God

[Blacknight]

Ok I kno this is a contrivertial topic n' all but I was wondering how many of you out there beleive in God? And if you do or don't y or y not?

[geo]

if there was a god, then who created god?

[Blacknight]

If there was a God he would be there from the start. The logic of God being there is that he has been there since the beginning. God has always been there and always will be.

[Andy A.]

The only evidence I've ever found for God is that Pi is Pi, and not just 3.

God must be purposefully making the math harder.

-Andy A.

[Frank(Aflak)]

Originally posted by geo
if there was a god, then who created god?

If there was a Big Bang where did the singularity come from? (by which point I mean that we know that the universe has a definate 'starting point.' The logic is that for the Big Bang to happen, all the conditions that caused it to happen would have had to existed . . but if the conditions were not caused by an outside power then they would have always existed, and therefore the big bang would have gone off an infinite amount of time ago . . a paradox. The argument is that god is the uncaused cause.

I believe in a god, but I don't believe that god takes an active role in influencing human life, nor do I accept Catholicism ( i was raised Catholic).

I belief that any belief/prayer should be personal and not a public ceremony. But thats just me.

[Ian W.]

I'd rather not get into all my views on the topic of religion, for fear that this thread would be closed in about 2 picoseconds, but the basic jist of it is that I believe there is some sort of greater force, perhaps not "God" per se, but something that created everything else. It might not be sentinent, it might be, but it's there, although not taking an active role in the universe at the moment. It's sort of a twisted deism (I think that's spelled right).

I was raised Jewish, but I believe that everything that comes from the Torah and stuff is not from "God", but stories told similar to Aesop's Fables, something to tell you how to live, and hwo to treat others, so that your life will be fullfilling and meaningful.

Oh well, in any case, I'm still going to synagogue this weekend for Rosh Hashanah, and I did my Eagle Project at my synagogue, so I'm not completely against what Judiasm teaches :p.

If you really want to hear all my theories on religion itself, PM me or something, cause as I said before, it's sure to start a flamewar here...

[Yan Wang]

Originally posted by Blacknight
Ok I kno this is a contrivertial topic n' all

Yep...

We should place bets.. er, ventures, on how long it will be before this thread gets closed. :)

As for the topic, I'm an atheist. I don't spend my time caring about it - I just don't care.

[SlamminSammy]

Originally posted by Frank(Aflak)
If there was a Big Bang where did the singularity come from? (by which point I mean that we know that the universe has a definate [sic] 'starting point.' The logic is that for the Big Bang to happen, all the conditions that caused it to happen would have had to existed . . but if the conditions were not caused by an outside power then they would have always existed, and therefore the big bang would have gone off an infinite amount of time ago . . a paradox. The argument is that god is the uncaused cause.

The Big Bang singularity contained our dimensions. Space and time are dimensions. Before the Big Bang there was no time, no space, no nothing. Does this paradox answer your question? :p

[Andy Baker]

This has already been well discussed on these forums... many opionions are here. (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14279&perpage=15&highlight=catholic&pagenumber=1)

My reply is the same as it was then. Currently, this thread is benign. Keep the attacks and criticisms out of it and it will be OK. My opinions are different from many here, but that is OK.

Andy B.

[FotoPlasma]

Originally posted by Andy Baker
This has already been well discussed on these forums... many opionions are here. (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14279&perpage=15&highlight=catholic&pagenumber=1)

My reply is the same as it was then. Currently, this thread is benign. Keep the attacks and criticisms out of it and it will be OK. My opinions are different from many here, but that is OK.

Andy B.
Heh. I was about to say the exact same thing. Sadly, however, all but the first of my posts in that thread are immaterial.

Play nice, children.

[Koko Ed]

Yes.
God is real.

[Ryan Dognaux]

I believe in God.. although my faith in my religion is shakey at best, I do believe in God.

[EddieMcD]

Yeah... I'd rather not go into my views of religion too, also for fear of this topic being closed faster than you can say "Brandon Martus"

Brandon Martus!

Alright, who said that! I'll send a hurricane your way!!!

Er, back on topic, I'll keep it brief. I don't like it when many different people try to sell me many different angles on life. So I have never been religious in my life. Science disproves everything religion tries to prove anyway. Personally, I don't believe in god, but I do think this should be a serious conversation nonetheless.

[srjjs]

Religion is based on faith, without facts and logic the way science is supported. I don't like believing something "just because."

[Joe Matt]

Well, I'm Roman Catholic, but I don't belive in the God that is on the Simpsons, where there is a guy with a white beard up in the clouds. I think God is why things are and how they work. I don't think god runs around and helps with our lives. I think God just keeps everying ok through checks and blanaces.

But the best part of God is that you just have to know, there isn't a 100% proof that God is real. I know that us geeks hate just beliveing just because, but I do it.

*end rant*

[Ryan Albright]

I am raised in a protestant home. and i do Believe in God. I have gone to a christian school all my life. If you look at charlie darwins life at the end of his life he said that his theory could not be right and he did acknowledge that evolution can be real. (right now i am gonna start talkinga bout different beliefs ia m not putting it down so dont get on my back just my opinion) Just look at the most simplest cell in your body. Even tho its the most simplest scientist cant even make a 100% diagram of it. HOw could that just come together. Gosh i wish i had philosphy HW this weekend so i would have my notebook. God is the beginning this is nothing before him. Gosh i really wish i had my bible notes here well if anyone wants to debate or talk with me you can pm me

[Bill Gold]

After putting ~30 minutes of thought into analyzing my beliefs I'd say that I don't believe in a God or multiple Gods. But I might be open to the old "clock maker(s) who walked away from his/her/their creation" concept. In any case, I don't feel the need to attend a church service, and I do believe in nothingness (aside from lots of rotting [except for those who are cremated]) after death. I'm even less inclined to accept documents written by people (and are therefore fallible) as the word/command of a God. This isn't to say that I don't respect peoples' beliefs in their Gods. I think people should be perfectly free to practice their religions as they wish. I just don't want people to attempt to force me to join in ("Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, "In God We Trust" on money, the 10 Commandments on display for the public in Local, State, and Federal buildings, et cetera). I guess I'll stop before I start some sort of flame war.

[Tytus Gerrish]

Not this again!

[Blacknight]

Yes this again....
Srry didn't notice the religion post earlier, but I have been having this debate w/ some of my friends on anther site and it is been going on for about a week, and it's already over 14 pages. And I was just wondering how many religious ppl we have in FIRST.

Personally I beleive there is a God. And for those who don't beleive, just look at nature and tell me that it all came from a pile of inorganic matter, and works so perfectly now. God's out there...

[srjjs]

If it didn't work perfectly, we wouldn't be here wondering about it. Evidence has shown that the universe is infinitely large, and uniformly ful of matter, so why can't it have happened?

[Blacknight]

First off science has never explained where the universe came from. They say that Stephen Hawkings (sp) found the equations that created the earth, and created the theory of randomally appering matter. One question for this, since we have the equation y can't we create our own randomally appearing matter, and if it happened before, y don't we occationally see something just appear out of nowhere. And if you say well the universe was just there, then where did all the dust and derbis come from?

[Yan Wang]

Here's what scientists do... just because they don't know something, they don't automatically attribute it so something else, ie. god. Yeah, I agree, it's pretty freaking confusing as how stuff exists, but just because it's confusing doesn't mean I will try to fill up that void of confusion with god.

A good book to read that provides a look at a scientist who struggles quite a bit with religion is "Contact", by a local Ithacan (we have a planetwalk in his honor), Carl Sagan.

From the book:
{Ellie speaking}"But imagine that your kind of god - omnipotent, omniscient, compassionate - really wanted to leave a record for future generations, to make his existence unmistakable to, say, the remote descendants of Moses. It's easy, trivial. Just a few enigmatic phrases, and some fierce commandment that they be passed on unchanged..."
"Joss leaned forward almost imperceptibly. "Such as...?"
{Ellie again, a bit later}"You know what I mean. Where are the burning bushes, the pillars of fire, the great voice that says 'I am that I am' booming down at us out of the sky?"
"But a voice from the sky is just what you found." Joss made this comment casually while Ellie paused for breath.

My favorite quote:
Anything you don't understand, Mr. Rankin, you attribute to God. God for you is where you sweep away all the mysteries of the world, all the challenges to our intelligence. You simply turn your mind off and say God did it.

[Marygrace]

Originally posted by Ryan Dognaux
I believe in God.. although my faith in my religion is shakey at best, I do believe in God.

Same here, I am spiritual not religious. My mom (redheadjokes) found a quote about it. Don't know who said it though.

"Religion is for those who are afraid of going to hell, spirituality is for those that have already been there,"

[Nick Mac]

This post brings up a very interesting thought. I think that the results of this post so far are so close because in most cases, one either believes in science, or religion. personally i believe in science. I want sure evidence that there is a god or isn't. So, i voted no. But I'm also a confirmed catholic. I haven't decided if that was a mistake or not yet, but i'd rather not think about it incase i feel it was a mistake! 9 years of ccd, down the drain!

[George1902]

Originally posted by Nick Mac
This post brings up a very interesting thought. I think that the results of this post so far are so close because in most cases, one either believes in science, or religion. personally i believe in science. I want sure evidence that there is a god or isn't. So, i voted no. But I'm also a confirmed catholic. I haven't decided if that was a mistake or not yet, but i'd rather not think about it incase i feel it was a mistake! 9 years of ccd, down the drain!

I just wanted to refute the statement that science and religion are mutually exclusive.

Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.
- Albert Einstein

Science investigates; religion interprets. Science gives man knowledge which is power; religion gives man wisdom which is control.
- Martin Luther King, Jr.

A little science estranges a man from God. A lot of science brings him back.
- Francis Bacon

I won't chime in on this topic myself, because I don't know most of you well enough to feel comfortable talking about something so personal.

Also, Nick: Those years in CCD are only wasted if you learned nothing. I hope you at least recieved a solid moral foundation from your Catholic upbringing.

I'd also like to commend everyone who has posted in this thread. I'm very impressed with how much everyone is respecting the opinions of others. *This* is where the true test of Gracious Professionalism is passed, not in some silly competition.

I'll leave you with one more quote. It's a good one to remember whenever discussing controversial topics.

The test of courage comes when we are in the minority; the test of tolerance comes when we are in the majority.
- Ralph W. Sockman

[Nick Mac]

What i was trying to say was that ever since the beginning, before the Europeans inhabited America, you were either pro-science, or pro-religion. You either believed, or needed concrete evidence before you could believe that there was/is a god. I guess that i'm the type that needs the concrete evidence.

Also, Nick: Those years in CCD are only wasted if you learned nothing. I hope you at least recieved a solid moral foundation from your Catholic upbringing.

I didn't mean to say that i tuned out my nine years of catholic education!!...what i was saying is that i'm not sure if i believe in what it was that I learned.


With all of that mentioned, i am also one of the people that criticizes God when something goes wrong. And i turned to God when my grandfather died. I'd really like to believe that there are reasons for why things happen. But i know that i will always ask the question "why?" and never fully accept.

[AlbertW]

the big bang HAD to happen, because before it, there was no time dimension, and therefore for everything possible to happen is inevitable


say there was x probability of the big bang happening (nonzero because there cannot be a zero probability of ANYTHING happening) at any given moment

so it's x/t

but t is zero, so the probability of it happening is infinite or undefined.

and god? never much cared for things that couldn't be proven to me (hell, it took them a while to convince me that working hard in school would, indeed, get me better grades) but i'm not a devout atheist (is that even possible?) or anything that goes around denying it.

i used to, but then i stopped caring :D

[Blacknight]

you're making it seem like a simple math equation. And if it was that simple why haven't we tried to duplicate it on a much smaller scale??? Or is it just an equations that is made up, trying to look like it's a fact?

[Jillian B.]

There are two things I don't argue about (well almost never, have a few times with FIRST people): religion and politics.

All I will say is that I personally don't believe in any religions, or any gods, or a God. And this isn't an absent minded choice. I've been in catholic school for 11 years. I know religion very well.

I believe that science can explain everything, and if you insist on the concept of a god, to me, a god is the equivalent to the greatest potential of the human race.

-Jill

[Ian W.]

A few things that I don't get. Maybe someone can explain them to me?

1) Today, the second day of Rosh Hashanah, my Rabbi made a sermon on how Judaism and Christianity, and Islam (only touched on this) were all related, and all "children of Abraham". So then, why so much bloodshed between the three? I mean, siblings don't hate each other that much, do they?

2) Days of rest reflect a purely business motive. Judaism came first, with Sat. being the "day of rest". Christianity came around, changing the day of rest to Sunday. Islam also came around, and it's day of rest is Friday (from what I remember, please correct me if I'm wrong). This shows religion being shaped around the economy, which if you ask me, shows that man is more powerful than God(s), no?

3) Much of Christianity used to deal with the Earth as the center of the universe. It was blasphemy to consider otherwise. Heaven and Hell can't exist as physical planes of existence in this universe right now, because there's that whole thing called outerspace, and Hell can't exist under us, because that'd mean each planet had it's own individual Hell (or something like that).

There's some more stuff I've been thinking about, but I don't want to cause too much of a ruckus :).

Remember, this isn't out to hurt anyone, it's just some questions I have regarding religions, also kind of why I don't exactly believe in everything I hear in Temple. Those three questions by themselves are enough to shake my small amount of faith in religions as a whole, but I'd like to see how some other people view them.

[Blacknight]

ok
1. Yes the three religions are similar in text, the Koran, the old testiment of the Bible and the, Torah, are all similar. But then again they are all also totally different. (I hope you kno the diff by now) The bloodshed is caused when men bend the word of God to their liking. The Torah originally said "go out and kill people, call it a holy war and you're going straight to heaven," no Muhamad said that to gain followers, and thus he became head of the Islamic nation. Again the pope bendt the words of God to inflict fear into the commonfolk by saying you're going to hell if you're not Catholic. Thus it is by MAN's word that the bloodshed has come about.

2. The day of rest first came into play in the 10 commandments. The Jewish nation beleived that the sabbath day was set aside for God, and God alone. Then along came Jesus and said that the day was set aside for God AND men. But probably the reason for each sabbath being on a differnt date is from calenders. Diff calenders for diff reagions back in the ancient days...

3. Heaven and Hell aren't of this universe, they are on two different planes of exhistance. Just as we are in one, Heaven and hell are in their own also.

hope that helped...

[Nick Mac]

If anyone's ever read up on religion, you'll realize that since the beginning, religion has been its own form of government. Taxes, leaders, wars, corruption...defeat.

[Tytus Gerrish]

You all need to Hear George carlin's views on this

[Ashley Weed]

Yes, I believe in a God... I can not tell you that it is male/female, black/white, or any other charecteristics. I am very pious, and hold stong beliefs within my church.

But, this past year I have had a lot to try and figure out. Why do things happen? Why does it happen at a specific instant? Why me, or why you? Throughout the past 13 months, I have become terminaly ill, been in a horrific automobile accident, and found my true love. I have had to deal with such thoughts as why me, and why now? If there is a God, what was the purpose of choosing me? However, through my religion I did find that people do care about me no matter what happens. My church family has been incredible to me over the past months, and I see that as God's way of saying to me that I can overcome anything.

... just a random blurb, from my overstuffed mind ...

[Blacknight]

Man twisted religion to his own uses, such at Government. Religion by itself has no political stances

[Raven_Writer]

I belive in God, but I have no religion.

[DanL]

My thoughts on religion is that man created it as a means of comfort - there's probably some kind of Fruedian term for it. We're a social animal, and it's my belief that the fear of being alone scares us to death. We need something to comfort us, whether it's a loved one, a community, or the belief in a supreme being.

If you look beyond western culture, the only thing constant about religion is that it exists. The Native Americans have their animalistic gods... Hinduism and(?) Buddhism have their cycles of birth and rebirths... Chinese culture has its blend it Confucianism and Daoism.... every culture has or has had its own unique beliefs. One can't help but wonder what is the 'correct' religion, if any. Did Ghandi go to hell because he didn't believe in Jesus? Are we all about to be smitten by lightning bolts hurled from Mount Olympus?

The primary reason I don't believe in religion is because the roots of every major religion can be traced back to the culture and tradition of its origional people. All it takes is a few charismatic leaders to tie it together into formal doctrine. If, say, the Christian God exists, why did he let so many thousands of years go by letting people believe in 'heathen' gods like Ra, Zeus, or Jupiter? You can't possibly tell me that just because he was pissed off at two people for eating some fruit, he let millions of people go to hell for believing something they had no alternative to believe in. The fact of the matter is that society controls what you believe in. If the Christian God is the one true god, how was Joeus Doeius, your average law-abiding Athenian, ever expected to know the truth?

Religion is just a means of identifying oneself as part of a community. It's disgusting what can be done with this power, though...

More people have died in the name of (a) g/God(s) throughout the history of the world than any other reason.

Then there's the whole just-look-up-at-the-sky argument. A while ago, I found this fascinating article (http://skyandtelescope.com/news/article_949_1.asp) about a deep-space photo that summed things up pretty well...
The full ACS image is about 3.1 arcminutes square, the size of a sand grain held at arm's length against the sky. The ACS magnifies this small field into a vast panorama of some 300,000 stars and thousands of faint background galaxies.

300,000 stars - who knows how many like our own sun? Thousands of faint galaxies - just like our Milky Way. All this in the area of a grain of sand held at arms length. How many grains of sand held at arms length does it take to fill up the entire nighttime sky? It doesn't take much effort to realize that our entire lives - the people we meet, the places we see, the memories we keep - everything we know is not even a blink of the eye in the long run.

I think it's our universal fear that everything we've ever expierienced means nothing that we've created religion as a way to deal with death. Personally, that's the reason why I want to try to change the world. I believe it was in Lord of the Rings when one of the characters was talking to Treebeard... Treebeard said that compared to Ents, Humans live such short lives. Yet what they do in that period of time is so much. I think it's the fear of passing into time, unremembered, that drives so many of us.

[FotoPlasma]

This thought just occured to me: Faith is the willingness to believe something which cannot be proven, hence, atheists have faith in the thought that there is no God.

If a religion is based on faith, or if a person has faith in God, then one should acknowledge that there cannot be a way to prove that said religion is correct, or that God exists.


More reading (Please note the following: I didn't write any of the content from these links. I take no responsibility for hurt feelings, insulted intelligences, offended vocabularies, or out-of-style hairdos. I won't respond to flames, either.):

Your radical ideas about religion as a mechanism of social control have already occurred to others (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=579852)
I Figured Out Faith (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=428136)
Boy, I was sure lucky to be born into the one true faith! (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1231440)
Religion is a crutch for weak people (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=633587)
Atheism is a crutch for weak people (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=875324)
An Atheist's Defense of Christianity (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=928987)

[Blacknight]

So SuperDanman you can look up at the billions of stars n' such in the sky and say that it was created by randomally appearing matter?

And God was always there and his presence was known at the time of the other greek and roman "gods" And science has proven this. From the whole thing about chariots at the bottom of the red sea to large ammounts of sulfer and ash where sodom and gomorrah used to be standing. He was always there. And society doesn't control what you beleive in. There's a thing called choice and you use that power to choose what you want to beleive. If society controled what you beleived in then we'd all be the same, just like communism.

And as i posted above, (which no one obviously reads before they post) People didn't die in the name of religion, they died in the name of the person who used religion to their benifit. Was muhammad just a lowly prophet? No he was the POLITICAL leader of the islamic nation. And most ppl in politics have power and are always wanting more. So Muhammad tossed in "go out and kill people, call it a holy war and you're going straight to heaven" Bam more power, for him. Same thing with the crucades, the pope wants more power, so he calles it a holy war so he isn't blamed with genocide. Men being tempted by power and defiling religion.

[Ian W.]

But, if religion is supposed to be a unifying force, why does it, directly or indirectly, kill more people than any other reason?

What you are saying, is that religion is a tool to be used for power. That fits with my personal theories on religion, but it doesn't go at all with what you're trying to say, I think.

Religion, from what I can tell, is supposed to bring peace. To paraphrase from some religious book (I have no idea where it came from, and I'm too lazy to go and hunt down my Siddur), "Nations shall not lift up sword against nation, and they shall experience war no more." That is said almost every time I'm at a service at my temple, be Rosh Hashanah, or a Friday night service that my parents ask me to come to. To me, that means that religion, or at least Judaism (I can't say for anything else, I don't really know), was created to bring people together, teach them morals, and attempt to make peace.

Seeing how Christianity and Islam both come from Judaism, I'm going to assume they have the same basic goals, but I can't be certain.

I just don't see how religion can be both a tool used by man, but also the grand unifying thing for the Earth. It just doesn't work out, at least how I see it.

[Blacknight]

It is supposto be a tool for men to learn about God, but men MISUSE religion. It's like over the counter medicine, use it properly, it helps you out, but you can misuse it and have deadly resluts.

[Nick Mac]

why is it necessary for men to learn about god, if its god that men created?

[Blacknight]

To better understand what you beleive in.

Going of you logic then
Why does man need to learn about science since science created man? (going of evolution was correct)

[Melissa Nute]

I've read this...and all I can say is wow...
Blacknight...you are making this thread controversial.

ChiefDelphi isn't the place for religion, in my view.

[Blacknight]

I said at the beginning this would be contrivertial, and those who don't want in then don't join. But frankly i c this post as a way to see other ppl's veiwpoints about creation n' such...

[Madison]

Originally posted by Blacknight
The bloodshed is caused when men bend the word of God to their liking.

hope that helped...

I'm sorry, Matt, but perhaps I'm missing the obvious here -- who, exactly, do you feel to be qualified to interpret the word of God? You've said, so far, that the spiritual and political leaders of three of the largest religions in the world have corrupted the word of God in their quest for more power. Yet, somehow, such people are still exalted by their followers. So, then, if you don't believe the Pope is qualified to be an unbiased interpreter of messages from God, who is? You? Do you believe that you don't have your own bias influencing your interpretation of scripture?

God was created (or exists, depending on your perspective) to be an infallible entity. That was a really smart move, really, because the moment something intangible and ethereal becomes omnipotent and infallible, there exists no logic that can defeat it. It is the ultimate justification for the most unimaginable and horrific of actions. It's carte blanche for people to exercise their will -- as you've said.

As far as I can see, you're responsible for a good amount of the posting in this thread -- trying pretty hard at convincing others that they're misguided or wrong. Does this thread satisfy a missionary requirement for a merit badge or something?

I understand the desire to want to to compare your belief system with others. It's natural and healthy for us to reexamine our views of the world periodically so that we don't become complacent in our existence. However, where matters of metaphysics and belief systems are concerned -- where there are no "hard facts" -- it's pretty rude to consistently reply to every disparate viewpoint and explain why it's incorrect. In fact, it's annoying and reflects pretty poorly upon you.

If you're truly interested in learning about other's feelings on this matter, to put it bluntly, shut your trap and listen. If you're interested in reassuring yourself about your belief system by silencing or dismissing others, please, shut your trap.

Have a nice day.

[Melissa Nute]

Originally posted by Blacknight
I said at the beginning this would be contrivertial, and those who don't want in then don't join. But frankly i c this post as a way to see other ppl's veiwpoints about creation n' such...
Not when you are analyzing everyone's post...
good-day

[Nick Mac]

Personally i like the idea of this thread. I think it interesting to pose science versus religion in a science based message board.

[FotoPlasma]

Originally posted by Meli W.
Not when you are analyzing everyone's post...
good-day
Aww. But he hasn't done mine, yet! I feel so ignored.

As for the thread, it could have been good. The concept is honest enough. Execution, however, is slightly on the lacking side...

[Melissa Nute]

Originally posted by FotoPlasma
Aww. But he hasn't done mine, yet! I feel so ignored.

As for the thread, it could have been good. The concept is honest enough. Execution, however, is slightly on the lacking side...
Awww...maybe he wont ignore you soon :p

What you said about the thread is exactly what I'm feeling, but said a lot nicer. heh

[Blacknight]

Fine i shall shut my trap then, and let all your questions go unanswered.

Oh and there isn't any merit badge that i could get for this, and it would be no use for me anyways I'm already Eagle...

[IMDWalrus]

No option for agnostics? :)

There really isn't enough evidence for or against...so I stay neutral. If I had to choose, I'd go atheist, but calling myself agnostic is easier...especially since there are more than a few poeple that have no idea what it means. :)

[Ryan Dognaux]

Originally posted by Blacknight
I'm already Eagle...

When I read this, I was concerned partly. From what I've gathered, you've already gone against 3 points of the Scout Law -
Courteous, Kind, and Reverent.
I've found some of your replys flat out rude.
From the 10th Edition of The Boy Scout Handbook-
A Scout respects the beliefs of others.

In my opinion, you're not showing the 12th point of the Scout Law very well. I understand you may be trying to influence others with your Religious beliefs, but don't here. The question originally was "Do you believe in God?", but since then it has turned into a shake-down on people's beliefs. Hopefully these posts will help do to continue to do good turns daily in a more constructive way.

/ends Scout references ;)

[Blacknight]

Does the word debate mean anything to you?

[Nick Mac]

Originally posted by Blacknight
Does the word debate mean anything to you?

could we possibly get an aim chat going this weekend inspired by the subject of th is post?

[Ryan Dognaux]

This thread isn't about a debate over religion, it's about whether a person believes in God or not.

[Frank(Aflak)]

I believe that religion is strictly personal and that there should be no men who are given power to feed their interpretations of god to large amounts of followers.

As long as your religion does not involve the wholesale sacrifice of human infants, or something along those lines, you should be free to practice it, and, more importantly, you should follow personal beliefs more readily than you follow the words of your nearest pastor/rabbi/sheik/etc.

The Bible is also a bad thing for personal freedom of religion, it leads too many to accept too much without thought. An intelligent person can read the Bible and, for him, it can be a good thing. But too many people take the Bible at face value, especially seeing as how many contradictions exist, especially between the old and new testaments.

[jonathan lall]

Just a few notes and elaborations after reading a couple select posts....

Originally posted by Blacknight
First off science has never explained where the universe came from. They say that Stephen Hawkings (sp) found the equations that created the earth, and created the theory of randomally appering matter. One question for this, since we have the equation y can't we create our own randomally appearing matter, and if it happened before, y don't we occationally see something just appear out of nowhere. And if you say well the universe was just there, then where did all the dust and derbis come from?

Man twisted religion to his own uses, such at Government. Religion by itself has no political stances
Regarding the first paragraph, there's no easy way of saying this: that really makes no sense. I realize certain forum members are sort of talking down to you, but they are, as am I, frustrated with certain things you said which show bias affecting reason, or a lack of research. I think you need to read about the physics side of this debate. I (and most others would) suggest reading A Brief History of Time by the aformentioned Stephen Hawking. It's a very light read and is very basic; it is a good way to start off in terms of physics, and is fun at the same time. Seriously. I love that book, and I've read it three times over a span of 5 years.

Religion has no stances? Sure it does. Christianity for example, created Mosaic law, and is actually pretty liberal in nature I think. By "liberal," I do not mean "left wing" by the way.

Originally posted by SuperDanman
My thoughts on religion is that man created it as a means of comfort - there's probably some kind of Fruedian term for it. We're a social animal, and it's my belief that the fear of being alone scares us to death. We need something to comfort us, whether it's a loved one, a community, or the belief in a supreme being.

I think it's our universal fear that everything we've ever expierienced means nothing that we've created religion as a way to deal with death.
Indeed.

Originally posted by Frank(Aflak)
If there was a Big Bang where did the singularity come from? (by which point I mean that we know that the universe has a definate 'starting point.' The logic is that for the Big Bang to happen, all the conditions that caused it to happen would have had to existed . . but if the conditions were not caused by an outside power then they would have always existed, and therefore the big bang would have gone off an infinite amount of time ago . . a paradox. The argument is that god is the uncaused cause.

I believe in a god, but I don't believe that god takes an active role in influencing human life, nor do I accept Catholicism ( i was raised Catholic).

I belief that any belief/prayer should be personal and not a public ceremony. But thats just me.
Regarding the Big Bang, the way you have to think about it is that because it's a singularity, our perception of the four dimensions are immaterial in that situation. It is not a paradox, because as far as we are concerned, time did not exist. There is also no experiment we can do to determine what happened "before" the Big Bang. By the way, the Vatican (and to my knowledge, other Christian beliefs too) recognizes the Big Bang however it doesn't like research into that which was "before" the Big Bang, with good reason I suppose. Just in case any Creationists want to try to strike it down (which incidentally can't be done at this point), it doesn't really conflict with the Bible very much anyway.

Regarding the views on prayer, I agree; prayer should (IMO) be a personal thing. Don't you think God would be a tad annoyed at hearing the Lord's Prayer every day? That's not praying, that's like doing chores. It's also a good sign of someone who is in their religion due to fear of God or of their peers' dislike of dissent. It's good, I think, that you are coming to your own conclusions as to your beliefs. A lot of people can't. I am supposed to be Christian, but I am agnostic, because my interpretation of everything I've learned makes me see that way. What I think people belonging to any religion should do, is research other peoples' beliefs and science, and then form their own based not on ignorance and refuting of others, but understanding where they're coming from. The argument that faith prohibits research into atheism/Islam/Budhism/whatever is a cop-out, especially since the concept of faith was invented by religion in the first place.

Originally posted by Ryan_team710
I am raised in a protestant home. and i do Believe in God. I have gone to a christian school all my life. If you look at charlie darwins life at the end of his life he said that his theory could not be right and he did acknowledge that evolution can be real.
This is a classic argument made by those who take Genesis to the letter. One must remember however, that Darwin was about to die when he 'recanted'. He was the first to make such a radical postulation, and lived among Christians. If I made an arguably blasphemous theory like that, I'd be afraid of what's to come too.

I'm not going to try to sway Christians away from Creationism, but I do have to point out that evolution is a theory based on empirical data, and just about everything points to it's existance. I should also point out that the same is not true for Creationism.

Originally posted by George1083
I just wanted to refute the statement that science and religion are mutually exclusive.

Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.
- Albert Einstein

The test of courage comes when we are in the minority; the test of tolerance comes when we are in the majority.
- Ralph W. Sockman
I like your second quote. Your first one also has to be put into perspective. Einstein spent the latter part of his life trying to refute unification and quantum mechanics because of his belief in determinism and that God almost 'prearranged' everything.


/me catches breath

Okay.

[kane]

Would you look on me any different if i said i belived in a god. Would you look on me any different if i said i did not belive in a god. My question is what does it matter who belives what, why do people come up and ask me what religion i am, why should that have any barring on how i am as a person, i know some religious people who would run over an old person in the street just to get to a dime someone dropped, and i know some athesists that wouldn't hurt a fly (and the other way around). Life is better not knowing ways to seperate yourself from your peers, instead you should look in them to find their true character not the one defined by a sterotypical member of their "class".

[Frank(Aflak)]

Originally posted by kane
Would you look on me any different if i said i belived in a god. Would you look on me any different if i said i did not belive in a god. My question is what does it matter who belives what, why do people come up and ask me what religion i am, why should that have any barring on how i am as a person, i know some religious people who would run over an old person in the street just to get to a dime someone dropped, and i know some athesists that wouldn't hurt a fly (and the other way around). Life is better not knowing ways to seperate yourself from your peers, instead you should look in them to find their true character not the one defined by a sterotypical member of their "class".

this is exactly why I think religion should be private. Well, its some more good reasons, anyway. BTW, as far as I'm concerned, atheism is a religion . . in my sense of the word.

[Andy Baker]

For the most part, this has been a thoughtful and respectful thread. There are many good posts by good people.

I have two observations:

1. It makes me feel like a proud father to see many of you mature over the years. I see people respecting other's opinions (for the most part), even though they disagree with them. I see many people in this thread who would've flamed each other a year ago.

Don't get me wrong... healthy debate is good. But when you start attacking someone else's personal beliefs, that is when people get defensive and they tell you to stop.

2. I consider the people who post on the CD Forums to be fairly smart people. I would assume that almost all of you have above average intelligence. With this said, it amazes me that all of these smart people have such different beliefs when it comes to religion and politics. Within this crowd of fairly smart people, there are atheists, very religious people, die-hard Democrats, and right-wing Republicans. The neat thing is that, for the most part, we all get along fairly well.

For example... I just called my friend Bill Gold for a simple favor. Bill is a great guy. I've known him for about 3 years. We both know that we differ on some controversial issues, but we still consider each other friends. I can call him for a favor and he can do the same with me. I value our friendship. It's OK that we disagree on some issues. We still respect each other even though we disagree. It's OK. It really is. People are going to disagree... as long as the respect is there.

So, debate. Voice your opinion. But... as you are proving your intelligence, be respectful. Hey... maybe I have something there. Maybe this "Respectful Intelligence" is a derivative of "Gracious Professionalism". Hmmm.

Be good,
Andy B.

[Nick Mac]

atheism is a religion...you believe in something just like other religions...

[Adam Y.]

Srry didn't notice the religion post earlier, but I have been having this debate w/ some of my friends on anther site and it is been going on for about a week, and it's already over 14 pages. And I was just wondering how many religious ppl we have in FIRST.
It has to be fairly high. I rember there was a recent poll that said that 70 percent of people did not want refrences of god removed from the public.
300,000 stars - who knows how many like our own sun? Thousands of faint galaxies - just like our Milky Way. All this in the area of a grain of sand held at arms length. How many grains of sand held at arms length does it take to fill up the entire nighttime sky? It doesn't take much effort to realize that our entire lives - the people we meet, the places we see, the memories we keep - everything we know is not even a blink of the eye in the long run.
Actually science belives now that parallel universes probably exists due to the laws of probability.
I personally belive a higher enitity does exisist. I just do not know what.

[srjjs]

Originally posted by Adam Y.
Actually science belives now that parallel universes probably exists due to the laws of probability.
Coincidentally, that means that there actually is a "heaven" and a "hell" for each religion somewhere out there, because there is a small, but non-zero probability of a world fitting any description existing.

[IsabelRinging]

Originally posted by Nick Mac
atheism is a religion...you believe in something just like other religions...

Okay, I'm aware that this is kind of nitpicky, but it bothered me.

Athiesm is not a belief in something. It is the lack of belief in something (God).


re·li·gion
n.[list=1]
a. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
b. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.
[/list=1]


I suppose by definition four that one could claim athiesm to be a religion, but this would only be true when someone actively does not believe in God, which is usually not the case. Disbelief in something is fairly passive activity, wouldn't you say?

[jonathan lall]

Well, atheism is too a broad belief to be called a religion. It isn't really a religion, because there are recognized religions that branch off from it. Atheism simply means a lack of theism, so calling it a religion isn't really accurate, no?

[FotoPlasma]

The argument of "atheism as a religion" reminds me very much of two things: the first is null is not zero (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1132701), and the second is the concept of mu (http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/M/mu.html) (not the coefficient of friction or the Greek letter).

[Beth Sweet]

Well, everyone else has been so good to share, so I may as well add in my little bit. I've been born and raised Catholic, and I definately believe in God. He has helped me get through things that I never thought possible. I've seen people that were said to have less than 10% chance of survival after car accidents completely cured following prayer masses, and I believe. I don't like how in my religion, you just recite a prayer, because to me, reciting words week after week really doesn't mean anything. I guess that I feel God spiritually, just not in the way that my faith does.

[srjjs]

Atheism is no more a religion than, say, monotheism.

[The Lucas]

Originally posted by IMDWalrus
No option for agnostics? :)

There really isn't enough evidence for or against...so I stay neutral. If I had to choose, I'd go atheist, but calling myself agnostic is easier...especially since there are more than a few poeple that have no idea what it means. :)

You should have included a "Not Sure" for the agnostics. There are more of them then you may realize. Unfortunately, there are probably more people who don't know what an agnostic is than there are people who declare themselves agnostic.

This thread is very interesting. It reminds me of the "Philosophy of Religion" class took last semester. The whole class was arguments for and against the existence of God so I've been comparing the arguments on this thread to ones I learned. On the first day of class the prof took an anonymous poll of everyone's belief. Everyone had to classify themselves as "Theist", "Atheist" or "Agnostic" and "Hostile" (I am right and you are so very wrong) or "Friendly" (I am very open-minded about the whole thing). Then he took the same poll after the Final. Here are the results:

BEFORE:
Theist: 27 Friendly, 3 Hostile
Agnostic: 10 Friendly, 2 Hostile
Atheist: 2 Friendly, 1 Hostile

AFTER:
Theist: 28 Friendly, 4 Hostile
Agnostic: 6 Friendly, 2 Hostile
Atheist: 6 Friendly, 0 Hostile

(Note: 1 more person was polled in the After poll)
Interpret that data how you will. I am one of those Friendly Agnostics that stuck around the camp (Open-mindedness is a value I try to live by). Here are a few quotes:

"I do not consider it an insult, but rather a compliment to be called an agnostic. I do not pretend to know where many ignorant men are sure -- that is all that agnosticism means. "
Clarence Darrow (Scopes trial, Dayton, Tennessee, July 13, 1925)

"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear."
Thomas Jefferson

"Hostile Agnostic. I don't know and neither do you"
Bumper Sticker

"Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color."
Don Hirschberg

If anyone wants to learn about well established philsophical agruements about God, just wants to debate this stuff, or wonders what an agnostic is, feel free to AIM me at "The Lucas 365"

[KenWittlief]

wow, interesting thread!

some thoughts to ponder:

Science vs religion: Science and religion dont mix for a very simple reason. Science deals with things that are controllable, predictable and repeatable. Try to apply the rules of science to humans and see if you can draw any conclusions to prove anything. People respond to stimuli in different and completely unpredictable ways. Extend that out to God, and there is no experiment you can conduct to prove or disprove anything concerning God or religon, because you cannot put God into your laboratory condtions, you cant control God, and God would be infinitely beyond our ability to comprehend, so how could we predict what God would do in any given situation (in response to any test conditions we come up with)?

religon and conflict. Another problem here. Even if you take the existance of God as a given, now you have an even bigger problem: defining Gods nature. There are as many possible concepts of what you think God is (what God does, how God interacts with man, Gods character...) as there are people on the earth. The conflicts that arise from religion always stem from disagreement over what we think God wants us to do.

God and you. When I was taking philosophy and logic courses in college I gave religion a lot of thought, trying to figure out if it was possible to determine if God is real or not. I spent several days contemplating what sign God could give me (or anyone) to indicate that He is there, that He is real. I came to the conclusion that the only perfect sign (one that could not be a coincidence) would be if God came to you personally in some way, and interacted with you on a personal level, revealed Himself.

and in the end, isnt that what its really all about? if God is not interested in interacting with you on a personal level, then it doesnt really matter if God exists or not, right? If you never have any personal interaction with God, then what difference does it make if God exists or not?

Thats why these discussions always come down to the point where we must all concede that our religious beliefs are a personal matter. If God has revealed Himself to me, there is nothing I can say or do to convince anyone esle of that. God has to deal with each of us one by one.

For the record, millions of people state they do have such a personal relationship with the creator of the universe, and I am one of them.

[Jon Reese]

all i have too say is that something cannot come from nothing so there must have been a god to create every thing and there must be a god after the great season 231 had last year and all the help ive had starting a rookie tean\m this year!!!!!

[Tarsen]

Im going to throw my two cents in here, mostly because no one has really said what i have to say.

I dont follow any of the Judo-Christian religions, im solitary eclectic Wiccan. I do invact believe in God (God with a big "G" generally refering to Jahova). But reading the Bible ive found that his rules and edicts are too contradicting for me to justify following them, and when it comes right down to it, i dont like Jahova. I wont go into why, because it would offend alot of people and thats not what im here for.

Im a very logical, scientific person, so the contradictory statements of the Bible doenst sit well with me. Most people think it is very strange that a scientist like me believes in something like magick. But i find magick is a very good blend of science and religion; its a good go between if you look at it the right way. Magick requires believe in something that cannot be tested or usually seen, like religion, but it is brought about by strict, logical rules and methods like science.

Personally i favor the egyptian pantheon (Isis being my favorite) over other gods and goddesses, but thats not saying i dont recognize them. I feel that the divinity that permiates all things, the All, Gaia, ect. whatever you want to call it, is formless, incomprehensable and unknowable. But we as humans have given the All form and shape, substance and voice, breath and life.

All gods and goddesses are the right god and goddess, as long as you arnt harming yourself or others in thier names. Isis, Jahova, the God and Goddess, Thor, Pan, Zues, Bast, or no religion at all, they are all equally valid. Many paths lead to the same clearing in the forest.

I think many people forget the most important point of any good religion, and the Wiccan Rede sums it up pretty well. "And it harme none, do as ye will." I think we forget that all to often.

Im not here to preach anything, and if it seems like i am, or if im offending you, i apologize. I am just voiceing my views on the subject. If by some chance one of you would like to learn more about Wicca or other pagan beliefs, i would be happy to help you find that information. You can email me at tarsen@goldenwyvern.org or AIM be at ChibiTarsen.

Thank you for listening.

[KenWittlief]

Tarsen,

I agree with your post on a couple things. There are forms of religion that do have a scientific aspect to them, you experiment with it and see what happens. I was really into the new age movement about 17 years ago.

One thing about this though, you have to be willing to accept any concequences if the experiment produces results you didnt expect.

I also understand what you said about the bible containing contradictions. There are many places where it seems to be saying one thing, then later it says the opposite. Its been my experince that if you study these things you have to take a step back to understand what is really going on there.

About 10 years ago I had the opportunity to sit down and right up the sum of my religious experiences. I have a copy of it in PDF format on my aol account. If anyone wants to read it, its over 50 pages long. If nothing else, it is interesting what we learn along the way when we really put ourselves into a serious spiritual search.

http://members.aol.com/wittlief/testimony.htm

[Tarsen]

agreed, magick can be dangerous. but luckily i dont have delustions of great power and the spells i weave are tiny things ment to make my life easier and healing spells. im not foolish enough to think i can control dark forces or anything.

[Marygrace]

Originally posted by Tarsen
I dont follow any of the Judo-Christian religions, im solitary eclectic Wiccan.

Cool, my mom is part wiccan. Ive looked into it, it was fun and all just to explore, but it wasn't for me. :)

[anna~marie]

God existst! how can u say that He doesnt? seriously do u think that everything just magicaly created itself and its own rules?
to save time for arguing, just PM me is u want to contradict me!
one love, one G od, one way!

[generalbrando]

I haven't read this whole thread, forgive me if there's repetition.

Personally I have never fully adopted any one faith. I use the label agnostic. Agnostic seems to have gray area, but basically what it means in my case is that I have no convictions. I don't believe there is a God and I don't believe there is not a God (hence, I'm not atheist). The only real point I want to make for others to think about is this: it is true that we cannot absolutely prove the existence of God. It is a belief. However, to say that He does not exist is equally unscientific as saying He does exist. We have cannot absolutely prove that He does not exist.

Please don't take my view to be that all scientists should be agnostic. I use 'scientific' only in the root meaning that science means knowledge. I'm saying we lack the real knowledge to justity saying He doesn't exist, so to be athiest on the basis that we don't have evidence for His existence is a contradiction in my mind. I'm not saying atheists are wrong. I'm justing saying that they also believe in something, as was pointed out near the beginning of the thread.

As always, I mean no offense and I respect others' beliefs or lack there of.

[KenWittlief]

it is true that we cannot absolutely prove the existence of God. It is a belief.

not sure I understand this

if you mean 'prove the existance of' like I can prove the existance of my car, or my son

then I dont understand your assertion. If you accept it as true, then in the biblical account, it was proven to Moses that God exists, and to the disciples of Jesus

and to anyone else who has experienced a personal interaction with God - Gods existance has been proven to them

or do you simply mean, those people cant prove it to anyone else, without Gods cooperation?

[generalbrando]

Good point. I mean basically the last thing you said. I'm saying that God's existence is something unproven to most people, hence we can have this discussion. If we all knew for sure that he existed, this thread would serve little purpose, right? So take my words lightly - His existence can be proven, however I have no proof, as many do not.

Does that clear up what I mean?

[KenWittlief]

thats true. If this thread was titled "does the moon exist?" there wouldnt be 6 pages of discussion :c)

[Ryan Albright]

hey sorry guys i havent posted in this thread for awhile, I have been trying to catch up and if i am repetive...forgive me.

On the point of What God looks like:
He is a spirit, He came down to earth in a earthly form to die for are sins.

Big Bang Theory;
So if we start at x how does the big bang come along. You have to have somethign to start something. Its cause and effect, The big bang could not start from nothign you have to have a cause to get a effect (i.e. big bang)

God is the ultimate being he brought us hear and one day he will come back to take his chosen home. If you know anything about the christian faith there are Calvinist (coming down from John Calvin ) and there is Arminist (sorry spelling sucks). Calvinist believe that Before the begining of time that God pre-destined people that will be save and people that wont . Arminist beleive that you can choose to believe in God or not. For me personally i am a Calvinist. God said that he knows everythign about us, how many hairs on our head, when we will die. I also believe thatwhen we are destined to die we will no matter were we are. I coule be sitting in a airplane on the crapper anywhere.

[anna~marie]

God spoke, and BANG!!!:yikes: it appeared

[shyra1353]

i havent voted because i dont really know what i think and its one of those areas in my life where im still undecided ... but going through some old emails, i found this and thought that it related to this topic:

Finally, The Truth on National TV.

Billy Graham's daughter was being interviewed on the Early Show and Jane Clayson asked her "How could God let something like this happen?"(regarding the attacks on Sept. 11).

Anne Graham gave an extremely profound and insightful response. She said "I believe that God is deeply saddened by this, just as we are, but for years we've been telling God to get out of our schools, to get out of our government and to get out of our lives. And being the gentleman that He is, I believe that He has calmly backed out. How can we expect God to give us His blessing and His protection if we demand that He leave us alone?" (In light of recent events...terrorists attack, school shootings, etc.)

* Let's see, I think it started when Madeline Murray O'Hare (she was murdered, her body was found recently) complained she didn't want any prayer in our schools, and we said OK. Then, someone said you better not read the Bible in school...the Bible that says thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal, and love your neighbor as yourself. And we said, OK.

* Then, Dr. Benjamin Spock said we shouldn't spank our children when they misbehave because their little personalities would be warped and we might damage their self-esteem (Dr. Spock's son committed suicide) And we said, an expert should know what he's talking about so we said OK.

* Then, someone said teachers and principals better not discipline our children when they misbehave. And the school administrators said no faculty member in this school better touch a student when they misbehave because we don't want any bad publicity, and we surely don't want to be sued (There's a big difference between disciplining and beating, smacking, humiliating, kicking, etc.) And we said, OK.

* Then someone said, let's let our daughters have abortions if they want, and they won't even have to tell their parents. And we said, OK.

* Then some wise school board member said, since boys will be boys and they're going to do it anyway, let's give our sons all the condoms they want, so they can have all the fun they desire, and we won't have to tell their parents they got them at school. And we said, OK.

* Then some of our top elected officials said it doesn't matter what we do in private as long as we do our jobs. And agreeing with them, we said it doesn't matter to me what anyone, including the President, does in private as long as I have a job and the economy is good.

* And then someone said let's print magazines with pictures of nude women and call it wholesome, down-to-earth appreciation for the beauty of the female body. And we said, OK.

* And then someone else took that appreciation a step further and published pictures of nude children and then stepped further still by making them available on the internet. And we said OK, they're entitled to their free speech.

* And then the entertainment industry said, let's make TV shows and movies that promote profanity, violence, and illicit sex. And let's record music that encourages rape, drugs, murder, suicide, and satanic themes. And we said it's just entertainment, it has no adverse effect, and nobody takes it seriously anyway, so go right ahead.

* Now we're asking ourselves why our children have no conscience, why they don't know right from wrong, and why it doesn't bother them to kill strangers, their classmates, and themselves. Probably, if we think about it long and hard enough, we can figure it out. I think it has a great deal to do with "WE REAP WHAT WE SOW."

* Dear God,
Why didn't you save the little girl killed in her classroom?"
Sincerely, Concerned Student...
AND THE REPLY
Dear Concerned Student,
I am not allowed in schools.
Sincerely, God.

* Funny how simple it is for people to trash God and then wonder why the world's going to hell.
* Funny how we believe what the newspapers say, but question what the Bible says.
* Funny how everyone wants to go to heaven provided they do not have to believe, think, say, or do anything the Bible says.
* Funny how someone can say "I believe in God" but still follow Satan who, by the way, also "believes" in God.
* Funny how we are quick to judge but not to be judged.
* Funny how you can send a thousand 'jokes' through e-mail and they spread like wildfire, but when you start sending messages regarding the Lord, people think twice about sharing.
* Funny how the lewd, crude, vulgar and obscene pass freely through cyberspace,but the public discussion of God is suppressed in the school and workplace.
* Funny how someone can be so fired up for Christ on Sunday, but be an invisible Christian the rest of the week.
* Are you laughing?
* Funny how when you go to forward this message, you will not send it to many on your address list because you're not sure what they believe, or what they WILL think of you for sending it to them.
* Funny how I can be more worried about what other people think of me than what God thinks of me.
* Are you thinking? Pass it on if you think it has merit. If not then just discard it....no one will know that you did.
* But, if you discard this thought process, then don't sit back and complain about what bad shape the world is in!

[Tarsen]

ill have to more or less agree, i have little respect for people who try to push blame off on "God" or some other metaphysical being for something they did, or did not do, and the consequences of such. we have free will, and our decisions are ours to make. thus the responsibility lays on us to do right, not "God".

[DanL]

Originally posted by Ryan_team710
hey sorry guys i havent posted in this thread for awhile, I have been trying to catch up and if i am repetive...forgive me.

On the point of What God looks like:
He is a spirit, He came down to earth in a earthly form to die for are sins.

Big Bang Theory;
So if we start at x how does the big bang come along. You have to have somethign to start something. Its cause and effect, The big bang could not start from nothign you have to have a cause to get a effect (i.e. big bang)




Arrg, this is the most common argument used against the Big Bang theory.

According to your beliefs, God is infinite - He transcends time. This means that you believe the property of being infinite exists. Yet, in your argument, you disprove the Big Bang by stating that something had to create it. In layman's terms, you're saying that the Big Bang can't be real because something had to create it - matter/energy/whatever is not infinite. At the same time, however, you admit that it is possible for something (God) to be infinite. Which is it? Is it possible for something to have to property of being infinite, or is it not possible for something to have the property of being infinite?



Originally posted by shyra1353
Finally, The Truth on National TV.

Billy Graham's daughter was being interviewed on the Early Show and Jane Clayson asked her "How could God let something like this happen?"(regarding the attacks on Sept. 11).

Anne Graham gave an extremely profound and insightful response. She said "I believe that God is deeply saddened by this, just as we are, but for years we've been telling God to get out of our schools, to get out of our government and to get out of our lives. And being the gentleman that He is, I believe that He has calmly backed out. How can we expect God to give us His blessing and His protection if we demand that He leave us alone?" (In light of recent events...terrorists attack, school shootings, etc.)
....

Alright, this post really upset me. Not only is it terribly biased, but it is full of half-truths and it outright insults people who are not Christian by forcing Christian values into their faces.

I'm not going to go over every point the post raises, but I will flame the most insulting ones.

* Let's see, I think it started when Madeline Murray O'Hare (she was murdered, her body was found recently) complained she didn't want any prayer in our schools, and we said OK. Then, someone said you better not read the Bible in school...the Bible that says thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal, and love your neighbor as yourself. And we said, OK.
Guess what? Every other major belief system throughout history has said the same exact thing!! Has that ever stopped people from killing? NO! The reason the Bible has no place in our schools is because contrary to the beliefs of some ultra-conservatives in this country, not everyone is Christian! Think of it in these terms: would you be offended if every day I shoved my Athiestic beliefs into your face? Of course you would! For the same reason, in our public schools, we do not shove Christian beliefs into the faces of Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, Daoists, Native Americans, etc.

Then, Dr. Benjamin Spock said we shouldn't spank our children when they misbehave because their little personalities would be warped and we might damage their self-esteem (Dr. Spock's son committed suicide) And we said, an expert should know what he's talking about so we said OK.
Listen to how ridiculous this argument is. The author attributes this entire practice to one particular person whos son tilts the argument into the author's favor. SOCIETY DECIDED THIS, NOT ONE PERSON WHOSE CIRCUMSTANCES COINCIDENTALLY REINFORCE YOUR ARGUMENT!

Then, someone said teachers and principals better not discipline our children when they misbehave. And the school administrators said no faculty member in this school better touch a student when they misbehave because we don't want any bad publicity, and we surely don't want to be sued (There's a big difference between disciplining and beating, smacking, humiliating, kicking, etc.) And we said, OK.
What exactly is the author talking about here? If he isn't talking about beating, smacking, humilating, kicking, etc., exactly what kind of discipline IS he talking about? As far as I know, detention, suspensions, and expulsions are still used everywhere....

Then someone said, let's let our daughters have abortions if they want, and they won't even have to tell their parents. And we said, OK.
I'm not going into the abortion debate, but notice how this point is a blatant ad hominem argument - the way it is phrased makes it seem like "our [teenage] daughters" are the only ones getting abortions.

* Now we're asking ourselves why our children have no conscience, why they don't know right from wrong, and why it doesn't bother them to kill strangers, their classmates, and themselves. Probably, if we think about it long and hard enough, we can figure it out. I think it has a great deal to do with "WE REAP WHAT WE SOW."
Funny... as I recall, there have only been around 20 or 30 kids at most who have killed strangers, classmates, and themselves with no conscience... now, exactly how many of "our children" are there actually? A few hundred million? 20 out of a billion is not a big percentage at all. Don't get me wrong - I'm not saying that Columbine was completely insignificant. I'm saying the way this argument is phrased makes it sound like the great corruption of society is forcing ALL of "our children" to be the Trenchcoat Mafia, which if was the case, you'd probably be dead by now.


Again, what really upset me about this quote is it is completely biased and phrased in half-truths (actually, more like quarter-truths or 20/1,000,000 truths). It is violently Christian. It makes it sound as if the Bible has held the answers to every single problem in society and the reason problems exist is because we rejected the Bible. It completely insults every other set of beliefs. In short, keep this trash out of here. If you want to have a discussion, please use intelligent arguments NOT filled with decieving half-truths.

[Marygrace]

I have been hestitating for awhile to put my own opinion about religion in this thread. Religion has been the cause of most of my family's problems. My mother is a Christian Wiccan (WHich i think i have posted once already), my sister and father are full-throttle christians, my brother is morman, and I dont believe in relgion. Dont get me wrong, i believe in a higher power, never doubted that there was one. Religion was not something i want to dedicate my life to. Im not willing to have people to tell me whether or not im going to hell because i made a mistake. Nor do i want to be a part of something that tottally shuts out anything that does not believe in what they believe in.
My family was torn apart by relgion. My sister and mother haven;t talked in about five years all because my sister doesnt understand wut my mom believes in, instead she chose fear and didn;t bother looking into it. (Knowledge really is power) And my father disaproves of my brothers choice of belief. I realize that a lot of people out there only have their religion, it is the only thing getting them through this thing called life........

.......I just wish people wouldn't try to force their beliefs upon other people and they would get rid of the thinking that their way is the only way to go.

[Matt Attallah]

I think there is. If not - than i'm just playin' it safe! :D

[srjjs]

Originally posted by Matt Attallah
I think there is. If not - than i'm just playin' it safe! :D
Good point. (If certain people are to be believed) Those who don't believe in God will go to hell if there really is one, but just die if they're right. However, those who believe go to heaven if they're right, and if there really isn't a god, they just die.

I'll take my chances, but it doesn't hurt to keep that in mind.

[Ken Leung]

Originally posted by srjjs
Those who don't believe in God will go to hell if there really is one, but just die if they're right.

Seems rather unfair to cultures who were never exposed to the concept of God.

[generalbrando]

Not only unfair, but also remember that not everyone who believes in God believes that they will go to hell if they don't believe in him. It may be written in different scriptures, however not everyone follows those. So is it possible that someone could not believe in God and have it turn out that there is one and he/she doesn't go to hell?

[KenWittlief]

What exactly is the author talking about here? If he isn't talking about beating, smacking, humilating, kicking, etc., exactly what kind of discipline IS he talking about?

spanking. When I was in 2nd grade (public school in buffalo, NY) one boy in my class threw a snowball and hit a girl in the eye. She told the teacher, the student was made to stand in front of the class, and the teacher paddled his behind with the 'board of education'. Spanking was always reserved for those situations where a student physically hurt or attacked another person. We knew full well that if we 'laid hands' on someone else, that a teacher or the principle WOULD lay hands on us. This form of discipline was very effective, both as a deterrent, and as punishment.

Funny... as I recall, there have only been around 20 or 30 kids at most who have killed strangers, classmates, and themselves with no conscience... you are talking about high profile, multiple killings that happened inside the school buildings - The US has [I believe] the highest percentage of its own population in prison - our prison system is overwhelmed - Most of those people in prison were brought up in our public education system.

I dont know the exact number, but somewhere around 100 people are murdered in the US every day.

Those who don't believe in God will go to hell if there really is one, but just die if they're right. However, those who believe go to heaven if they're right, and if there really isn't a god, they just die.

this idea that religion is about what happens to you when you die is misleading. If there is a God, then why would He only be interested in you after you die?

Religion is about your personal relationship with God, now - here - today

if you dont want God to be a part of your life now, then He wont be present with you after this life is over either (that would be hell)

and if you DO want God to be personally involved with your life here and now, He will continue that relationship after this physical life is over.

[anna~marie]

well heres the Bible's view on that all

say ur driving down a road and u happen to be going over the speed limit, right? well lets just say that you didnt know what the speed limit was. does that mean that u are exempt from the law? by no means! it is accessible to anyone to know. the same goes with God and the Law

[George1902]

Originally posted by anna~marie
well heres the Bible's view on that all

say ur driving down a road and u happen to be going over the speed limit, right? well lets just say that you didnt know what the speed limit was. does that mean that u are exempt from the law? by no means! it is accessible to anyone to know. the same goes with God and the Law

Actually, if the speed limit is not clearly posted, they can't say you were exceeding the posted limit. Can they?

George

[KenWittlief]

I think the analogy that was being made is we all are born with a conscience, with a sense of right and wrong

and Im not aware of any culture or group of people who do not have some concept of God.

It seems to be a part of our human nature to think, feel, or otherwise know that something greater than ourselves exists.

[Madison]

Originally posted by KenWittlief
and Im not aware of any culture or group of people who do not have some concept of God.

Athiests, maybe?

Where can I collect my prize?

[KenWittlief]

no I dont mean individuals, I mean a culture, for example, if the native americans had no concept of God, or the people on Hawaii or tahiti, something along those lines

[Blacknight]

and athiesm isn't a cult, a cult must have some spiritual purpose and athiesm just doesn't have it.

[Madison]

Originally posted by Blacknight
and athiesm isn't a cult, a cult must have some spiritual purpose and athiesm just doesn't have it.

Perhaps you mean culture, rather than cult?

[anna~marie]

heres my comments on the whole right and wrong issue on this thread

u believe in one thing as morally incorrect, and ur friend another. so whos right? where are u to draw ur morals and laws at without "violating" another person's right? i mean one person could entirely think that killing people is right, but you dont. so whos to say he's right? its all a matter of opinion.
well thats where God comes in! He, being perfect and, well, God, can set all the rules. they unite us where our petty opinions are miniscule in comparison to God. Just look! He created everything! You would think He would know best.
and to all of you that think that there are no absolutes and no absolute rules, are u absolutely sure?

[DanL]

Originally posted by anna~marie
heres my comments on the whole right and wrong issue on this thread

u believe in one thing as morally incorrect, and ur friend another. so whos right? where are u to draw ur morals and laws at without "violating" another person's right? i mean one person could entirely think that killing people is right, but you dont. so whos to say he's right? its all a matter of opinion.
well thats where God comes in! He, being perfect and, well, God, can set all the rules. they unite us where our petty opinions are miniscule in comparison to God. Just look! He created everything! You would think He would know best.
and to all of you that think that there are no absolutes and no absolute rules, are u absolutely sure?

Back to the point I made in my first post on this topic... if you expand on your idea to all the religions, how do you know which religion is the 'right' religion? What makes one g/God(s) more 'right' than another g/God(s)? Ghandi did not believe in Christianity, but if Christianity is the 'right' religion, does that mean Ghandi's going to hell? It seems to me that all the contradictions between religions is proof that religion is just a creation of man... if there really was one true religion, I'd think the g/God(s) of that religion would make it clear, not have a different religion for every major cultural group throughout the history of the world.

[anna~marie]

look around, you must be able to see that all this did not happen just by a mere accident! there fore, there is a supreme being.
next off, why the God of Isreal? For starts, He answers prayers! You ask, and the God who made you gives! He give peace that you cannot comprehend or explain, just try to get to know Him if you dont believe me.
Besides, this God isnt some stupid statue made by human hands. He lives!
You might want to talk to some people who were once other religions who came to know God and His grace, it would really do good. There are many books and t hings.

[JAH]

I, like many of you others, believe in God but, as Ryan Dognaux said, am shakey. I do not attend church regularly but I do believe. Whenever I've got into a debate with this with my friends, I just plainly state. Ok, you believe one thing, I believe another. You may be right, I may be right. We can believe separate things and no one is harmed. It is usually dropped at that point. My belief is very shakey, I believe in God, am just not sure which religion I really am. I'm not overly worried about it at the moment, I believe and that is enough for me at the moment. Everyone has different thoughts on everything. It is no different than did you like this movie or that CD...except a bit more weighty. Over ones choice of God or not, you shouldn't dislike the person or like them more over their choice. Would you really hate someone if they didn't like your favorite movie? I'd certainly hope not. The subject of a higher being shouldn't be any different. Respect other's choices and don't criticize them for their choice.

[anna~marie]

well i for one, am not critizing anyone!
i love all, and wish them to know God.
and besides, being "religious" is not what this all is about! its about a personal relationship!
its not about tryin to p ick fights with people and all that, but loving them and wishin for them to know what you know about life and God, and in turn sharing it with them. not to hurt them or make them feel bad, but in hopes that they will be as happy as you!
we share because we care

[KenWittlief]

One of the primary aspects of Christianity is the belief that if you search for God with all your heart, you will find Him.

I have to think that no matter what part of the world you are from, whatever religious background you have, that God can reach through all of that and touch your life in a personal way.

If you think religion has to be complicated and profound, then think of a person who is not very intelligent, or someone who cant hear, or who cant read, or someone who cant think in words.

God is the creator of all - you dont find Him with your intellect, you dont find Him by reciting a magic incantation.

You find Him with your heart - with the part of you that knows no words.

[Tarsen]

I for one, kinda went the other way around. I know "God" and have been a christian most of my life. But i found myself dissatisfied and unhappy with my faith, and was generally hipocritical about my religion. And then not too long ago i stumbled upon wicca, and found my true connection with a higher being. i found in the God and Goddess what i never had with "God" and in Isis i found the strength i have alway lacked. My prayers are answered just like anyone elses, and i am a better person because of the path i walk. I am more happy with myself, and do more good than i have in my past. Perhaps who you worship is not so important as how that worship affects you?

[KenWittlief]

Im interested to know what it was about Christianity that you rejected, and what you found in another religion that God would not give you.

But that is way off topic and I dont want to derail this thread.

You can send me a PM if you wish.

[Blacknight]

Just a couple things to ponder n' some things to get out.

Athiesm isn't a culture, how could it be? All cultures have some type of religion, and culture is a whole heritige, and the common lifestyle of a large group of ppl. Yes some Athiests might be common in the way of religion but take a random group of athiests and you prob won't find anything in common, thus it cannot be a culture. (also lacking the heritige thing)

If ya never kno God r you going to hell? No, only if you have never had access to him or his word. Take a tribe of pigmies, Most of them will never hear the word of God, but yet they are spared because of God's grace. Same thing w/ the age of accountability and mentally challenced people. How can you grasp at a loving relationship w/ your God when you can't hold a spoon?

Can i ever be erased in the book of life? No, if you beleived that Jesus is God's son and he died for us, then you have believed, and will receive eternal life. Even if someone who is a devout athiest, blasphmey's God and his followers all his life, if he has a change of heart, even for one day, and accepts Christ, he will be accepted to the kingdom of God, even if he turns from God and returns to his ways, God will never forget him.

And just a note to all, God answers prayers, in his time, he wants a relationship w/ you. But God won't answer a prayer if you don't fully trust him, if you have so to speak a back up plan. And God isn't the only one w/ power on this earth, Satan has almost as much power as God, using Temptation he can change our views to somehting that ignores God, so beware

And a last thing to ponder, If today's society upholds and protects individuality, and everyone has to be different, then y do ppl persecute, tease, and fight others because we are different? Why do ppl who say they are religious at church never admit to it outside of church, as if they are ashamed to be different. If you beleive in something, or say you beleive in somthing, really beleive in it, stand up for it, for then others might see what you have, and they might not have.

Chow~

[KenWittlief]

I was surfing the web tonight, looking up information on Joshua's long day (a day in biblical history when the sun stood still in the sky for 12 hours)

and I stumbled on an awesome website that talks about the historical and scientific verification of the biblical, as a literal record of history.

I bookmarked it and will probabally read the whole site eventually. Just wanted to share:

http://www.grmi.org/renewal/Richard_Riss/evidences/

[MisDa-zRoxMySox]

All I have to say is my God is always with me and hes always with you. No matter what goes right or what goes wrong MY God is always there, even for you non-believers. There doesn't have to be some scientific explaination. From what I can remember, its the scientific explaination that killed santa...and the easter bunny...and the great pumpkin...etc.

[MathewSmith]

I Believe in a Loving and caring god that sent his son here to die to save the human race. Isn't that cool?:D

[Dan 550]

Discussing this kind of topic on this webforum is never a good idea, and I'm suprized honestly that it's not closed yet. I voted, because I am a firm believer in democracy, and I happen to believe in God, and I happen to be a Catholic (but not a Roman Catholic, thank you) but will not discuss my own views on this forum due to the "right and wrong" this sort of topic tends to lead to. Carry on.

[Madison]

Originally posted by Blacknight
How can you grasp at a loving relationship w/ your God when you can't hold a spoon?


Forgive me, but what on Earth gives you any right to speak for or about the experience of mentally or physically disadvantaged people? Are you mentally or physically challenged in some way?

That is, without question, the most arrogant thing I've read regarding religion in ages and ages -- as if you are somehow better than people who don't (or can't, by your interpretation) have a similar relationship with your God. Well, my heaven, how can I show my appreciation that your God shows benevolence to the people He makes unable to maintain their relationship with him? What a swell thing to do. You pity the poor other folks who don't believe the same thing as you, for by the grace of you and your God, they won't live in eternal damnation. Whatever.

Oh -- take a random group of catholics and tell me how they have in common besides that religion thing -- then talk to me about how athiesm isn't a culture.

Ciao.

[Marygrace]

Here is my story. (http://www.mbwfamily.com/marygrace/mrypages/Through%20the%20eyes%20of%20the%20youngest.htm)

So if you read the story you find Im not a big fan of religion although I am a big believer in God. Don't get upset with people because of what they believe in, just leave it at that, agree to disagree. There is no need to get worked up and angry at someone just because they dont think the same way as you. It will never end up good, and more egos will end up shot than minds changed.

[Blacknight]

I was saying an outsiders look
by no means did i mean that all mentally handicapt ppl are going to hell. By far they are going to other way. Because of grace they are saved because they cannot fully understand like we can their decision. And if they can all the better. But what i beleive by grace they are saved.
i ment it in a way w/out grace not something i beleive in
srry if you were offended, but you were the one who took it wrong

[KenWittlief]

Blacknight

the flaw in your logic is your assertion that you find God, or interact with God, with your intellect and reasoning

you dont find God with your mind, you find Him with your heart

we think humans are intellectual beings, but at some point in our lives we realize we are emotional beings first

and you ability to think or reason in sophisticated ways has nothing to do with whats in your heart.

[jonathan lall]

Two notes: first, I just read the last couple posts, so I may have missed a vital part of the argument, however while I disagree with most of what Blacknight is saying, his assertion that atheism isn't really a culture I have to agree with (although I disagree with his reasoning behind it); there is only one belief, usually based on reason, that is common among atheists. Here is a link to what is generally my reasoning (though in the words of someone far more eloquent than I): http://www.thatthinline.com/brandx/atheism.shtml. In advance, I'd like to warn you not to read it if you are not willing to hear the other side argued. Also, there's some, um... (very mild) language that may offend you in case you can't handle that.

Here's a quote from it that's particularly relevant.

Atheism is a religion, too. It is a belief that god doesn't exist, just like theism is a belief that god does.
This is one of the worst, but most common misconceptions regarding atheism. Atheism, by definition, is a disbelief, not a belief. Sure, an atheist can say "I believe there is no god," but it is a different use of the word. (There are multiple uses for half the words in the English language.) Semantics is a fascinating little game debaters often play to make the other side appear to be stating something they're not. This is exactly that, and two can play at this game. Let me revisit my dragon example. If I were to ask a theist if they believed in dragons, they would probably respond, "No, I do not believe in dragons." At least I hope so anyway. Therefore, does this theist now belong to the "dragons do not exist" religion? Sounds ridiculous, doesn't it? So does a "god does not exist" religion. You know why? Because it's not one. And if you still don't believe me (there's that word again), let me put it this way- religions have to have certain characteristics to be considered a religion, correct? I think it would be a agreed that some of these characteristics include a belief in a higher power, miracles, the afterlife, supernatural occurrences, use of prayer, rituals, preachers/leaders, holy books and/or scriptures…I could go on and on. My point is atheism includes none of these, so how could it ever be considered a religion? Let's not kid ourselves.

[Matt Adams]

Just a few things that I would like people to think about...

First off, people have a wide variety of views and beliefs. In modern American culture, we hold the strong ideal that we all need to tolerate and respect the beliefs of others. I couldn't agree more. However, I would like to propose a few thoughts.

The first of which is this:
There can logically be only one absolute truth.

This will bother people, though it shouldn't, so I shall extrapolate:

First off, let's say there is a box on my desk. Inside this box, there is room for a coffee mug. I say, "I believe there is no coffee mug in the box" and my friend Sally says, "No, I believe there IS a coffee mug in the box!"

It doesn't matter what Sally or I believe. There either IS a coffee mug in the box, or there is not a coffee mug in the box. This fact is non-debateable.

The same goes along with God. Either there is a God, or God does not exist. The quantity of people with certain beliefs, or even the strength of their beliefs does not change the simple fact: there is an answer to the question, "Does God exist?"

To make every effort to discover the truth, is (in my opinion) not something that's merely a "good idea," but absolutely the most important question that each person must answer. Living your life for ideals that may sound good, but are not fundamentally true is much too big a gamble, given the weight of what is possibly an eternal destiny.

Essentially, each person must take a firm look at their beliefs and say, "How do I know that what I believe to be true, ACTUALLY IS TRUE?" You must be subjective.

aka...

Believing all people who don't believe in God are "angry indiviuals" or that everyone who believes in God must be "ignorent to reason" doesn't change the fact that both of these groups, by their obvious contradictions, can not both be correct. The mug can not be both IN BOX and NOT IN THE BOX. It's one or the other.

Furthermore, if you believe God exists, it is immensely important that you follow the most accurate truth you can find, since the vast majority of world's major religions give no reward for only deciding that God exists.

Being moderately well read on appologetics, I would really enjoy a chance to talk with any or all of you about any questions you may have.

AIM: Snag83
Email: justaskmatt@mjadams.endjunk.com

Matt

[KenWittlief]

Johnathan, I read through most of the BrandX website.

The author comes across as being angry, resentfull, arrogant and full of pride and self confidence - as if he is impressed by his own reasoning skills that have allowed him to figure out that religion is a 'bunch of fairy tales'.

But the error in his logic is this statement:

To assume that there is a god is to assume something that cannot be tested, measured, or discovered, which is how we, as humans, prove anything


thats totally wrong. The existance of God can be tested, measured and discovered - so many times throughout the bible God communicates to us, "seek the Lord and you will find Him"

the best detailed example of this is recorded on the night of the last supper in John (14:21)

Jesus came right out and said, If you love me, if you love God, then God WILL reveal Himself to you

its not that we assume God exists, then delude ourselves into believing its true - millions of people have had this personal experience of God making Himself known to us, revealing Himself to us, in a personal way. The result is that we know (not think or believe) that God is who He is, as described in the bible - but that knowledge is given to us in a way that I cant pass it on to you, or anyone else - you have to seek God for yourself and He will reveal Himself to you - only Him, not the rest of us.

The problem BrandX has is, he wants to determine if God is real or not, THEN he will decide what he wants his relationship with God to be - its a 'show me the money' thing - God, prove to me that you are real, then I will love you and follow you.

What is that? its arrogance pure and simple. People who think this way have turned their relationship with their creator around backwards - God doesnt owe us an explaintion, or proof, we owe Him proof that we love Him, that we want to follow Him, that we want to be like him.

If someone holds a gun to your head and says "do what I tell you", then the things we do have no merit, whether they are good or evil, because we are dong them against our will.

But if from our own freewill, we choose to do what is good and true, If you read the bible and say "this is the way I want to be", then you dont need the proof before you do what it says

but the amazing message the bible brings us, the good news is, that God does reveal Himself to those people, God wants to be a part of our lives here and now, on a daily basis - that is what christianity is all about

not pouring water on the head of a baby - Its about you finding your nature revealed in the bible, and God pouring out His Spirit and love on you

personally!

[wun]

I do beleve in God.
I beleve in him because of many things. Mostly the way He has changed my life, and the storys I have heard about how He has changed other peoples lives. It also feels good, because, when you talk to Him, it lets you feel like you have (at least some) controle over normaly un-controlible situations.

[KenWittlief]

I looked up the exact place where Jesus said God would reveal Himself to us, its John 14:21 - read it for yourself, and check different translations

but there is no way getting around what that whole chapter is saying - that God is going to interact with us individually and personally, that He will reveal Himself to us.

[KenWittlief]

So if you read the story you find Im not a big fan of religion although I am a big believer in God.

theres an old song that says "you gotta walk that lonesome highway by yourself"

in the end we must all work out our relationship with God for ourselves. It appears you have already realized this, and are off to a good start.

[jonathan lall]

The usual disclaimers apply here. I am a lot more neutral in this whole argument than it may seem from this post. I'm just playing Devil's Advocate, and making a few points toward the credibility of the Bible I can't leave out. A further disclaimer though, I haven't read the whole Bible (mainly parts of Genesis I've read in any detail). Feel free to put me in my place. I'm also getting a bit alarmed having read more of the previous posts as to how this is becoming a Christian debate... people are putting down other faiths without even realizing it. Anyway...



Johnathan, I read through most of the BrandX website.

The author comes across as being angry, resentfull, arrogant and full of pride and self confidence - as if he is impressed by his own reasoning skills that have allowed him to figure out that religion is a 'bunch of fairy tales'. I think he comes across as that because he's trying to keep an informal ambiance to his writing, and is clearly establishing his frame of reference. I think that's good. He provides his bias and gives examples, then makes his experiences in the whole affair, which led him to his conclusion, known. I think that in general, logic and theistic religion do not mix, but I'll elaborate on that in a moment.





But the error in his logic is this statement:
To assume that there is a god is to assume something that cannot be tested, measured, or discovered, which is how we, as humans, prove anything thats totally wrong. The existance of God can be tested, measured and discovered - so many times throughout the bible God communicates to us, "seek the Lord and you will find Him" I beg to differ. You are making the leap in logic to assume the Bible is some sort of factual account of anything (or rather of everything). Of course it contains factual events and information, but many of the events require a leap in imagination to even fathom. This is I suppose to be expected though. More importantly however, the Bible was written by a number of different people and has been edited heavily by early Christian bishops and the like, and then translated from Hebrew. How can one read it and assume it was the intended meaning then? Not only that, but many texts were declared apocryphal by early Christians, which, just like that, makes them not part of the Bible, whether induced by divine revelation or not. Why?

Well, I'll give you an example of why I can't take the Bible with the same faith that Ken does. One reason why is because the Old Testament contains evidence of multiple gods, and that early pagan Israelites decided to worship Yahweh, the God of Sinai alone (incidentally, God is known as Jehovah by some Christians, and as Yahweh by others, which shows the lack of credibility of the modern-day Bible even more). Thus, it is possible that all accounts of multiple gods in the Old Testament were altered out. This would explain why the Lord decides to wipe mankind from the Earth prior to the Flood, because he says basically that he screwed up; how is this an account of an omnipotent god? It would also explain why he physically goes down to Sodom and Gomorrah, and why he simply acts as a normal man sometimes; I find the example in Genesis where he physically wrestles with Jacob particularly interesting. Contrast this image of God with that of the kind and forgiving one in New Testament, and you're in a quandary. Why does God say, "Let us make man in our image" in Genesis? Is this a 'royal we' or something? The point is, taking the Bible as fact is a bad idea IMO. Whether or not it was originally a divine revelation and a perfect account of facts, it is very far from that now. How then can one take it as fact? Can you give me one example of a test I can perform to determine whether or not God exists? The meaning of that statement of BrandX's is analogous to what M. Krass said in this thread much earlier...
God was created (or exists, depending on your perspective) to be an infallible entity. That was a really smart move, really, because the moment something intangible and ethereal becomes omnipotent and infallible, there exists no logic that can defeat it. It is the ultimate justification for the most unimaginable and horrific of actions. It's carte blanche for people to exercise their will -- as you've said.



The problem BrandX has is, he wants to determine if God is real or not, THEN he will decide what he wants his relationship with God to be - its a 'show me the money' thing - God, prove to me that you are real, then I will love you and follow you. How is that a problem? I think it is a reasonable thing to do. God never provided anyone with any proof of his existence. In any case, it will never be proven whether or not God exists, because the concept of God prevents this from happening. Perhaps this is good, because diversity in religion is a great thing, if only a contributor to values and natural law. I have little interest in swaying the beliefs of any religion, but I do wish some people were more open to all sides. In any case, everything can be explained through a systematic use of logic and the scientific method, versus theism, which cannot explain everything. I can however leave you a(nother) quote...
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?Logic burns theism again. I can't think of a way around this.

[KenWittlief]

Johnathan, I think you are mixing up your concept of God, with God Himself.

If God exists then there is nothing that requires Him to be mysterious or etheral, or impossible to pin down and understand. There are many cases in the old and new testiment where God makes His presence, nature and character perfectly clear

and somehow you seem to have missed this, but as I pointed out before, Jesus said that He is willing and able to reveal Himself to us - and millions of people have experienced this personally.

What more proof do you need that someone exists, than to have them reveal themselve to you personally?

The problem that I pointed out with BrandX, wanting to see the proof first

this is similar to someone who is rich - win the lottery tomorrow and you will have hundreds of people showing up at your door - if you are wealthy and you meet a girl and fall in love with her, then how do you know if she is really in love with you, or only in love with your money?

one answer to most of your questions is freewill. Evil exists in our world, and God does not stamp it out because He gave us a freewill. If everytime someone did something evil, God immediately stepped in and prevented it, or punished them, then our freewill would be lost.

At some point in the future God will reveal Himself to the world, in all His might and glory, and every knee will bend and every person will acknowledge that He is our creator.

but for some reason, at this point in history, our freewill is intact, and we have the option to choose to follow God, or to go our own way and do whatever we want to.

which goes back to what I was trying to say earlier. If you know something is right, you dont have to be promised a reward for doing it, and you dont have to be threatened with punishment if you dont. And you dont need a higher being to perform signs and wonders in your presence to prove to you that its right and true. You do it only because it is the right thing to do. What you do of your genuine freewill reveals the deepest aspects of your character.

and for some reason, God respects that, and adds to it - as I said in my last post.

I could address all the questions and concerns in your post, but I think I have derailed this thread too much already - if you are really interested in those things, send me a PM and I will respond to your last post in more detail.

[jonathan lall]

I think you are mixing up your concept of God, with God Himself.
Come again, are you saying my view of God is wrong? :D See, that statement doesn't go with in the end we must all work out our relationship with God for ourselves.

[KenWittlief]

not really. If your concept of God is that Hes suppose to be infallible, but then He logically would not be able to allow evil to exists, or He should have know He would end up wiping out most of humanity with a global flood

and therefore God is self contradictory, and cant exist

well yes, the God you define in that manner cannot exist

but thats not who God is, thats only your definition or concept of God at this point in time.

That doenst mean you cant keep persuing God for the rest of your life, learning more and more about Him

I doubt you will be able to understand everything about Him in this lifetime

but what you do come to know and understand, that will be a reflection of your personal relationship with him, and yours alone.

[Tristan Lall]

The mug can not be both IN BOX and NOT IN THE BOX. It's one or the other.To extend this analogy, we have only to open the box to discover the existence or nonexistence of the cup. And so it is with the Christian god. Except that when dealing with deities, we're unfortunately unable to do anything of the sort--simply opening the box is not an option. We are therefore confronted with a problem: how to discover the contents of the box? We can weigh the box, shake the box, make ritual incantations all about the box, ask a so-called psychic for $650 an hour--but in the end, not one of these things will prove, one way or another that the mug exists. It is only supposition, based on inadequate evidence, since there are an infinite number of things that could cause the box to exhibit these properties. And so it is, once more, with God. The alleged miraculous acts could have been caused by any number of possible series of events--there is nothing to say that only the Christian god could have done these things--why not Horus or Hanuman? Can a believer in the god of the Jews, Christians and Muslims dispute their existence (without hypocrisy), and if so, how?
But the error in his logic is this statement:
To assume that there is a god is to assume something that cannot be tested, measured, or discovered, which is how we, as humans, prove anythingthats totally wrong. The existance of God can be tested, measured and discovered - so many times throughout the bible God communicates to us, "seek the Lord and you will find Him"but there is no way getting around what that whole chapter is saying - that God is going to interact with us individually and personally, that He will reveal Himself to us.How exactly, can an impartial non-believer measure, test and discover the word of God, revealed "individually and personally", when God doesn't want to speak to those without Christian faith? (It is absurd to try to offer proofs that can only be known to a partial observer!) And in any case, even if we were to assume that the Bible was the unvarnished Truth of God, which version of the Bible would we consult? The King James? The New American? The original Greek and Aramaic? Each version of the Bible differs on numerous counts, and we cannot say with any sort of certainty, which of these represents the truth, if any. But, let us once again make the assumption that we have found a version of the Bible that is consistent with the spirit and intent of the original versions (only in English, so it is comprehensible). How can we tell that it isn't just the writings of people, uninfluenced by God?

As it happens, there exist entire religions that are provably based on the writings of humans. Scientology (http://www.xenu.net) (see here (http://www.rickross.com/reference/scientology/scien413.html) for further details), for instance. Of course, we can also prove that it is the work of a less-than-half-decent science-fiction author (L. Ron Hubbard), and is intended solely to decieve and swindle its unwitting believers, but that's beside the point. It is not inconceivable that Christianity (rather, ancient Judaism) could have had its roots in the vision of a man (or men), rather than a god.

But don't get me wrong here--I'm not saying that Christianity is a swindle on the order of L. Ron's monstrosity. In fact, it holds certain crucial moral principles rather dear: "Thou shalt not kill", "Thou shalt not steal", and others (and not just the commandments). What strikes me as odd, is that some individuals believe that it requires a god to make these morals have any value! No, this is not the case! Speaking pragmatically, these sorts of regulations make society function in an orderly fashion--they are necessary to the operation of society, irrespective of the existence of gods. And indeed in many cultures, legal systems, and yes, religions too, these same moral tenets are held equally inviolable, and ensure that the society can exist without self-destructing.

Is it too hard to consider, therefore, that at some point, people felt that these morals were being ignored, and decided to construct, or more likely modify a cosmological framework, to impress upon others the value of obeying? (The Jesuits modified native American legends to suit their purposes--why do we say that the same did not occur between ancient Jews and pagans?) While the message might have been accompanied by a threatening "don't do evil or my god will smite you (or I'll do it in his name)", the message itself was "uphold these moral values". Take the supernatural out of the equation, and the morality remains, valid as ever, and in no way diminished.

The morality is diminished, however, by people of all religions who display hatred toward nonbelievers, or attempt vainly to convert people to their god's cause. Pat Robertson and Osama bin Laden are both examples of this phenomenon (though for vastly different reasons). They disseminate and amplify the hatred, the ill will and the stupidity that came about because they remembered their religions, and forgot their morality.

On a related note, religions themselves are known to abandon morality for profit, or greater numbers of followers, or other less-than-holy causes. The Catholic church at the time preceding the Reformation was guilty of ignoring morality, to line its coffers with the indulgences of the devout commonfolk, who would pay to have their sins confessed away. Militant Islamic (and other) sects regularly advocate military and paramilitary attacks in the name of Allah (or God, as the Christians know him). Israel steals land from Palestinians, and drives them from their homes, all the while trumpeting its Jewish heritage. What have these travesties got to do with the simple need, centuries ago, to unite warring tribes under a common moral framework? These three religions are all descended from the same roots, but they have fought for centuries amongst themselves, and with others, each in the name of God. They have forgotten that they "shalt not kill", and they have instead entrenched themselves in dogma, deceit and outright carnage.

Even if we step back and recognize the fact that not all groups (indeed the majority) of Christians, Muslims and Jews believe in the use of violence, we can still question their devotion to the truth. It all comes back to this truth of which we are so concerned, because to do the moral thing, and to know the truth--these things often go hand-in-hand. I question the devotion to truth of any religion that actively attempts to persuade people that the mythologies of the past are every bit as credible as science, while offering but a miniscule fraction of the evidence that would be required to make a scientific claim. If this foundation exists to inspire and recognize the pursuit of science and technology, why do some of us insist on promoting theology instead?

We can say that Jesus or YHWH or Isis (not the bastardized, westernized version!) talks to us, and is with us every step of the way--but without proof, what is that but comforting, yet hollow talk? I object to the supposition that any gods exist, because there is not a shred of evidence to prove that any gods have done anything. (Are there things that you and I cannot explain? Yes, and perhaps these things may forever remain inexplicable--but if you can attribute these things to God, I can attribute them to little green men, or another god, or parlour tricks and psychological chicanery. Or I can offer no explanation at all.)

I notice now, that Ken has posted the following:
which goes back to what I was trying to say earlier. If you know something is right, you dont have to be promised a reward for doing it, and you dont have to be threatened with punishment if you dont. And you dont need a higher being to perform signs and wonders in your presence to prove to you that its right and true. You do it only because it is the right thing to do. What you do of your genuine freewill reveals the deepest aspects of your character.True enough--and you don't need a deity to do these things. Just do them out of your own morality, and be doubly content that you have done good, and that you have not invoked the supernatural in matters where its existence has not been established.

Finally, I should point out that that BrandX fellow has some interesting points, if you can excuse his occasional bad taste. He's definitely worth a critical read--for Christians and others alike.

[Tristan Lall]

By the way, I'm not tag-teaming you with my brother. He's as surprised as anyone that I showed up....

And by the way, that Epicurus mind-bender is rather elegant. I'd really like to see someone explain that away, without resorting to attacking poor Epicurus, or redefining omnipotent like Thomas Aquinas tried to do.

[KenWittlief]

Tristan

I think your concept of what God is trying to accomplish with us, or the way that He is interacting with us, is not what God is actually doing.

Your post conveys a sense of what you think God must do, if He is going to be fair - that He must reveal Himself to the believer and the non-believer, He must provide proof to everyone, because thats what you want Him to do

or that is your concept of fairness.

If God is only revealing Himself to some people, and not to nonbelievers, then revealing Himself is not His goal at this time - something else is going on. And He is not giving the believers the ability to prove His existance to the nonbelievers. He is retaining that ability to Himself.

As for the bible, this collection of documents contains 66 books, written by 40 authors over a period of thousands of years, but when you study it you discover it is an integrated message system, that could only have originated from outside our time domain.

We know for certain that the entire bible was not written by one group of people at the same time. The old testiment was originally written in hebrew, and was translated into greek around 250 BC. The new testiment was most likely originally written in greek (which was the most precise and well documented language in human history).

So we know it wasnt all written at once. But the reason I say its an integrated message system is, you can see the same message from page one to the end. Every book conveys a consistant message of the nature of God, and His relationship to us.

And its not about morality. Its not about right and wrong (as you pointed out, we somehow inherently know whats right and wrong for the most part).

When you study the bible as a whole, one message comes through: reconciliation. Its a common misconception that christainity teaches that if you do good things, you will goto heaven, and if you do bad things, you will goto the other place.

The bible teaches that man rebelled against his creator, had a falling out

and that God would rather die than to live without us - that He provided a way for us to be reconciled to Him - not something we have to earn, not something we have to mediate and pray for, or pay money for, or work and toil for - that reconciliation is offered to us as a priceless gift - free to us, but infinitely valuable.

That is the difference between the judeo/christain understanding of God, and all the other religions of the world. All the other religions say you have to work or be moral, or be good, or sacrifice yourself, or kill your way into heaven.

It totally amazes me how much our society has lost sight of what Jesus really came here for - so we could be reconciled to Him. Nothing else!

back to your question of which version or translation of the bible is the correct one? I believe the original texts were written by men on whom God had poured out His Spirit, so they would communicate exactly what He wanted us to know. There may be errors that have crept in as the originals were hand copied, and there are difficulties in translating from one language to another.

But we have many ancient manuscripts of all 66 books, and its not hard for a person to learn the original languages and study them. That use to be a major part of what ministers did - learned to read greek and hebrew, studied the scriptures in their original languages - this is how the great strides in understanding have been brought out, taking christianity out of the dark ages to where it is today.

for some reason in the last 30 years or so, many regular people have taken it on themselves to study the bible in earnest, not leaving it to their pastor or minister to study it for them and give them the highlights. People who do this, and dont go beyond the english translations often run into difficulties - but if you study the bible in earnest, study the works of scholars and others who have taken the time to learn the original languages

the wealth of insight and understanding that opens up to you is well worth the time and energy.

As for your question, why are we talking about religion on a science and technology forum? I didnt start this thread - it is in the off topic section - and for many people their relationship with their creator is more important that their career. But dont jump to the conclusion that science and the bible are somehow at odds. Modern science sprang up only in europe, in a society that was based on christianity (with many difficulties, and a somewhat corrupt leadership)

but even still, read the writings of Newton, or Pascal, or any of the people who brought about the existance of what we call the scientific method. They were all christians. Their reason for studying science was to better understand the one who created the universe. Its only been in the last 150 years or so, that some scientist have become arrogant, thinking they have eliminated the need for God, or have somehow proven that the bible is full of errors, and creating a skewed form of science where theorys that can never be proven by direct observation are now accepted as scientific fact (when in reality, these 'facts' require more faith than all the religions put together).

[KenWittlief]

one thing I missed. When I said we should do the right thing, without God needing to beat us over the head to do it

the right thing I am referring to is to seek out our creator, to seek to be reconciled to God

not that we should all run around and be good and moral all the time. If you are honest with yourself, you will discover that although we know inside what we should do, very often we do just the opposite

its only when we have established that relationship with our creator, and He pours out His Spirit and love on us, and through us, that peoples lives are really turned around, and that type of unconditional love pours out from us.

[KenWittlief]

And by the way, that Epicurus mind-bender is rather elegant. I'd really like to see someone explain that away, without resorting to attacking poor Epicurus, or redefining omnipotent like Thomas Aquinas tried to do.


Its simple - Ive already addressed this

God is not malevolent (having, showing, or arising from intense, often vicious ill will, spite, or hatred)

God has given us a freewill. If God erased evil, then we would no longer have a freewill, because we would no longer be able to do anything wrong.

We were not created to be robots. we were given the ability to choose between good and evil

and in the end, to choose to seek our creator, or to go our own way.

[Matt Adams]

The statements claimed within are based on my faith as a follower of Jesus Christ. They are representative of myself only. I feel blessed to live in a country where topics of this sort can be spoken in an open environment without fear of persecution or censorship. I hope that we all are able to appreciate that...

I would also like to preface this by saying that I do not attack Tristan's beliefs, but simply try to give answers to many of the questions from the perspective of a follower of Christ. I absolutely have the utmost respect for Tristan's opinions and thoughts.

To extend this analogy, we have only to open the box to discover the existence or nonexistence of the cup. And so it is with the Christian god. Except that when dealing with deities, we're unfortunately unable to do anything of the sort--simply opening the box is not an option. We are therefore confronted with a problem: how to discover the contents of the box?
<SNIP>
Can a believer in the god of the Jews, Christians and Muslims dispute their existence (without hypocrisy), and if so, how?As I’m sure that you know Tristen, there is absolute no way to prove with 100% certainty that God does or does not exist. However, to assume that since one can't determine with 100% fact that God does exist, doesn't make the case that God does not exist any stronger.
I think when one subjectively weighs the evidence for both sides, the case for Christianity is among the strongest explainations of the truth, for a number of different reasons.
I’d like to make a few points on your comments below, and follow up with other evidence to support the evidence for Christ in a seperate post.

How exactly, can an impartial non-believer measure, test and discover the word of God, revealed "individually and personally", when God doesn't want to speak to those without Christian faith? (It is absurd to try to offer proofs that can only be known to a partial observer!) This is an excellent point! If God didn’t wish for non-Christians to know him, it would be impossible for non-believers to do so. But I think it’s important to realize God’s view: He loves each and every person, and more than anything in the world he wants to form a relationship with them. However, this choice is not up to God, it is up to each person. It’s stated clearly:

Jeremiah 29:13
You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart

And in any case, even if we were to assume that the Bible was the unvarnished Truth of God, which version of the Bible would we consult? The King James? The New American? The original Greek and Aramaic? Each version of the Bible differs on numerous counts, and we cannot say with any sort of certainty, which of these represents the truth, if any. I find this argument proposed by many people, and it most often exagerated immensely. If one looks at the Bible and it’s translations, there is amazing uniformity. The fundamental meanings are all there, and all rooted in the truth. Please give some examples if you have some concerns, and I’d love to address them. Examples will help both sides.

But, let us once again make the assumption that we have found a version of the Bible that is consistent with the spirit and intent of the original versions (only in English, so it is comprehensible). How can we tell that it isn't just the writings of people, uninfluenced by God?Well, one ought to take a look at what these people wrote. For instance, the Gospels; Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were all written by people who walked and spoke with Jesus Christ, all within a generation of His death. I would say that these people, assuming that Christ is the son of God, probably had some sort of influence… namely having spoken with Jesus Himself! If one looks at Paul, also a writer of many books in the New Testament, you’ll see that he was actually a fierce non-believer in Jesus, and actually committed what would probably be considered war-crimes against Christians until Jesus appeared to him, upon which he was a immense believer who spent his life, and ultimately DIED while trying to spread the Gospel. Thought: Why would Paul spend part of his life in prision, and ultimately die for a lie?

As it happens, there exist entire religions that are provably based on the writings of humans. Scientology (see here for further details), for instance. Of course, we can also prove that it is the work of a less-than-half-decent science-fiction author (L. Ron Hubbard), and is intended solely to decieve and swindle its unwitting believers, but that's beside the point. Just because it’s claimed to be a true doesn’t mean it is... we’re back to the mug.

It is not inconceivable that Christianity (rather, ancient Judaism) could have had its roots in the vision of a man (or men), rather than a god.I think that the immense amount of prophecies that were proclaimed prior to the coming the Christ, that were fulfilled by Jesus makes the Old Testament, as a whole, an immensely reliable historical source. There are documents that were written centuaries before the coming of Christ with prophecies regarding his coming, all of which were fufilled.

But don't get me wrong here--I'm not saying that Christianity is a swindle on the order of L. Ron's monstrosity. In fact, it holds certain crucial moral principles rather dear: "Thou shalt not kill", "Thou shalt not steal", and others (and not just the commandments). What strikes me as odd, is that some individuals believe that it requires a god to make these morals have any value! No, this is not the case! Speaking pragmatically, these sorts of regulations make society function in an orderly fashion--they are necessary to the operation of society, irrespective of the existence of gods. And indeed in many cultures, legal systems, and yes, religions too, these same moral tenets are held equally inviolable, and ensure that the society can exist without self-destructing.Ahh… objective moral values.

Morals are not relative. If you think that morals vary from society to society... that sometimes things could possibly be "right to some, and wrong to others," then you must also accepting the following scenario:

Since all values are relative, ultimately, nothing is “right” or “wrong.”

However, let’s get right to it: The holocaust, where millions of people were executed in a method nothing less then absolute genocide. Could anyone make the arguement that perhaps nothing was wrong with that?

If you believe in a relative value system… then absolutely nothing wrong occurred during the holocaust and you should quit being so judging of the nazis: they were just doing what they believed to be right, and it was just human nature taking it’s course. We're all too human to believe that “the holocaust might have been okay.” Some things, such as murdering the innocent, rape, torture, theft, are all absolutely morally wrong, not merely a “bad idea.”

<SNIP>
On a related note, religions themselves are known to abandon morality for profit, or greater numbers of followers, or other less-than-holy causes. The Catholic church at the time preceding the Reformation was guilty of ignoring morality, to line its coffers with the indulgences of the devout commonfolk, who would pay to have their sins confessed away.
<SNIP>
These three religions are all descended from the same roots, but they have fought for centuries amongst themselves, and with others, each in the name of God. They have forgotten that they "shalt not kill", and they have instead entrenched themselves in dogma, deceit and outright carnage.
Even if we step back and recognize the fact that not all groups (indeed the majority) of Christians, Muslims and Jews believe in the use of violence, we can still question their devotion to the truth. It all comes back to this truth of which we are so concerned, because to do the moral thing, and to know the truth--these things often go hand-in-hand.People claiming to be followers of Christianity who commit hypocritical acts have absolutely ZERO bearing on the historical evidence relating to the existence and divinity of Jesus Christ and the Christian faith. Arguments that members of a religion committed hypocritical acts do not support or diminish the mutually exclusive fundamentals of the belief system they have. If I say I’m a member of FIRST and cheat at the game, that doesn’t mean that FIRST doesn’t stand for and promote ideals of gracious professionalism. Laws and truths, by their definition, are steadfast.
I question the devotion to truth of any religion that actively attempts to persuade people that the mythologies of the past are every bit as credible as science, while offering but a miniscule fraction of the evidence that would be required to make a scientific claim.
<SNIP>
(Are there things that you and I cannot explain? Yes, and perhaps these things may forever remain inexplicable--but if you can attribute these things to God, I can attribute them to little green men, or another god, or parlour tricks and psychological chicanery. Or I can offer no explanation at all.)I plan on making a strong historical claim in a future post. I wished to address your previous comments first. However, there is a distinct difference between little green men and that of a historical person, such as Jesus. People have not only claimed to see a historical Jesus, but the wrote about him, including sources outside the Bible. Not only did the write, they suffered while trying to proclaim what they saw to all the nations. Many of the disciples of Christ not only went around and “talked the talk” but the were killed for proclaiming the truth that they saw within their lifetimes. I can't imagine any person who would you die for a lie, something that you didn’t truly see. I find it much harder to believe that so many who saw and knew Jesus would do the same. They had nothing to gain by spreading a false truth; on the contrary, they had absolutely everything to lose: their lives

There is evidence out there to support a case for Christianity, and it is very strong. Science and religion need not contradict each other, and I see no reason why the understanding by humans about how the world and universe interacts seemingly explains away God. Simply understanding scientific principals doesn’t diminish that these principles had to be set, a groundwork and foundation had to be laid down.

I hope that I was able to address some questions and concerns. Look for a future post.

Matt

[jonathan lall]

I was skimming (and I mean skimming) and came across this
That is the difference between the judeo/christain understanding of God, and all the other religions of the world. All the other religions say you have to work or be moral, or be good, or sacrifice yourself, or kill your way into heaven. I'll edit this post later when I get time to respond to the whole thing. This particular quote though I am really upset about... are you sure that's what you meant? BRB...

uhh, Tristan's a male name

[D.J. Fluck]

Honestly, with the utmost respect:

Most of the posts here have all made good points from both sides of the argument, but as of late I really haven't seen too much except repeating yourselves or different people posting the same stuff that someone else posted a few pages earlier. Honestly (no matter what you think), I don’t think any of you will be convincing anyone through this thread to change their minds on this subject no matter how well the argument. Brandon, I request that you close this thread and let this matter drop before it offends somebody (which it already has, and it’s not me for the record).

-D.J.

[KyleGilbert45]

I second DJ's motion to have this thread closed.

[jonathan lall]

IMO this has stayed civil and isn't really showing any signs of going sour. The majority of people participating in this discussion are raising good points all around and I enjoy hearing about other people's beliefs... I think there's much more to be said before this thread grinds to a halt naturally. I was planning on posting something when I got time later this week however if this is really getting under the skin of someone, sure Brandon, do what's necessary.

[Matt Adams]

I don't believe in pre-emptive strikes against the first ammendment... It's been civil. If you don't want to read it, it's always a choice.

My two cents.

Matt

[Madison]

I don't believe in pre-emptive strikes against the first ammendment... It's been civil. If you don't want to read it, it's always a choice.

My two cents.

Matt

It's not a pre-emptive strike against anything. ChiefDelphi owns and operates this website and they can do whatever they'd like with it. You have no rights here.

[FotoPlasma]

It's not a pre-emptive strike against anything. ChiefDelphi owns and operates this website and they can do whatever they'd like with it. You have no rights here.
Hey! That's my line!

:p

[Matt Adams]

It's not a pre-emptive strike against anything. ChiefDelphi owns and operates this website and they can do whatever they'd like with it. You have no rights here.I agree, I'm just saying that regardless of who owns this site... stopping people from talking because somebody MIGHT get offended... isn't that a bit much? Are we so afriad that during a conversation someone might be offended that it should supercede perhaps the chance for someone to expand their mind?

I wasn't refering to "rights" as much as what IS right, though I admittedly used the 1st amendment to make the point.

Matt

[FotoPlasma]

I agree, I'm just saying that regardless of who owns this site... stopping people from talking because somebody MIGHT get offended... isn't that a bit much? Are we so afriad that during a conversation someone might be offended that it should supercede perhaps the chance for someone to expand their mind?
....
Matt
Television. I rest my case.

[Matt Adams]

Television. I rest my case.
Shouldn't we expect this place to be something better?

I think so.

Matt

[KyleGilbert45]

I'm now thinking this really should be closed. If you'd like to keep it open it's probably not a good idea to turn it into a chat.

[KenWittlief]

I think this thread has merit if it stays on its original subject, allowing people to express their belief on whether or not there is a God.

I have resisted the questions and tempation to take the discussion to the next question (how do you know, or why do you believe what you believe)

but people keep bringing up interesting questions - which makes it difficult to not explain how you have come to your postion, or why.

Religion is one of those subjects that everyone has deep feelings about - and Christianity, once you delve below the surface, is both comforting and disturbing

so I agree, yes - if we go into this discussion too deeply, people will be disturbed (or offended)

the moderators of CD can choose to either avoid the risk altogether, and close the thread, or we can step back, and keep this on the surface - allowing people to address the original subject of this thread (the poll).

If the quote from my post about christianity being different from all other religions is what some people are upset about - Im not sure what aspect of that you 'hope I didnt mean' - so let me clarify. Christianity is about being reconciled to your creator - this was made possible by the free gift that Jesus offers us, its not something you can earn by being a good person, you cant earn it by doing anything, its a gift - already paid in full

and christianity IS the only faith that teaches this - others teach you must be good, the good in your life must outweigh the bad, you must work off your bad karma, you must meditate and ascend to a higher state of conscienceness, you must do noble things - some pagan religions had human sacrific as part of their rituals - Im not saying this to put down or offend other religions - its a noble thing to want to earn your way, to be moral

but the difference with christianty is, you dont have to. The debt has already been paid, so you dont have to pay it again - that should be good news, not something that offends or disturbs.

I know the politically correct thing to say these days is that all religions lead to God, all roads lead to the same place - but clearly christianity is a different path - trying to take the depth out of the subject of religion by saying that, in the end, all religions are the same anyway, really is not honest - its only an attempt to avoid the controversy, to smooth things over and avoid the real issues.

people are always passionate and emotional about their deepest held beliefs - this is true in science as well as religion - If this were a medical forum and a Dr posted his findings that accupuncture does not cure cancer, but radiation treatment and chemotherapy can stop some forms of cancer - we would not be inclinded to tell him to stop talking that way, because people who pratice accupuncture are going to be offended

and we certainly would not assert that all forms of medical treatment cure cancer - if we did that, then people would die who could have been treated and saved.

[KenWittlief]

there is one other reason to keep this thread open.

FIRST is about WHAT we do with our lives, and HOW we do engineering and science things

but this thread is partly about WHY we choose to do those things

and I think its very interesting, that here on a science and technology forum, you scroll up to the top of the page, and see that 55% of us believe in God

if nothing else, this thread shows that religion and science are not incompatible ways of life.

[Joe Matt]

That's the problem, these things have been discussed OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN. It's like the PC vs. Mac debates, the Battlebots & Robot Wars threads, and MANY OTHER threads that have been done to death. These threads don't turn out good at all. People's feelings are hurt, they leave, teams are hurt, nothing good comes from a thread like this that's 3 pages long. I think every opinoin has been discussed already and I think that locking the thread is the only way for this to end on a high note.