

The main problem i have personally with the main religions is the ' here is where we stand and we dont move position ' .If a certain idea of god is static ,to me it is not living.
All people are different and some people need a set position to be able to understand and also to respect the spiritual authority of it .

The writings are a product of personal experience's and become the accepted view of truth, and it is truth as the people see it at the time. The problem we have is that over time people come to see the text's in their own way and the truth may become lost to both the modern church or fashionable idea's.

To talk of the bible for instance :-
' Then the angel carried me away in the Spirit into a desert. There I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that was covered with blasphemous names and had seven heads and ten horns. '. - from revelation.

To some people they take this literally but it could be seen as speaking of the Roman emporor Nero, who is to know what is the right way to interpret , you must accept the church's view if you want the modern established view.

Even the very small scale religions of indigenous people's have tradition at the heart of their views of god, it is transmitted by word of mouth so evolves more with time but is essentially the same - a symbol.

I see parallels in all human experiences , but nothing is ever perfect and no system or religion is, nothing that comes through us can be,You can have Personal experience inside of religion, all have differing views on the personal aspect, i find the bahai's quite open to others idea's but dont wholly support any one religion.
I would call each religion a different aspect of god, seen in a cultural context.

Sandok

Bahai's are quite open and all but I must say, any religion that refuses me alcohol and such is just not right. One should be to judge what his good or bad for him by experience, not writings in a book by someone who didn't like his first hangover or something. Same with Hinduism which is quite open, yet some of the more strict rulings makes us worship the cow, meaning we can't drink or eat it. Why? In the 21st century, this is just nonsense and all in all, religion has a bunch of rules you aren't "allowed" to contest, which is just beyond understanding for me.

Maddogg6

Same reason then - same reason now - some *man* and an agenda. Some may be 'good' agenda. But too many seem nonsensical as you state.
Incest for instance - its no longer just 'gods will' why its bad - theres genetic reason why its not good. But - yeah - to worship a cow makes me think some one with influence had some 'weird' (quoted becuase 'weird' is subjective) relationship with one at some point
- no need to assume Im being sick here - but same reason we would never even consider eating our pet dogs here - they are more like 'family' than 'raised for consumption' ... I imagine a cow could have had the same effect on some hindu leader way back when?? - certainly makes more sense than a cow being some religious symbol - they are too tasty
edit: even then - too much meat is not good either - but its a good source of protein - we all need to survive. /edit

Esaz666

yeah i allways find it interesting,
all the different rules in all the different
religions. It is hard work , the people all come from a different
cultural viewpoint for each one. No alcahol is sensible but quite restricting,
i think its a throw back for the bahai`s because they originate from Iran
and it was based in a shia muslim community at the start until the community started executing them.

This is a big problem with the organised religions , too many rules, some are
sensible, others dont mean anything anymore - out of date.
We do need rules , im not one to go for absolute freedom, it would be a dangerous place if we were allowed to go with our every whim without care.
Generally its hard to be religious but not as hard to be spiritual, in a lot of ways the many rules take us away from the real message of these religions, which is a shame.

One of the problems with the word god is that it has gathered many negative connections over time.
what I would call the the center of nearly all religion is becoming god conscious, but not god as in person but as Law.A universal Law/force with personality, goodness, love.

If you ask a scientist why the world exists he will say ," i dont know" but he can answer how the world exists, if you ask why is there air he will say "i have no answer", he will say "air is part oxygen, part nitrogen" etc.
A scientist can show you how to make air out of the parts but he cannot tell you why.

Athiest is another view of the world , a theists view - theist's require you to beleive , a belief in the non-existance of god. Atheist's require you to belive also as religion does , to have faith ,to trust in that reality.
But how can you believe ?, you are asking the imposible because if you listen to the argument. If someone is doubtful, how can he believe?, you can repress the doubt,
you could even enforce that belief, but deep down like a cancer the doubt will go on lurking in the back of the mind.Sooner or later the belief will fail as it is unfounded. Because the foundation of this belief is doubt.

`Budda says if there is no doubt then there is no question of belief .then one simply knows `

but i am not a buddhist , There is room for all the different views of the world!, thats what makes it so beutifull, free will.

Maddogg6

huh?

Atheist: Atheism is the state either of being without theistic beliefs (aka non-theist) , or of actively disbelieving in the existence of deities (aka 'militant atheist').

As, Its not 'belief' in realizing 'reality'. Ie An airplane flies - takes no belief to realize that reality. Its not the same thing to be a juror and 'believe' some one is guilty or innocent - compared to theistic beliefs.

I suppose you could say, it took 'faith' in aerodynamic knowledge to test fly the first aircraft but again thats totally different, as this 'faith', unlike religious faith - is 'testable' or can be expressed in '% of likelyhood' - where religious faith - its only all or nothing.

I would venture to say - most 'atheists' are actually 'non-theists. And its our faith laced media that demonizes non-faith. Many times the term atheist is said as if it means 'devil worshiper' or 'empty/shallow stupidity'.

I would also venture to say - most atheists - are more like 'I dunno, so Im not gonna waste time arguing facts -vs- 'beliefs' '.

BWX

I'll see you in HELL!!

Maddogg6

taking reservations?

Esaz666

LoL,
heh , defining something allways seems to cause trouble, i dont mean to cause any trouble , i was simply pointing out a flaw in reasoning.

A belief is allways a belief, for or against something. Athiest means someone against the theist view.
I am not against the athiest standpoint as it is perfectly inteligent,reasonable and scientific, especially if it help's you live your life. In life its more the journey you make not the view you have that`s important, at the very least because our actions on others effect our future happiness.

But Im against any form of compulsion by media or other forms, people should be
free to find out truth for themselves , it is allways good to find out more information, i know in my life i have made many mistake's, anything that helps point me in the right direction i welcome with a smile! after i realise its my ego thats hurting

In England our media comes from a sceptical view ,so it is not such a problem, it must be bad to feel allmost brainwashed, my family are not religious at all, nearly all of my friends are also atheist or don't know. To force your view on people is a bad thing to do, because it doesnt work, i would be the first to rebel if that was the case.When someone rebels it can be a sign of inteligence.

some people who become religious become very happy/enthusiastic, shout about their view's a bit too much but dont allways take this as trying to force anyone, its just because they are happy to feel safe in their chosen view and wish to share , it can be a freeing feeling to become a little clearer about why we live, it is good to be positive and respect all people.

Maddogg6

Not if your 'indifferent', open minded, willing to learn facts as they are presented. As I see most atheists are. 'Belief' is the opposite of 'open-minded'. Or at the very least, 'belief' becomes an obstacle for learning anything that may contradict a belief.

No - its not. Re-read my posted definition.
That was my point - an atheist is not always 'against' a theist view (those who are, are called 'militant atheists') - non-theists are just 'with out' a theist view - or 'indifferent' if you will. Edit: Most who say 'athiests' are more like agnostics - but agnostics will consider religious non-facts - as part of their 'un-certainty', but will typically side with some theists views - thus the differentiations /edit.

Its not like - 'not to make a choice - is still making a choice'.
Its only 'your either, with me or against me' - for a theists view of their beliefs in general. Aka Blasphemy. Not so for all (most) atheists.

Agreed - But, I hope you agree, people can disagree- but still respect each other..?

But I'll agree - I have no problems with those who find happiness in their beliefs - until it impedes on my happiness. To forge policy based on a 'belief' that trumps 'facts', to promote/cause prejudice, or their 'screaming from the rooftops' keeping me awake at night etc..