Why are many Christians self-contradictory?

[Renegade_Turner]

Also, the rules and morals taught by most religions are guidelines. No one is going to be able to adhere to every rule all the time. If so there would be no need for police. No one's perfect. Except me.

[Ragdollmaster]

I think they blame minor mishaps on them being imperfect since the lady listened to the talking snake.

[Healey]

!

[Ragdollmaster]

Humans didn't 'invent' time. Time has always been present and will always be present. Nothing, I repeat, NOTHING can happen without a change over time. Time controls everything, space included.

Concepts like the beginning of time are too complex for the human brain. Try to think it through. Some people might try to say "AHAH" and present a theory about nothingness/how things first started, but it will always fall through. We can't prove anything about the beginning of time.

I heard one of my friends suggest an idea of a 'loophole' cycle, where everything cycles through itself at the beginnings and ends of time, basically taking ecology and mixing it with fate/destiny/predestination, saying that nothing will ever change in this loophole theory, even if you intentionally try to change it, because you will have already done that. Cool idea. Then I asked, "What started the loophole? Where were the original materials that started getting recycled?" "Uhh..."

[Renegade_Turner]

Healey, that last post didn't actually address anything of what I said, it just went off on a big rambling tangent which I don't think even you yourself quite understood because it was too messy to form a cohesive viewpoint.

[TheBigCheese]

We can't prove anything about the beginning of time.

We can't make any statements, but we can sure get a good idea of what was happening. The light from stars extremely far away will have been traveling for millions of years. Obviously it won't give us information on the beginning of time but it can have a baring on the beginning of the universe.

You could say that there is no beginning of time, and that it has always existed. It's not a physical entity, so there's no 'materials' clause saying "what created time?".

[Ragdollmaster]

You could say time is a physical entity as the fourth dimension. Mathematically it's only a variable, though.

[TheBigCheese]

Time in the fourth dimension (at least from what I've read) isn't a physical entity. It's an abstract concept.

Depth (the 3rd dimension) isn't a physical entity, it's a measure. Time is just a measure of all the passing instances of the universe.

Suggested Video: http://www.tenthdimension.com/medialinks.php
Pretty interesting if you haven't already seen it. Stuff about time starts at around 3:00.

Whoops, I got this thread off topic. Feel free to continue.

[Assaultman67]

I find it interesting how one of these topics always seems to pop up in every forums board ...(but i also enjoy pointing out hypocrisy )

It all seems to boil down to the scientific vs religious perspective ...

it normally starts off as one calling the other intolerant, which in ironic because it normally turns out that the OP is intolerant themselves ...

Science extremists seem to like poking holes in religious stories about the origins of the universe, and then stating that their explanation is the absolute truth ...

Which is hypocritical because science in nature is just theories based on observations ... to state what we know now is absolute fact makes scientists very close minded ... we do not know everything, therefore, we make observations on what we do know (we once thought that the world was flat, the atom was considered the smallest thing in the universe at one time, the atomic model changed like 5 times throughout history ...)

religious extremists seem to like poking at the things that science doesn't explain and why their religion should be followed ...

They also are hypocrites, because they cause conflict and anger that their very religion opposes ...

I honestly don't fully understand how these discussions happen ... religion is food for emotional enlightenment and science is food for the rational enlightenment ... they really have nothing to do with each other and neither is better ...

[tokage]

To the initial question: It is not only christians, who are self contradictory, I think humans in general are self contradicting beings. That is not necessarily a bad thing. The ability to accept two contradicting systems of belief at the same time, helps a lot in flexibility for problem solving and I think living beings in general wouldn't survive long without it in a dynamic world. What I mean is, you just have to make simplifications in what you think is right, when you want to deal with a situation in adequate time. In another situation these simplified assumptions won't help you at all and you need things simplified in another way.

One famous example is this:
Tweety is a bird, does tweety fly?
Birds fly, so the anwser should be yes. But:
Tweety is a bird, namely an ostrich, does Tweety fly?

It is just convenient and adequate to assume all birds fly, but it won't fit into all situations.
Humans are no logical beings, because the world is too complex to have it fit in just one set of assumptions in a convenient way, so it should be no surprise, that from our minds all kinds of strange contradictory beliefs come to the surface, religion being by far one of the most illogical.

[Renegade_Turner]

I honestly don't fully understand how these discussions happen ... religion is food for emotional enlightenment and science is food for the rational enlightenment ... they really have nothing to do with each other and neither is better ...

It's not so cut and dried. I'm on the fence to be honest. Science explains a lot of things, but it does not explain for the existence of the physical universe.

It's impossible to know whether or not there was a creator, and if there is, who created the creator? I wish there was just nothingness, then I wouldn't have to think about these things.

Also, if it turns out that the Christian God was a reality, and that he created the physical laws which the universe follows, then wouldn't you be completely incorrect in saying that science and religion are completely unrelated?

I think they have a lot to do with each other...and I don't think it's a question of which is "better".

[invertin]

I AM ANGRY NOW

AAARRGGHHHH

TIME IS NOT THE FOURTH DIMENSION

IT IS NOT A DIMENSION AT ALL

DIMENSIONS ARE DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS THAT YOU CAN MEASURE SOMETHING IN, E.G HEIGHT, LENGTH

TIME IS NOT A DIRECTION

YOU CAN PUT TWO OBJECTS NEXT TO EACHOTHER TO MAKE THE TOTAL SIZE TALLER OR LONGER OR SOMETHING, BUT YOU CAN'T PUT TWO OBJECTS TOGETHER TO MAKE THEM TIMIER

THE HYPERCUBE IS A FOUR DIMENSIONAL OBJECT, IT DOES NOT TRAVEL THROUGH TIME

As for the religious thing-

THE BIBLE IS MEANT TO BE INTERPRETED SO THE STORIES COULD BE TAKEN AS GOD MADE ALL HUMANS AT ONCE THEY WENT POOF AND THEN THEY EXISTED, OR IT COULD BE A REPRESENTATION OF SOMETHING ELSE THAT HE DID, OR MAYBE IT NEVER HAPPENED AT ALL AND IT'S JUST TO TELL THE MORAL THAT SNAKES ARE EVIL

ANTI-CHRISTIANS = 0
CHRISTIANS = THEIR SCORE IS OPEN TO INTERPRETATION, BISH

[Renegade_Turner]

lol 1-0 for Christianity.

[Kestril]

Here's dementions for you: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkxieS-6WuA

Okay, so we've settled on why holidays are near the same time, now all we need to do is debate science v. religion. I can except both, to me, they don't contradict each other at all the point isn't to believe a parable in the bible is true, but to learn from said parable. True or not, the lessen remains the same.
actually, Arthur miller has a good take on it in his play, The Creation of the world and other Business It's a healthy mix of science and religion around the time of Eden. Basically Lucifer debates God about giving man knowledge, comically, of course, saying, something to the effect of"They'll praise you for the complexity of amino acids, physics, orbiting bodies" ect, ect. . . That's what I think, I think it's too big to be a big coincidence; and if he's offering me eternal life for being a good person, I'll take it!

A good comedy routine from Robin Williams goes something like this:
Joe: Mary, are you pregnate?
Mary: Yes, Joe, but I swear it was immaculate!
Joe: It better have been! because-
Mary: Oh, joe, what are we going to name him.
Joe: Jesus H. Christ! Mary! Name him!? we should get rid of hi-
Mary: That's good Joe! It was way better than naming him something like, "schmuck."

Point is: It's healthy to poke fun at religion sometimes, and not take everything too fundamentalist-ly, but also respect what other people believe, and sincerely try to win them over, no matter what side there on. Unless they believe something like, "kill the infidels"*


*note: no intended jab at peaceful Islamics, it's a jab at those dodgy terrorists.

[Assaultman67]

there really is no religion that says "kill the infidels" ...

the truth is that religion gets corrupted by people to accomplish goals ... (oops, missed the asterisk)

the same thing happens for science as well ... how many times has anybody seen a product sold that is "scientifically" backed? do you really think things such as magnets clipped around your gas lines will increase fuel efficiency?

... It's not so cut and dried. I'm on the fence to be honest. Science explains a lot of things, but it does not explain for the existence of the physical universe.

Maybe not, but thats just how i think it should be taken generally ...