Religion Debates and Discussions

i agree.

 

So he's a loon for saying praying for Trump is a sin.

But other religious people aren't loons for saying touching yourself is a sin?

 

and...?

 

How come you're the authority on what a sin is, and what it isn't?

I say that praying for Trump is a sin and that touching yourself isn't. Why am I wrong and you're right?

 

But I know God better than you. You don't understand him, I do.

What's your response to that?

 

I was playing devil's advocate, if you'll excuse the irony there.

Imagine I'm another religious person who disagrees with you about what things are sins. I tell you that you don't understand God like I do, that I'm right about what he wants and you're wrong. How do you respond to that?

 

Look at what the Bible says, and if he's right, good for him, but the way you put it makes him seem like an arrogant person. If he's wrong, tell him so, if he keeps going, ignore him.

 

The point he's trying to make is that a lot of the arguments he's been presented with feel sort of like "I'm right, you just don't understand." He's not attacking anyone.

 

a rectangle is not a square but a square is a rectangle

so is heaven a different dimension? it's represented as "in the sky" but it's not physically there...where is it?

not trying to argue a point here, im actually curious bc idk where a christian believes heaven is

is heaven in "gods home"? if so where is "gods home"??

 

Yeah sure. Why not. How would you respond?

That's difficult when there are so many different interpretations of the Bible! It would be easier to tell who was right if you had to take everything 100% literally, but that would also be horrific because we'd all be stoning each other to death. When people try to reconcile modern society with biblical teachings, they end up discarding large parts of the bible or saying they're just metaphorical, and that's where the different interpretations come in. Me and Gehenna might both be Christians following the Bible but we could have completely different views on certain points. I'm wondering how he showed that he understands God better than other Christians.

 

@GlobalistCuck

1) Actually there's lots of claimed miracles and proof. Now, I don't believe in every single one of these, but there's many many instances where people claim to have been to heaven or hell and back, because of a near death experience. Now, before you say it's just bc their high on the meds bc they were about to die, it's actually the #1 "dream" or miracle (from what I believe). There's always going to liar and deceiving people on both sides everywhere, because we live in a world with over 7 billion people. There's also many bibles found several thousand years ago. Such as, the dead sea scrolls. In which, they found a bible a long time ago (about 1000+ years ago, I think). And they compared the bibles and found about a .001% difference in a current bible and the dead sea scroll one, so if you were questioning that there had to be too many times where it just was altered and changed, it wasn't. And well, you can't tell 100% that it wasn't part of the atmosphere, because none of us where there at that time cx

2) I think Mormons and a bit of other Christians add on other unnecessary stuff, which again, is bound to happen. I don't think they are wrong as long as they have faith in Jesus.

3) I don't think millions of people do that, I think when they are happy and exaggerating a bit I see them talking about this HAD to be Jesus, but they don't know 100%, if they claim to know 100% tell them 'can you, also, read the future?', because they don't know at all. The "blessing" could've been less of a blessing then they might think or know. But at the time it's probably just an overwhelming power that they got what they wanted in their hearts. Even then, I barely see that and I hang out with Christians twice every week.

4) Yeah, I swore I heard that somewhere, I must've hit that point wrong, just thought there finally was some proof that kind of proved it wrong, rip. What has been tested do you know? or do you put a lot of faith into someone saying something without checking it cx

5) What do fossils, observed evolution, biogeography, DNA similarities between current organisms, etc, prove, though? That there was a God that made it all or what? Yes, Science is a beautiful creation made by God, it's the technique of finding truth in lies, essentially.

6) It's very, very, very hard to find a site that's unbiased about that. For a few reasons, no one is 100% informed about every detail and can answer each and every question that comes up in these types of topics. If we were, we'd be lying. There's things we don't understand about the entire process and things. So if from their point of view the majority of what they saw was proof that Christianity was true and very few things from the Atheist perspective, but couldn't make up their mind, but from someone else's perspective it might be much more clear to them that the Atheist perspective was very poor, as an example. As well, as vise versa. Here's what I do, look at the most plausible perspectives on both sides. That might help you get 2 sites you can compare and decide which one you like better. Give it time, though, and don't go to one site and just instantly ignore everything because like we said all of us are uninformed or not knowledgeable in some manner. The whole point about debating is to be open about the other perspective. And no you aren't biased bc you don't agree with me, it was biased because the statement didn't take into account another person perspective, which is required in a debate. For example, I cannot simply say "You can't believe in the big bang, because the law of conservation proves it doesn't exist" in that statement I completely disregarded your point of view and it seems kinda insulting rather than debating. That's how I felt when you said ("You can't claim "I believe in whatever science that doesn't contradict Christianity", for two reasons. Firstly, like 99% of science does contradict the Bible, try the laws of physics. And no "he can break these laws because God" is not a valid answer; circular logic. Secondly, if you want to not believe in things that have been proven time and time again, you need to be able to back yourself up with reason and evidence. Simply "it disagrees with these stories that I was taught as a kid" is ridiculous."). Why can't the person who I believe is God not break the laws of physics?

Who said the heavens where in the sky?

 

Could we have some examples of miracles please? I've asked Gehenna, and gave my explanation for them, I'd like to see what you're mentioning, so I can think about those as well.

Respectable

Actually, I've done lots of research into evolution, and I can tell you definitively what it was that was proven.
In fact, I already have, in response to basically this exact question, earlier in this thread.
It'a a bit jarring to me that you're making claims that evolution was disproven, and that you're not citing a source, not explaining the research done or the article, and that you're suggesting that evolution not only has little proof, but that it has not been thoroughly tested. It's ignorant to say that evolution has not been tested. It's not ignorant to debate the qualifications or legitimacy of the tests. I'll find my original comment and add it here as well, so you can see for yourself some of the testing that's been done.

No, it supports the idea that all life that we know of came from a few common ancestors, and changed immensely through evolution.
Again, as I've stated maybe three or four times on this thread, burden of proof lies with religion, and it is not the job of scientists to disprove religion. Because religion is not a disproveable idea, you can't say "if you can't disprove it, it's true." Again, I've posted links to things about this before, but this time I'll leave it up to you to do research on this.

This not the right conclusion to draw from the fact that nobody knows everything. Obviously you can't find only one site that gives you all the answers, neither should you trust said site if it were to exist. It's the responsibility of the researcher to go to different sites or articles that are as unbiased as they can find and draw their own conclusions. In reality, it's not very hard to find unbiased sites when it comes to finding information about a study. Often, studies are posted for free on scientific magazine websites (to clarify, a good scientific magazine is not a clickbaity, exaggerated load of bs that's meant to grab attention. It's a set of articles and studies that show only the research, and often some conclusions that may be drawn from the research alone).

Sorry I'm late to this conversation, but what process are we referring to?

You're right you can't, because it'd be very wrong. Like I described (I think it was actually in response to you), thinking of the big bang as the creation of the universe is very misleading. It was the rapid expansion of the universe, like stretching a rubber band. Only, an infinitely large rubber band. There still are disagreements about the exact details about the big bang, because science hasn't progressed far enough to understand it fully. However, the clear trend is that as more questions arise from research, more research is done to answer them. It's silly to suggest that because science can't answer something immediately, that science is wrong and can't be trusted. There are countless examples in history where thinking that got us into trouble.

What he's saying is that you can't claim that God can break the laws of physics because he is God. At least, you can't claim it without being fallacious. "Why can God break the laws of physics? Because he's God." This is pretty much the textbook definition of circular reasoning, which is no way to build an argument.

By this I assume you mean that heaven does not exist in the sky, because that's ridiculous. As Gehenna said, heaven exists as another dimension, separate from our own. It's like another universe.
What might surprise you is that not everyone agrees on this.
Two articles that claim that heaven has been directly imaged by NASA.

Spoiler: What you see will SHOCK YOU!

https://godshotspot.wordpress.com/2014/07/08/heaven-found/
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/cele...asas-hubble-vasko-nikolov-6076884986600968192
It doesn't take a scientist to see that these two are biased and have a clear agenda.

 

Since Christianity is taught from other humans, how could someone born on a deserted island be saved? I guess he's screwed then, he/she would never even know that Jesus walked the earth.