Are we supposed to worship something that does not want to be worshipped.

(May 7, 2009 at 3:52 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: A church isn't the building, it's the people. You're allowed to be inspired but there's a common sense limit defined with such guidance as idolatory. Idolatory is destructive to faith. Nature is enough.

They used to tell us that as Rat Catchers as well.

Why do churches have buildings then? More to the point why do some Christian religions have rather awesome & expensive buildings?

Kyu

Actually frodo that is not what I wanted you to see with that demonstration.What I was pointing out was the contradiction on Gods part.Making a commandment, and then authorizing them to violate it to take away a plague that he himself unleashed upon them.This God of yours is not very practical considering that he is supposed to be omnicient as well he knew that they would worship that serpent but he led them to it.

Where is the proof that 'god' has made any commandments?

Are they not commandments from people?

(May 8, 2009 at 9:18 am)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: Why do churches have buildings then? More to the point why do some Christian religions have rather awesome & expensive buildings?

Indeed. Is it idolatory or inspiration? Is it servicing the community or corruption of power, boasting, lies?

(May 8, 2009 at 9:45 am)chatpilot Wrote: Actually frodo that is not what I wanted you to see with that demonstration.What I was pointing out was the contradiction on Gods part.Making a commandment, and then authorizing them to violate it to take away a plague that he himself unleashed upon them.This God of yours is not very practical considering that he is supposed to be omnicient as well he knew that they would worship that serpent but he led them to it.

There is no detriment to the biblical God here. It's your understanding is way too limited chatpilot.

(May 9, 2009 at 1:15 pm)g-mark Wrote: Where is the proof that 'god' has made any commandments?

Are they not commandments from people?

If you don't believe god inspired them, yes. To make sense in context they need to be from God.

Where is the evidence that God DID inspire them? Or that there is even A God to inspire them in the first place, Fr0d0?

It's truth in it's own right EvF. It doesn't need evidence. Evidence, as you know, is absolutely illogical in this context. You'd need God like measuring tools like Adrian said. I confidently assume that you aren't a god.

There can be no evidence but that doesn't mean that that's a reason to believe. That's a reason NOT to believe.

If there COULD be evidence and there WAS, then you'd have a good reason to believe.

Since there is no evidence, why believe? If you are to believe because there can't be evidence then by that logic you'd believe in fucking anything and everything unprovable and unfalsifiable.

There can be no evidence of the FSM either, or Zeus, or Santa, or Russell's Teapot by that logic. So by that logic also - if you believe in God because there's no evidence then you'd believe in them too.

If there not being able to be any evidence in GOD= reason to believe then the same applies to all THOSE things too (and much much much more, on and on).

There's no reason to believe those things because there's no evidence. The fact there CAN'T be evidence because they happen to be unprovable and unfalsifiable does NOT make it a good reason to believe in them! And that includes God. I mean that would be like saying the fact there CAN'T be any evidence IS evidence! Totally nonsensical. Non-sequitur.

EvF

Blimey, you're a broken record EvF. THERE IS reason, just you don't make the reasoning where I do.

Evidence has been discounted unless you can counter the logic presented... that you'd need god like measuring tools to view the evidence. If you cannot counter this logic, then you can't keep repeating the evidence line. It's presently debunked.

(May 9, 2009 at 6:04 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Blimey, you're a broken record EvF. THERE IS reason, just you don't make the reasoning where I do.

Evidence has been discounted unless you can counter the logic presented... that you'd need god like measuring tools to view the evidence. If you cannot counter this logic, then you can't keep repeating the evidence line. It's presently debunked.

Can you show us your reasoning? Can you show us why you believe Fr0d0?