Quote Originally Posted by stillaneon
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.


Quote Originally Posted by stillaneon
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 There are TONS of historical documents that are sources of argument as well.


Quote Originally Posted by stillaneon
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.

Quote Originally Posted by stillaneon
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/so..._religion.html

http://www.associatedcontent.com/art...nd.html?cat=38

http://www.associatedcontent.com/art...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?