By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Movies & TV - Hollywood anti catholic bullshit needs to stop

epicurean on 08 January 2018
ArchangelMadzz said:
WolfpackN64 said:

That's because it's a philosophical argument. Both sides have an assumption and reason towards it. The Cosmological Argument needs a necessary being. That's it's whole argument. Proof is provided in the model of the Principle of Sufficiënt reason. It's the closest you can argue for or against God.

I'm going to state again. It's scientifically impossible to say anything about a necessary being. If it exists, it would encompass all knowledge and all qualities of all beings and objects, past, present and future. Since it's essence is of a limitless quantity, the being itself is the ONLY ONE that can understand his own essence. We can understand parts of it's essence through revelation (theology) or reason (philosophy). Thus, in most cases, and certainly here. This is a philosophical debate first and foremost. And if it didn't exist, we wouldn't know.

No it isn't. If someone provides a God with a specific and unique definition then it can be tested.

Again, there's no reason why this argument is giving the 'necessary being' all of these traits. It's giving the being these traits just because it can. 

But even if we go ahead and say that this philosophical idea is fact, And this being of infinite power of time and space and knowledge of every atom in the universe (jeez) existed, the idea it was doing things for 9 billion years then made this rock, and waited 5 billion years to make some special monkeys and require us to have a pope and wear these special robes and rituals and can only have sex in a certain position etc etc because???? You also have to follow this or bad things will happen..

To go back to your original response this is why I show little respect to Catholicism/religion because the fact that people can read that and their bullshit meters don't go off and not see it's just a system to control people's actions just blows my mind.

What actions do you feel "The Church" is trying to control?



Owner of PS4 Pro, Xbox One, Switch, PS Vita, and 3DS

Around the Network
Ganoncrotch on 08 January 2018
WolfpackN64 said:
OneTime said:

No -  the Bible and the Church say that the Sun God Ra was not the same as the burning bush.  Archaeologists say they are.

your move.

Did the archeologists do an autopsy on the remains of the burning bush?

Just going to point out your asking for proof effectively on the same measure that Santa isn't real, he isn't, he is a fictional character based around the 25th of Dec to make children happy and behave themselves because if they're bold they don't get presents, you've just chosen to invest more time and effort into believe of Santa for Adults which is nice, but he still is a fictional character made to..... yeah.... just santa but a less white beard.

Fun one I always enjoy though if you were to have a read through the good book, on day 4 Santa made the Sun... didn't anyone ask how the first 4 days were measured? It is written that it is measured by days and nights ie the light and the dark... but the Sun doesn't exist yet so the thing which makes the Earth have days is not in effect, the change from day to night, light to dark... those things didn't happen for days 1>4 Surely it should just be written "until we have a way to sort this shit out, Imma start making stuff" and then after enough things have been created for the system to work it would be on Day 2 that he chucked all the fish and other life into the Rivers and Sea's of the Earth, providing that he was happy to assume every bit of time before the first Night was Day 1.

 

But sod it, can't really go through the Bible and proof read it for plot holes

aint no one got time for that.



Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive

WolfpackN64 on 08 January 2018
donathos said:
Religion has been the source of much destruction throughout human history. The Catholic Church isn't the only offender in this regard -- not by any stretch of the imagination -- but it has played a prominent role, because of how successful it has been. It is no wonder that the Church catches flak in movies, especially given the (relatively) recent scandals involving pedophilia.

The argument for a "necessary being" is funny to me. Besides "begging the question," it seems to make no claim as to the nature of this supposed "being," apart from any other singular event or phenomenon (not even to the point of being sensibly described as a "being" in the first place). When pressed on the subject, WolfpackN64 says, "I never said it had to be sentient, interpret being in a wide sense here." Well, if we're not discussing a sentient being -- if we allow ourselves "wide sense" enough to encompass the Big Bang -- then we're no longer discussing the concept of God in any meaningful manner, let alone some specific God like Yahweh. The defense of the argument reduces to "the argument contends nothing in particular," so...

Though I am curious as to how things would have been worse during the Middle Ages without the Church...

I gave the possability for a wider interpretation not because I believe in such an interpretation. But because I actually want to give people who think otherwise space to argue along the lines of the same argument. I don't mind atheïsts, only when they bring no decent arguments to the table I start to get annoyed.



epicurean on 08 January 2018
Ganoncrotch said:
WolfpackN64 said:

Did the archeologists do an autopsy on the remains of the burning bush?

Just going to point out your asking for proof effectively on the same measure that Santa isn't real, he isn't, he is a fictional character based around the 25th of Dec to make children happy and behave themselves because if they're bold they don't get presents, you've just chosen to invest more time and effort into believe of Santa for Adults which is nice, but he still is a fictional character made to..... yeah.... just santa but a less white beard.

Fun one I always enjoy though if you were to have a read through the good book, on day 4 Santa made the Sun... didn't anyone ask how the first 4 days were measured? It is written that it is measured by days and nights ie the light and the dark... but the Sun doesn't exist yet so the thing which makes the Earth have days is not in effect, the change from day to night, light to dark... those things didn't happen for days 1>4 Surely it should just be written "until we have a way to sort this shit out, Imma start making stuff" and then after enough things have been created for the system to work it would be on Day 2 that he chucked all the fish and other life into the Rivers and Sea's of the Earth, providing that he was happy to assume every bit of time before the first Night was Day 1.

 

But sod it, can't really go through the Bible and proof read it for plot holes

aint no one got time for that.

Um, if you're posting that image, then you truly haven't done any research and its probably not worth debating.



Owner of PS4 Pro, Xbox One, Switch, PS Vita, and 3DS

WolfpackN64 on 08 January 2018
ArchangelMadzz said:
WolfpackN64 said:

That's because it's a philosophical argument. Both sides have an assumption and reason towards it. The Cosmological Argument needs a necessary being. That's it's whole argument. Proof is provided in the model of the Principle of Sufficiënt reason. It's the closest you can argue for or against God.

I'm going to state again. It's scientifically impossible to say anything about a necessary being. If it exists, it would encompass all knowledge and all qualities of all beings and objects, past, present and future. Since it's essence is of a limitless quantity, the being itself is the ONLY ONE that can understand his own essence. We can understand parts of it's essence through revelation (theology) or reason (philosophy). Thus, in most cases, and certainly here. This is a philosophical debate first and foremost. And if it didn't exist, we wouldn't know.

No it isn't. If someone provides a God with a specific and unique definition then it can be tested.

Again, there's no reason why this argument is giving the 'necessary being' all of these traits. It's giving the being these traits just because it can. 

But even if we go ahead and say that this philosophical idea is fact, And this being of infinite power of time and space and knowledge of every atom in the universe (jeez) existed, the idea it was doing things for 9 billion years then made this rock, and waited 5 billion years to make some special monkeys and require us to have a pope and wear these special robes and rituals and can only have sex in a certain position etc etc because???? You also have to follow this or bad things will happen..

To go back to your original response this is why I show little respect to Catholicism/religion because the fact that people can read that and their bullshit meters don't go off and not see it's just a system to control people's actions just blows my mind.

The necessary being is the prime mover. Not the being that literally moves everything. For then we wouldn't be contingent (moved and mover), but solely determined (moved).



Around the Network
Ganoncrotch on 08 January 2018
WolfpackN64 said:
Ganoncrotch said:

I put a link to the article in my post, it was very much real, commissioned this May and finalized and unveiled in November.... only after a few weeks people started to spread pics of it online and of course since it has a priest offering his loaf to a kids face it wasn't long before.... like most things of this nature in the catholic church.

It was covered up, a real good sign for the church and how they handle these things, you can be happy in the knowledge that it's still going on under there, but now with a sheet over it!

Apparently the "mistake" happened because when the statue existed as a 2d image it was less..... dick like and the kids 2d position would have been beside the priest, the statue maker just bought that to life in 3d and aye, the loaf became far less innocent.

They covered it up because they realized it was indecent. Luckily much of what went wrong in the church with the child abuse scandals has been adressed. They've taken a much more proactive stance and they have resolved to actually process reports of abuse themselves.

Self regulation of child sex abuse, good stuff.

Anyways look people have believed in adult Santa for thousands of years, I'm not going to try to change your mind over the course of a forum thread and don't jokingly suggest that if someone showed you evidence to change your mind that you would. You have faith to believe, things like this test that faith, be strong, keep believing!



Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive

Ganoncrotch on 08 January 2018
epicurean said:
Ganoncrotch said:

Just going to point out your asking for proof effectively on the same measure that Santa isn't real, he isn't, he is a fictional character based around the 25th of Dec to make children happy and behave themselves because if they're bold they don't get presents, you've just chosen to invest more time and effort into believe of Santa for Adults which is nice, but he still is a fictional character made to..... yeah.... just santa but a less white beard.

Fun one I always enjoy though if you were to have a read through the good book, on day 4 Santa made the Sun... didn't anyone ask how the first 4 days were measured? It is written that it is measured by days and nights ie the light and the dark... but the Sun doesn't exist yet so the thing which makes the Earth have days is not in effect, the change from day to night, light to dark... those things didn't happen for days 1>4 Surely it should just be written "until we have a way to sort this shit out, Imma start making stuff" and then after enough things have been created for the system to work it would be on Day 2 that he chucked all the fish and other life into the Rivers and Sea's of the Earth, providing that he was happy to assume every bit of time before the first Night was Day 1.

 

But sod it, can't really go through the Bible and proof read it for plot holes

aint no one got time for that.

Um, if you're posting that image, then you truly haven't done any research and its probably not worth debating.

Again you want to read my other post on here. VGchartz isn't going to be the turning point for people to start to look at the facts.



Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive

epicurean on 08 January 2018
Ganoncrotch said:
epicurean said:

Um, if you're posting that image, then you truly haven't done any research and its probably not worth debating.

Again you want to read my other post on here. VGchartz isn't going to be the turning point for people to start to look at the facts.

You're right (and that goes both ways), but that was a ridiculously easy picture to discredit yourself, and I don't know if I even believe the adam/eve narrative.



Owner of PS4 Pro, Xbox One, Switch, PS Vita, and 3DS

WolfpackN64 on 08 January 2018
VGPolyglot said:
My stance is not that God does not exist, but that I'm not going to believe in any god until they're proven to exist. However, I can say with almost 100% certainty that the Abrahamic God as described by the holy texts cannot exist because of the contradictions that exist within the writings.

These contradictions are widely aknowledged by catholics however. My bible even calls attention to the contradictions in the footnotes. The bible was written by humans, of course it's full of contradictions. If you'd want to start with the more or less historical work, you'd have to start with Jozua, but even then the book of Judges is where they started getting the general gist right.



Alara317 on 08 January 2018

When the Catholic church is squeaky clean, then and only then may it be free of criticism.