Re: Digest for the-sspc@googlegroups.com - 18 Messages in 1 Topic

[John Hawley]

He does

Sent from my iPhone

On May 7, 2010, at 2:06 AM, the-sspc...@googlegroups.com wrote:

  Today's Topic Summary

Group: http://groups.google.com/group/the-sspc/topics

• Religion [18 Updates]

 Topic: Religion

Quoc-Thuy Vuong <vqt...@lv5.org> May 06 07:45AM -0400 ^

 
Maybe God has logic himself. Asian refers to the object having roots from
asia. Japan is known as the land of the rising sun. Japan is an asian
country. Therefore, the sun is asian.
 
Thuy has owned Mvpeh's example which owned Andrew's opinion.
 
Cheers
 


 

Andrew Towle <andyt...@gmail.com> May 06 07:00AM -0500 ^

 
I didn't really believe that. I just kind of said to get back at Michael, in
stupid way of course. But after Adam and Eve were banished from the Garden
of Eve, they became sinful and developed a more human way of thinking.
That's the kind of thinking that we use today. We, as one may say, are
selfish. We won't belive in something unless we have some sort of proof. Why
is that? It's because of logic. God himself didn't create logic, but after
we became sinful, it's the way our minds became.
 
Beers
 
 
--
Andy T.


 

Quoc-Thuy Vuong <vqt...@lv5.org> May 06 03:19PM -0400 ^

 
Soooo...is logic a sign of sin? -aru?
 


 

Mvpeh <marton....@gmail.com> May 06 03:37PM -0500 ^

 
What you just said is logic is a sin?
 
[?][?][?][?][?][?]
 
 
--
-Marton


 

Quoc-Thuy Vuong <vqt...@lv5.org> May 06 04:52PM -0400 ^

 
More accurately a *sign* of sin. If people use logic, they use a
god-forsaken trait, according to Andrew. Then again, to come up with that I
need logic so I show sin according to him. If Andrew is to come back, he
would show sin. In a way, it is sinning. I think.
 
Cheers? -aru?
 


 

Andrew Towle <andyt...@gmail.com> May 06 04:37PM -0500 ^

 
No, I don't belive logic is a sin. But us, by human nature, think a certain
way. Logic isn't necasarily a bad thing. It's certainly not a sin.
 
 
--
Andy T.


 

Quoc-Thuy Vuong <vqt...@lv5.org> May 06 05:43PM -0400 ^

 
Are you sure? You said that logic is a human way of thinking, formed after
we became sinful. Logic is therefore a part of humans or sin. Atleast, it's
a sign of sin.
 
-aru
 


 

Andrew Towle <andyt...@gmail.com> May 06 04:44PM -0500 ^

 
Well, I guess you could say that....
 
 
--
Andy T.


 

Quoc-Thuy Vuong <vqt...@lv5.org> May 06 05:45PM -0400 ^

 
Then again, maybe God did in order for humans to create some sort of order
for us to live by. *Maybe*-aru
 


 

Andrew Towle <andyt...@gmail.com> May 06 04:46PM -0500 ^

 
Yeah, that sounds more like it...
 
 
--
Andy T.


 

David Reich <elli...@gmail.com> May 06 05:50PM -0400 ^

 
But wait, you say that logic isn't from God - but didn't God create
absolutely everything? Including logic, even indirectly? By creating
humans who created logic, it could be atrributed to Him?
 


 

Quoc-Thuy Vuong <vqt...@lv5.org> May 06 05:53PM -0400 ^

 
On top of that, if God can create everything can he create a material that
even he can't destroy? Being omnipotent he can destroy it. Although, by
being able to destroy it, he didn't create the material. *Paradox!!!*[?]
 
Cheers
 


 

Michael Oppenheimer <doomw...@gmail.com> May 06 09:15PM -0400 ^

 
God can't have created logic. It's just there. That's like saying that God
created math. It can't be created, it's just there because it is.


 

Paul Gully <nano...@gmail.com> May 06 09:24PM -0400 ^

 
mainly because logic and mathematics would be the method god would've used
to create the universe. nothing, not even god, could make any sense without
logic.
 
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 9:15 PM, Michael Oppenheimer


 

Andrew Towle <andyt...@gmail.com> May 06 09:17PM -0500 ^

 
Logic is a human way of thinking. So is SMALL-MINDEDNESS.
 
 
--
Andy T.


 

Quoc-Thuy Vuong <vqt...@lv5.org> May 06 10:22PM -0400 ^

 
Hm... small-mindedness.
 
small-mind·ed (smôlmndd)
*adj.*
*1. * Having a narrow or selfish attitude.
*2. * Characterized by pettiness or selfishness.
 
By your action of capital letters, you imply that someone here is such. By
my eyes, I see no one who is conducting the action of small-mindedness.
Either you see something I don't or you have misused the word. Or...
 
Cheers
 
 


 

Mvpeh <marton....@gmail.com> May 06 10:14PM -0500 ^

 
God couldn't be "God" without logic. He obviously uses logic for his
decisions. For example: He apparently disliked Jews, thought of a plan,
created Hitler, and BAM! 11 million Jews dead.
 
A moar serious example: The 7 days of which he created us. He thought out
his processes. There; LOGIC!
 
No offense to Jews, just a crude little joke. O_o
 
 
--
-Marton


 

Mvpeh <marton....@gmail.com> May 06 10:17PM -0500 ^

 
There are two types of logic:
 
Deductive reasoning concerns what follows necessarily from given premises.
However, inductive reasoning—the process of deriving a reliable
generalization from observations—has sometimes been included in the study of
logic. Correspondingly, we must distinguish between deductive validity and
inductive validity (called "cogency"). An inference is deductively valid if
and only if there is no possible situation in which all the premises are
true and the conclusion false.An inductive argument can be neither valid nor
invalid.
 
Just defining logic, pretty much.
 
 
--
-Marton


 

[Andrew Towle]

Marton, God did not hate the Jews. He doesn't hate anyone.

--
Andy T.

[Quoc-Thuy Vuong]

Then if he didn't hate the Jews, why did he send a destructive genocide upon them? Twice? And is still killing them today? Isn't everyone God's children and made by God? Then why did he make people who are bent on destroying others in his name?

-Aru?

[Michael Oppenheimer]

And why do all the Christians say that if you are Jewish then you go to hell?

[Andrew Towle]

Christians don't say that. In the Bible, it refers to the Jews as God's chosen people. If yiou actually read everything in the Bible tha there is to read about the Jews, you's see what I am talking about and you'd stop babbling.

--
Andy T.

[Quoc-Thuy Vuong]

Since I'm not going to read the bible anytime soon, can you post that excerpt? I'd like to see the evidence rather than hear conflicting, empty arguments.
And who is yiou? And you's?

Cheers

[Michael Oppenheimer]

First of all, I'm not babbling. I am just passing on what every Christian (other than you apparently) told me. The part about the Jews that you call the Old Testament is actually the Torah (abridged). Don't the Christians blame the Jews for killing Jesus? Also, I haven't read the Bible, I plan to after I read the other books I have lined up. But someone ruined the ending for me, they told me that the main character dies...

P.S. See, I can make jokes too

[Quoc-Thuy Vuong]

The main character dies!?!? Now you ruined it for me, too!
Good thing I wasn't gonna read it, anyway.

Cheers

[dew96 (saucy)]

Um Christians don't have this hatred that you are talking about. In fact, in the book of Exodus and Leviticus multiple times God refers to the Jews as His chosen people. Personally, I believe that faithful Jews can go to heaven. And technically it was the Roman government that crucified Jesus, not the Jews. So don't just accuse Christians of something without researching it. And the main character does die. EVERY ONE DIES. The entire bible is about people who lived 2000 years or more ago! Abraham is dead, Moses is dead, Paul is dead, and Jesus ascended to heaven (after his resurrection) . Every "main character" is dead in other religions too! Muhammad is gone, and so is the Buddha (unless you count his reincarnations) and pretty much everyone except for the Dali Lama (unless you believe that his reincarnations aren't real).

[Quoc-Thuy Vuong]

Everybody dies!?! NOOOOOOO! SO MANY SPOILERS!

Well, if it was the Roman government, why is it that Jews are scapegoated by the Nazis, enslaved by the Egyptians, and are killed today in Palestine? Hmmmm?

Cheers

[dew96 (saucy)]

Hitler thought he was right in killing the Jews because he didn't share their belief, not because they "killed Jesus". The Egyptians had the Jews enslaved simply because they had come into their land and worked for them by choice and then became enslaved (which btw God led them out of Egypt). And in Palestine, they are fighting over land, political freedom, and differences in belief, again not because they "killed Jesus". 

[Paul Gully]

well, it WAS the roman government. kinda.  Pontius Pilate was the
roman governor in that area at the time, and he 'convicted' Jesus. its
not like it was an executive order from the emporer though, Pilate was
acting on his own. the later roman emperors (Constantine) converted,
and the Roman Empire split into the Byzantine Empire and the Holy
Roman Empire. The enslavement by the supposedly egyptians happend far
far before the events of the New Testament, The Nazis were acting on
political and 'genetic' 'evidence', no religion really involved
(although Hitler was a devout christian), and the Jews in Palestine
are being persecuted by islamic extremists.

also, the jews have always been bankers- and as such have been getting
in the way of people being rich. a perfectly simple explanation is
that this bias against Judaism evolved from this. just speculating
here, though.

no god is nessecary to explain any of this....

[Paul Gully]

oh yeah, and this is correct- the jews definitly did not kill jesus.
he WAS a jew...

[Quoc-Thuy Vuong]

...Excellent rebuttals!

Cheers!

[Andrew Towle]

Uh..Paul. Even if Hitler said, or the books say, that he was a devout Christian, I can tell you that that's wrong. Any devout Christian knows and believes that killing people is wrong. Maybe he accepted Jesus right before he commited suicide, but if he didn't, then I'm pretty sure he's burning in hell right now.

--
Andy T.

[Paul Gully]

the thing is, andrew, that that generalisation is dead wrong, too. how
many acts of war have been made in the name of the christian god?
think of the thousands killed in the crusades. you are ALWAYS going to
be wrong when you say 'any devout christian knows...' because all
people interpret things differently- there is no absolute common
ground in religion.

[Andrew Towle]

Ok...But Hitler was by no means a true Christian. True, different people interpret things differently, but Hitler being a 'devout Christian' couldn't have interpreted the Bible verse ' Thou shalt not commit murder' to mean 'Hey! I wanna go kill all of the Jews becuase they aren't Christians!'

--
Andy T.

[Paul Gully]

well yeah, his actions weren't inspired by the bible, i agree. they
were inspired by the political situation at the time. he may have used
it as a rationalisation in private, i would imagine, but thats just
speculation.

[Andrew Towle]

I agree with that, yes.

--
Andy T.

[Paul Gully]

hooray! i think this is a first on here- peaceful solution without intervention!

[Andrew Towle]

Halelujah...if i spelled that right.

--
Andy T.

[Quoc-Thuy Vuong]

Hallelujah. That's how one spells it.

When there's agreement, there's harmony. When there's harmony, there's balance. Balance! Hooray-aru!

Cheers

On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 5:22 PM, Andrew Towle <andyt...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hallelujah...if i spelled that right.

[Andrew Towle]

All we need now is some small talk and some old person bad humor(like what i'm saying right now) and then we all walk away feeling awkward.

--
Andy T.

[Mvpeh]

I never said God hated Jews. Learn to read..?

--
-Marton

[Mvpeh]

AND OMG AN INTERVENTION IS A SNIPER RIFLE
--
-Marton

[Mvpeh]

And, Hitler didn't directly kill Jews. He just ordered his men.

--
-Marton

[Mvpeh]

And, Andrew, if you say Hitler is burning in Hell, all military commanders in the history of this planet will be, also. As will politicians that make the statement.

Anyways, he wasn't a Christian.

The claim is sometimes made that Hitler was a Christian - a Roman Catholic until the day he died. In fact, Hitler rejected Christianity.

The book Hitler's Secret Conversations 1941-1944 published by Farrar, Straus and Young, Inc.first edition, 1953, contains definitive proof of Hitler's real views. The book was published in Britain under the title, _Hitler's Table Talk 1941-1944, which title was used for the Oxford University Press paperback edition in the United States.

All of these are quotes from Adolf Hitler:

Night of 11th-12th July, 1941:

National Socialism and religion cannot exist together.... The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity's illegitimate child. Both are inventions of the Jew. The deliberate lie in the matter of religion was introduced into the world by Christianity.... Let it not be said that Christianity brought man the life of the soul, for that evolution was in the natural order of things. (p 6 & 7)

10th October, 1941, midday:

Christianity is a rebellion against natural law, a protest against nature. Taken to its logical extreme, Christianity would mean the systematic cultivation of the human failure. (p 43)

14th October, 1941, midday:

The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death.... When understanding of the universe has become widespread... Christian doctrine will be convicted of absurdity.... Christianity has reached the peak of absurdity.... And that's why someday its structure will collapse.... ...the only way to get rid of Christianity is to allow it to die little by little.... Christianity the liar.... We'll see to it that the Churches cannot spread abroad teachings in conflict with the interests of the State. (p 49-52)

19th October, 1941, night:

The reason why the ancient world was so pure, light and serene was that it knew nothing of the two great scourges: the pox and Christianity.

21st October, 1941, midday:

Originally, Christianity was merely an incarnation of Bolshevism, the destroyer.... The decisive falsification of Jesus' doctrine was the work of St.Paul. He gave himself to this work... for the purposes of personal exploitation.... Didn't the world see, carried on right into the Middle Ages, the same old system of martyrs, tortures, faggots? Of old, it was in the name of Christianity. Today, it's in the name of Bolshevism. Yesterday the instigator was Saul: the instigator today, Mardochai. Saul was changed into St.Paul, and Mardochai into Karl Marx. By exterminating this pest, we shall do humanity a service of which our soldiers can have no idea. (p 63-65)

13th December, 1941, midnight:

Christianity is an invention of sick brains: one could imagine nothing more senseless, nor any more indecent way of turning the idea of the Godhead into a mockery.... .... When all is said, we have no reason to wish that the Italians and Spaniards should free themselves from the drug of Christianity. Let's be the only people who are immunised against the disease. (p 118 & 119)

14th December, 1941, midday:

Kerrl, with noblest of intentions, wanted to attempt a synthesis between National Socialism and Christianity. I don't believe the thing's possible, and I see the obstacle in Christianity itself.... Pure Christianity-- the Christianity of the catacombs-- is concerned with translating Christian doctrine into facts. It leads quite simply to the annihilation of mankind. It is merely whole-hearted Bolshevism, under a tinsel of metaphysics. (p 119 & 120)

9th April, 1942, dinner:

There is something very unhealthy about Christianity (p 339)

27th February, 1942, midday:

It would always be disagreeable for me to go down to posterity as a man who made concessions in this field. I realize that man, in his imperfection, can commit innumerable errors-- but to devote myself deliberately to errors, that is something I cannot do. I shall never come personally to terms with the Christian lie. Our epoch Uin the next 200 yearse will certainly see the end of the disease of Christianity.... My regret will have been that I couldn't... behold ." (p 278)

 

--
-Marton

[Paul Gully]

hmm, thats interesting. thanks for correcting me on that point, although the bulk of my statement is still valid besides that. that is very interesting, actually.

[Andrew Towle]

Mvp, I didn't accuse you of saying God hated the Jews. I'm sorry if I did. Aren't you a Christian anyways?

--
Andy T.

[Mvpeh]

   I'm Christian, but half of me is Muslim. :D

--
-Marton

[Andrew Towle]

Ok. Do you mean half Muslim beliefs or heritage?

--
Andy T.

[Mvpeh]

Both.


--
-Marton

[dew96 (saucy)]

Can we have a real conversation about religion again instead of these short blurps? Thnx

On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 9:44 PM, Mvpeh <marton....@gmail.com> wrote:

Both.


--
-Marton

[Andrew Towle]

BLURP. BLURP.

--
Andy T.

[Quoc-Thuy Vuong]

Aiyaa...

Well back to religion, can Science really disprove Buddhism and its teachings? Souls really can't be tracked by scientific methods. Now discuss.

Cheers

[Mvpeh]

Yeah, people say that souls are real because they've been proved "scientifically". Explain.


--
-Marton

[Quoc-Thuy Vuong]

I meant scientifically disproven. Although, Paul displayed some evidence where souls only exist of free will didn't. It didn't make any sense to me, though-aru.

[Paul Gully]

no, science cannot categorically (or empirically , for that matter) disprove any claim that makes no observable predictions...

BUT Occams razor says there is no reason to make such claims. its not necessary for the world to make sense.

not to mention descartes clocks (which i posted about earlier), which makes souls basically pointless anyway. 

Martin, the 'experiment' you may be referring that 'proves' the existence of souls to was a flop- it was conducted under no professional scrutiny and the raw data is not conclusive at all. basically they said that the weight of the human body changed slightly at the time of death- which they claimed was the soul leaving the body. the results were not repeatable in anyway, and were shoddy at best even then.

[Michael Oppenheimer]

Way back a while ago, when Thuy was saying 'Why did Hitler kill the Jews then?' I think he meant why doesn't God stop all of these terrible things from happening to his chosen people? Also, I already know that the Jews didn't kill Jesus, but many people believe that. That is what I was saying.

The experiment is really pointless. There are way too many variables in the experiment to make any conclusive argument on behalf of it. It shouldn't be tested anyway. Killing someone just so an experiment can have one more piece of inconsequential evidence is not right.

[Quoc-Thuy Vuong]

So being such an experiment with so many variables, doesn't that further my point on how science can't prove nor disprove the existence of souls? Souls may not even be a physical thing but rather a spiritual thing that defines who you are.

Cheers

[Paul Gully]

Thuy, thats my point- no religion that claims the existence of souls makes any observable predictions about them. thus, there is nothing to be tester. science cannot prove or disprove souls, but logic says that: A, they aren't necessary (via occurs razor), and B may be a mixed blessing (Descartes Clocks)

you dont need to create anything to 'define' who you are- who you are is just the summation of the purely physical processes in the brain.

[David Reich]

http://www.thrivenotes.com/the-last-question/

[David Reich]

It's long, a bit repetitive by nature, but it's asimov so it's it's good, and the ending is mind-blowing

On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 10:39 PM, David Reich <elli...@gmail.com> wrote:

http://www.thrivenotes.com/the-last-question/

[Paul Gully]

ah, i have heard of this story. will read it tommorow.

[Paul Gully]

ahhhhhh. have read it tonight. chillingly good story.

read it!

[Michael Oppenheimer]

you know, ill read it some time