Whether you believe in religion or not

[RL...]

Whichever religion it is, it is fact that religion causes more problems than solutions. Religion directly and indirectly kills more ppl than the ppl it "saves".

I am a realist and look at things with a "greater good" mentality, so since it seems religion brings about more strife than contentment, I think the world should abandon such trivial nonsense. After all, believing in whatever you believe in will not change a thing or how any of our lives will unfold, so we might as well start living our life not by the rules of a book of preacher, but by the notion that we should try to better ourselves in every way and to live a wellness life trying to learn and educate ourselves as much as possible. I think we should learn how to care for each other and our whole civilization as a singular entity rather than the selfish and one-dimensional perspective of trying to further our own agendas.

After all, the greatest feeling one can feel is the feeling of helping someone just to help someone. Which leads to the one universal truth, the more you give, the more you get.

/rant

let the bashing commence

[81911SC]

Link to these "facts"?

[Ran]

Wrong. Religion does not do more harm than good. People twisting pure religion to their own personal desires do more harm than good. Westboro Baptist Church, Islamic Radicals, the power hungry kings and politicians of the Middle Ages.

I'm sorry, but most of you religion-bashers need to take a look at the real heart of religion. Even as an agnostic I can't find myself to see religion as a bad thing. Religion itself is a good thing. People, however, are the problem.

[qwick]

Religion does not do more harm than good. People twisting pure religion to their own personal desires do more harm than good.

Religion itself is a good thing. People, however, are the problem.

For the most part I agree with these statments. Even tho I dont belive in religion as it is taught, I belive it is more of a "comfort mechanism" for thoes afraid of the uncertainty of death. I also belive that as long as there are thoes that teach there will be thoes that follow, no matter how perverted they twist religion.

[RL...]

Wrong. Religion does not do more harm than good. People twisting pure religion to their own personal desires do more harm than good. Westboro Baptist Church, Islamic Radicals, the power hungry kings and politicians of the Middle Ages.

I'm sorry, but most of you religion-bashers need to take a look at the real heart of religion. Even as an agnostic I can't find myself to see religion as a bad thing. Religion itself is a good thing. People, however, are the problem.

Well since religion is something invented and perpetuated by humans, it is fundamentally flawed. And not only that, religion does cause more human suffering than human contentment. Ppl have done unspeakable things in the course of human history in the name of their god or religion, felling justified because "their" "god" is obviously the right one. LOL Religion is another way to disassociate ourselves from one another and to judge and condemn each other because of petty differences such as spiritual ideals.

[81911SC]

You still haven't posted these "facts".

[Ran]

Well since religion is something invented and perpetuated by humans, it is fundamentally flawed. And not only that, religion does cause more human suffering than human contentment. Ppl have done unspeakable things in the course of human history in the name of their god or religion, felling justified because "their" "god" is obviously the right one. LOL Religion is another way to disassociate ourselves from one another and to judge and condemn each other because of petty differences such as spiritual ideals.First off, stating that religion is something invented by humans is already showing your stance on the subject. To those that believe, it's a divine grace. Not a mortal invention. Also, your post is so vague that it makes me cry from laughter. You could spout out the same trivial nonsense about any institution. Why not take a look at government. After all, both government and religion are simply forms of politics right? Another point is that 80% of religions are not about disassociating people from each other. Hence when people try to convert you to their faith. Hmm, seems more like they're trying to help you understand and join them, rather than force you away like a plaguebearer.

[sport_122]

When I see the term religion it only denotes the overbearing, accuser, who tells you that you are not good enough. If that is your definition of religion, then you are right, that is the work of men. But that is NOT what real faith teaches which is what other people on this thread are arguing.

The most powerful tools ever known are love and truth. These things are incredibly powerful and they are the only things that can really change a person. Even a bullet does not change a persons mind or life. That said, the most destructive tools known are the one off of these. A false love, hatred, and a twisting of the truth, lies. These two things can masquerade as their counterparts, but you can easily tell which is which by watching what happens in their wake.

Lies and hatred will leave destruction in their wake. Truth and Love will yield peace and contentment. its only when people try to spread their beliefs by mixing the two sides that you see the bad side emerge. Most people who hate "religion" have been submerged in the lies and hatred side which masquerades as love.

And keep in mind that without something universal, there is NO universal truth.
so there is no "the more you give the more you get."

[man]

Just one question, after what you posted, why do you think you're a realist?

[SUBY_RUE]

Religion never hurt anyone, peoples decisions hurts other people. realist are just people that are selfish and blame others for their poor decisions...

[AirMax95]

NissanTun3r, you seem to be on a destructive religious tirade. You post these rants about how religion is man made, destroying the earth, and is only for the weak and feeble. Every post you make is garbage; lacking proof and substance. If this is how you express your opinion and dispute a topic, please avoid being a lawyer, and any field that involves writing/reporting.

I honestly don't think you have taken the time to explore religion past the extremist kooks that you see on the street corner that damn you to hell for driving a car. Like I said before in one of your post, you seem to have been exposed to an event that made you question what you barely knew anything about.

[RL...]

Religion never hurt anyone, peoples decisions hurts other people. realist are just people that are selfish and blame others for their poor decisions...

Not true. There have been genocides carried out in the name of religion.

[RL...]

NissanTun3r, you seem to be on a destructive religious tirade. You post these rants about how religion is man made, destroying the earth, and is only for the weak and feeble. Every post you make is garbage; lacking proof and substance. If this is how you express your opinion and dispute a topic, please avoid being a lawyer, and any field that involves writing/reporting.

I honestly don't think you have taken the time to explore religion past the extremist kooks that you see on the street corner that damn you to hell for driving a car. Like I said before in one of your post, you seem to have been exposed to an event that made you question what you barely knew anything about.

Religion is made by men. Do you really think the kuran, bible, etc were in existance before humans were? Obviously not. A human wrote these books supposedly influenced by a god and thus was born a religion, a set of beliefs and doctrines to live ones life by.

I never said religion destroys the earth....I've said it has indirectly killed millions, because it has. Religion isn't only for the weak, but I think that if ppl had the courage to truly beieve in themselves they would rely a LOT less on religion to comfort them.

Now if THIS is how you express your opinion about me, maybe you need to reread what I've posted. kthxbye

[BABY J]

Ha Ha - PWND.

[tinkolby_25]

christians are retarded
they believe in talking dead guy

[Starrfire]

Proof, aww the Christians don't have any...

[RL...]

christians are retarded
they believe in talking dead guy

That's the wrong way to look at things.....

[sport_122]

Religion is made by men. Do you really think the kuran, bible, etc were in existance before humans were? Obviously not. A human wrote these books supposedly influenced by a god and thus was born a religion, a set of beliefs and doctrines to live ones life by.

I never said religion destroys the earth....I've said it has indirectly killed millions, because it has. Religion isn't only for the weak, but I think that if ppl had the courage to truly beieve in themselves they would rely a LOT less on religion to comfort them.

Now if THIS is how you express your opinion about me, maybe you need to reread what I've posted. kthxbye


These are probably some of the most ridiculous arguments against organized religion that I have ever heard. I am beginning to think that your way of viewing the world in an almost agnostic way is the reason you have made some completely strange and unfounded statements. You have stated that you believe that YOU are responsible for doing good and that the INDIVIDUAL should have the courage to believe in themself...

That is EXACTLY the problem. The jewish faith, which is the origin of the christian faith, and arguably the origin of the islamic faith, was passed down for many centuries WITHOUT a text. The reason this faith can claim its existence before the origins of men, is simple. Because they all believe that the foundation of their faith lies on something eternal. Christians believe that Jesus, God, and the Holy Spirit are eternal, existing before creation and that they are the embodiment of our moral code and law. Jews just believe in the spirit and God. there are crossing views on this as well. But my point is that before there were texts there were people following these faiths. So they didn't just pop up because someone wrote a book. The way you state that shows me that you know nothing about the origin of these faiths. They existed for hundreds of years before any script was ever written. It's called oral tradition, and it is still used today. Without it there is no history, there is no past, your ancestors do not exist, and people are no different than ants.

Why does it matter? Well with your method of thinking, there is NO law because individuals all have their own beliefs. Even in your statment, you said ,the individual should be encouraged to believe in themself... So I ask where does that leave you? If I want someone dead, and I am the authority what holds me back? What makes your desire for life trump my desire for your life to end? In your world, I am to look to myself for guidence, but that becomes anarchy because what is in me doesn't sync with what is in the other 6+ billion people in the world. I can take your life and I am justified in doing so because YOU have agreed that this is how the world should functions. There is no justice, because justice has to be grounded in law which can only be truly support when it is founded on an absolute. Absolutes must be eternal.

With your method, you can't say we have laws or a moral code, because (I think I've said to you before) without the existence of an eternal, even law is subjective and has no foundation of purpose or reality. And there is NO moral code except that of which I(the individual) have decided upon. There is no justice, because YOU cannot punish ME because I make MY rules.

You are trying to blame religion when in fact you should be looking at people (the individuals) who falsely represent a religion. This is what people who watch too much tv do when they hear about islamic terrorist. The estimated number of terrorists in the islamic faith is said to make up less than 1% of all muslims, but this faith has been demonized by the actions of a few. Its like the world looking at what an American government does and blames all of America as if you or I are sitting on capital hill dictacting our desires to committ attrocities around the globe. There have been billions upon billions of christians and muslims, and jews, but you chose to look at the few who have made history and you are trying to place your judgement on religion while ignoring the real fact. Without faith, and real believers, this world would be more dangerous, more deadly, and a worse place to live.

And even in muslim and christian circles people within those faiths look at people who make claims to be in the same faith and do not claim these people. The majority of muslims, say that, islamic terrorists, are not following the qu'ron. Poeple like Hitler were twisted and domented and were not doing what they did in the name of God.

In fact, they were doing exactly what YOU say they should. They were ignoring the totality of their texts for the sake of making themselves the authority. Hitler, was making, his way the law. He was denying scripture and sculpting his own world based off of his personal views while claiming to be a christian authority.

You claim to look at things with a greater good mentality. But I call BS. The greater good mentality would look at the totality of these things and how they promote love, order, peace, integrity, honesty, and passion, and want more of the world to live to these codes. I think you just have a personal agenda.

And you are wrong, the greatest feeling someone can feel is love. Love is not helping someone just to help someone. Love is helping someone because you really care for their well being. Love is the greatest thing someone can receive and the greatest thing someone can give. That should be the litmus test of the successes and failures of people of faith.

And with ALL of this said, I think you have proven one thing. The weakminded person is one who pulls ridiculous statements out of his ass, claiming proof, and showing none, and making arguments based off of God knows what. Maybe you should go study "the facts" on where these faiths come from, and really looking at the numbers and the history, try to decide if your statements made any since.

[sport_122]

Proof, aww the Christians don't have any...

where is yours?

[BABY J]

LOL @ people "believing that" some eternal thing existed before them - lol. At some point a PERSON or PEOPLE "created" or "organized" that thought. Those people did NOT have proof of such eternal pre-existing entity... and they still don't. Those thoughts were CREATED out of a need/want to understand --- it's no different than kids believing that rain is angels crying --- it helps then understand it until they are older and smart enough to realize it's great mind-fuck... just like religion.

Carry on...

[99hatch]

These are probably some of the most ridiculous arguments against organized religion that I have ever heard. I am beginning to think that your way of viewing the world in an almost agnostic way is the reason you have made some completely strange and unfounded statements. You have stated that you believe that YOU are responsible for doing good and that the INDIVIDUAL should have the courage to believe in themself...

That is EXACTLY the problem. The jewish faith, which is the origin of the christian faith, and arguably the origin of the islamic faith, was passed down for many centuries WITHOUT a text. The reason this faith can claim its existence before the origins of men, is simple. Because they all believe that the foundation of their faith lies on something eternal. Christians believe that Jesus, God, and the Holy Spirit are eternal, existing before creation and that they are the embodiment of our moral code and law. Jews just believe in the spirit and God. there are crossing views on this as well. But my point is that before there were texts there were people following these faiths. So they didn't just pop up because someone wrote a book. The way you state that shows me that you know nothing about the origin of these faiths. They existed for hundreds of years before any script was ever written. It's called oral tradition, and it is still used today. Without it there is no history, there is no past, your ancestors do not exist, and people are no different than ants.

Why does it matter? Well with your method of thinking, there is NO law because individuals all have their own beliefs. Even in your statment, you said ,the individual should be encouraged to believe in themself... So I ask where does that leave you? If I want someone dead, and I am the authority what holds me back? What makes your desire for life trump my desire for your life to end? In your world, I am to look to myself for guidence, but that becomes anarchy because what is in me doesn't sync with what is in the other 6+ billion people in the world. I can take your life and I am justified in doing so because YOU have agreed that this is how the world should functions. There is no justice, because justice has to be grounded in law which can only be truly support when it is founded on an absolute. Absolutes must be eternal.

With your method, you can't say we have laws or a moral code, because (I think I've said to you before) without the existence of an eternal, even law is subjective and has no foundation of purpose or reality. And there is NO moral code except that of which I(the individual) have decided upon. There is no justice, because YOU cannot punish ME because I make MY rules.

You are trying to blame religion when in fact you should be looking at people (the individuals) who falsely represent a religion. This is what people who watch too much tv do when they hear about islamic terrorist. The estimated number of terrorists in the islamic faith is said to make up less than 1% of all muslims, but this faith has been demonized by the actions of a few. Its like the world looking at what an American government does and blames all of America as if you or I are sitting on capital hill dictacting our desires to committ attrocities around the globe. There have been billions upon billions of christians and muslims, and jews, but you chose to look at the few who have made history and you are trying to place your judgement on religion while ignoring the real fact. Without faith, and real believers, this world would be more dangerous, more deadly, and a worse place to live.

And even in muslim and christian circles people within those faiths look at people who make claims to be in the same faith and do not claim these people. The majority of muslims, say that, islamic terrorists, are not following the qu'ron. Poeple like Hitler were twisted and domented and were not doing what they did in the name of God.

In fact, they were doing exactly what YOU say they should. They were ignoring the totality of their texts for the sake of making themselves the authority. Hitler, was making, his way the law. He was denying scripture and sculpting his own world based off of his personal views while claiming to be a christian authority.

You claim to look at things with a greater good mentality. But I call BS. The greater good mentality would look at the totality of these things and how they promote love, order, peace, integrity, honesty, and passion, and want more of the world to live to these codes. I think you just have a personal agenda.

And you are wrong, the greatest feeling someone can feel is love. Love is not helping someone just to help someone. Love is helping someone because you really care for their well being. Love is the greatest thing someone can receive and the greatest thing someone can give. That should be the litmus test of the successes and failures of people of faith.

And with ALL of this said, I think you have proven one thing. The weakminded person is one who pulls ridiculous statements out of his ass, claiming proof, and showing none, and making arguments based off of God knows what. Maybe you should go study "the facts" on where these faiths come from, and really looking at the numbers and the history, try to decide if your statements made any since.

Very nice points man. I agree with this completely. Just because a few radicals claimed they were doing something in the name of God does not make it true. Just like when someone bombs an abortion clinic and claims God told them to. When that is simply not the case.

[sport_122]

LOL @ people "believing that" some eternal thing existed before them - lol. At some point a PERSON or PEOPLE "created" or "organized" that thought. Those people did NOT have proof of such eternal pre-existing entity... and they still don't. Those thoughts were CREATED out of a need/want to understand --- it's no different than kids believing that rain is angels crying --- it helps then understand it until they are older and smart enough to realize it's great mind-fuck... just like religion.

Carry on...

so where do you think the beginnings on knowledge come from. The beginnings of reason, discovery, etc?

There is no ability to understand things without something eternal. Without some sort of beginning to knowledge all things are based off of a guess. With the logic that you use all things taught whether its history, science, math, are all a part of a human creation which means their foundations are void because there is no truth to any of them. But knowledge had to exist before a person could even come to the conclusion that they "wanted or needed" to know how something works or where something comes from.

The very desire to want to know something exists. Where does desire come from? Not to be confused with instinct. Eating, sleeping, are instinctive, the desire to want to know how that works comes from somewhere else. Where would you say? It cannot be created by men ,because it existed before men began to understand what it was.

I guess my point is simply that to say that many cultures of different faith or origins acknowledge the existence of something greater because of the human ability to reason. In your statement it seems like you want to ignore everything that existed before we could define it as if we defined it to define our existence. The chronology is wrong because the concept had to come first. Before there is a question, before there is a need, before there is longing, there is a desire of knowledge as to how those things will sustain, or help a person cope with whatever it is.

So many people want to walk on both sides of the line and say that they believe in logic, reason, and understanding, but not an eternal something. The problem is that logic and reason and understanding exist on the same side of the line as the eternal something.

My belief in God stems from the fact that if I sit there and try to understand anything it always comes back to a foundation in something (an idea or concept) that is not going anywhere and has been around for a long time.

[BABY J]

Hmmm... in my mind --> anyone with a love for truth outside of himself/herself has to start with NO belief in God, and THEN look for evidence of such a God. That person needs to search for some objective evidence of a supernatural/spiritual power. All the people I write e-mails to or talk to about their faith are still often are still stuck at this "searching" stage. Me NOT believing in it puts me at a point where I HAVE ARRIVED, while they are still searching. The bible is written in circles --- leading to just more questions so that by the time you die, you really haven't gained anything but the ability to quote a scripture that coincides w/ most situations that you might encounter in life. SWEET! :rolleyes: Consequently, I arrived at the point I am at today by starting on the same road that my mom, grandparents and all other believers are on today... reading the bible and trying to make sense of it's dumbness... imagine that. What did I learn --- I learned to think that I DO believe in a higher power, but NOT in "God" (as we know it, and as we teach it).

The "I BELIEVE IN GOD" thing seems to demand something more personal, some leap of faith that helps one see life's big picture, some rules to live by. So, I'm saying, "I believe that there is no God... at least as we know it and are taught." I can say w/ the same certainty that bible-thumpers do that I'm right, (or more right than wrong) and I think we ALL as a people have missed the BIG picture.

Having taken that step in the belief of NOTHING, it informs every moment of my life. I'm not greedy. I have love... I love blue skies, rainbows and Hallmark cards --> and that has to be enough for me. Everything in the world is and everything that the world is NOT is plenty for me. It seems just rude to beg the invisible for more... to beg for some HEAVEN when there can be heaven here on Earth at times. The love of my family that raised me and the friends I have is enough that I don't "need" heaven. I don't "need" to hunch over a bible every Wednesday to learn how to make that translate into REAL life. I won the huge genetic lottery and I get joy, and I get to ENjoy it every day.

Believing there's no God (as it is taught) means I can't really be forgiven except by kindness of other people that I can talk to and look at and touch. That's good; b/c it makes me want to be more thoughtful --> I have to try to treat people right the first time around instead of knowing that I can just repint to "God" later on... b/c why should GOD 4give me for offending Bob? Shouldn't BOB forgive me himself?

Believing that there's no God stops me from being narrow-minded like devout Christians are... most not even OPEN to discussing some1 else's viewpoint. That's saying "I am a genius - I have it ALL figured out... no1 can tell me otherwise." Yeah -- good luck w/ that one. With my view... I can read ideas from all different people from all different cultures --> unlike Christians turning a deaf ear as soon as some1 w/ a different view than them starts to speak. Without God, we as people can agree on reality, and I can use this reality to keep learning where we are wrong and could all improve. Part of that REALITY is innocent people dieing of hunger/disease in the middle of street while begging for invisible help from "God" that never arrives. With NO God, we can all keep adjusting, so we can REALLY learn to communicate w/ each other no matter where we are from and what we believe in. With "God" in the picture, that's the 1st step for segregation (religious). I don't travel in circles where people say, "I have faith, I believe this in my heart and nothing you can say or do can shake my faith." That's just a long-winded religious way to say, "shut the f*ck up," or another two words that the FCC likes less (F*CK YOU). But all obscenity in the world is less insulting than, "It's how I was brought up" and "my imaginary friend means more to me than anything you can ever say or do." So, believing there is no God lets me be proven wrong and that's always fun. Why? B/c being proven wrong means that I'm learning something... that's always a plus.

Believing there is no God means the suffering I've seen in my family, my life, and indeed all the suffering in the world, isn't caused by an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent force that isn't bothered to help or is just "testing us"... that suffering is something we all may be able to help each other with in the future. The WORST people I know wouldn't let a 10 year old get pimped out and raped and killed in alleys w/ the power to stop it all in the name of "it's not meant to be understood" or "God works in mysterious ways." Like I said, I have LITERALLY seen people die waiting for invisible help from "God". But if I believe in US (people), then WE should come to the rescue of that person in the street. CAUSE GOD IS NOT FUCKING GOING TO!!! A God, if there was one, would want US to help that man... GET A CLUE!!! No God means the possibility of less suffering in the future... but only if WE as PEOPLE, and I mean ALL F*CKING PEOPLE help EACH OTHER!!!

Believing there is no God gives me more room for belief in family, people, love, truth, beauty, sex, Jello and all the other things I can prove and touch/taste that make this life the best life I will ever have... how can "heaven" compare if all of my friends and family will not be there? THIS is likely the best life I will ever have... same goes for you.:goodjob:

If there is a God, I imagine he is laughing at the people who are asking for MORE (heaven, prayers, streets of gold, angels), when he has provided everything that we will ever need RIGHT HERE... each other... and also given us more smarts - adaptability - and reign over everything else that "He" created ---- yet we kneel down and pray that he would help "just a little more" w/ your mortgage payment this month... TOTALLY pissing off the fact that you have the most advaced brain of all beings and can figure the mortgage thing out on your own. We kneel down for a few seconds and say "Lord help Bobby next door find a new house since he got evicted" and then hop in bed w/ 3 "spare" bedrooms and think nothing more of it. Yeah --- "waiting on you God --- do your thing kind sir.":rolleyes:

People have missed the whole fuckin' ship... and will likely always continue to.

[BABY J]

EDIT

[RL...]

These are probably some of the most ridiculous arguments against organized religion that I have ever heard. I am beginning to think that your way of viewing the world in an almost agnostic way is the reason you have made some completely strange and unfounded statements. You have stated that you believe that YOU are responsible for doing good and that the INDIVIDUAL should have the courage to believe in themself...

That is EXACTLY the problem. The jewish faith, which is the origin of the christian faith, and arguably the origin of the islamic faith, was passed down for many centuries WITHOUT a text. The reason this faith can claim its existence before the origins of men, is simple. Because they all believe that the foundation of their faith lies on something eternal. Christians believe that Jesus, God, and the Holy Spirit are eternal, existing before creation and that they are the embodiment of our moral code and law. Jews just believe in the spirit and God. there are crossing views on this as well. But my point is that before there were texts there were people following these faiths. So they didn't just pop up because someone wrote a book. The way you state that shows me that you know nothing about the origin of these faiths. They existed for hundreds of years before any script was ever written. It's called oral tradition, and it is still used today. Without it there is no history, there is no past, your ancestors do not exist, and people are no different than ants.

Why does it matter? Well with your method of thinking, there is NO law because individuals all have their own beliefs. Even in your statment, you said ,the individual should be encouraged to believe in themself... So I ask where does that leave you? If I want someone dead, and I am the authority what holds me back? What makes your desire for life trump my desire for your life to end? In your world, I am to look to myself for guidence, but that becomes anarchy because what is in me doesn't sync with what is in the other 6+ billion people in the world. I can take your life and I am justified in doing so because YOU have agreed that this is how the world should functions. There is no justice, because justice has to be grounded in law which can only be truly support when it is founded on an absolute. Absolutes must be eternal.

With your method, you can't say we have laws or a moral code, because (I think I've said to you before) without the existence of an eternal, even law is subjective and has no foundation of purpose or reality. And there is NO moral code except that of which I(the individual) have decided upon. There is no justice, because YOU cannot punish ME because I make MY rules.

You are trying to blame religion when in fact you should be looking at people (the individuals) who falsely represent a religion. This is what people who watch too much tv do when they hear about islamic terrorist. The estimated number of terrorists in the islamic faith is said to make up less than 1% of all muslims, but this faith has been demonized by the actions of a few. Its like the world looking at what an American government does and blames all of America as if you or I are sitting on capital hill dictacting our desires to committ attrocities around the globe. There have been billions upon billions of christians and muslims, and jews, but you chose to look at the few who have made history and you are trying to place your judgement on religion while ignoring the real fact. Without faith, and real believers, this world would be more dangerous, more deadly, and a worse place to live.

And even in muslim and christian circles people within those faiths look at people who make claims to be in the same faith and do not claim these people. The majority of muslims, say that, islamic terrorists, are not following the qu'ron. Poeple like Hitler were twisted and domented and were not doing what they did in the name of God.

In fact, they were doing exactly what YOU say they should. They were ignoring the totality of their texts for the sake of making themselves the authority. Hitler, was making, his way the law. He was denying scripture and sculpting his own world based off of his personal views while claiming to be a christian authority.

You claim to look at things with a greater good mentality. But I call BS. The greater good mentality would look at the totality of these things and how they promote love, order, peace, integrity, honesty, and passion, and want more of the world to live to these codes. I think you just have a personal agenda.

And you are wrong, the greatest feeling someone can feel is love. Love is not helping someone just to help someone. Love is helping someone because you really care for their well being. Love is the greatest thing someone can receive and the greatest thing someone can give. That should be the litmus test of the successes and failures of people of faith.

And with ALL of this said, I think you have proven one thing. The weakminded person is one who pulls ridiculous statements out of his ass, claiming proof, and showing none, and making arguments based off of God knows what. Maybe you should go study "the facts" on where these faiths come from, and really looking at the numbers and the history, try to decide if your statements made any since.

LOLOL

You might make some good points here and there but you have taken what I've said and distorted, no twisted my words 180 degrees. I am not agnostic, there is no doubt there there is some kind of higher power...I do not refer to it as god because I do not want ppl to mislead ppl to think that I am a christian or am referring to christianity's god or jesus....with that said...

First of all, Individuals such as you and I are responsible for the way this world is and will be. Not god, not buddha, not religion, although religion indirectly and directly affect the actions of millions of ppl, but it comes down to human choice. A choice to kill someone, or a choice to help someone...and yes, EVERYONE should believe in themselves more....

And the origin of christianity is not jewish faith, christianity is no more than a rip off of other religions that have preceeded it....

My method? My world? If you want to kill someone what's holding you back? I don't know why you would ask me such a ? but to answer it nothing but yourself. If you want to kill someone you could probably do it. But there are consequences...such as possible jail time etc....You keep referring to my method or my world, and yet you don't understand what I'm about. I am not saying there needs to be anarchy or no laws. An anarchal society would be utterly horrible. The fact is there are laws that bind society, but one can still deviate from that....at a price.....And we do have moral code....although it changes with society...

I think you are wrong about thinking laws have to based on absolutes, as there is nothing absolute in this world, everything is variable. Laws change as societys' perspective changes, to meet our chaning views and as our society gets smarter. Such as racism etc...I mean it wasn't until the 60's when discrimination was made illegal for house rentals which is pretty recent

I don't know why you're lecturing us about islamic terroists and hitler and whatnot, I know not to judge a group of ppl by the actions of a few, and I do not...although we can all agree female asian drivers are the worst!

I do look @ things with a greater good mentality.

The greatest feeling someone can achieve is love and helping others....I think I've said that earleir so how could I be wrong?

[sport_122]

LOLOL

You might make some good points here and there but you have taken what I've said and distorted, no twisted my words 180 degrees. I am not agnostic, there is no doubt there there is some kind of higher power...I do not refer to it as god because I do not want ppl to mislead ppl to think that I am a christian or am referring to christianity's god or jesus....with that said...

you also said in another thread "God has no direct influence on this planet or what happens on it, good or bad. God(or gods/whatever is out there) could be good, could be bad, I think it is neither. I think it just is."

undeniably statements of an agnostic. Its what you are whether you believe it or not. It just defines your beliefs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism
more
http://arts.cuhk.edu.hk/humftp/E-text/Russell/agnostic.htm
more
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/agnostic
you sir are an Agnostic and don't even know it!
http://www.religioustolerance.org/agnostic.htm

Well if you need more proof let me know. Its only a google of agnostic or (especially apathetic agnosticism) away.

You are very wrong about the Christian faith. The Christian faith directly stems from the first major mono-theistic faith, Judaism. There are similarities between this and other faiths, but it does not change its origins. That's like saying that the only real religion is whatever the FIRST one was because it was first and everything else was copied. So all religions after are posers.

When we speak of law and absolutes lets go back to the concept of laws and what they were intended to do. Laws were intended to help society function. All written law, and unwritten, has its place to support human life and well being within a society. Written law all stems from the same moral code or moral law. Those are things that are the laws about murder, theft, etc etc. People all over the world when they kill they have to try to justify it some way. That's because the entire world views the taking of life as a wrong thing to do. Which proves that their is something in humans that tells us that killing is wrong.

I have commented on the choice thing on another thread so I will not go back into that.

Lastly, you said
"First of all, Individuals such as you and I are responsible for the way this world is and will be. Not god, not buddha, not religion, although religion indirectly and directly affect the actions of millions of ppl, but it comes down to human choice. A choice to kill someone, or a choice to help someone...and yes, EVERYONE should believe in themselves more...."

and then you said
"I don't know why you're lecturing us about islamic terroists and hitler and whatnot, I know not to judge a group of ppl by the actions of a few, and I do not...although we can all agree female asian drivers are the worst!"

again a contradiction (EVEN IN THE SAME POST)
The people I listed did exactly what you started this thread about. But what you say is that it would be a better world if people believed in themselves. The same people who you can contribute to creating these terrible religions and governments, and performing horrible acts toward one another, you want them to be relinquished of "religion" as if it is going to make them better people. It wont because these people have already proven that they are ignoring the doctrines of their faith in light of "believing in themselves" So how do you figure that makes sense?

So what is it to you? Is your culprit religion, or is it the individuals. It can't be both in this case, because you have attacked the system and the individual. Its either that one of them is right and one is wrong or they both are wrong. But if they both are wrong, then you can't say that you think people should look to themselves because you have indirectly placed humans as responsible for the bad in our world either through religion or through their own philosophy of life. You want people to take your arguments seriously (some I do) but you don't seem to know what your argument is.

So how about you tell us specifics? Why don't you actually step up and provide us with specifics on when a religion, in its very doctrine says that we are to commit genocide, or when a religion in its doctrine said, lets hurt people, lets hate people. Give us that example? Let us know what you mean when you say religion, because to me "in the name of religion" means nothing unless you can tell me about the individual. Because you yourself said that you do not judge a group of people by the actions of a few, but that is exactly what you are doing. You are taking the 99% of the world who have some sort of faith and judging them based off of the 5% who claim faith but do stupid things.

There is no way around your skew here. If it is the religion then we can talk about how billions of people in our world are "religious" and the high majority of them have nothing to do with the problems in our respective societies. Or you can look at the individuals as a whole who do not follow the rules of their faith. That would be like saying laws in America are pointless because look at how many people break them and make our world a worse place to live.

so what is the point for you? Why do you even post on here? You made a blanket statement of which you have not shown your sources? Is it that YOU have been jaded by people of faith, I would bet Christianity because you used the term "saves" in your first post, when in fact ONLY Christianity uses it widely? Is that you just can't stand it? Because all I can see is you using the actions of a few to define ME and my family and MY friends whom I know do 10 times more to serve individually than any of the non-theists I know. Boy Scouts, Salvation Army, Red Cross, Habitat 4 Humanity, over seas missions, educators peace corps, these things all have their foundations in service and that service is spawned by religion.

As much as I would like to continue this discussion with you I am going to start ignoring what you post. Mostly because you do not have a specific goal in your statements and responding to you is beginning to be the same with no advance in thought. You don't seem to have a direction in your arguments, and your points are actually starting to contradict the very nature of your POV. I would just like to see you get specific with real examples and real points.

...BTW I think I agree with the female asian driver statement.

[RL...]

I am not an agnostic as I do acknowledge a higher power....

this is wiki definition: philosophical (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy) view that the truth value (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_value) of certain claims — particularly metaphysical (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysics) claims regarding theology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theology), afterlife (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afterlife) or the existence of deities (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deity), ghosts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghosts), or even ultimate reality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality) — is unknown or, depending on the form of agnosticism, inherently impossible to prove or disprove.

I do not see things this way. I do acknowldege higher power, but can one prove it? Not in the sense that I can show you god and say, look here's god. But I think it is proven with each sunset and each sunrise...

And then it says agnostics view theology as unprovable or unkown, again, I do not look at things as such. I think all theologies are false. That's not to say religions don't have things to offer to SOME ppl and teach about living well, but I jsut do not believe that religions are true...

As far as afterlife goes, I think there is complete nothingness, much like how before we were born there was nothingness, we were not in existance yet. And when we die, we die, and there is no heaven, no hell. I also do not belive in "souls", I think ppl tend to make humans out to be something we are not. We are simply mammals. Yes, we are the most resourceful mammals on this planet, but to think that we have souls and religions, then why, maybe frogs have souls and religions? I mean, why should religion, souls, and all these religious concepts only be particular to one species of life on this planet, homo sapiens? We are here to live, and to die. Nothing more, nothing less.

[sport_122]

Hmmm... in my mind --> anyone with a love for truth outside of himself/herself has to start with NO belief in God, and THEN look for evidence of such a God. That person needs to search for some objective evidence of a supernatural/spiritual power. All the people I write e-mails to or talk to about their faith are still often are still stuck at this "searching" stage. Me NOT believing in it puts me at a point where I HAVE ARRIVED, while they are still searching. The bible is written in circles --- leading to just more questions so that by the time you die, you really haven't gained anything but the ability to quote a scripture that coincides w/ most situations that you might encounter in life. SWEET! :rolleyes: Consequently, I arrived at the point I am at today by starting on the same road that my mom, grandparents and all other believers are on today... reading the bible and trying to make sense of it's dumbness... imagine that. What did I learn --- I learned to think that I DO believe in a higher power, but NOT in "God" (as we know it, and as we teach it).

The "I BELIEVE IN GOD" thing seems to demand something more personal, some leap of faith that helps one see life's big picture, some rules to live by. So, I'm saying, "I believe that there is no God... at least as we know it and are taught." I can say w/ the same certainty that bible-thumpers do that I'm right, (or more right than wrong) and I think we ALL as a people have missed the BIG picture.

Having taken that step in the belief of NOTHING, it informs every moment of my life. I'm not greedy. I have love... I love blue skies, rainbows and Hallmark cards --> and that has to be enough for me. Everything in the world is and everything that the world is NOT is plenty for me. It seems just rude to beg the invisible for more... to beg for some HEAVEN when there can be heaven here on Earth at times. The love of my family that raised me and the friends I have is enough that I don't "need" heaven. I don't "need" to hunch over a bible every Wednesday to learn how to make that translate into REAL life. I won the huge genetic lottery and I get joy, and I get to ENjoy it every day.

Believing there's no God (as it is taught) means I can't really be forgiven except by kindness of other people that I can talk to and look at and touch. That's good; b/c it makes me want to be more thoughtful --> I have to try to treat people right the first time around instead of knowing that I can just repint to "God" later on... b/c why should GOD 4give me for offending Bob? Shouldn't BOB forgive me himself?

Believing that there's no God stops me from being narrow-minded like devout Christians are... most not even OPEN to discussing some1 else's viewpoint. That's saying "I am a genius - I have it ALL figured out... no1 can tell me otherwise." Yeah -- good luck w/ that one. With my view... I can read ideas from all different people from all different cultures --> unlike Christians turning a deaf ear as soon as some1 w/ a different view than them starts to speak. Without God, we as people can agree on reality, and I can use this reality to keep learning where we are wrong and could all improve. Part of that REALITY is innocent people dieing of hunger/disease in the middle of street while begging for invisible help from "God" that never arrives. With NO God, we can all keep adjusting, so we can REALLY learn to communicate w/ each other no matter where we are from and what we believe in. With "God" in the picture, that's the 1st step for segregation (religious). I don't travel in circles where people say, "I have faith, I believe this in my heart and nothing you can say or do can shake my faith." That's just a long-winded religious way to say, "shut the f*ck up," or another two words that the FCC likes less (F*CK YOU). But all obscenity in the world is less insulting than, "It's how I was brought up" and "my imaginary friend means more to me than anything you can ever say or do." So, believing there is no God lets me be proven wrong and that's always fun. Why? B/c being proven wrong means that I'm learning something... that's always a plus.

Believing there is no God means the suffering I've seen in my family, my life, and indeed all the suffering in the world, isn't caused by an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent force that isn't bothered to help or is just "testing us"... that suffering is something we all may be able to help each other with in the future. The WORST people I know wouldn't let a 10 year old get pimped out and raped and killed in alleys w/ the power to stop it all in the name of "it's not meant to be understood" or "God works in mysterious ways." Like I said, I have LITERALLY seen people die waiting for invisible help from "God". But if I believe in US (people), then WE should come to the rescue of that person in the street. CAUSE GOD IS NOT FUCKING GOING TO!!! A God, if there was one, would want US to help that man... GET A CLUE!!! No God means the possibility of less suffering in the future... but only if WE as PEOPLE, and I mean ALL F*CKING PEOPLE help EACH OTHER!!!

Believing there is no God gives me more room for belief in family, people, love, truth, beauty, sex, Jello and all the other things I can prove and touch/taste that make this life the best life I will ever have... how can "heaven" compare if all of my friends and family will not be there? THIS is likely the best life I will ever have... same goes for you.:goodjob:

If there is a God, I imagine he is laughing at the people who are asking for MORE (heaven, prayers, streets of gold, angels), when he has provided everything that we will ever need RIGHT HERE... each other... and also given us more smarts - adaptability - and reign over everything else that "He" created ---- yet we kneel down and pray that he would help "just a little more" w/ your mortgage payment this month... TOTALLY pissing off the fact that you have the most advaced brain of all beings and can figure the mortgage thing out on your own. We kneel down for a few seconds and say "Lord help Bobby next door find a new house since he got evicted" and then hop in bed w/ 3 "spare" bedrooms and think nothing more of it. Yeah --- "waiting on you God --- do your thing kind sir.":rolleyes:

People have missed the whole fuckin' ship... and will likely always continue to.


Wow. lots to say but I am going to try to keep it short.
So again, with no God, how do you think love is defined? Where do you think the concept comes from? Do you believe the higher power contributed at all to you and who you are? I actually agree that the Bible is written in circles, sort of, but you need to understand the way its written. It isn't written in passages and numbered sections or as a lord of the rings book, it is a collection of scrolls and scripts written by numerous people to give account of similar experiences. It should almost read in circles and every account should be consistent with similar accounts and situations from other books.
The I believe in God does demand something more personal. It does not show you life's big picture and we cannot fully understand the things that are written in the Bible. Chances are that many things we think about God are not accurate with who he is.

but you said, you have taken a step in the belief of NOTHING. But you haven't, not if you claim that you believe in a higher power. I don't believe that blue skies, rainbows, or love mean anything unless they are from God. Because I do believe in an eternal, those things on earth to me serve as revelations of his character.

I don't believe reality can be defined without God. Because REALITY is also subjective. My reality is not yours and yours is not mine, so how without God do you suppose ALL men can arrive to the same reality? It can't happen. The 6+ billion people on this planet will not arrive on an agreed reality without the existence of the infinite to state what that reality is and to prevent it from changing. I don't believe we can learn anything without the existence of the eternal and infinite because all the things we would learn would change and the reason we can continue to develop in knowledge is because the foundations have been set.

I believe that suffering is caused by disobedience. We see this in everyday life. I think that their is another part of suffering that most don't pay attention to. Suffering makes life better in showing us what we have and allowing us to realize that what we have is gifted. its not mandatory and there is nothing that says we deserve it.

Based on your readings and history, what do you think of Jesus? Just curious.

[BABY J]

Wow. lots to say but I am going to try to keep it short.
So again, with no God, how do you think love is defined? Where do you think the concept comes from? Do you believe the higher power contributed at all to you and who you are? I actually agree that the Bible is written in circles, sort of, but you need to understand the way its written. It isn't written in passages and numbered sections or as a lord of the rings book, it is a collection of scrolls and scripts written by numerous people to give account of similar experiences. It should almost read in circles and every account should be consistent with similar accounts and situations from other books.
The I believe in God does demand something more personal. It does not show you life's big picture and we cannot fully understand the things that are written in the Bible. Chances are that many things we think about God are not accurate with who he is.

but you said, you have taken a step in the belief of NOTHING. But you haven't, not if you claim that you believe in a higher power. I don't believe that blue skies, rainbows, or love mean anything unless they are from God. Because I do believe in an eternal, those things on earth to me serve as revelations of his character.

I don't believe reality can be defined without God. Because REALITY is also subjective. My reality is not yours and yours is not mine, so how without God do you suppose ALL men can arrive to the same reality? It can't happen. The 6+ billion people on this planet will not arrive on an agreed reality without the existence of the infinite to state what that reality is and to prevent it from changing. I don't believe we can learn anything without the existence of the eternal and infinite because all the things we would learn would change and the reason we can continue to develop in knowledge is because the foundations have been set.

I believe that suffering is caused by disobedience. We see this in everyday life. I think that their is another part of suffering that most don't pay attention to. Suffering makes life better in showing us what we have and allowing us to realize that what we have is gifted. its not mandatory and there is nothing that says we deserve it.

Based on your readings and history, what do you think of Jesus? Just curious.

My previous post can stand on it's on w/out further amplification --- but I can "hear" your curiosity in your post --- this is the SAME thing that I am referring to in the post... you're still searching. :) I'm on the road right now -- but I will address your post... stay tuned.

J'son

[sport_122]

I am not an agnostic as I do acknowledge a higher power....

this is wiki definition: philosophical (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy) view that the truth value (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_value) of certain claims — particularly metaphysical (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysics) claims regarding theology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theology), afterlife (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afterlife) or the existence of deities (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deity), ghosts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghosts), or even ultimate reality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality) — is unknown or, depending on the form of agnosticism, inherently impossible to prove or disprove.

I do not see things this way. I do acknowldege higher power, but can one prove it? Not in the sense that I can show you god and say, look here's god. But I think it is proven with each sunset and each sunrise...

And then it says agnostics view theology as unprovable or unkown, again, I do not look at things as such. I think all theologies are false. That's not to say religions don't have things to offer to SOME ppl and teach about living well, but I jsut do not believe that religions are true...

As far as afterlife goes, I think there is complete nothingness, much like how before we were born there was nothingness, we were not in existance yet. And when we die, we die, and there is no heaven, no hell. I also do not belive in "souls", I think ppl tend to make humans out to be something we are not. We are simply mammals. Yes, we are the most resourceful mammals on this planet, but to think that we have souls and religions, then why, maybe frogs have souls and religions? I mean, why should religion, souls, and all these religious concepts only be particular to one species of life on this planet, homo sapiens? We are here to live, and to die. Nothing more, nothing less.

Dude, don't look now, but you are STILL making Apathetic arguments!

When you say that I think there is a God, but we do not know him/her/it etc. And then you say God has nothing to do with what is going on in the world. You have just made agnostic arguments.

BTW... If you read up on hedonism, that is where the agnostic classes typically end up. With the argument that the only knowledge is self knowledge and the only goodness is self goodness, and to live in this world it will take you implicating yourself as the authority and not a god.

These are all inclusive in agnosticism.
I have done TONS of research on this. I can put you in touch with some professors, pastors, other agnostics if you want. Maybe they can clarify it to you.

The reason they even have an Agnostic branch of the church is for people who believe in God or are not sure, but don't believe God is knowable.

http://www.uctaa.net/ourchurch/intro.html
http://www.geocities.com/bicolagnostics/

You are agnostic. Call someone else and ask them.

[sport_122]

My previous post can stand on it's on w/out further amplification --- but I can "hear" your curiosity in your post --- this is the SAME thing that I am referring to in the post... you're still searching. :) I'm on the road right now -- but I will address your post... stay tuned.

J'son

I am NOT searching. I am investigating. Before I get in a discussion with you I have to know who you are and what your experience has been because I can't reasonably discuss anything you say without that information.

[RL...]

you also said in another thread "God has no direct influence on this planet or what happens on it, good or bad. God(or gods/whatever is out there) could be good, could be bad, I think it is neither. I think it just is."

undeniably statements of an agnostic. Its what you are whether you believe it or not. It just defines your beliefs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism
more
http://arts.cuhk.edu.hk/humftp/E-text/Russell/agnostic.htm
more
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/agnostic
you sir are an Agnostic and don't even know it!
http://www.religioustolerance.org/agnostic.htm

Well if you need more proof let me know. Its only a google of agnostic or (especially apathetic agnosticism) away.

You are very wrong about the Christian faith. The Christian faith directly stems from the first major mono-theistic faith, Judaism. There are similarities between this and other faiths, but it does not change its origins. That's like saying that the only real religion is whatever the FIRST one was because it was first and everything else was copied. So all religions after are posers.

When we speak of law and absolutes lets go back to the concept of laws and what they were intended to do. Laws were intended to help society function. All written law, and unwritten, has its place to support human life and well being within a society. Written law all stems from the same moral code or moral law. Those are things that are the laws about murder, theft, etc etc. People all over the world when they kill they have to try to justify it some way. That's because the entire world views the taking of life as a wrong thing to do. Which proves that their is something in humans that tells us that killing is wrong.

I have commented on the choice thing on another thread so I will not go back into that.

Lastly, you said
"First of all, Individuals such as you and I are responsible for the way this world is and will be. Not god, not buddha, not religion, although religion indirectly and directly affect the actions of millions of ppl, but it comes down to human choice. A choice to kill someone, or a choice to help someone...and yes, EVERYONE should believe in themselves more...."

and then you said
"I don't know why you're lecturing us about islamic terroists and hitler and whatnot, I know not to judge a group of ppl by the actions of a few, and I do not...although we can all agree female asian drivers are the worst!"

again a contradiction (EVEN IN THE SAME POST)
The people I listed did exactly what you started this thread about. But what you say is that it would be a better world if people believed in themselves. The same people who you can contribute to creating these terrible religions and governments, and performing horrible acts toward one another, you want them to be relinquished of "religion" as if it is going to make them better people. It wont because these people have already proven that they are ignoring the doctrines of their faith in light of "believing in themselves" So how do you figure that makes sense?

So what is it to you? Is your culprit religion, or is it the individuals. It can't be both in this case, because you have attacked the system and the individual. Its either that one of them is right and one is wrong or they both are wrong. But if they both are wrong, then you can't say that you think people should look to themselves because you have indirectly placed humans as responsible for the bad in our world either through religion or through their own philosophy of life. You want people to take your arguments seriously (some I do) but you don't seem to know what your argument is.

So how about you tell us specifics? Why don't you actually step up and provide us with specifics on when a religion, in its very doctrine says that we are to commit genocide, or when a religion in its doctrine said, lets hurt people, lets hate people. Give us that example? Let us know what you mean when you say religion, because to me "in the name of religion" means nothing unless you can tell me about the individual. Because you yourself said that you do not judge a group of people by the actions of a few, but that is exactly what you are doing. You are taking the 99% of the world who have some sort of faith and judging them based off of the 5% who claim faith but do stupid things.

There is no way around your skew here. If it is the religion then we can talk about how billions of people in our world are "religious" and the high majority of them have nothing to do with the problems in our respective societies. Or you can look at the individuals as a whole who do not follow the rules of their faith. That would be like saying laws in America are pointless because look at how many people break them and make our world a worse place to live.

so what is the point for you? Why do you even post on here? You made a blanket statement of which you have not shown your sources? Is it that YOU have been jaded by people of faith, I would bet Christianity because you used the term "saves" in your first post, when in fact ONLY Christianity uses it widely? Is that you just can't stand it? Because all I can see is you using the actions of a few to define ME and my family and MY friends whom I know do 10 times more to serve individually than any of the non-theists I know. Boy Scouts, Salvation Army, Red Cross, Habitat 4 Humanity, over seas missions, educators peace corps, these things all have their foundations in service and that service is spawned by religion.

As much as I would like to continue this discussion with you I am going to start ignoring what you post. Mostly because you do not have a specific goal in your statements and responding to you is beginning to be the same with no advance in thought. You don't seem to have a direction in your arguments, and your points are actually starting to contradict the very nature of your POV. I would just like to see you get specific with real examples and real points.

...BTW I think I agree with the female asian driver statement.

Christianity, along with all other theistic belief systems is the greatest fraud of all time. It serves to detatch us from the world and each other. It submits blind submission to authority. It reduces human responsibility to the effect that god "controls everything". And in turn, awful crimes can be justified in the name is a divine pursuit. and it empower those who know the truth, but use the myth to manipulate and control society. The religious myth is the most powerful myth ever created.

Circumcision, the great flood, baptism, afterlife, final judgement, virgin birth, resurection, crucifiction, saviors, communion, easter, xmas, passover, etc... are all egyptian ideas, and egyptian mythology long predates christianity or judaism...these are facts....coincidence....I think not....

yes, laws have been established by society to try and mantain order and "peace"...and are INTENDED to help society...I woudl say the majority of the world views killing as bad, but that really jsut depends on the circumstance doesn't it? After killing someone who is about to rape you or killing someone because you just feel like it are 2 different things right? I don't see the point you are making....

YOU completely take what I say and distort it. I did not ever say religion TELLS ppl to do bad things or it teaches ppl to do wrong. I said that ppl have done bad things feeling justified by their religion, which is true and undeniable. I did not contradict myself at all.

As far as the culprit or my point is here it goes...I will try and make it sounds as unambiguous as possible.

Religion helps a lot of ppl, it does alot of good, and it also cause a lot of damage and ppl do unspeakable things because of it, that's not to say that religion is telling ppl to act a fool, but everyone interpretes it in their own way, which is also why there are 256725 different types of christianity and bibles alone...

People shape this world, not god, not religion. But people actions are based off of what? Off of their mental perspectives and ideaologies. And most ppl in this world are religious to some extent, to some religion, which influences how each of those ppl live and make choices.

I think when we as a society one day reaches a point where we all live each day trying to further our civilization as a whole, instead of jsut trying to further ourselves for personal gain, that we will realize religion was unnecessary, and that we can prosper, function, and live life to the fullest without it.

I do not define you or anyone else by the actions of a few. Just because you are christian or buddhist or whatever I do not think badly of you nor do I classify you as some type of person....I accept everyone for who they are and I accept that ppl are different with different views...and who knows, I could very well be wrong about everything...After all the smartest thing anyone can do is realize their own ignorance and stupidity

My point, I don't really have a point....No matter what I can not change your mind nor vice versa, we are jsut having a debate here, and I am throwing out my opinions, I do not plan to change anyones minds, I am just argueing from my side...:cheers:

[RL...]

Dude, don't look now, but you are STILL making Apathetic arguments!

When you say that I think there is a God, but we do not know him/her/it etc. And then you say God has nothing to do with what is going on in the world. You have just made agnostic arguments.

BTW... If you read up on hedonism, that is where the agnostic classes typically end up. With the argument that the only knowledge is self knowledge and the only goodness is self goodness, and to live in this world it will take you implicating yourself as the authority and not a god.

These are all inclusive in agnosticism.
I have done TONS of research on this. I can put you in touch with some professors, pastors, other agnostics if you want. Maybe they can clarify it to you.

The reason they even have an Agnostic branch of the church is for people who believe in God or are not sure, but don't believe God is knowable.

http://www.uctaa.net/ourchurch/intro.html
http://www.geocities.com/bicolagnostics/

You are agnostic. Call someone else and ask them.

I haven't done research but I've read what agnosticism is about, if thats a word, and it doesnt fit me...nor my views

[stillaneon]

I promised myself that I would stay out of this section as much as I could.

but seriously\/\/\/\/



These are probably some of the most ridiculous arguments against organized religion that I have ever heard. I am beginning to think that your way of viewing the world in an almost agnostic way is the reason you have made some completely strange and unfounded statements. You have stated that you believe that YOU are responsible for doing good and that the INDIVIDUAL should have the courage to believe in themself...
Why is that so hard to believe? Even the bible states that "God" will not help those who don't help themselves. Why is it so hard to believe that the point there is to get off your lazy ass and try to fix the problem, then, either you will solve it, or you will be so preoccupied that you won't bitch to your "God" about it anymore.


That is EXACTLY the problem. The jewish faith, which is the origin of the christian faith, and arguably the origin of the islamic faith, was passed down for many centuries WITHOUT a text. The reason this faith can claim its existence before the origins of men, is simple. Because they all believe that the foundation of their faith lies on something eternal. Christians believe that Jesus, God, and the Holy Spirit are eternal, existing before creation and that they are the embodiment of our moral code and law. Jews just believe in the spirit and God. there are crossing views on this as well. But my point is that before there were texts there were people following these faiths. So they didn't just pop up because someone wrote a book. The way you state that shows me that you know nothing about the origin of these faiths. They existed for hundreds of years before any script was ever written. It's called oral tradition, and it is still used today. Without it there is no history, there is no past, your ancestors do not exist, and people are no different than ants.
There is no maybe, Judaism was a round long before Islam and Christianity.
And you're right Oral tradition has been used throughout history. Like Homer's Odyssey and the Iliad. Does that make them fact?


Why does it matter? Well with your method of thinking, there is NO law because individuals all have their own beliefs. Even in your statment, you said ,the individual should be encouraged to believe in themself... So I ask where does that leave you? If I want someone dead, and I am the authority what holds me back? What makes your desire for life trump my desire for your life to end? In your world, I am to look to myself for guidence, but that becomes anarchy because what is in me doesn't sync with what is in the other 6+ billion people in the world. I can take your life and I am justified in doing so because YOU have agreed that this is how the world should functions. There is no justice, because justice has to be grounded in law which can only be truly support when it is founded on an absolute. Absolutes must be eternal.
lol at your reasoning for law. Just because most current laws are based on the teachings of morals found in the bible, doesn't make "God" real, or the bible correct. There is something called moral tradition. There were laws and rules set up way before the current "Fad" of Christianity was recognized.
There will always be Justice, because it is the way of the world. You may kill me because you feel that it is the right thing, or that you are justified, but it will come back. Only so many people can die before people will react out of fear.


With your method, you can't say we have laws or a moral code, because (I think I've said to you before) without the existence of an eternal, even law is subjective and has no foundation of purpose or reality. And there is NO moral code except that of which I(the individual) have decided upon. There is no justice, because YOU cannot punish ME because I make MY rules.

Read above. and I can do whatever the fuck I want with your interpretation. including punishing you. The problem with you interpretation is, there is no logic. it's called anarchy. Again, you cannot compare a legal system to God.


You are trying to blame religion when in fact you should be looking at people (the individuals) who falsely represent a religion. This is what people who watch too much tv do when they hear about islamic terrorist. The estimated number of terrorists in the islamic faith is said to make up less than 1% of all muslims, but this faith has been demonized by the actions of a few. Its like the world looking at what an American government does and blames all of America as if you or I are sitting on capital hill dictacting our desires to committ attrocities around the globe. There have been billions upon billions of christians and muslims, and jews, but you chose to look at the few who have made history and you are trying to place your judgement on religion while ignoring the real fact. Without faith, and real believers, this world would be more dangerous, more deadly, and a worse place to live.
Honestly, there is nothing wrong with looking at the acts of a few and making assumptions. It's just like every walk of life. If you go to a McDonald's and they spit in your food, you will be less likely to eat at McDonald's again. I continuously have people come to my store complaining about how they were treated elsewhere. It is the responsibility of the party to correct a problem. Just like any thing else in life (even Nature). You weed out the bad to allow for the growth of the good. It is a horrible thing to watch people make assumtions on "insert faith here" people because of something that a few did, but if you don't want a particular stereotype, then take care of the issue before someone else does.


And even in muslim and christian circles people within those faiths look at people who make claims to be in the same faith and do not claim these people. The majority of muslims, say that, islamic terrorists, are not following the qu'ron. Poeple like Hitler were twisted and domented and were not doing what they did in the name of God.
Hitler Claimed killing in the name of God. He was weeded out. Before you start trying to call people crazy, read Numbers. Chapter 15 and start about Verse 32 and read just 4 or 5 verses. Your "God" commanded to stone a man because he was collecting wood on the Sabbath.

Yeah, let's talk about crazy


In fact, they were doing exactly what YOU say they should. They were ignoring the totality of their texts for the sake of making themselves the authority. Hitler, was making, his way the law. He was denying scripture and sculpting his own world based off of his personal views while claiming to be a christian authority.
And he was wrong. He was an extremist. At any point did anyone say that hitler was in the right? Just wondering because you are the first person who has brought this up


You claim to look at things with a greater good mentality. But I call BS. The greater good mentality would look at the totality of these things and how they promote love, order, peace, integrity, honesty, and passion, and want more of the world to live to these codes. I think you just have a personal agenda.

And you are wrong, the greatest feeling someone can feel is love. Love is not helping someone just to help someone. Love is helping someone because you really care for their well being. Love is the greatest thing someone can receive and the greatest thing someone can give. That should be the litmus test of the successes and failures of people of faith.
Not even starting on this subject, you have decided to type a wall of text that gets so far away from the point that you hope people will think you are intelligent.

Get off your soapbox and stick to the subject at hand


And with ALL of this said, I think you have proven one thing. The weakminded person is one who pulls ridiculous statements out of his ass, claiming proof, and showing none, and making arguments based off of God knows what. Maybe you should go study "the facts" on where these faiths come from, and really looking at the numbers and the history, try to decide if your statements made any since.
Here is the proof. Religion is:

[/QUOTE=Webster's Dictionary]a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects:.

the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: [/QUOTE]

Basically, A way to explain things for the un-explaining. Only the, what was your name for it; oh yeah, weakminded, would believe anything that a book tells them instead of investigating it themselves.

The Bible is a piece of literature, just like any other book.

[RL...]

I promised myself that I would stay out of this section as much as I could.

but seriously\/\/\/\/



Why is that so hard to believe? Even the bible states that "God" will not help those who don't help themselves. Why is it so hard to believe that the point there is to get off your lazy ass and try to fix the problem, then, either you will solve it, or you will be so preoccupied that you won't bitch to your "God" about it anymore.


There is no maybe, Judaism was a round long before Islam and Christianity.
And you're right Oral tradition has been used throughout history. Like Homer's Odyssey and the Iliad. Does that make them fact?


lol at your reasoning for law. Just because most current laws are based on the teachings of morals found in the bible, doesn't make "God" real, or the bible correct. There is something called moral tradition. There were laws and rules set up way before the current "Fad" of Christianity was recognized.
There will always be Justice, because it is the way of the world. You may kill me because you feel that it is the right thing, or that you are justified, but it will come back. Only so many people can die before people will react out of fear.



Read above. and I can do whatever the fuck I want with your interpretation. including punishing you. The problem with you interpretation is, there is no logic. it's called anarchy. Again, you cannot compare a legal system to God.


Honestly, there is nothing wrong with looking at the acts of a few and making assumptions. It's just like every walk of life. If you go to a McDonald's and they spit in your food, you will be less likely to eat at McDonald's again. I continuously have people come to my store complaining about how they were treated elsewhere. It is the responsibility of the party to correct a problem. Just like any thing else in life (even Nature). You weed out the bad to allow for the growth of the good. It is a horrible thing to watch people make assumtions on "insert faith here" people because of something that a few did, but if you don't want a particular stereotype, then take care of the issue before someone else does.


Hitler Claimed killing in the name of God. He was weeded out. Before you start trying to call people crazy, read Numbers. Chapter 15 and start about Verse 32 and read just 4 or 5 verses. Your "God" commanded to stone a man because he was collecting wood on the Sabbath.

Yeah, let's talk about crazy


And he was wrong. He was an extremist. At any point did anyone say that hitler was in the right? Just wondering because you are the first person who has brought this up


Not even starting on this subject, you have decided to type a wall of text that gets so far away from the point that you hope people will think you are intelligent.

Get off your soapbox and stick to the subject at hand


Here is the proof. Religion is:

[/QUOTE=Webster's Dictionary]a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects:.

the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices:

Basically, A way to explain things for the un-explaining. Only the, what was your name for it; oh yeah, weakminded, would believe anything that a book tells them instead of investigating it themselves.

The Bible is a piece of literature, just like any other book.[/QUOTE]

he is right

[Starrfire]

Hmmm... in my mind --> anyone with a love for truth outside of himself/herself has to start with NO belief in God, and THEN look for evidence of such a God. That person needs to search for some objective evidence of a supernatural/spiritual power. All the people I write e-mails to or talk to about their faith are still often are still stuck at this "searching" stage. Me NOT believing in it puts me at a point where I HAVE ARRIVED, while they are still searching. The bible is written in circles --- leading to just more questions so that by the time you die, you really haven't gained anything but the ability to quote a scripture that coincides w/ most situations that you might encounter in life. SWEET! :rolleyes: Consequently, I arrived at the point I am at today by starting on the same road that my mom, grandparents and all other believers are on today... reading the bible and trying to make sense of it's dumbness... imagine that. What did I learn --- I learned to think that I DO believe in a higher power, but NOT in "God" (as we know it, and as we teach it).

The "I BELIEVE IN GOD" thing seems to demand something more personal, some leap of faith that helps one see life's big picture, some rules to live by. So, I'm saying, "I believe that there is no God... at least as we know it and are taught." I can say w/ the same certainty that bible-thumpers do that I'm right, (or more right than wrong) and I think we ALL as a people have missed the BIG picture.

Having taken that step in the belief of NOTHING, it informs every moment of my life. I'm not greedy. I have love... I love blue skies, rainbows and Hallmark cards --> and that has to be enough for me. Everything in the world is and everything that the world is NOT is plenty for me. It seems just rude to beg the invisible for more... to beg for some HEAVEN when there can be heaven here on Earth at times. The love of my family that raised me and the friends I have is enough that I don't "need" heaven. I don't "need" to hunch over a bible every Wednesday to learn how to make that translate into REAL life. I won the huge genetic lottery and I get joy, and I get to ENjoy it every day.

Believing there's no God (as it is taught) means I can't really be forgiven except by kindness of other people that I can talk to and look at and touch. That's good; b/c it makes me want to be more thoughtful --> I have to try to treat people right the first time around instead of knowing that I can just repint to "God" later on... b/c why should GOD 4give me for offending Bob? Shouldn't BOB forgive me himself?

Believing that there's no God stops me from being narrow-minded like devout Christians are... most not even OPEN to discussing some1 else's viewpoint. That's saying "I am a genius - I have it ALL figured out... no1 can tell me otherwise." Yeah -- good luck w/ that one. With my view... I can read ideas from all different people from all different cultures --> unlike Christians turning a deaf ear as soon as some1 w/ a different view than them starts to speak. Without God, we as people can agree on reality, and I can use this reality to keep learning where we are wrong and could all improve. Part of that REALITY is innocent people dieing of hunger/disease in the middle of street while begging for invisible help from "God" that never arrives. With NO God, we can all keep adjusting, so we can REALLY learn to communicate w/ each other no matter where we are from and what we believe in. With "God" in the picture, that's the 1st step for segregation (religious). I don't travel in circles where people say, "I have faith, I believe this in my heart and nothing you can say or do can shake my faith." That's just a long-winded religious way to say, "shut the f*ck up," or another two words that the FCC likes less (F*CK YOU). But all obscenity in the world is less insulting than, "It's how I was brought up" and "my imaginary friend means more to me than anything you can ever say or do." So, believing there is no God lets me be proven wrong and that's always fun. Why? B/c being proven wrong means that I'm learning something... that's always a plus.

Believing there is no God means the suffering I've seen in my family, my life, and indeed all the suffering in the world, isn't caused by an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent force that isn't bothered to help or is just "testing us"... that suffering is something we all may be able to help each other with in the future. The WORST people I know wouldn't let a 10 year old get pimped out and raped and killed in alleys w/ the power to stop it all in the name of "it's not meant to be understood" or "God works in mysterious ways." Like I said, I have LITERALLY seen people die waiting for invisible help from "God". But if I believe in US (people), then WE should come to the rescue of that person in the street. CAUSE GOD IS NOT FUCKING GOING TO!!! A God, if there was one, would want US to help that man... GET A CLUE!!! No God means the possibility of less suffering in the future... but only if WE as PEOPLE, and I mean ALL F*CKING PEOPLE help EACH OTHER!!!

Believing there is no God gives me more room for belief in family, people, love, truth, beauty, sex, Jello and all the other things I can prove and touch/taste that make this life the best life I will ever have... how can "heaven" compare if all of my friends and family will not be there? THIS is likely the best life I will ever have... same goes for you.:goodjob:

If there is a God, I imagine he is laughing at the people who are asking for MORE (heaven, prayers, streets of gold, angels), when he has provided everything that we will ever need RIGHT HERE... each other... and also given us more smarts - adaptability - and reign over everything else that "He" created ---- yet we kneel down and pray that he would help "just a little more" w/ your mortgage payment this month... TOTALLY pissing off the fact that you have the most advaced brain of all beings and can figure the mortgage thing out on your own. We kneel down for a few seconds and say "Lord help Bobby next door find a new house since he got evicted" and then hop in bed w/ 3 "spare" bedrooms and think nothing more of it. Yeah --- "waiting on you God --- do your thing kind sir.":rolleyes:

People have missed the whole fuckin' ship... and will likely always continue to.

Absolutely perfect, i wish I could meet people like you around here. reps +1 lol.(that's the best I can do over the internet.)

[sport_122]

So, in response to several people, for the sake of time.

The Bible is a collection of literature. Why does this make a difference? Because to have several accounts from different sources in different regions, with historical support ads validity. You can look up historically and find other things about Jesus, about Paul, Peter, Pilate, prophets, moses, etc etc. They really existed and there is evidence in a lot of cases to support some of the things you will read, like the crucifixion of Jesus. This is very well supported through historical documents from numerous cultures. Even in the new testaments the authors put in specific things that talk about numerous witnesses or specific locations and times where at that time you could go to the place and say, who was here when?, and tell me what happened?


In debate you need to first establish a grounds for your argument. You need to establish whatever each individuals preconceptions are about the topic and then you need to establish the question. If you are going to understand anything about the Bible, you cannot look at it in cross section. You have to look at it in the totality of its contexts. This is why a christian and a person who doesn't really study the bible in its historical context will almost never agree. You enter into looking at it, as if it were a book of fables, when it is more grounded in documented history than it is "fairytale".

Also, If you believe the Bible to be just a collection of stories and not the inspired word of God, then in no way can you use that as a source because you don't even believe its valid. You cannot rightly make an argument to support a knowledge of something you don't even believe to be valid, that is a terrible way to make a point to a christian or anyone who has elaborately investigated the Bible and its cultures.

Stillaneon,
You asked if at any point people agreed with Hitler...Yes, they did, and there are still some who do? do you think these people are representative of the christian church because they followed the beliefs of a mad man. History writes that Hitler had all sorts of mental problems.

do you think that all people on this forum are speed demons, and drive like F&F movie characters because they drive the same types of cars as some of us. That is the path that is taken when all religions are grouped together and judged based on the actions of individuals. Are there a lot of individuals, yes, because there are thousands of years of history that involves religion.

We have a very very strong difference in definitions about what it means to be a Christian. I realize that there are a lot of posers out there. There are people who are "christian" by default, and much of the world thinks that America is a Christian nation, but I don't. So before anyone wants to bash being christian why don't you tell me what it means to be what i am?

So why the wall of posts? The wall of posts lay down the foundation of my arguments. I am still waiting to hear (read) foundation laid down for yours. The difference between you and I so far is that I have lots of reason to come to my conclusions and my thoughts. All I have gotten is blanket statements, still. Statements that first said All religions, then an emphasis on the people, but its really not the people (to some) its the religion again, if this thought is grounded I am missing something, someone explain it to me with facts.

So you said that I compared a legal system to God. The presence of law does not denote a legal system. But WITHOUT (that is not a comparison) a universal law there is no grounds for a legal system. You completely misquoted my statements about law. Because I believe the reason you cannot legally do what you want is because we are not judging what is write based off of a subjective moral code. For instance, speeding is not right whether you do it or not, and everyone can agree on that because their are posted speed signs to tell you so. If it were based on your personal code, then for you 55 could be fast, for me 75, for someone else 100. That is anarchy. Individuals deciding what their laws or rules should be on their own.

On a real not, I spent two years assistant teaching at a high school. I would love to see you come into a classroom with 25 kids and tell them that their absolute authority is themselves. You would have no control over that class and they would run all over each other. The reason our world is so bad right now, is because so many people are abandoning what they should be doing based on their faiths. If they are abandoning their faiths for their own personal reasons then why attribute that to the religion itself? The Bible speaks negatively of these types of people, so how do you suppose their religion is the principle by which they are doing so much wrong?

Also, you obviously have NOT read everything that was in this thread. All of my posts have been in direct correlation with what someone else has posted. This is in reference to saying that I was getting off subject. The topic is a bad world = the absence of a good God. Love is a direct relation to this topic as for the christian, it is believe that God is love and that His love is demonstrated through provision of law and logic. Seems pretty relevant to me. Just b/c you don't like what my view is, doesn't mean you shouldn't try to understand it, which is what most of us on this thread are doing, and not flaming as mandated by the rules of this forum.

Lastly, what you don't know about me is how I came to believe the things I believe. I have a degree in studies of religion. I have discussed things with everyone from atheists, to agnostics, to buddhists, christians (some of whom I don't agree with at all) and just about anyone else who wants to discuss things. For a weak minded person, I am willing to bet that I have spent MORE time investigating these things from different points of view than anyone else on this thread. If I see a christian on here, misrepresenting the foundations of their faith I would call them on it too. yeah, some people of faith are weak minded, no doubt about it, but not me.

As a Christian I am pretty sure I have a better scope of what we should and should not believe. I know when to throw up a flag and say that does not represent the church, or that is not what the Bible says, or that is taken out of context. And it always amazes me how, people who claim to not like it, would act as if they know and understand it better than people who have been submerged in it. I ONLY understand other faiths and other beliefs and views because I have spent time investigating and discussing their foundations and their histories through questions and study with people who live these faiths. You have asked no questions of me, you have only assumed to understand the foundations of my arguments to support my points. That sounds a lot like the...umm, weak minded christians who have been mentioned before who don't have the ability to explain what their beliefs are and can only throw their hands up at the sign of a good debate. Believe me I AM NOT ONE OF THOSE. And it seems like you can't handle it. I appreciate the views of the people on hear. I don't agree with them and I think many of them are put together with little thought, and even though I will question their reasons and their methodology, I will still respect them. I expect the same.

BTW, I would welcome sitting down with any of you in person and explaining what I believe because I know its not normal for people who believe in God to be able to explain WHY they believe. There is no "IT JUST IS" with me.

[RL...]

So, in response to several people, for the sake of time.

The Bible is a collection of literature. Why does this make a difference? Because to have several accounts from different sources in different regions, with historical support ads validity. You can look up historically and find other things about Jesus, about Paul, Peter, Pilate, prophets, moses, etc etc. They really existed and there is evidence in a lot of cases to support some of the things you will read, like the crucifixion of Jesus. This is very well supported through historical documents from numerous cultures. Even in the new testaments the authors put in specific things that talk about numerous witnesses or specific locations and times where at that time you could go to the place and say, who was here when?, and tell me what happened?


In debate you need to first establish a grounds for your argument. You need to establish whatever each individuals preconceptions are about the topic and then you need to establish the question. If you are going to understand anything about the Bible, you cannot look at it in cross section. You have to look at it in the totality of its contexts. This is why a christian and a person who doesn't really study the bible in its historical context will almost never agree. You enter into looking at it, as if it were a book of fables, when it is more grounded in documented history than it is "fairytale".

Also, If you believe the Bible to be just a collection of stories and not the inspired word of God, then in no way can you use that as a source because you don't even believe its valid. You cannot rightly make an argument to support a knowledge of something you don't even believe to be valid, that is a terrible way to make a point to a christian or anyone who has elaborately investigated the Bible and its cultures.

Stillaneon,
You asked if at any point people agreed with Hitler...Yes, they did, and there are still some who do? do you think these people are representative of the christian church because they followed the beliefs of a mad man. History writes that Hitler had all sorts of mental problems.

do you think that all people on this forum are speed demons, and drive like F&F movie characters because they drive the same types of cars as some of us. That is the path that is taken when all religions are grouped together and judged based on the actions of individuals. Are there a lot of individuals, yes, because there are thousands of years of history that involves religion.

We have a very very strong difference in definitions about what it means to be a Christian. I realize that there are a lot of posers out there. There are people who are "christian" by default, and much of the world thinks that America is a Christian nation, but I don't. So before anyone wants to bash being christian why don't you tell me what it means to be what i am?

So why the wall of posts? The wall of posts lay down the foundation of my arguments. I am still waiting to hear (read) foundation laid down for yours. The difference between you and I so far is that I have lots of reason to come to my conclusions and my thoughts. All I have gotten is blanket statements, still. Statements that first said All religions, then an emphasis on the people, but its really not the people (to some) its the religion again, if this thought is grounded I am missing something, someone explain it to me with facts.

So you said that I compared a legal system to God. The presence of law does not denote a legal system. But WITHOUT (that is not a comparison) a universal law there is no grounds for a legal system. You completely misquoted my statements about law. Because I believe the reason you cannot legally do what you want is because we are not judging what is write based off of a subjective moral code. For instance, speeding is not right whether you do it or not, and everyone can agree on that because their are posted speed signs to tell you so. If it were based on your personal code, then for you 55 could be fast, for me 75, for someone else 100. That is anarchy. Individuals deciding what their laws or rules should be on their own.

On a real not, I spent two years assistant teaching at a high school. I would love to see you come into a classroom with 25 kids and tell them that their absolute authority is themselves. You would have no control over that class and they would run all over each other. The reason our world is so bad right now, is because so many people are abandoning what they should be doing based on their faiths. If they are abandoning their faiths for their own personal reasons then why attribute that to the religion itself? The Bible speaks negatively of these types of people, so how do you suppose their religion is the principle by which they are doing so much wrong?

Also, you obviously have NOT read everything that was in this thread. All of my posts have been in direct correlation with what someone else has posted. This is in reference to saying that I was getting off subject. The topic is a bad world = the absence of a good God. Love is a direct relation to this topic as for the christian, it is believe that God is love and that His love is demonstrated through provision of law and logic. Seems pretty relevant to me. Just b/c you don't like what my view is, doesn't mean you shouldn't try to understand it, which is what most of us on this thread are doing, and not flaming as mandated by the rules of this forum.

Lastly, what you don't know about me is how I came to believe the things I believe. I have a degree in studies of religion. I have discussed things with everyone from atheists, to agnostics, to buddhists, christians (some of whom I don't agree with at all) and just about anyone else who wants to discuss things. For a weak minded person, I am willing to bet that I have spent MORE time investigating these things from different points of view than anyone else on this thread. If I see a christian on here, misrepresenting the foundations of their faith I would call them on it too. yeah, some people of faith are weak minded, no doubt about it, but not me.

As a Christian I am pretty sure I have a better scope of what we should and should not believe. I know when to throw up a flag and say that does not represent the church, or that is not what the Bible says, or that is taken out of context. And it always amazes me how, people who claim to not like it, would act as if they know and understand it better than people who have been submerged in it. I ONLY understand other faiths and other beliefs and views because I have spent time investigating and discussing their foundations and their histories through questions and study with people who live these faiths. You have asked no questions of me, you have only assumed to understand the foundations of my arguments to support my points. That sounds a lot like the...umm, weak minded christians who have been mentioned before who don't have the ability to explain what their beliefs are and can only throw their hands up at the sign of a good debate. Believe me I AM NOT ONE OF THOSE. And it seems like you can't handle it. I appreciate the views of the people on hear. I don't agree with them and I think many of them are put together with little thought, and even though I will question their reasons and their methodology, I will still respect them. I expect the same.

BTW, I would welcome sitting down with any of you in person and explaining what I believe because I know its not normal for people who believe in God to be able to explain WHY they believe. There is no "IT JUST IS" with me.

1) NOT TRUE, there is hardly any reliable evidence to prove this

2) as a christian you THINK you have a better scope of what we should and should not believe. Your perspective is biased, as you are a christian and even if someone were to smack you in the face with hard proof of every judaochristian religion being false and untrue, you would denounce it as blasphemous and most likely the work of the devil. That is why many christians are close minded, because they cannot see past their own choices and ignorance.

[sport_122]

1) NOT TRUE, there is hardly any reliable evidence to prove this

2) as a christian you THINK you have a better scope of what we should and should not believe. Your perspective is biased, as you are a christian and even if someone were to smack you in the face with hard proof of every judaochristian religion being false and untrue, you would denounce it as blasphemous and most likely the work of the devil. That is why many christians are close minded, because they cannot see past their own choices and ignorance.

Are you serious? What do you mean reliable (here we go again with the subjective statements)?
How about this.
There are thousands of historical scripts. Hell the bible even has a complete and accurate lineagle listed to trace the lineage of jewish kings. Cross cultural references, where one culture says this happened between them and another culture and on both sides the accounts are the same. The Romans kept really good records, which give account to Jesus and Pilate and the problems which worried Rome in relation to the Jews and the emerging followers of Christ. There are TONS of records documenting the travels of Paul and Peter. There are tons of records giving information on Kind David, and Herod. The Egyptians have records of the mass exodus. The region and terrain show evidence of a great flood. To even say what you just said tells me that you have NOT even started to look. There are scrolls after scrolls telling about men who follwed Jesus who were going around doing miraculous things. There is MORE evidence to put historical perspective to the Bible than there is to anything else, becaue the writing took place over more than one thousand years. What do you think a group of guys sat down and wrote a book? When you write something over that amount of time and you include people who are very documented in history, then it is very simple to find validity in the text and its historical stance.

Maybe we could assume that this history is all about passed down perceptions. Well that would be the same case with all history which is why the only way to discuss this stuff again is to look at what we know to be universally true.

I find it funny that you would suggest that I use the term "the work of the devil". I have never said that to anyone in my life. I agree that my perspective is biased. When I got my degree in studies of Religion, it had nothing to do with just christianity. It was religion in general. It was MOSTLY historical information on the people involved in the foundations or respective religions. You dont seem to be able to understand that the bible has history because your preconseption is that its all christian mumbo jumbo.

The argument that you seem to be trying to make is the argument of relativity. That because I am a christian I think have a better scope. Wrong. I only think that I have universal reasons for belief in God. I am not asking anyone to be a christian, (which is a lot more than just belief).
Your post is quick to assume that you know my thoughts and you know where I am from. If that is the case please tell me. Who am I? What are my intentions? My intentions are to show you that your way of thinking, when left to itself and without the need for any christian or God references is faulted. Your beliefs do not agree with your own statements when aligned in your scope of logic, based of what you said. You didn't even know your arguments are those of that apethetic agnostic (which is a strong trend you are setting for someone who does not believe this to be true)

You are making the common error that people make when they start to fault at debate, or give up on understanding. You are trying to make it all personal and relative, but you are still failing to bring any good arguments to the table in response to my statements. The first thing YOU said in this thread was "its proven that religion has caused all these problems...". We are still waiting on that proof. You can go to a book store or library right now and find books about history that use the Bible as a source. And you can find books that are specifically about the lives of some of the people written in the bible, that are not books meant to "convert" you. You will need to look that up on your own, because as you said "even if you were smacked across the face< to see Jesus resurrected or Peter walking on water, you would dismiss it as witch craft. Tricks. Smoke and mirrors." If all there is is relativity then there is no point to us even talking. There is no point to us ever seeking any knowledge or trying to gain any understanding.

[BABY J]

Are you serious? What do you mean reliable (here we go again with the subjective statements)?
How about this.
There are thousands of historical scripts. Hell the bible even has a complete and accurate lineagle listed to trace the lineage of jewish kings. Cross cultural references, where one culture says this happened between them and another culture and on both sides the accounts are the same. The Romans kept really good records, which give account to Jesus and Pilate and the problems which worried Rome in relation to the Jews and the emerging followers of Christ. There are TONS of records documenting the travels of Paul and Peter. There are tons of records giving information on Kind David, and Herod. The Egyptians have records of the mass exodus. The region and terrain show evidence of a great flood. To even say what you just said tells me that you have NOT even started to look. There are scrolls after scrolls telling about men who follwed Jesus who were going around doing miraculous things. There is MORE evidence to put historical perspective to the Bible than there is to anything else, becaue the writing took place over more than one thousand years. What do you think a group of guys sat down and wrote a book? When you write something over that amount of time and you include people who are very documented in history, then it is very simple to find validity in the text and its historical stance.

Maybe we could assume that this history is all about passed down perceptions. Well that would be the same case with all history which is why the only way to discuss this stuff again is to look at what we know to be universally true.

I find it funny that you would suggest that I use the term "the work of the devil". I have never said that to anyone in my life. I agree that my perspective is biased. When I got my degree in studies of Religion, it had nothing to do with just christianity. It was religion in general. It was MOSTLY historical information on the people involved in the foundations or respective religions. You dont seem to be able to understand that the bible has history because your preconseption is that its all christian mumbo jumbo.

The argument that you seem to be trying to make is the argument of relativity. That because I am a christian I think have a better scope. Wrong. I only think that I have universal reasons for belief in God. I am not asking anyone to be a christian, (which is a lot more than just belief).
Your post is quick to assume that you know my thoughts and you know where I am from. If that is the case please tell me. Who am I? What are my intentions? My intentions are to show you that your way of thinking, when left to itself and without the need for any christian or God references is faulted. Your beliefs do not agree with your own statements when aligned in your scope of logic, based of what you said. You didn't even know your arguments are those of that apethetic agnostic (which is a strong trend you are setting for someone who does not believe this to be true)

You are making the common error that people make when they start to fault at debate, or give up on understanding. You are trying to make it all personal and relative, but you are still failing to bring any good arguments to the table in response to my statements. The first thing YOU said in this thread was "its proven that religion has caused all these problems...". We are still waiting on that proof. You can go to a book store or library right now and find books about history that use the Bible as a source. And you can find books that are specifically about the lives of some of the people written in the bible, that are not books meant to "convert" you. You will need to look that up on your own, because as you said "even if you were smacked across the face< to see Jesus resurrected or Peter walking on water, you would dismiss it as witch craft. Tricks. Smoke and mirrors." If all there is is relativity then there is no point to us even talking. There is no point to us ever seeking any knowledge or trying to gain any understanding.And how do you feel about ex-Creationists and ministers who have realized that it's all a bunch of silly myths after clinging desperately to scripture for years? And trust me, I've been all through the "Evidence That Demands a Verdict Series" and other Josh McDowell writings, as well as wandering though a lot of Hal Lindsey's works. Plus scores of others.

They all fall apart when scrutinized at a truly intellectual level. They use a document to prove itself. You cannot do this - it is an inherently flawed method of proof. By applying the same type of logic anything becomes true because it proves itself.

If you want to believe something, that's fine, that's faith. But don't try to turn it into a scientific or historical study because it will fall apart quickly under the jaundiced gaze of rigorous academic scrutiny.

[sport_122]

And how do you feel about ex-Creationists and ministers who have realized that it's all a bunch of silly myths after clinging desperately to scripture for years? And trust me, I've been all through the "Evidence That Demands a Verdict Series" and other Josh McDowell writings, as well as wandering though a lot of Hal Lindsey's works. Plus scores of others.

They all fall apart when scrutinized at a truly intellectual level. They use a document to prove itself. You cannot do this - it is an inherently flawed method of proof. By applying the same type of logic anything becomes true because it proves itself.

If you want to believe something, that's fine, that's faith. But don't try to turn it into a scientific or historical study because it will fall apart quickly under the jaundiced gaze of rigirous academic scrutiny.

I don't have an opinion on ex-creationists because in the same manner there are ex atheist and non-theists becoming theist (not necessarily christians) every day just as well. Thom Rainer, Greg Bahnsen are examples, there are just as many going the other way. I don't know their reasons, I don't know who they are and where they are from so I cannot give account to them. Greg and Tom have publicized their belief and I think I share many views with them. They were both completely against the idea of God, because of the same things that many people have mentioned here. No suprise of course. But what changed them was that study along with the rationalizing of their own arguments began to fail. They both came to a place when they believed that if there is no God, then there is no reason (reasoning/rational thought).

Also, again, please take note, that I do not use scripture as a reason to believe and prove Gods existence. I don't believe the Bible is the proof. If that were the case then we would have a huge problem in our hands because there are millions of books out there. You are right, that does not work and I don't believe it to be grounds for any explanation in this kind of discussion.

The problem I have with the statement of the intellectual level, is in the fact that "intellectuals" (assuming we share the same definition) are changing views both ways. I would assume that you agree intellectuals exist on both sides. How do you feel about the intellectual who holds to their beliefs either one way or the other? Is one of them wrong? They can easily be me and you. Subjectivity would say "I am as intellectual as i say, not the SAT, GMAT, or LSAT etc.

I don't want to make statements on science or history, I don't believe either one of these topics will clarify anything in debate as you will see if you read some of my posts. My real arguments are only based on what I believe to be universal or eternal in existence. I only mentioned the science and historical nature of the bible in response to people claiming it was dreamed up. it most certainly was not, and many of the same people who write the history books that we use in our schools would agree. The Bible is full of historical information, letters, accounts, events. And again, I am not talking about the myths that people harp on. I'm talking about the old testament and its writing and how it syncs up with Jewish history. and the new testament and how it syncs with very accurate documentation from districts in Rome.

To say that the bible has not historical validation is to say that.

Kind David, Pharoah, Pontious Pilate, Moses, Jesus, Peter, Paul, John, Luke, Matthew, The Jews, The cities written within,the wars discussed etc etc etc, never happened. that is completely wrong. Find a historian and ask them if the Bible is used in study of historical events.

dont take my word for it. All it takes is for a few historians to use it for me to be correct. If none of them use it then I am wrong. The problem is that I already know non-theist historians who don't believe in the miraculous things, and don't believe in God and think religious choice is the workings of a chemical reaction in the brain, and still reference the Bible when doing study. I know because some of these people taught me.

[BABY J]

There are no first-person, contemprary, eye witness accounts of anything Jesus did. The gospels were all written in third person 30-40 years after the end of Jesus' ministry. We don't know who the authors really were. We've made educated assumptions in regards to their authorship. Given that none of the texts we have are in the author's hand, nor written in the first person, we have no real way of knowing anything about their authorship. None of them would be admissable as evidence of anything in any courtroom in the United States. Our flawed legal system has higher standards for credibility than Christianity does.

Most of the New Testament theology and doctrine comes from an egotistical man who claims to have had a miraculous conversion experience with no corroboration other than his own claims. Today we'd call that person a "nut case."

I think it's absolutely mind boggling that anyone would give credence to the mystical, superstitious, inconsistent, ignorant, thousands of years old writings of multiple authors over the peer reviewed, acredited, reality-based science of today. Makes no sense to me at all. And the only proof you have of your contrarian viewpoint is to say, 'I believe it.' Well, welcome to Heaven's Gate, or the People's Temple, or the Manson Family.

The Earth is not flat. It is not the center of the Universe. The stars and planets do not revolve around it. It is not carried on the back of a turtle, Atlas doesn't carry it on his shoulders, etc etc etc.

[BABY J]

Furthermore...

I find the idea that young earth creationists require that good, solid science be completely ignored and to instead believe in magic to be very insulting. To me, other believers should be offended by the suggestion.

Seriously, you guys are stuck in the Dark Ages.
* You either take the scientific stance that the age of the universe to be AT LEAST 13.9 billion years based on solid astrophysics and the amount of time it has taken light from the most distant objects we can see to reach Earth, or you believe in magic.
* You either take the scientific stance that the age of the Earth is 4.5 billion years based on solid geophysics and the geological record, or you believe in magic.
* You either take the scientific stance that living organisms inherently improve their abilities to process available energy through proven natural evolutionary processes, or you believe in magic.

You can't expect people to take you seriously, to put any credibility in what you say, as long as you take such a ridiculous stance. Whether or not you believe "God" was responsible for these processes is up to you, but whether or not these processes exist is simply not open to debate unless you have some cult-like mentality that eschews the reality that you're surrounded by. And believe me, concepts like dinorsaurs with saddles on them are definitely cult-like in their ridiculousness to any rational human being.

Now, watch me pull a rabbit out of my hat.

[BABY J]

I'll finish by putting this on your plate --- you can eat it or not:

"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."
- Albert Einstein, letter to an atheist (1954), quoted in Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas & Banesh Hoffman

"During the youthful period of mankind's spiritual evolution, human fantasy created gods in man's own image who, by the operations of their will were supposed to determine, or at any rate influence, the phenomenal world."
- Albert Einstein, quoted in: 2000 Years of Disbelief, James Haught

"I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our own being."
- Albert Einstein to Guy H. Raner Jr., Sept. 28, 1949, quoted by Michael R. Gilmore in Skeptic magazine, Vol. 5, No. 2

"It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I also cannot imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere.... Science has been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is unjust. A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death."
- Albert Einstein, "Religion and Science," New York Times Magazine, November 9, 1930

(Note that several of us were lambasted for just the position voiced above earlier in this thread and others.)

"I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on creatures of his own creation. I cannot do this in spite of the fact that mechanistic causality has, to a certain extent, been placed in doubt by modern science. My religiosity consists in a humble admiration of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality. Morality is of the highest importance -- but for us, not for God. "
- Albert Einstein, from Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas & Banesh Hoffman

"Nobody, certainly, will deny that the idea of the existence of an omnipotent, just, and omnibeneficent personal God is able to accord man solace, help, and guidance; also, by virtue of its simplicity it is accessible to the most undeveloped mind. But, on the other hand, there are decisive weaknesses attached to this idea in itself, which have been painfully felt since the beginning of history. ..."
- Albert Einstein, Science and Religion (1941)

[sport_122]

Furthermore...

I find the idea that young earth creationists require that good, solid science be completely ignored and to instead believe in magic to be very insulting. To me, other believers should be offended by the suggestion.

Seriously, you guys are stuck in the Dark Ages.
* You either take the scientific stance that the age of the universe to be AT LEAST 13.9 billion years based on solid astrophysics and the amount of time it has taken light from the most distant objects we can see to reach Earth, or you believe in magic.
* You either take the scientific stance that the age of the Earth is 4.5 billion years based on solid geophysics and the geological record, or you believe in magic.
* You either take the scientific stance that living organisms inherently improve their abilities to process available energy through proven natural evolutionary processes, or you believe in magic.

You can't expect people to take you seriously, to put any credibility in what you say, as long as you take such a ridiculous stance. Whether or not you believe "God" was responsible for these processes is up to you, but whether or not these processes exist is simply not open to debate unless you have some cult-like mentality that eschews the reality that you're surrounded by. And believe me, concepts like dinorsaurs with saddles on them are definitely cult-like in their ridiculousness to any rational human being.

Now, watch me pull a rabbit out of my hat.

I think I addressed this in my other response.

My views are that science and saddle back dinosaurs do not deliver any validity to our arguments unless you want to look at the origins of science and that it comes from the revelation of knowledge which is already in existence, but has yet to reveal. which again, denotes an eternal...

BTW...Im young but Im not a 16 year old kid.;)

*astrophysics: You should not assume that the model they used is 100% accurate. Astrophysicists will tell you that their model is based off of speculation and it is only used to gain an estimation. So there is NO certainty.

*4.5 billion year old earth. see above. Its the same thing. And you have not asked me how old I think the earth is. You have assumed that I fall into one of your categories.

*micro biology: Im not sure what you are trying to say here. I believe in adaptation, but I don't believe that the microbs that you see on a rock are going to turn into anything more. This is another one of those laws that are not rooted in good research but speculative analysis.

Now I think that your point is supposed to center around scientific proof. The things you listed are only proof in the incomplete nature of science. To except these things as fact it boils down to you excepting what someone else told you as truth and that is another form of faith. You cannot say that we have proof of the age of the earth or universe. We have speculation because no one can testify to it. And I know you realize that there are tons of non theist scientist (anthropologists) who reject evolution after field study. My point again is that you have only listed more things about science which I believe is a terrible way to try to explain the existence of God unless you want to talk about the origins. Science is as subjective as religion and choice. If you don't believe it ask a scientist.

[sport_122]

I'll finish by putting this on your plate --- you can eat it or not:

"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."
- Albert Einstein, letter to an atheist (1954), quoted in Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas & Banesh Hoffman

"During the youthful period of mankind's spiritual evolution, human fantasy created gods in man's own image who, by the operations of their will were supposed to determine, or at any rate influence, the phenomenal world."
- Albert Einstein, quoted in: 2000 Years of Disbelief, James Haught

"I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our own being."
- Albert Einstein to Guy H. Raner Jr., Sept. 28, 1949, quoted by Michael R. Gilmore in Skeptic magazine, Vol. 5, No. 2

"It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I also cannot imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere.... Science has been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is unjust. A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death."
- Albert Einstein, "Religion and Science," New York Times Magazine, November 9, 1930

(Note that several of us were lambasted for just the position voiced above earlier in this thread and others.)

"I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on creatures of his own creation. I cannot do this in spite of the fact that mechanistic causality has, to a certain extent, been placed in doubt by modern science. My religiosity consists in a humble admiration of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality. Morality is of the highest importance -- but for us, not for God. "
- Albert Einstein, from Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas & Banesh Hoffman

"Nobody, certainly, will deny that the idea of the existence of an omnipotent, just, and omnibeneficent personal God is able to accord man solace, help, and guidance; also, by virtue of its simplicity it is accessible to the most undeveloped mind. But, on the other hand, there are decisive weaknesses attached to this idea in itself, which have been painfully felt since the beginning of history. ..."
- Albert Einstein, Science and Religion (1941)

How about I quote people who are more current seeing as how you seem to thing I am calling upon the archaic.

"The fundamental reason why a lot of paleontologists don't care much for gradualism is because the fossil record doesn't show gradual change and every paleontologist has know that ever since Cuvier. If you want to get around that you have to invoke the imperfection of the fossil record. Every paleontologist knows that most species, most species, don't change. That's bothersome if you are trained to believe that evolution ought to be gradual. In fact it virtually precludes your studying the very process you went into the school to study. Again, because you don't see it, that brings terrible distress." (Dr. Stephen Jay Gould)

"I admit that an awful lot of that has gotten into the textbooks as though it were true. For instance, the most famous example still on exhibit downstairs (in the American Museum) is the exhibit on horse evolution prepared perhaps 50 years ago. That has been presented as literal truth in textbook after textbook. Now I think that that is lamentable, particularly because the people who propose these kinds of stories themselves may be aware of the speculative nature of some of the stuff. But by the time it filters down to the textbooks, we've got science as truth and we've got a problem." (Dr. Niles Eldridge, Curator of Invertebrate Paleontology at the American Museum)

"To postulate that the development and survival of the fittest is entirely a consequence of chance mutations seems to me a hypothesis based on no evidence and irreconcilable with the facts. These classical evolutionary theories are a gross over-simplification of an immensely complex and intricate mass of facts, and it amazes me that they are swallowed so uncritically and readily, and for such a long time, by so many scientists without murmur of protest." (Sir Ernest Chain, Nobel Prize winner)

"I reject evolution because I deem it obsolete; because the knowledge, hard won since 1830, of anatomy, histology, cytology, and embryology, cannot be made to accord with its basic idea. The foundationless, fantastic edifice of the evolution doctrine would long ago have met with its long- deserved fate were it not that the love of fairy tales is so deep-rooted in the hearts of man." (Dr. Albert Fleischmann, University of Erlangen)

"The more one studies paleontology, the more certain one becomes that evolution is based on faith alone; exactly the same sort of faith which is necessary to have when one encounters the great mysteries of religion... The only alternative is the doctrine of special creation, which may be true, but is irrational." (Dr. L.T. More)


This does nothing to get us anywhere in our discussion. Which is why I have said that science does not prove anything. What you and I are demonstrating is that science is as faith based as religion. Just as you cannot run a scientific study to prove the existence of God, you cannot do one the discredit it either. So how do you believe this to be the case. If the study exists please send it to me. So just like you take science for its word. When it is not totally legitimized on ANY topic, I take the very existence of eternal or universal things as evidence. I hope to God that cutting and pasting quotes from Einstein was not the rabbit.

For science to be an argument you have to have science that actually studies the topic in this context. You can't because its subjective. Just like this is not a good reason to believe it is not a good reason to disbelieve.

[stillaneon]

The Bible is a collection of literature. Why does this make a difference? Because to have several accounts from different sources in different regions, with historical support ads validity. You can look up historically and find other things about Jesus, about Paul, Peter, Pilate, prophets, moses, etc etc. They really existed and there is evidence in a lot of cases to support some of the things you will read, like the crucifixion of Jesus. This is very well supported through historical documents from numerous cultures. Even in the new testaments the authors put in specific things that talk about numerous witnesses or specific locations and times where at that time you could go to the place and say, who was here when?, and tell me what happened?

There are four books that have seperate descriptions of present (in that time) activity. The gospels. And even then, there is only one event that they all describe.


In debate you need to first establish a grounds for your argument. You need to establish whatever each individuals preconceptions are about the topic and then you need to establish the question. If you are going to understand anything about the Bible, you cannot look at it in cross section. You have to look at it in the totality of its contexts. This is why a christian and a person who doesn't really study the bible in its historical context will almost never agree. You enter into looking at it, as if it were a book of fables, when it is more grounded in documented history than it is "fairytale".

Totality of what. I said literature, not fairytale. It may be historically accurate, that doesn't make it the turth, the light or the way.


Also, If you believe the Bible to be just a collection of stories and not the inspired word of God, then in no way can you use that as a source because you don't even believe its valid. You cannot rightly make an argument to support a knowledge of something you don't even believe to be valid, that is a terrible way to make a point to a christian or anyone who has elaborately investigated the Bible and its cultures.

I can debate however I want. If the Bible wasn't as flawed as it was, then it wouldn't allow itself to be a scource of argument.

Maybe while "God" was inspiring people to write, he could've inspired them to leave less loopholes.


Stillaneon
You asked if at any point people agreed with Hitler...Yes, they did, and there are still some who do? do you think these people are representative of the christian church because they followed the beliefs of a mad man. History writes that Hitler had all sorts of mental problems.

Let me tell you about another guy that was killed for believeing he was amazing.

http://www.jakezim.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/family-guy-jesus.jpg


do you think that all people on this forum are speed demons, and drive like F&F movie characters because they drive the same types of cars as some of us. That is the path that is taken when all religions are grouped together and judged based on the actions of individuals. Are there a lot of individuals, yes, because there are thousands of years of history that involves religion.

I don't group Christians together nor to I group Muslims together. So that is a void argument, but I can tell you that Authorities do groupus with the F & F wannabes. It's called profiling, it happens. get over it.


We have a very very strong difference in definitions about what it means to be a Christian. I realize that there are a lot of posers out there. There are people who are "christian" by default, and much of the world thinks that America is a Christian nation, but I don't. So before anyone wants to bash being christian why don't you tell me what it means to be what i am?

Do we. I define a Christian as someone who believe Jesus Christ is their Lord and Savior. Do you have another definition?
The only thing I can tell you about what it means to be you, is that you are someone who feels that because you know a little bit about what you hear on Sunday that you can step in the ring with people who have spent a lot of time realizing how flawed organized religion and the Christian faith is.


So why the wall of posts? The wall of posts lay down the foundation of my arguments. I am still waiting to hear (read) foundation laid down for yours. The difference between you and I so far is that I have lots of reason to come to my conclusions and my thoughts. All I have gotten is blanket statements, still. Statements that first said All religions, then an emphasis on the people, but its really not the people (to some) its the religion again, if this thought is grounded I am missing something, someone explain it to me with facts.

I've seen no reasoning so far. Just an extreme amount of text running in circles. You honestly don't have any kind of proof to support your cause, if you do, then you are a liar, because religion is based on faith. Blind faith on that.


So you said that I compared a legal system to God. The presence of law does not denote a legal system. But WITHOUT (that is not a comparison) a universal law there is no grounds for a legal system. You completely misquoted my statements about law. Because I believe the reason you cannot legally do what you want is because we are not judging what is write based off of a subjective moral code. For instance, speeding is not right whether you do it or not, and everyone can agree on that because their are posted speed signs to tell you so. If it were based on your personal code, then for you 55 could be fast, for me 75, for someone else 100. That is anarchy. Individuals deciding what their laws or rules should be on their own.

I understand what anarchy is. My point was, that even if religion wasn't present, there would still be a code of values set forth to the well-being of man-kind.

You want to say that without religion the world would be anarchy, but its weak-minded fools like you who dont have the common sense to realize whats right and wrong without a "greater power" funneling shit through a human medium.


On a real not, I spent two years assistant teaching at a high school. I would love to see you come into a classroom with 25 kids and tell them that their absolute authority is themselves. You would have no control over that class and they would run all over each other. The reason our world is so bad right now, is because so many people are abandoning what they should be doing based on their faiths. If they are abandoning their faiths for their own personal reasons then why attribute that to the religion itself? The Bible speaks negatively of these types of people, so how do you suppose their religion is the principle by which they are doing so much wrong?

I never once said christianity didn't have a hopeful set of values.

Again, It works for the weak-minded who can't make decisions based on right and wrong, who need reassurance that everything will be ok when their loved one's die.



Also, you obviously have NOT read everything that was in this thread. All of my posts have been in direct correlation with what someone else has posted. This is in reference to saying that I was getting off subject. The topic is a bad world = the absence of a good God. Love is a direct relation to this topic as for the christian, it is believe that God is love and that His love is demonstrated through provision of law and logic. Seems pretty relevant to me. Just b/c you don't like what my view is, doesn't mean you shouldn't try to understand it, which is what most of us on this thread are doing, and not flaming as mandated by the rules of this forum.

The topic of the thread is whether or not you believe in Religion. you have spent the majority of the time forcing way too much text down people's throats and (being hypocritical) not allowing for an opposing view. I am not flaming you for your belief. if you need it, more power to you, I am glad it helps.


Lastly, what you don't know about me is how I came to believe the things I believe. I have a degree in studies of religion. I have discussed things with everyone from atheists, to agnostics, to buddhists, christians (some of whom I don't agree with at all) and just about anyone else who wants to discuss things. For a weak minded person, I am willing to bet that I have spent MORE time investigating these things from different points of view than anyone else on this thread. If I see a christian on here, misrepresenting the foundations of their faith I would call them on it too. yeah, some people of faith are weak minded, no doubt about it, but not me.

I have to say that doesn't impress me a whole lot. You have come into this thread extremely close-minded. which is fine. I wouldn't expect much more from someone so die hard in the Christian-faith.


As a Christian I am pretty sure I have a better scope of what we should and should not believe. I know when to throw up a flag and say that does not represent the church, or that is not what the Bible says, or that is taken out of context. And it always amazes me how, people who claim to not like it, would act as if they know and understand it better than people who have been submerged in it. I ONLY understand other faiths and other beliefs and views because I have spent time investigating and discussing their foundations and their histories through questions and study with people who live these faiths. You have asked no questions of me, you have only assumed to understand the foundations of my arguments to support my points. That sounds a lot like the...umm, weak minded christians who have been mentioned before who don't have the ability to explain what their beliefs are and can only throw their hands up at the sign of a good debate. Believe me I AM NOT ONE OF THOSE. And it seems like you can't handle it. I appreciate the views of the people on hear. I don't agree with them and I think many of them are put together with little thought, and even though I will question their reasons and their methodology, I will still respect them. I expect the same.

You keep trying to wave this supposed research you have. You are right, I have asked no questions about you. Because the thread has nothing to do with you, it has to do with the topic at hand. Religion. For someone with a degree in a religious field, it would almost seem fitting for you to realize what a joke for you to be arguing for a religion, instead of your personal faith.


BTW, I would welcome sitting down with any of you in person and explaining what I believe because I know its not normal for people who believe in God to be able to explain WHY they believe. There is no "IT JUST IS" with me.

why, it won't make it any more true.

I'll leave you with this. Show me proof, and I don't mean the wind blows, babies are born, etc. I want concrete proof. Until you have it, you dont have any argument other than your own emotional experiences, made up books about spending time in heaven before you were revived, what you were force fed as a baby, or what someone told you as they were taking advantage of a weakened emotional state that you were in

[sport_122]

There are four books that have seperate descriptions of present (in that time) activity. The gospels. And even then, there is only one event that they all describe.
Totality of what. I said literature, not fairytale. It may be historically accurate, that doesn't make it the turth, the light or the way.


You need to read the context of what you are responding to. Because you basically just agreed with me in saying that the bible has historical value. That is NOT why I believe the Bible is truth. Those are two different things. I guess you don't understand that.



I can debate however I want. If the Bible wasn't as flawed as it was, then it wouldn't allow itself to be a scource of argument.

Maybe while "God" was inspiring people to write, he could've inspired them to leave less loopholes.

Same thing I said before. You can debate how you want. It just wastes your time responding on things out of context. BTW. There are TONS of historical documents that are sources of argument as well.



Do we. I define a Christian as someone who believe Jesus Christ is their Lord and Savior. Do you have another definition?
The only thing I can tell you about what it means to be you, is that you are someone who feels that because you know a little bit about what you hear on Sunday that you can step in the ring with people who have spent a lot of time realizing how flawed organized religion and the Christian faith is.

I've seen no reasoning so far. Just an extreme amount of text running in circles. You honestly don't have any kind of proof to support your cause, if you do, then you are a liar, because religion is based on faith. Blind faith on that.

I understand what anarchy is. My point was, that even if religion wasn't present, there would still be a code of values set forth to the well-being of man-kind.

You want to say that without religion the world would be anarchy, but its weak-minded fools like you who dont have the common sense to realize whats right and wrong without a "greater power" funneling shit through a human medium.

Anyone can say they believe that Jesus is the savior. What does it mean? You are so intelligent that you can pull stuff about me and Sunday morning out of your butt, but you can't seem to even stay in context with the statements that you quote. You are typical. You are the kind of person who can only say...give me proof. The proof you ask for has nothing to do with anything you have talked about so far. Do you have the ability to use logic? do you have the ability to understand love? do you believe in anything eternal that is NOT religious? You are exactly right RELIGION IS BASED ON FAITH!!! I don't disagree with that one bit, so what are you arguing. Are you arguing against the belief in God. Because there are those who believe in God but aren't "religious". What is RELIGIOUS to you? You throw it around, but ALL you can reference it to is the few people you have come across. so if you define organized religion as flawed, what do you think is the alternative.

NOT ONE TIME have I said that the absence of religion would lead to anarchy. If so quote me on it. You can't because almost every argument you have made so far has been a response a misquoted and non contextual statements. You are interpreting my arguments because you ASSUME that you know what I mean, and you ASSUME that I am "every other religious person" that you have talked to or come across. You assumed and YOU ARE WRONG. And here is where you have done it yet again.


I never once said christianity didn't have a hopeful set of values.

Again, It works for the weak-minded who can't make decisions based on right and wrong, who need reassurance that everything will be ok when their loved one's die.

The topic of the thread is whether or not you believe in Religion. you have spent the majority of the time forcing way too much text down people's throats and (being hypocritical) not allowing for an opposing view. I am not flaming you for your belief. if you need it, more power to you, I am glad it helps.

I have to say that doesn't impress me a whole lot. You have come into this thread extremely close-minded. which is fine. I wouldn't expect much more from someone so die hard in the Christian-faith.

You keep trying to wave this supposed research you have. You are right, I have asked no questions about you. Because the thread has nothing to do with you, it has to do with the topic at hand. Religion. For someone with a degree in a religious field, it would almost seem fitting for you to realize what a joke for you to be arguing for a religion, instead of your personal faith.

So again, you prove that you have not read through this thread.

1. You say that you are not flaming anyone for their beliefs yet, people of religious faith are "weak minded". That's interesting because that seems like flaming to me.
2. The topic of this thread is NOT whether or not you believe in Religion. That's the title, not the topic. Go read the first post and stop assuming you know everything.
3. I am not arguing for any specific religion. I am arguing against the lack of proof, (paraphrased) that religion is responsible for all these problems which the OP said it was truth. I ask for proof. So is he weak minded because he has not given proof of his statements? Or is that okay because he has a similar view as you? I don't think he is weak minded. I think he has an opinion and it should have been stated as so, but he is entitled to believe what he wants. Its ONLY when someone wants to try to test the foundation of MY arguments that I WILL show that my arguments are just as grounded in faith as those who do not believe, or profess science as a 100% end all on everything. That is fundamentally and by definition wrong.
4. You don't make sense to me. You said I am arguing for religion and then you tell me to prove it? What the hell does that mean? Prove what, that religion exists? Prove that God exists? What? The existence of God has nothing to do with religion, because there are religions that DONT BELIEVE IN GOD!!!
5. Lastly, you say that I have come into this thread "close-minded". Wrong. All I'm asking is for proof of the statement, when I can show where sociologists, anthropologists, historians, archaeologists, criminologists, and many many other fields of social scientists will say that organized religion helps society. The problem is you seem like the kind of person who would just dismiss that too.

So what you have done is decided to go against the only person on this thread who is willing to take a "proof of his statements challenge", by showing you resource after resource that says people in this world who subscribe to a faith are less likely to get in trouble, less likely to break laws and more likely to live a fulfilled life (note that doesn't mean perfect or easy) Its true of prisoners who leave jail/prison, and its true of everyday citizens.

If I give you links you are not willing to say that I am NOT crazy or weak minded. So who is "close minded" one?


Pick one and email him/her...dont take my word for it! Ask them if the statements in the first thread are justified.
http://hirr.hartsem.edu/sociology/sociologists_of_religion.html

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/28396/the_value_of_literature_religion_and.html?cat=38

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/173891/the_teaching_of_religion_and_science_pg2.html?cat= 9



Oh. Since you said this:

"I understand what anarchy is. My point was, that even if religion wasn't present, there would still be a code of values set forth to the well-being of man-kind."

That is EXACTLY my reason for believing in God. Not b/c of religion or what i have heard the "weak minded" people say (who I will agree ARE out there) but because there are those things that are not physical or reflex action and existing in all of life that do not have to be taught. Even before men formed societies we new certain things were good and certain things were bad. It is too great a circumstance that hundreds of nomads or wanders could come together and agree instinctively that murder, and stealing were wrong. Science cannot give account to this. This is a question of origin which NOTHING that is subjective can claim understanding of, and the concept is one that is undeniable in existence. Where do you think those things come from?

[RL...]

sport, religion is based on faith, blind faith because there is no REAL PROOF. That's why they call it faith..

[sport_122]

sport, religion is based on faith, blind faith because there is no REAL PROOF. That's why they call it faith..

I agree. I just posted this BTW. I 100% agree with this statement. Nobody can prove their religion is right. There are too many religions and too many sects of religions and its all based on personal experience. Even within a single faith, there are divisions of beliefs and interpretation. I firmly agree.