Re: What is the internet comming to?
Posted by Crono on Tue Sep 20th at 1:40am 2005
I believe I said, "how many versions have there been of many religious books over the eons?", but: okay.
All I was saying though, is that it's foolish (YES, it is) to think that things don't get changed, especially when someone has a great deal to gain by it being changed. Whether it be a law, book, or whatever.
Even if you say "they" have dated the book back and "said" it is very close ... does that actually mean it is? It's possible, and is likely, but it's not guaranteed ... that's where the whole faith thing I was talking about comes in to play. When it comes down to it: it is something you BELIEVE. You may believe it so much and advocate your view to such a point that you claim to 'know' that's the way it is, but it's still a belief, whatever that specific belief is: it doesn't matter.
I know earlier, you said something along the lines of, "there is a right and wrong belief" and blah blah blah. And, what I'm saying is: of course there's a right and wrong belief, but as far as you, I, or anyone concerned: we don't know which one it is, or even if the belief exists yet! That's my view on imposing beliefs anyway. There really is no way to know you're correct ... you'd have to go there and see and come back ... but, there's always a million reasons why one single event can happen. So, it's no wonder why it can't be proven. I mean, seriously, even if we ran into an Alien civilization that said, "yeah, we spiked your oceans which eventually formed into Human life" ... even if that were true, I doubt many would believe it. (Except Alientologists. You know? That famous-people-who-like-Battlefield-Earth-a-little-too-much-cult ... which costs money)
Does that make sense? That's the only reason why I'm saying it's "wrong" to impose your views. I mean ... would you think it's okay if lets say: you taught your child that we were all created from Elves and fairies? And literally made them believe that their entire lives? Wouldn't that be "wrong"? And mean, not to mention, since you know it is a pointless quest if they ever took it, to find themselves through those beliefs (since it's rubbish you made up). I'm not saying any religion is this ... it is odd that religions that never really interacted have many similarities in their books and stories. But, as we DO know, just because there IS a correlation, doesn't mean it actually means something.
Of course, as Dr.G said, it is all speculative. No one really knows. And if they claim to, they're probably lying or have some other agenda.
On a side note, I've never understood the reason why some religions want SO many people, and going about it by any means necessary. It seems, they just don't want to be wrong. I don't see why it's any harm to let other people believe what they like.
On things like abortion ... I don't know, I think, it should be discouraged, since it does open a window of irresponsibility ... but, on the other hand ... do you really have the right to tell a woman you don't know that she has to have her child? Especially if the child isn't developed yet? (No, the answer is no). Think about it this way: most women who get abortions are teens, who're for all intensive purposes, on their own. If they DID have that child, chances are, it would not have a good life and could even be more prone to be involved in crimes. Now ... it's kind of along the same lines as: if you could go back in time and kill Hitler before he was a threat, would you? I would hope you wouldn't, not because he was a terrible person, or anything like that, but the world would be very different if WW2 never happened. On top of that, who knows? Quite possible someone worse would have taken control of the armed forces in Germany. I mean, Hitler was a moron in strategy, what if his generals ran the whole thing? We would have been slaughtered.
So, really, the easiest thing, and most sensible thing, to do is to not speculate about whatever child being born and not having a chance or anything like that, because, let's take our teen pregnancy issue again, if she did have an abortion and later in her life, she found someone, who she would not have met otherwise, and then began a more wonderful life then if she had kept the original child, then wouldn't that be better? Not to mention, if she had a child then it would be taken care of properly and be a better person (most likely and hopefully).
And I understand what the view is that "everyone should have a chance" type deal, but, it's retarded to think you can control everything, look what happens when you try! Sure, be against abortion, that's your view, but, I would hope that if the time came, no matter how against it you are, you would let it be, since you really have no say. Unless you're willing to help the percentage of women who would have gotten an abortion out of your money, then you have no say. It's, as what was brought up earlier, unless it's happening to you it's very easy to give judgement or advise or to make a choice for who ever.
And, just to mention ... seriously, if you're going down the "group of cells are alive" route, then by your logic women should get pregnant and have a child at every menstruating cycle, since that is potentially another human being. The entire reason WHY women have, what is it? 40,000 eggs? is so they can CHOOSE when and how many children they'd like. Believe me, whether they have a kid now, or some other time, they're all children they can potentially have, they'll all, in some way, be the same.
What really defines a person is how they are treated in their life. But, again. Irresponsibility is such a problem now days. Let me ask you though, if people were more responsible and only got an abortion if absolutely necessary, would you feel differently? (I doubt you would, but I thought I'd ask anyway)
Crono
super admin
6628 posts
633 snarkmarks
Registered: Dec 19th 2003
Location: Oregon, USA
Blame it on Microsoft, God does.
Re: What is the internet comming to?
Posted by wil5on on Tue Sep 20th at 3:26am 2005
On the topic of religion being used to control people, in medieval times, the bible was only allowed to be in latin. Only preists and the nobility could understand latin, so the general populace had no idea what the bible actually said and theyd beleive pretty much anything. The bible was first produced for the masses (in English) illegaly, and people would travel the lands reading from it. This was shortly before the Renaissance.
wil5on
member
1733 posts
323 snarkmarks
Registered: Dec 12th 2003
Location: Adelaide
Occupation: Mapper
"If you talk at all during this lesson, you have detention. Do you understand?"
- My yr11 Economics teacher
Re: What is the internet comming to?
Posted by Crono on Tue Sep 20th at 3:28am 2005
I didn't say no one could be right ... but you don't know. How could you know ... or anyone? What I was trying to point out with the alien comment is that, even if the truth, by whoever, was presented, chances are, if it didn't coincide with what people already believed they'd most likely try to 'destroy' it.
I'm not saying no one is right ... it's just ... how would you determine so? Kill everyone so we can all find out? Then what's the point? You can't go back (as far as we know) and even if you do ... how would you inform anyone? Anyone who generally comes back from "something" isn't believed.
A good example of this, where it is the case that it isn't true, is the general alien abduction. A lot of these abduction stories are too close to things that happen in media. (A good example is the first, ever, recorded report of someone being "abducted", or at least, saying they were, was in the 40's ... in America, only (mostly), which also makes you think, was the DAY after the premiere of the Outer Limits. The "Alien Commander who was controlling [his] brain" was described very closely to the alien commander from that episode.)
It's all belief. I just think, looking at something that's obviously ridiculed could help anyone look at their own beliefs and analyze them. And honestly, why wouldn't you want to do that? It'd only help you understand what you're so faithful in anyway, right?
But, The very concept of saying, "someone may know what is right" when it comes to the existential existence, but ... would it be accepted if it isn't already proclaimed?
I mean if a profit, from heaven, walked up to you tomorrow and said, "Hey, we just wanted to let you know, that only 1 being from out realm has made contact with this world before and you guys are pretty much wrong" ... would you believe him? Let's assume he's correct and everything .... No ... no you wouldn't. Because it goes against everything you believe. Not to mention you can't believe everything you hear or everyone you talk to.
Again, I'm not saying anything about any religion, I'm just saying ... put it in another perspective about something you could get more of a grasp on (since, none of us, most likely, can even comprehend what actually goes on in our universe, not to mention what value, if any, a life has.)
Crono
super admin
6628 posts
633 snarkmarks
Registered: Dec 19th 2003
Location: Oregon, USA
Blame it on Microsoft, God does.
Re: What is the internet comming to?
Posted by Crono on Tue Sep 20th at 4:36am 2005
410 words is not long. If you think it is ... maybe you should read more. Because, you're going to have a hell of a time after high school if you have trouble reading something that's barely a page long.
Like, that post should only take you maybe ... 4 minutes. (I read it in 2 minutes at a gradual pace.)
So ... not that long.
Crono
super admin
6628 posts
633 snarkmarks
Registered: Dec 19th 2003
Location: Oregon, USA
Blame it on Microsoft, God does.
Re: What is the internet comming to?
Posted by Crono on Tue Sep 20th at 4:49am 2005
Yes, I figured that.
But, when I think of the word know I think:
? quote:
1. To possess knowledge, understanding, or information.
2. To be cognizant or aware.
and when I think of the word believe I think:
? quote:
1. To accept as true or real: Do you believe the news stories?
2. To credit with veracity: I believe you.
3. To expect or suppose; think: I believe they will arrive shortly.
1. To have firm faith, especially religious faith.
2. To have faith, confidence, or trust: I believe in your ability to solve the problem.
3. To have confidence in the truth or value of something: We believe in free speech.
4. To have an opinion; think: They have already left, I believe.
Not sure why I'd possibly think that's what those words meant 
( 
)
Also, let me ask you ... how can you KNOW what you think is true ... yet also have faith? What's the point of faith if you know ...
I'm guessing, it's just the words make you feel differently? Kind of like, the flood "victims", whatever agency was getting angry because media networks continually refereed to the people there as "refugees" ... and it's just like ... look, I know the word has gotten misconstrued because of people fleeing their country from government persecution, but, the word refugee is someone seeking refuge including from a natural disaster. (The on-line dictionary doesn't have that, but Oxford does)
Crono
super admin
6628 posts
633 snarkmarks
Registered: Dec 19th 2003
Location: Oregon, USA
Blame it on Microsoft, God does.
Re: What is the internet comming to?
Posted by Crono on Tue Sep 20th at 5:43am 2005
Yeah ... but ... once you "know" from faith ... at some point you "know" ... but would you still have "faith" at that point? Either way, whichever comes first, by your description(s), they will occur at the same time, at which point ... they're contradicting each other.
But, I'm really focusing on, believing or faith or whatever, based on whether you can prove it or not. Because all we "know" we generally have some way to prove it, at least right now. And by prove, I mean, 99.99% to the T (Not sure why that's so common ... to the T ... what a weird phrase ... what makes T more accurate then any other letter? It's not particularly hard to write or say either) that this is the case. Since, if it were disproved, in any situation, it would automatically become False. I think the only exception to this is "classical" physics, since it still works enough on our plane, no matter how much it doesn't work on a quantum existence.
I just keep racking up the posts, don't I? ... I'm almost at 4K aren't I? Man, that makes me feel like an ass.
Crono
super admin
6628 posts
633 snarkmarks
Registered: Dec 19th 2003
Location: Oregon, USA
Blame it on Microsoft, God does.
Re: What is the internet comming to?
Posted by Crono on Wed Sep 21st at 1:44am 2005
A T square! Yes. I didn't think about that possibility.
Some of those "phrases" I've never heard though.
You know what I think is a little ... well ... sad? Sliced bread wasn't "invented" until 1935. (That's the official date, because it wasn't sold pre-sliced before that day on wide scales) ... the toaster is older. Before, you just cut off the piece of bread you were going to use. Then again, most households either baked bread everyday, or bought it fresh from a baker. I just thought that date was a little late in the "game". (Same thing goes for Milkshakes ... and hot dogs for that matter)
Crono
super admin
6628 posts
633 snarkmarks
Registered: Dec 19th 2003
Location: Oregon, USA
Blame it on Microsoft, God does.
Re: What is the internet comming to?
Posted by mazemaster on Wed Sep 21st at 3:00am 2005
I've lived in the US all my life and have never heard anyone use the word "shoestring" to mean shoelace.
mazemaster
member
890 posts
162 snarkmarks
Registered: Feb 12th 2002
