Upload
Login or register

finni

Last status update:
-
Gender: male
Age: 22
Date Signed Up:3/20/2011
Last Login:7/18/2014
Location:Scandinavia
FunnyJunk Career Stats
Content Thumbs: 8175 total,  9261 ,  1086
Comment Thumbs: 14666 total,  17469 ,  2803
Content Level Progress: 8% (8/100)
Level 180 Content: Anon Annihilator → Level 181 Content: Anon Annihilator
Comment Level Progress: 55.2% (552/1000)
Level 314 Comments: Wizard → Level 315 Comments: Wizard
Subscribers:1
Content Views:295508
Times Content Favorited:373 times
Total Comments Made:4336
FJ Points:10747
Favorite Tags: spoilers (3) | You (3) | game (2) | hard (2) | Jon Snow (2) | kill (2) | know (2) | Nothing (2) | of (2) | starks (2) | thrones (2)
I am here for one reason, and one reason only.

(BTW I' actually just 17. I am stating that I'm 20 for... personal reasons)

My proud student teknicolor
You will sit by my right hand!

Text Posts

  • Views: 71765
    Thumbs Up 2579 Thumbs Down 192 Total: +2387
    Comments: 259
    Favorites: 169
    Uploaded: 10/21/12
    Pluto and Talos Pluto and Talos
  • Views: 56787
    Thumbs Up 1345 Thumbs Down 107 Total: +1238
    Comments: 76
    Favorites: 55
    Uploaded: 06/23/13
    You poor fool of a Snow... You poor fool of a Snow...
  • Views: 26036
    Thumbs Up 1218 Thumbs Down 112 Total: +1106
    Comments: 254
    Favorites: 37
    Uploaded: 10/15/11
    Skyrim Skyrim
  • Views: 52163
    Thumbs Up 1108 Thumbs Down 80 Total: +1028
    Comments: 63
    Favorites: 31
    Uploaded: 06/20/13
    The night is dark and full of spoilers The night is dark and full of...
  • Views: 28360
    Thumbs Up 878 Thumbs Down 128 Total: +750
    Comments: 169
    Favorites: 19
    Uploaded: 11/16/12
    Ja Ja
  • Views: 31149
    Thumbs Up 760 Thumbs Down 60 Total: +700
    Comments: 75
    Favorites: 22
    Uploaded: 04/24/14
    Christian Viking Christian Viking

latest user's comments

#151 - The Norse Gods gave you a flag with a cross in it. Seems legit  [+] (1 new reply) 07/02/2014 on Scandinavians +4
User avatar
#190 - bjornkrage (07/02/2014) [-]
shh, don't let them know
#99 - I'm sorry to hear that about the teenagers  [+] (1 new reply) 07/02/2014 on dmagen's profile 0
User avatar
#100 - dmagen (07/02/2014) [-]
thanks
really a stupid loss of life
#153 - Well the arguments I presented does make it very unique. T… 07/02/2014 on finni's profile 0
#151 - "just look at the evidence. countless religions, all clai…  [+] (2 new replies) 06/20/2014 on finni's profile 0
User avatar
#152 - dmagen (06/21/2014) [-]
it's more like a 1000 people came to the police to claim they murdered a man nobody has ever seen or heard of, with no compliant ever heard of a "missing man".

it does matter because a religious point of view is not a unique one, it has nothing special that makes it worth a decent consideration.
going with that example, after the police starts to see that 10, 12, and then 20 people "evidence" is completely made up, they decide that continuing investigating that case is a waste of man power.

on the contrary, until a century ago we thought physics is deterministic in nature and now every aspect of it has turned around to suggest an inherently unpredictable universe on the miniature scale.
(just on a note, you should read that article it really blows your mind nautil.us/issue/9/time/in-search-of-times-origin )

I can not say for certain that anything that exists must have a cause, because even time itself may not be a fundamental part of the universe, but let's assume it does hold true.
there are two options either that beginning itself, as ungraspable as it was, was a "natural" process, or that an imaginably sophisticated being spontaneously came to being, himself without a beginning, only to create an unlimited universe so that he could choose a tiny speck of dust out and from that a tiny group from one species to worship him because apparently he's got confidence issues and needs to be remembered how awesome he is.

why does the universe exist? we don't know... but that doesn't mean you can fill that gap with any argument you like and call it true.
User avatar
#153 - finni (07/02/2014) [-]
Well the arguments I presented does make it very unique.
The point of my analogy is that even if there have been countless of religions claiming their gods to be the true one and all of them wrong, does not mean that my god has to be the same. The evidence have ruled out all the other gods, but it does not mean that God has to be ruled out. It's all about the evidence.

I presented to you the fine-tuning argument, kalam cosmological argument, ontological argument, argument from contingency. All of these arguments points to a Creator of the universe.
#149 - We can still discuss these things without them being emotional…  [+] (4 new replies) 06/20/2014 on finni's profile 0
User avatar
#150 - dmagen (06/20/2014) [-]
yeah but I don't like talking about it...
but if you insist,
so first of all the only parts that old testament got right was stuff about historic events that happened to the old Jewish kingdom, and even then it's filled with a lot of a lot of divine interpretation that was made up afterward to justify exactly what went wrong.

secondly, I believe that there are no good reason believing in a god.
just look at the evidence. countless religions, all claiming to have the right god/gods/deities, all obviously impacted by the culture the believers lived in, and if survived long enough change and accommodate to the changing culture. all based on their own stories that "prove" they are right, no matter how improbable those stories are to ever have happened.

on the other hand, the scientific inquiry of the world has led to so many things, so much knowledge gained, and not a single hint pointing at a creator.

science seeks evidence and later build itself upon those to be as close to the truth as possible. not so is religion which depicts the truth and then seeks evidence to verify it later, ignoring any counter evidence as bogus or interpreting it in a highly illogical manner to fit the "truth".

because of that, religion can only ever exist behind the gaps of knowledge science has.
first god was in the sky, then he was in space, and now he's god knows where (pun intended).
first god created the earth, then god created the entire solar system, and now god created the big bang or something (I have no idea what stories people tell themselves).

don't say "you don't know why A is, so it's possible that it's because of B and you can't prove otherwise"
say "you and I don't know what A is, but Iv'e got a proposition B to explain it, what do you think about it? can we verify it? if not do you perhaps have better ideas?"

also I agree that the existence of a god is not illogical in and of itself, but the religious depiction of him is ludicrous.
User avatar
#151 - finni (06/20/2014) [-]
"just look at the evidence. countless religions, all claiming to have the right god/gods/deities, all obviously impacted by the culture the believers lived in, and if survived long enough change and accommodate to the changing culture. all based on their own stories that "prove" they are right, no matter how improbable those stories are to ever have happened. "

If there is a murder and the police is to investigate this murder they identify a gun was used. Let's say they bring 100 suspects and none of them matches the fingerprint on the gun. Then let's say they take a thousand suspects and none of them matches the fingerprint. Then they finally find this one guy who matches the fingerprint and then they have good reason to conclude that person was the murderer.

Similarly, it does not matter how many religions that claim to have the truth, what matters is what matches up to the evidence. All you have said is that there is a long diversity of suspects, but that doesn't make it logical to conclude "Well since there are SOOO many people the police suspect, then none of them did it" You still got to show that they are wrong somehow.

"on the other hand, the scientific inquiry of the world has led to so many things, so much knowledge gained, and not a single hint pointing at a creator. "

On the contrary, science does point to the hint of a creator. The mere fact that the universe had a beginning hints to a cause, since something that begins to exist cannot come out of nothing.

Look at the Kalam Cosmological Argument: www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CulBuMCLg0

Teleological argument: www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Yt7hvgFuNg

The Ontological reason for believing in God: www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQPRqHZRP68

But also very deep thought, why does the Universe exist at all? Argument from contingency goes like this: www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2ULF5WixMM

Once you have gotten to the conclusion that God exists the only question left is, which God? well it's only one monotheistic god from these arguments. The question then becomes, has this god, or creator if you don't like the name god, revealed himself in any of the world religions? I'd argue that he has, in Jesus Christ, proving that the God of Israel, Jakob, Isak and Abraham is the true and only God and that he approved of Jesus of Nazereth's teachings.

Events that are agreed by most NT historians concerning Jesus:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=WC9R_7qRUno
User avatar
#152 - dmagen (06/21/2014) [-]
it's more like a 1000 people came to the police to claim they murdered a man nobody has ever seen or heard of, with no compliant ever heard of a "missing man".

it does matter because a religious point of view is not a unique one, it has nothing special that makes it worth a decent consideration.
going with that example, after the police starts to see that 10, 12, and then 20 people "evidence" is completely made up, they decide that continuing investigating that case is a waste of man power.

on the contrary, until a century ago we thought physics is deterministic in nature and now every aspect of it has turned around to suggest an inherently unpredictable universe on the miniature scale.
(just on a note, you should read that article it really blows your mind nautil.us/issue/9/time/in-search-of-times-origin )

I can not say for certain that anything that exists must have a cause, because even time itself may not be a fundamental part of the universe, but let's assume it does hold true.
there are two options either that beginning itself, as ungraspable as it was, was a "natural" process, or that an imaginably sophisticated being spontaneously came to being, himself without a beginning, only to create an unlimited universe so that he could choose a tiny speck of dust out and from that a tiny group from one species to worship him because apparently he's got confidence issues and needs to be remembered how awesome he is.

why does the universe exist? we don't know... but that doesn't mean you can fill that gap with any argument you like and call it true.
User avatar
#153 - finni (07/02/2014) [-]
Well the arguments I presented does make it very unique.
The point of my analogy is that even if there have been countless of religions claiming their gods to be the true one and all of them wrong, does not mean that my god has to be the same. The evidence have ruled out all the other gods, but it does not mean that God has to be ruled out. It's all about the evidence.

I presented to you the fine-tuning argument, kalam cosmological argument, ontological argument, argument from contingency. All of these arguments points to a Creator of the universe.
#112 - Love that anime 06/20/2014 on Poor Rikka 0
#187 - He asked you pretty kindly to go and wear your fedora somewhere else 06/20/2014 on There's No Escaping Homework 0
#147 - Maybe some of the Old Testaments are not literally true, but a…  [+] (6 new replies) 06/20/2014 on finni's profile 0
User avatar
#148 - dmagen (06/20/2014) [-]
finni I don't want to argue with you about religion.
all the stuff you said in your comment are completely wrong, but I don't want to argue with people about faith.
User avatar
#149 - finni (06/20/2014) [-]
We can still discuss these things without them being emotional or heat-tempered.

When you exist with a comment saying that everything I just said is completely wrong I feel the need to respond because I am very certain I am not completely wrong in everything I just said.

We don't need it to be emotional, but we should still be perfectly able to discuss these issues like civil people without name calling or anything like that. If you are afraid of offending me than don't worry, I've gone all my life with hearing basically insults at my faith.
User avatar
#150 - dmagen (06/20/2014) [-]
yeah but I don't like talking about it...
but if you insist,
so first of all the only parts that old testament got right was stuff about historic events that happened to the old Jewish kingdom, and even then it's filled with a lot of a lot of divine interpretation that was made up afterward to justify exactly what went wrong.

secondly, I believe that there are no good reason believing in a god.
just look at the evidence. countless religions, all claiming to have the right god/gods/deities, all obviously impacted by the culture the believers lived in, and if survived long enough change and accommodate to the changing culture. all based on their own stories that "prove" they are right, no matter how improbable those stories are to ever have happened.

on the other hand, the scientific inquiry of the world has led to so many things, so much knowledge gained, and not a single hint pointing at a creator.

science seeks evidence and later build itself upon those to be as close to the truth as possible. not so is religion which depicts the truth and then seeks evidence to verify it later, ignoring any counter evidence as bogus or interpreting it in a highly illogical manner to fit the "truth".

because of that, religion can only ever exist behind the gaps of knowledge science has.
first god was in the sky, then he was in space, and now he's god knows where (pun intended).
first god created the earth, then god created the entire solar system, and now god created the big bang or something (I have no idea what stories people tell themselves).

don't say "you don't know why A is, so it's possible that it's because of B and you can't prove otherwise"
say "you and I don't know what A is, but Iv'e got a proposition B to explain it, what do you think about it? can we verify it? if not do you perhaps have better ideas?"

also I agree that the existence of a god is not illogical in and of itself, but the religious depiction of him is ludicrous.
User avatar
#151 - finni (06/20/2014) [-]
"just look at the evidence. countless religions, all claiming to have the right god/gods/deities, all obviously impacted by the culture the believers lived in, and if survived long enough change and accommodate to the changing culture. all based on their own stories that "prove" they are right, no matter how improbable those stories are to ever have happened. "

If there is a murder and the police is to investigate this murder they identify a gun was used. Let's say they bring 100 suspects and none of them matches the fingerprint on the gun. Then let's say they take a thousand suspects and none of them matches the fingerprint. Then they finally find this one guy who matches the fingerprint and then they have good reason to conclude that person was the murderer.

Similarly, it does not matter how many religions that claim to have the truth, what matters is what matches up to the evidence. All you have said is that there is a long diversity of suspects, but that doesn't make it logical to conclude "Well since there are SOOO many people the police suspect, then none of them did it" You still got to show that they are wrong somehow.

"on the other hand, the scientific inquiry of the world has led to so many things, so much knowledge gained, and not a single hint pointing at a creator. "

On the contrary, science does point to the hint of a creator. The mere fact that the universe had a beginning hints to a cause, since something that begins to exist cannot come out of nothing.

Look at the Kalam Cosmological Argument: www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CulBuMCLg0

Teleological argument: www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Yt7hvgFuNg

The Ontological reason for believing in God: www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQPRqHZRP68

But also very deep thought, why does the Universe exist at all? Argument from contingency goes like this: www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2ULF5WixMM

Once you have gotten to the conclusion that God exists the only question left is, which God? well it's only one monotheistic god from these arguments. The question then becomes, has this god, or creator if you don't like the name god, revealed himself in any of the world religions? I'd argue that he has, in Jesus Christ, proving that the God of Israel, Jakob, Isak and Abraham is the true and only God and that he approved of Jesus of Nazereth's teachings.

Events that are agreed by most NT historians concerning Jesus:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=WC9R_7qRUno
User avatar
#152 - dmagen (06/21/2014) [-]
it's more like a 1000 people came to the police to claim they murdered a man nobody has ever seen or heard of, with no compliant ever heard of a "missing man".

it does matter because a religious point of view is not a unique one, it has nothing special that makes it worth a decent consideration.
going with that example, after the police starts to see that 10, 12, and then 20 people "evidence" is completely made up, they decide that continuing investigating that case is a waste of man power.

on the contrary, until a century ago we thought physics is deterministic in nature and now every aspect of it has turned around to suggest an inherently unpredictable universe on the miniature scale.
(just on a note, you should read that article it really blows your mind nautil.us/issue/9/time/in-search-of-times-origin )

I can not say for certain that anything that exists must have a cause, because even time itself may not be a fundamental part of the universe, but let's assume it does hold true.
there are two options either that beginning itself, as ungraspable as it was, was a "natural" process, or that an imaginably sophisticated being spontaneously came to being, himself without a beginning, only to create an unlimited universe so that he could choose a tiny speck of dust out and from that a tiny group from one species to worship him because apparently he's got confidence issues and needs to be remembered how awesome he is.

why does the universe exist? we don't know... but that doesn't mean you can fill that gap with any argument you like and call it true.
User avatar
#153 - finni (07/02/2014) [-]
Well the arguments I presented does make it very unique.
The point of my analogy is that even if there have been countless of religions claiming their gods to be the true one and all of them wrong, does not mean that my god has to be the same. The evidence have ruled out all the other gods, but it does not mean that God has to be ruled out. It's all about the evidence.

I presented to you the fine-tuning argument, kalam cosmological argument, ontological argument, argument from contingency. All of these arguments points to a Creator of the universe.
#145 - I don't see any reason you have given me for believing Islam i…  [+] (8 new replies) 06/20/2014 on finni's profile 0
User avatar
#146 - dmagen (06/20/2014) [-]
as saying that believing in a certain book or not proves any religion validity.
basically I believe in provable concepts.

I believe that what I believe doesn't matter to reality as it only exist in between my ears and does not force reality to do it's bid.

that said, a lot of the old testament was already proved to be false, like the exodus for example.

I acknowledge that any religion can be true, but the chances for that in my opinion are close to zero.
User avatar
#147 - finni (06/20/2014) [-]
Maybe some of the Old Testaments are not literally true, but at least one event is. The fact that the universe had a beginning.

There are many good reasons to believe in God, based on arguments and evidence, but there are very few reasons to deny the existence of God. Most reasons I find are often emotional reasons and the problem of evil, but not really that the fact that God exists is anyway illogical.
User avatar
#148 - dmagen (06/20/2014) [-]
finni I don't want to argue with you about religion.
all the stuff you said in your comment are completely wrong, but I don't want to argue with people about faith.
User avatar
#149 - finni (06/20/2014) [-]
We can still discuss these things without them being emotional or heat-tempered.

When you exist with a comment saying that everything I just said is completely wrong I feel the need to respond because I am very certain I am not completely wrong in everything I just said.

We don't need it to be emotional, but we should still be perfectly able to discuss these issues like civil people without name calling or anything like that. If you are afraid of offending me than don't worry, I've gone all my life with hearing basically insults at my faith.
User avatar
#150 - dmagen (06/20/2014) [-]
yeah but I don't like talking about it...
but if you insist,
so first of all the only parts that old testament got right was stuff about historic events that happened to the old Jewish kingdom, and even then it's filled with a lot of a lot of divine interpretation that was made up afterward to justify exactly what went wrong.

secondly, I believe that there are no good reason believing in a god.
just look at the evidence. countless religions, all claiming to have the right god/gods/deities, all obviously impacted by the culture the believers lived in, and if survived long enough change and accommodate to the changing culture. all based on their own stories that "prove" they are right, no matter how improbable those stories are to ever have happened.

on the other hand, the scientific inquiry of the world has led to so many things, so much knowledge gained, and not a single hint pointing at a creator.

science seeks evidence and later build itself upon those to be as close to the truth as possible. not so is religion which depicts the truth and then seeks evidence to verify it later, ignoring any counter evidence as bogus or interpreting it in a highly illogical manner to fit the "truth".

because of that, religion can only ever exist behind the gaps of knowledge science has.
first god was in the sky, then he was in space, and now he's god knows where (pun intended).
first god created the earth, then god created the entire solar system, and now god created the big bang or something (I have no idea what stories people tell themselves).

don't say "you don't know why A is, so it's possible that it's because of B and you can't prove otherwise"
say "you and I don't know what A is, but Iv'e got a proposition B to explain it, what do you think about it? can we verify it? if not do you perhaps have better ideas?"

also I agree that the existence of a god is not illogical in and of itself, but the religious depiction of him is ludicrous.
User avatar
#151 - finni (06/20/2014) [-]
"just look at the evidence. countless religions, all claiming to have the right god/gods/deities, all obviously impacted by the culture the believers lived in, and if survived long enough change and accommodate to the changing culture. all based on their own stories that "prove" they are right, no matter how improbable those stories are to ever have happened. "

If there is a murder and the police is to investigate this murder they identify a gun was used. Let's say they bring 100 suspects and none of them matches the fingerprint on the gun. Then let's say they take a thousand suspects and none of them matches the fingerprint. Then they finally find this one guy who matches the fingerprint and then they have good reason to conclude that person was the murderer.

Similarly, it does not matter how many religions that claim to have the truth, what matters is what matches up to the evidence. All you have said is that there is a long diversity of suspects, but that doesn't make it logical to conclude "Well since there are SOOO many people the police suspect, then none of them did it" You still got to show that they are wrong somehow.

"on the other hand, the scientific inquiry of the world has led to so many things, so much knowledge gained, and not a single hint pointing at a creator. "

On the contrary, science does point to the hint of a creator. The mere fact that the universe had a beginning hints to a cause, since something that begins to exist cannot come out of nothing.

Look at the Kalam Cosmological Argument: www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CulBuMCLg0

Teleological argument: www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Yt7hvgFuNg

The Ontological reason for believing in God: www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQPRqHZRP68

But also very deep thought, why does the Universe exist at all? Argument from contingency goes like this: www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2ULF5WixMM

Once you have gotten to the conclusion that God exists the only question left is, which God? well it's only one monotheistic god from these arguments. The question then becomes, has this god, or creator if you don't like the name god, revealed himself in any of the world religions? I'd argue that he has, in Jesus Christ, proving that the God of Israel, Jakob, Isak and Abraham is the true and only God and that he approved of Jesus of Nazereth's teachings.

Events that are agreed by most NT historians concerning Jesus:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=WC9R_7qRUno
User avatar
#152 - dmagen (06/21/2014) [-]
it's more like a 1000 people came to the police to claim they murdered a man nobody has ever seen or heard of, with no compliant ever heard of a "missing man".

it does matter because a religious point of view is not a unique one, it has nothing special that makes it worth a decent consideration.
going with that example, after the police starts to see that 10, 12, and then 20 people "evidence" is completely made up, they decide that continuing investigating that case is a waste of man power.

on the contrary, until a century ago we thought physics is deterministic in nature and now every aspect of it has turned around to suggest an inherently unpredictable universe on the miniature scale.
(just on a note, you should read that article it really blows your mind nautil.us/issue/9/time/in-search-of-times-origin )

I can not say for certain that anything that exists must have a cause, because even time itself may not be a fundamental part of the universe, but let's assume it does hold true.
there are two options either that beginning itself, as ungraspable as it was, was a "natural" process, or that an imaginably sophisticated being spontaneously came to being, himself without a beginning, only to create an unlimited universe so that he could choose a tiny speck of dust out and from that a tiny group from one species to worship him because apparently he's got confidence issues and needs to be remembered how awesome he is.

why does the universe exist? we don't know... but that doesn't mean you can fill that gap with any argument you like and call it true.
User avatar
#153 - finni (07/02/2014) [-]
Well the arguments I presented does make it very unique.
The point of my analogy is that even if there have been countless of religions claiming their gods to be the true one and all of them wrong, does not mean that my god has to be the same. The evidence have ruled out all the other gods, but it does not mean that God has to be ruled out. It's all about the evidence.

I presented to you the fine-tuning argument, kalam cosmological argument, ontological argument, argument from contingency. All of these arguments points to a Creator of the universe.
#143 - How do you know Christianity isn't true then?  [+] (10 new replies) 06/19/2014 on finni's profile 0
#144 - dmagen (06/19/2014) [-]
well for the same reason I know Islam isn't true.
I don't let books or ideas dictate what is reality.
I acknowledge that full description of reality may be bigger than what we can ever imagine, and that we may never reach a full understanding of it, but I still love it for simply being and try to understand it the best I can using the knowledge that was passed down to me by previous people like me.
#145 - finni (06/20/2014) [-]
I don't see any reason you have given me for believing Islam is true.
All I can grasp is that Islam is written in a Book, and you don't believe all books, well of course you don't, but you have to have reasons for not believing all books, and saying that you don't believe all books does nothing to disprove Islam's validity.

At best, it puts your understanding of truth at a very narrow road, but even if you believe it to be false does not mean it actually is false
User avatar
#146 - dmagen (06/20/2014) [-]
as saying that believing in a certain book or not proves any religion validity.
basically I believe in provable concepts.

I believe that what I believe doesn't matter to reality as it only exist in between my ears and does not force reality to do it's bid.

that said, a lot of the old testament was already proved to be false, like the exodus for example.

I acknowledge that any religion can be true, but the chances for that in my opinion are close to zero.
User avatar
#147 - finni (06/20/2014) [-]
Maybe some of the Old Testaments are not literally true, but at least one event is. The fact that the universe had a beginning.

There are many good reasons to believe in God, based on arguments and evidence, but there are very few reasons to deny the existence of God. Most reasons I find are often emotional reasons and the problem of evil, but not really that the fact that God exists is anyway illogical.
User avatar
#148 - dmagen (06/20/2014) [-]
finni I don't want to argue with you about religion.
all the stuff you said in your comment are completely wrong, but I don't want to argue with people about faith.
User avatar
#149 - finni (06/20/2014) [-]
We can still discuss these things without them being emotional or heat-tempered.

When you exist with a comment saying that everything I just said is completely wrong I feel the need to respond because I am very certain I am not completely wrong in everything I just said.

We don't need it to be emotional, but we should still be perfectly able to discuss these issues like civil people without name calling or anything like that. If you are afraid of offending me than don't worry, I've gone all my life with hearing basically insults at my faith.
User avatar
#150 - dmagen (06/20/2014) [-]
yeah but I don't like talking about it...
but if you insist,
so first of all the only parts that old testament got right was stuff about historic events that happened to the old Jewish kingdom, and even then it's filled with a lot of a lot of divine interpretation that was made up afterward to justify exactly what went wrong.

secondly, I believe that there are no good reason believing in a god.
just look at the evidence. countless religions, all claiming to have the right god/gods/deities, all obviously impacted by the culture the believers lived in, and if survived long enough change and accommodate to the changing culture. all based on their own stories that "prove" they are right, no matter how improbable those stories are to ever have happened.

on the other hand, the scientific inquiry of the world has led to so many things, so much knowledge gained, and not a single hint pointing at a creator.

science seeks evidence and later build itself upon those to be as close to the truth as possible. not so is religion which depicts the truth and then seeks evidence to verify it later, ignoring any counter evidence as bogus or interpreting it in a highly illogical manner to fit the "truth".

because of that, religion can only ever exist behind the gaps of knowledge science has.
first god was in the sky, then he was in space, and now he's god knows where (pun intended).
first god created the earth, then god created the entire solar system, and now god created the big bang or something (I have no idea what stories people tell themselves).

don't say "you don't know why A is, so it's possible that it's because of B and you can't prove otherwise"
say "you and I don't know what A is, but Iv'e got a proposition B to explain it, what do you think about it? can we verify it? if not do you perhaps have better ideas?"

also I agree that the existence of a god is not illogical in and of itself, but the religious depiction of him is ludicrous.
User avatar
#151 - finni (06/20/2014) [-]
"just look at the evidence. countless religions, all claiming to have the right god/gods/deities, all obviously impacted by the culture the believers lived in, and if survived long enough change and accommodate to the changing culture. all based on their own stories that "prove" they are right, no matter how improbable those stories are to ever have happened. "

If there is a murder and the police is to investigate this murder they identify a gun was used. Let's say they bring 100 suspects and none of them matches the fingerprint on the gun. Then let's say they take a thousand suspects and none of them matches the fingerprint. Then they finally find this one guy who matches the fingerprint and then they have good reason to conclude that person was the murderer.

Similarly, it does not matter how many religions that claim to have the truth, what matters is what matches up to the evidence. All you have said is that there is a long diversity of suspects, but that doesn't make it logical to conclude "Well since there are SOOO many people the police suspect, then none of them did it" You still got to show that they are wrong somehow.

"on the other hand, the scientific inquiry of the world has led to so many things, so much knowledge gained, and not a single hint pointing at a creator. "

On the contrary, science does point to the hint of a creator. The mere fact that the universe had a beginning hints to a cause, since something that begins to exist cannot come out of nothing.

Look at the Kalam Cosmological Argument: www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CulBuMCLg0

Teleological argument: www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Yt7hvgFuNg

The Ontological reason for believing in God: www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQPRqHZRP68

But also very deep thought, why does the Universe exist at all? Argument from contingency goes like this: www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2ULF5WixMM

Once you have gotten to the conclusion that God exists the only question left is, which God? well it's only one monotheistic god from these arguments. The question then becomes, has this god, or creator if you don't like the name god, revealed himself in any of the world religions? I'd argue that he has, in Jesus Christ, proving that the God of Israel, Jakob, Isak and Abraham is the true and only God and that he approved of Jesus of Nazereth's teachings.

Events that are agreed by most NT historians concerning Jesus:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=WC9R_7qRUno
User avatar
#152 - dmagen (06/21/2014) [-]
it's more like a 1000 people came to the police to claim they murdered a man nobody has ever seen or heard of, with no compliant ever heard of a "missing man".

it does matter because a religious point of view is not a unique one, it has nothing special that makes it worth a decent consideration.
going with that example, after the police starts to see that 10, 12, and then 20 people "evidence" is completely made up, they decide that continuing investigating that case is a waste of man power.

on the contrary, until a century ago we thought physics is deterministic in nature and now every aspect of it has turned around to suggest an inherently unpredictable universe on the miniature scale.
(just on a note, you should read that article it really blows your mind nautil.us/issue/9/time/in-search-of-times-origin )

I can not say for certain that anything that exists must have a cause, because even time itself may not be a fundamental part of the universe, but let's assume it does hold true.
there are two options either that beginning itself, as ungraspable as it was, was a "natural" process, or that an imaginably sophisticated being spontaneously came to being, himself without a beginning, only to create an unlimited universe so that he could choose a tiny speck of dust out and from that a tiny group from one species to worship him because apparently he's got confidence issues and needs to be remembered how awesome he is.

why does the universe exist? we don't know... but that doesn't mean you can fill that gap with any argument you like and call it true.
User avatar
#153 - finni (07/02/2014) [-]
Well the arguments I presented does make it very unique.
The point of my analogy is that even if there have been countless of religions claiming their gods to be the true one and all of them wrong, does not mean that my god has to be the same. The evidence have ruled out all the other gods, but it does not mean that God has to be ruled out. It's all about the evidence.

I presented to you the fine-tuning argument, kalam cosmological argument, ontological argument, argument from contingency. All of these arguments points to a Creator of the universe.

channels owned

Subscribe anti-artige
Subscribe nordicbros