Atheists and Agnostics Meeting Place

[wakanabetch]

ganito po kasi un pag kaka alam ko kung naniniwala ka na may Diyos


kung meron man ma tatanggap mo ung gift nya

if wala

wala lang diba ? so mas ok kung maniwala na lang ?

un ay opinion ko lang

 

[ronell10]

ganito po kasi un pag kaka alam ko kung naniniwala ka na may Diyos


kung meron man ma tatanggap mo ung gift nya

if wala

wala lang diba ? so mas ok kung maniwala na lang ?

un ay opinion ko lang

anong gift ba?

 

[GarapataSaBuwan]

ganito po kasi un pag kaka alam ko kung naniniwala ka na may Diyos


kung meron man ma tatanggap mo ung gift nya

if wala

wala lang diba ? so mas ok kung maniwala na lang ?

un ay opinion ko lang

Merong tinatawag na "Pascal's Wager" pagdating sa paniniwala sa God (naalala ko lang dahil nasa final exam namin yun years and years ago). Parang yun yung sinasabi mo na "mas ok kung maniwala na lang," kasi kung totoo, you reap all the benefits, pero kung hindi, walang mawawala sa yo. Praktikalan lang ang dating. :P

 

[wakanabetch]

@garapatasabuwan yea parang ganun nga



@ronell10 ung gift of life or ung eternal life in heaven ung gift pag naniwala ka ma tatanggap mo sila kung totoo man ang Diyos pero kung d totoo dba wala naman consequence gets mo sir ung point ko ?

 

[mightymarc]

di ko alam kung puro alternick lahat ng bago dito oh ano
pero welcum na din.

 

[GarapataSaBuwan]

di ko alam kung puro alternick lahat ng bago dito oh ano
pero welcum na din.

Sino in particular at bakit mo nasabi?

 

[greyhame]

Some creationists claim that evolution is atheistic. This is in fact false. Evolution is no more atheistic than, say, farming, or engineering.
Even Pope John Paul II himself did not reject evolution.

“[N]ew findings lead us toward the recognition of evolution as more than a hypothesis. In fact it is remarkable that this theory has had progressively greater influence on the spirit of researchers, following a series of discoveries in different scholarly disciplines. The convergence in the results of these independent studies—which was neither planned nor sought—constitutes in itself a significant argument in favor of the theory.”

-from a speech to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (1996)
Also, more than ten thousand members of clergy have declared:

"We the undersigned, Christian clergy from many different traditions, believe that the timeless truths of the Bible and the discoveries of modern science may comfortably coexist. We believe that the theory of evolution is a foundational scientific truth, one that has stood up to rigorous scrutiny and upon which much of human knowledge and achievement rests." (Clergy Letter Project 2005)

What should theists be concerned about is creationism (those who believe in the literal interpretation of Genesis), because this thought can lead to a crisis of faith, when they realize its absurdity, and its arguments that are downright dishonest.
For others, creationism led them to abandon religion altogether.

 

[GarapataSaBuwan]

Some creationists claim that evolution is atheistic. This is in fact false. Evolution is no more atheistic than, say, farming, or engineering.
Even Pope John Paul II himself did not reject evolution.

-from a speech to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (1996)
Also, more than ten thousand members of clergy have declared:

What should theists be concerned about is creationism (those who believe in the literal interpretation of Genesis), because this thought can lead to a crisis of faith, when they realize its absurdity, and its arguments that are downright dishonest.
For others, creationism led them to abandon religion altogether.

Ang hirap kasi sa theistic creationism (opinyon lang) parang matinding compromise lang ng magkabilang dulo. "Bible as the source of all truth"--kung literal, obviously magfe-fail, kung metaphorical, ang danger sa faith ay magiging sobrang subject to interpretation na makakapanghina sa doctrine, lalo na dahil maraming tao ang umaasa na lang sa interpretation ng religious leaders nila, although they take that as absolute truths anyway.

So kung irereconcile ang science at doctrine, tapos yung doctrine ang maga-adjust along the way dahil nga merong scientific evidence--na obvious na nangyayari na sa simbahan tulad ng quotes mo--gaano pala kareliable ang "universal truths" nila, at what does that say about the reliability ng source nun?

 

[sevenshadows]

Ang hirap kasi sa theistic creationism (opinyon lang) parang matinding compromise lang ng magkabilang dulo. "Bible as the source of all truth"--kung literal, obviously magfe-fail, kung metaphorical, ang danger sa faith ay magiging sobrang subject to interpretation na makakapanghina sa doctrine, lalo na dahil maraming tao ang umaasa na lang sa interpretation ng religious leaders nila, although they take that as absolute truths anyway.

So kung irereconcile ang science at doctrine, tapos yung doctrine ang maga-adjust along the way dahil nga merong scientific evidence--na obvious na nangyayari na sa simbahan tulad ng quotes mo--gaano pala kareliable ang "universal truths" nila, at what does that say about the reliability ng source nun?

Greyhame presented firstly John Paul II. You should learn to differentiate the different stances of different religious groups. It is Catholics vs. Protestants with Muslims.

"Bible as the source of all truth" does not apply to Catholics, as they created the man-made Holy Bible. The Bible is just one of their tools. Protestants believe in "Sola Scriptura" in the same way Muslims are against evolution as the Holy Koran has preeminence in almost all things there is.

 

[greyhame]

Ang hirap kasi sa theistic creationism (opinyon lang) parang matinding compromise lang ng magkabilang dulo. "Bible as the source of all truth"--kung literal, obviously magfe-fail, kung metaphorical, ang danger sa faith ay magiging sobrang subject to interpretation na makakapanghina sa doctrine, lalo na dahil maraming tao ang umaasa na lang sa interpretation ng religious leaders nila, although they take that as absolute truths anyway.

So kung irereconcile ang science at doctrine, tapos yung doctrine ang maga-adjust along the way dahil nga merong scientific evidence--na obvious na nangyayari na sa simbahan tulad ng quotes mo--gaano pala kareliable ang "universal truths" nila, at what does that say about the reliability ng source nun?

Good analysis.
Yung iba kasing theists, may knee-jerk reaction pagdating sa evolution, not knowing that many clergies have accepted evolution as a scientific fact, and not just a hypothesis.

 

[GarapataSaBuwan]

Greyhame presented firstly John Paul II. You should learn to differentiate the different stances of different religious groups. It is Catholics vs. Protestants with Muslims.

"Bible as the source of all truth" does not apply to Catholics, as they created the man-made Holy Bible. The Bible is just one of their tools. Protestants believe in "Sola Scriptura" in the same way Muslims are against evolution as the Holy Koran has preeminence in almost all things there is.

Tama ka, nag-generalize ako dahil hindi ako ganoon ka-learned pagdating sa particular stances ng mga religion. Ngayon ko lang nalaman ang tungkol sa Sola Scriptura. Thank you for the gentle reminder at bagong kaalaman.

Pero along the same vein, kung titingnan kung gaano naman ka-kaunting tao ang nakaaintindi at nakaka-appreciate sa difference na yun, gaano siya nagiging karelevant, let's say, sa vast majority ng mga Katoliko na nagsisimba tuwing Linggo na "naniniwala sa sinasabi ng Bibliya" in the most basic sense? Hindi ba ganun pa rin katindi yung magiging krisis nila? Yun lang yung main point ko. Palitan mo ng "Bible as a guide to morality," pareho pa rin ang epekto sa isang Katolikong nagsisimulang magtanong.

 

[mightymarc]

The fallacy that authority=truth

 

[ronell10]

@garapatasabuwan yea parang ganun nga



@ronell10 ung gift of life or ung eternal life in heaven ung gift pag naniwala ka ma tatanggap mo sila kung totoo man ang Diyos pero kung d totoo dba wala naman consequence gets mo sir ung point ko ?

actually nalito ako sa sagot mo


@marc

ano daw?


@xhi

long time! si GH pumunta dun

 

[mightymarc]

yun sagot ko sa tanong ni TickOnMoon. teka ako pa sinasabihan mo ng ano daw?

 

[ronell10]

yun sagot ko sa tanong ni TickOnMoon. teka ako pa sinasabihan mo ng ano daw?

yung previous post sa kabilang page? hehe sorry nalito na din ako, naddc net

 

[sevenshadows]

The fallacy that authority=truth

Indeed a very useful tool in proving the fallacy of the Abrahamic faiths is the process in determining the ultimate visible human authority.

In that process they will probably beat each other so hard that ultimately we would not be needing to talk about it again.

 

[9Ten8ti]

@garapatasabuwan.. ngayun ko pa lang nabasa post mo kasi nagkaproblema si butas sim hehe...matagal din akong nagstudy ng bible(self study) kaya nakabuo ako ng opinion ng ganun pero ilang taon din bago ko siya totally accepted... kung sinundan mo ang bible from genesis to revelation, wala yata doon passage that god says i am omniscience or all knowing... alam naman natin imahenasyun ng tao talagang to da highest ikanga... kaya naisip ko lang na yung writers or yung mga characters that involved in the bible ay sila lang may claim that god is omniscience yet never nagclaim si god... at kaya passed on nalang until our generations... yung god ko? yun yung god of da bible base sa understanding ko at di base sa anumang sabi ng bawat religions...una ko pinag-aaralan doktrina ng bawat christian religions yet wala ni isa totally understand da bible(Still my strong opinion), andami kong tanong na di masagot kaya nagself study nalang ako...warning lang to all TnB readers, itoy opinion ko lang at ako ito. walang kinalaman ibang tao or organisasyun rito, ang sakin lang naishare ko sa inyo my understanding about god.

 

[darts090]

@garapatasabuwan.. ngayun ko pa lang nabasa post mo kasi nagkaproblema si butas sim hehe...matagal din akong nagstudy ng bible(self study) kaya nakabuo ako ng opinion ng ganun pero ilang taon din bago ko siya totally accepted... kung sinundan mo ang bible from genesis to revelation, wala yata doon passage that god says i am omniscience or all knowing... alam naman natin imahenasyun ng tao talagang to da highest ikanga... kaya naisip ko lang na yung writers or yung mga characters that involved in the bible ay sila lang may claim that god is omniscience yet never nagclaim si god... at kaya passed on nalang until our generations... yung god ko? yun yung god of da bible base sa understanding ko at di base sa anumang sabi ng bawat religions...una ko pinag-aaralan doktrina ng bawat christian religions yet wala ni isa totally understand da bible(Still my strong opinion), andami kong tanong na di masagot kaya nagself study nalang ako...warning lang to all TnB readers, itoy opinion ko lang at ako ito. walang kinalaman ibang tao or organisasyun rito, ang sakin lang naishare ko sa inyo my understanding about god.

Job 37:16

Do you know the balancings of the clouds,
the wondrous works of him who is perfect in knowledge.

Psalm 147:5

Great is our Lord and mighty in power;
his understanding has no limit.

1 Samuel 2:3

Talk no more so very proudly,
let not arrogance come from your mouth;
for the LORD is a God of knowledge,
and by him actions are weighed.

Isaiah 55:9

For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
so are my ways higher than your ways
and my thoughts than your thoughts.

Job 28:24

For he looks to the ends of the earth
and sees everything under the heavens.

1 John 3:19-20

By this we shall know that we are of the truth and reassure our heart before him; for whenever our heart condemns us, God is greater than our heart, and he knows everything.

Hebrews 4:13

And no creature is hidden from his sight, but all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account.

Isaiah 46:9

I am God, and there is none like me,
declaring the end from the beginning
and from ancient times things not yet done.


Psalm 139:4

Even before a word is on my tongue,
behold, O LORD, you know it altogether.

 

[renmazuo274]

Boom! Score one for the de facto theists against one claiming to be one of their own.

Still does not change the fact that the fairytale book is still written by man and not by the god himself though so there could be errors

 

[GarapataSaBuwan]

@garapatasabuwan.. ngayun ko pa lang nabasa post mo kasi nagkaproblema si butas sim hehe...matagal din akong nagstudy ng bible(self study) kaya nakabuo ako ng opinion ng ganun pero ilang taon din bago ko siya totally accepted... kung sinundan mo ang bible from genesis to revelation, wala yata doon passage that god says i am omniscience or all knowing... alam naman natin imahenasyun ng tao talagang to da highest ikanga... kaya naisip ko lang na yung writers or yung mga characters that involved in the bible ay sila lang may claim that god is omniscience yet never nagclaim si god... at kaya passed on nalang until our generations... yung god ko? yun yung god of da bible base sa understanding ko at di base sa anumang sabi ng bawat religions...una ko pinag-aaralan doktrina ng bawat christian religions yet wala ni isa totally understand da bible(Still my strong opinion), andami kong tanong na di masagot kaya nagself study nalang ako...warning lang to all TnB readers, itoy opinion ko lang at ako ito. walang kinalaman ibang tao or organisasyun rito, ang sakin lang naishare ko sa inyo my understanding about god.

"...yet wala ni isa totally understand da bible..." Kahit sabihin mong strong opinion mo lang, sinasabi mo pa rin na your God is the God of the Bible. Kung yung accounts sa Bible ay, according to you:

1) matinding imahinasyon lang, or
2) mayroong claims na ang "characters" lang niya ang nagclaim at hindi pala talaga galing kay God (response ni darts notwithstanding),

plus:

3) ginawa ng tao at kinompile ng tao para ngayon ay maging guide sa religion,

then I really don't know kung bakit mo pa kinailangang magbase sa Bible ng isang sobrang derived na paniniwala.