NationStates Jolt Archive

This message is for the religious people of the world.

Remember when, as a little kid, you lost your first tooth? Your parents told you about the tooth fairy, and gave you money so you would't be scared about something you didn't understand. And during Christmas, you were told about Santa Clause, and that he flew around the world every Christmas Eve delivering presents to all the little boys and girls. But only the ones who behaved got presents. These two stories solved problems whithout a real explanation. Then came the subject of death. "What happens when we die?"
"We go to a WONDERFUL place in the clouds where nothing bad can happen and everyone is happy for all of eternity."

But this story was different. It started millions of years ago when people wanted to explain something like "Why is the sky blue?" and they decided that someone must have created us. The simple fact is this: a little white lie is fine, unless it starts wars. Almost every one of history's wars was started because people just didn't understand.


By the way, the sky is blue because the air molecules in the atmosphere bend the sun's light so that only the blue light reaches your eyes.

What does it matter to you what religious people believe? You can say they're ignorant, and they can say you're ignorant. My view, is they're both right. There's no need to spend time trying to denounce eachother, why can't the two groups work together? Besides, my personal opinion is, that in the end, you have a chance with any religion and you have no chance of savior, if that's real, with athetism.

I'm just trying to get people to realize what religion has caused, and partialy how ludacris it is. I would love it if religions could work together, but I know they won't. Not to mention, you don't see athiests burning crosses on people's lawns, or sacraficing millions over a 2000-year dead carpenter, do you?

No, but I've also seen a black person stealing a tv once, does that mean all black people are bad? I've seen radical Americans, does that mean all Americans are bad? I've seen ignorant people, does that mean all people are ignorant?

Edit: You can't condemn a whole people because of the actions of a few.

Mabye it's better when dying, to belive you are going to a better place than facing the fact that you will be put in a box and burried. Or put in a owen. But still, you can't claim that religions are 100 % problem free.

Edit: You can't condemn a whole people because of the actions of a few.

So true...

Mabye it's better when dying, to belive you are going to a better place than facing the fact that you will be put in a box and burried. Or put in a owen. But still, you can't claim that religions are 100 % problem free.

You can't claim anything is problem free.

Ever heard of people like Mother Theresa? Ever heard of people who believe it is their mission from God to help others and to make the world a better place? You don't expound upon them, do you.

And I agree with Kelmak, with religon you have a chance (any religon). Without it, you have NONE.

Besides, those who have declared war in the name of God are heretics...

Ever heard of people like Mother Theresa? Ever heard of people who believe it is their mission from God to help others and to make the world a better place? You don't expound upon them, do you.

And I agree with Kelmak, with religon you have a chance (any religon). Without it, you have NONE.

Besides, those who have declared war in the name of God are heretics...


Exactly.

My question is: how could there not be a God?

People have done research, and they've found more evidence for Christ's resurrection than that Julius Ceasar lived.

Well look when you die if you believe that god created us in his likeness then you should know we will live with him again and be happy.

My question is: how could there not be a God?

People have done research, and they've found more evidence for Christ's resurrection than that Julius Ceasar lived.

Really? I never knew that. I always thought there just an assload of proof that Jesus excisted, mind showing me some of the resurection proof? That could be interesting.

Sure.

-Eyewitnesses
-Jesus appeared to people after his resurrection. Mary, the Apostles, others.

-Documentation
-4 pieces of work
-1 of those pieces written by a historian

-"Crime scene"
-The tomb was empty. The soldiers had sealed it with a huge stone that was impossible to move.

Sorry, I intended to reply a while ago, but my comp crashed.

"How could there not be a god?"

Well, there's multiverse theory, quantum machanics, and the Ceasar thing, that's just stupid, man. It's fairly obvious that Jesus did exist, but there isn't any evidence, and definately no proof, that he "rose again from the dead"

I would also like to point out that, although those people may have been just bad apples, religion was the worm.

Ummmmm.....
Are you telling me that your "proof" it what was written down in the bible?? By the way, none of the apostles wrote anything down in the bible. The Gospels were written hundreds of years later.

The worm? wow.... Well, being black is the worm for stealing things, being white is the worm for being raciast, being a minorty is the worm for being stupid...

Um, Kelmak? According to you, you can say something is perfect. THE PURPOSE OF YOUR RELIGION!!! Get your facts straight

Matthew and John were apostles, and they wrote the books that bear their name. These books were recorded history. Even if you don't take them to be absolute truth, you can consider them historical documents.

Matthew and John were apostles, and they wrote the books that bear their name. These books were recorded history. Even if you don't take them to be absolute truth, you can consider them historical documents.

I'm just trying to get people to realize what religion has caused, and partialy how ludacris it is. I would love it if religions could work together, but I know they won't. Not to mention, you don't see athiests burning crosses on people's lawns, or sacraficing millions over a 2000-year dead carpenter, do you?

But your premise is flawed. People start wars and find ways to justify them afterwards. A very good example of that is currently being played out with the US action in Iraq. Throughout history, mankind has been cruel to one another for many reasons, religion being only one of them (although a popular one because there's no real test for validity). It is just as simplistic to think that, without religion, there would be no more war or strife or cruelty. Until mankind changes it's perceptions, blaming religion for war is simply a band-aid solution like the tooth fairy or Santa Claus.

This message is for the religious people of the world.

Do you believe that you are reaching all the "religious" people of the world? Do you see yourself as one enlightening the masses?

Remember when, as a little kid, you lost your first tooth? Your parents told you about the tooth fairy, and gave you money so you would't be scared about something you didn't understand. And during Christmas, you were told about Santa Clause, and that he flew around the world every Christmas Eve delivering presents to all the little boys and girls. But only the ones who behaved got presents. These two stories solved problems whithout a real explanation. Then came the subject of death. "What happens when we die?"
"We go to a WONDERFUL place in the clouds where nothing bad can happen and everyone is happy for all of eternity."

So you think this "WONDERFUL place in the clouds" is the essential point in religion? Do you think it is the essential point in Christianity?

But this story was different. It started millions of years ago when people wanted to explain something like "Why is the sky blue?" and they decided that someone must have created us. The simple fact is this: a little white lie is fine, unless it starts wars. Almost every one of history's wars was started because people just didn't understand.

Do you believe that all wars are started for religious reasons?

By the way, the sky is blue because the air molecules in the atmosphere bend the sun's light so that only the blue light reaches your eyes.

Do you believe that "religious" people are ignorant of science?

how could u be a heretic if u claim war in the name of God, you guys might think its not true, but in the Bible God tells the Israelites to take over cities w/ sinful ppl in them
if we left everything alone, imagine what kind of world it would be today, im not saying what the KKK did is right, im just saying that ur not a heretic if u fight for God
btw, a religion is a belief, Christianity, Islam, Atheism and others are all religions, no one in the world is w/o a religion, believing in nothing, is believing in all but something

Kashun, get your facts straight. There is undeniable proof that Luke wrote Luke and John wrote John. Also, my point is that there's no purpose for you to be attacking Religion as not being perfect. Nothing is. I said that earlier, did ya read that or not?

how could u be a heretic if u claim war in the name of God, you guys might think its not true, but in the Bible God tells the Israelites to take over cities w/ sinful ppl in them
if we left everything alone, imagine what kind of world it would be today, im not saying what the KKK did is right, im just saying that ur not a heretic if u fight for God

Right, I guess, I forgot about that, and Sodom and Gamora. But, i don't think that everyone who says they're fighting for God is actually telling the truth...

Have I not already explained that I am not racist in any way? I live in the country in the middle of a bunch of racist hicks that claim it is in the name of God. And I hate it. You do realze the KKK are protestant?

Those weren't the Mathew and John mentioned as apostles. Look it up. There weren't any eyewitnesses, or any living people from that time period, for that matter, when the gospels were written. Those are stories passed on for at least a couple hundred years.

yes, i agree, some ppl just find ways for war, some ppl that live in our country, not mentioning any names there

Have I not already explained that I am not racist in any way? I live in the country in the middle of a bunch of racist hicks that claim it is in the name of God. And I hate it. You do realze the KKK are protestant?

Those weren't the Mathew and John mentioned as apostles. Look it up. There weren't any eyewitnesses, or any living people from that time period, for that matter, when the gospels were written. Those are stories passed on for at least a couple hundred years.

You are predijuce if you attack a whole group of people for the actions of the few. I'm a protestant too, so what? Does that mean I'm in the KKK? Also, I said Luke and John, and they did right their respective books, and they also wrote most of the new testiment. You look up your shiz first.

the KKK had the intention of doing the right thing, they got out of control and became hugely infamous, everyone makes a mistake, its not what the outcome of ur mistake is, its how u react to ur mistake and fix it, its human nature to pursue ur own idea because no one wants to be wrong, the Supreme Court had to intervene w/ that issue

and yes, the 4 apostles were the disciples of Jesus, they saw what he did, 3 of them are about the same time period, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, John described his own part of Jesus' life, u better study more about what ur talking about

ACtually, Mathew was written anonomously, but they believe it was Matt, as well as Mark too, and actually, there's some proof that Luke wrote Mark too.

it doesnt matter who wrote it, they wrote it through God, it describes the same thing through different words, its like having 3 witnesses of a car crash, when the police officer asks them what they saw, it wont be the exact same i guarantee u

Berkylvania, name a war that hasn't started because of religious differences.

Mro
When I said the WONDERFUL place in the clouds thing, I was simply refering to religion. I go to a Catholic school, man. I know what I'm talking about. I do believe almost all wars started because of religious differences.
As for the last question: You bet.

Kelmak
Luke wasn't an Apostle. Read the Bible. AS I SAID BEFORE, according to you, GOD IS PERFECT. You sound like my religion book. Always contradicting yourself...
I am not racist. However, I do have one predudice. PEOPLE WHO IGNORE FACTS THROWN AT THEM WITH A CATAPULT

Good point was for the fellow above you. God is perfect, religion is not, as religion is a man's device. Also, I know! Ignorant white people just bother the hell out of me. Thirdly, it doesn't matter if Luke was an apostle or not, just like it doesn't matter if you're a Senator or not. You can still view Politics or what not.

EDIT: KAshun, a few wars that weren't caused by religion: World War one was caused by an assisanation, Gulf war was caused by an invasion of Kuwiat, no religion involved at all, Civil War was caused by States rights, Revolutionary War was caused by sickness of opresson.

Do you need more?

I know my facts. I'm asking you to check them. Try Google.

Berkylvania, name a war that hasn't started because of religious differences.

Mro
When I said the WONDERFUL place in the clouds thing, I was simply refering to religion. I go to a Catholic school, man. I know what I'm talking about. I do believe almost all wars started because of religious differences.
As for the last question: You bet.

Kelmak
Luke wasn't an Apostle. Read the Bible. AS I SAID BEFORE, according to you, GOD IS PERFECT. You sound like my religion book. Always contradicting yourself...
I am not racist. However, I do have one predudice. PEOPLE WHO IGNORE FACTS THROWN AT THEM WITH A CATAPULT

Vietnam, Iraq, WWI, WWII, the American Revolution. I could go on.

a war not started on religion could be the war on terror, one we are in right now, it developed out of the hatred of man for another, if u think that was jihad, then take the vietnam war, communism is not a religion

kashun, Luke might have not been a disciple of the 12, i probably gotta check that again, but he was definitely an apostle, an apostle or disciple is a follower, Paul was an apostle, he came way after Jesus died and rose again :o

Well, I'm not going to comment on Vietnam, I don't know much about it. You may be right. As for the others.
Iraq: If you sacrafice yourself killing nonbelievers, you go straight to heaven. That is a believe of the followers of Osama Bin Laden.
WWI and WWII. Hitler, a Catholic, had a prejudice against Jews, and he thought they were inferior.
The American Revolution. We fought for many freedoms, one of them, a main one, religious freedom from the Church of England. Also why the pilgrims came and brought loads of diseases to the Natives.
Religion wasn't the main reason in this one, but it was a largely contributing factor.

Not all religions = Christianity

Luke wasn't one of the 12, but he was a historian. He also followed the apostle Paul.

Well, I'm not going to comment on Vietnam, I don't know much about it. You may be right. As for the others.
Iraq: If you sacrafice yourself killing nonbelievers, you go straight to heaven. That is a believe of the followers of Osama Bin Laden.
WWI and WWII. Hitler, a Catholic, had a prejudice against Jews, and he thought they were inferior.
The American Revolution. We fought for many freedoms, one of them, a main one, religious freedom from the Church of England. Also why the pilgrims came and brought loads of diseases to the Natives.
Religion wasn't the main reason in this one, but it was a largely contributing factor.

Newsflash on WW1... Hitler wasn't in charge for that! Gasp! It caused by an Arch-Duke getting shot in Seribia, by a psycho anarchist.

Kelmak, What does Paul have to do with it?
As I have said before, if you do not agree with what I'm saying, CHECK GOOGLE!

we the Americans fought ww2 out of conciencious belief, if u studied ur history, between ww1 and ww2, america started falling away from moral beliefs and religion, as for the American Revolution the pilgrims moved away from england for their religion, the american colonies fought about 100 years later because of what England was doing to them, like taxes and other crap w/o representation for themselves
if ur really desperate for the war argument, and want to tie them to religion, in Matthew 20 something:something, 22:4 i think, it says u will hear of wars and rumors of wars, if accept those words of the Bible then i guess u win the argument

All religion is, all that it amounts to, is the physical embodiement of faith. On a more basic level, it is simply the tool set a person choses to use in order to explore their own spiritual path. Religion is not the end, but the means, and should not be confused with the goal. The Bible itself warns against that, as do most holy texts from other religions.

In a sense, I agree with you. Religion has a woeful history of misuse. But then again, so does fire. Religion, like fire, is a tool and all tools can be willfully misused. This doesn't invalidate the tool or the purpose for which it was made, but does bring into serious question the motives of the user. I understand your anger and, to an extent, share it. However, the conclusion you have reached absolves mankind of the same exact personal responsibility for it's actions that it has used religion for. It is a thing, a signpost, a map, not the final destination and should never be valued for more than that or abused by use as justification for basic human instincts towards violence. We are responsible for our conflicts and for the resolution of them, not God, not the Church, and we must act responsibly with our tools, be they from the toolbox of reason or the toolbox of spirituality.

Every once in a while I run across a thread like this that intends to destabilize all religious beliefs.

Well guess what, religion HAS incited alot of people to do things in the name of 'god' over the years, but religion is NOT the key factor in FAITH.

Ever noticed that a vast majority of religions (established and otherwise) has the same basic rule? Its called the Golden Rule. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Its a simple concept really. Your actions should reflect the way you want to be treated. If you want to be treated like you are a jack*** then do that to others.

Faith, the belief in something greater than yourself, has incited people to do many good things too.
It is because of Faith that firemen run into collapsing buildings to save civillians.
It is because of Faith that Mother Teresa administered assistance to impoverished people.
It is because of Faith that random acts of kindness are spread.
Faith builds businesses. Faith builds marriages. Faith builds people.

With faith in something greater than yourself, you feel a drive to betterment of yourself and your surroundings. Faith and hope go hand in hand. Mankind stagnates without either. In faith, government exists. It doesnt matter if the ideal is monetary, or spiritual.

Faith in things likes the Easter bunny, the Tooth Fairy, and Santa Clause all revolve around giving children a sense of wonderment, a belief in magic and it is the basis of spiritual faith later in life. You whole life is suspended in Faith of all kinds. So why would you try to destroy that in others?

Luke wasn't one of the 12, but he was a historian. He also followed the apostle Paul.
yes, i dont know if Luke was a historian, but he was a doctor, he wrote the book of Acts, and Paul has to do w/ it because he was an apostle but not one of the 12

Not all religions = Christianity
we know, but im not gonna defend religions i dont believe in, and Christianity seems to be the most debated religion
Kelmak, What does Paul have to do with it?
As I have said before, if you do not agree with what I'm saying, CHECK GOOGLE!
google is a search engine, it will give u opinions and thoughts of ppl, it may give u facts but its not the answer to all questions
btw, talking about faith, google is a bad way to store ur faith

Kashun, you said that Paul wasn't an apostle. Secondally, not everything you say is true. You said that Hitler caused WW1.

Kashun, you said that Paul wasn't an apostle. Secondally, not everything you say is true. You said that Hitler caused WW1.
copy that

Well, I'm not going to comment on Vietnam, I don't know much about it. You may be right. As for the others.

Then you shouldn't make hideous blanket statements until you have done the research.


Iraq: If you sacrafice yourself killing nonbelievers, you go straight to heaven. That is a believe of the followers of Osama Bin Laden.

What does Osama Bin Laden have to do with the US invasion of Iraq? Not a thing, as the recent Congressional commission has pointed out. The reason given by the Bush administration for our invasion of Iraq was "the immenent threat posed by Saddam having weapons of mass destruction". Saddam's government was secular, by the way, and that was one of the main reasons Bin Laden also opposed him.


WWI and WWII. Hitler, a Catholic, had a prejudice against Jews, and he thought they were inferior.

But not specifically because of religious reasons and certainly not with the endorsement of the Catholic church. By the way, WWI wasn't about Hitler at all, it was about rising nationalisim as well as economic and imperial competition.


The American Revolution. We fought for many freedoms, one of them, a main one, religious freedom from the Church of England. Also why the pilgrims came and brought loads of diseases to the Natives.
Religion wasn't the main reason in this one, but it was a largely contributing factor.

I'm confused by your rationale on this one. Yes, one of the reasons some initial colonists came to the Americas was to escape religious prosecution. Moreso, however, it was to have the chance at a new life and new prospects. When the American Revolution occured, it was far more about breaking from the monarchy and removing colonial ties and taxation than it was for any religious purpose.

Well, let's define faith, shall we? Faith is beliefe in something without reason, and often, entirely AGAINST reason!
Do you seriously believe that the only reason people do good things is because they fear a hell, or want to acheive heaven?
Do you think that If I were a fireman, I would stand back and watch people die in possibly the most painful way possible?

I don't need religion to tell me that I should not kill. I know I would feel great remorse and I know that that person is a person like me. I believe and ecourage that Golden Rule, and I know that Mother Theresa did those incredible things out of the goodness of her heart. I don't get into fights with jerks when they make fun of someone because I don't want to hell, I do it in a sense of justice.

How is it justice for you to get in fights over something as flamable as religious beliefs?

You say that religion starts wars but you are starting a war right now in the chatroom with your anti-religion talk. You think your any better than the religions that started those wars early in history? I don't think so. Your anti-religion is like a religion in itself. Thats why it has a name... Atheist!

Kelmak
I do believe I admitted to my mistake. If not, I admit to my mistake


Berkylvania
What does Osama Bin Laden have to do with the US invasion of Iraq? You're kidding, right? This whole thing started when those people who thought they would go straight to heaven slammed what were essentually bombs into the twin towers.
And please, before you write stuff, look at what I've written, you may find that some matters have already been settled

u were created in God's image, he put the conviction of not killing in u, if no human had any kind of moral conviction, parallel to the Bible or not, we would all be barbarians, God put the Ten Commandments in the Bible because ppl were falling astray, u try stabbing someone in their back, see how easy it is

Oopenshire
I have an out of forum question: Are you from Shawe? I know many people in Oop are.
I don't believe that I am starting a war here, and I know that this is a very controversial topic, and I apoligize.

Kelmak
Dude, I'm not gonna bother with you. Answer your own question by looking at the rest of this conversation.

Also there must be a God! Just think about it. How could our world run in such perfect harmony to sustain life without some sort of creator with a plan? How come Earth is the only known planet to be able to sustain life in the entire galaxy. God's presence is all around us. Just stick your head out the window.

Military conquest
You already know my views on MORALS. I'm not going to repeat them.

I'm going to take a second to answer Oopenshire.

Kelmak
I do believe I admitted to my mistake. If not, I admit to my mistake


Berkylvania
What does Osama Bin Laden have to do with the US invasion of Iraq? You're kidding, right? This whole thing started when those people who thought they would go straight to heaven slammed what were essentually bombs into the twin towers.

it started w/ hatred toward America, notice how all the nations tried invading Israel in the Six Day War, who sided w/ Israel, America did, and hatred between Islam and Judaism started w/ Abraham, he had not one son but two, Isaac and Ishmael, Isaac born a legimate son continued the Jewish generation, Ishmael broke off and began the Palastinian generation, they both claim Israel, why do u think every day in the news u hear, 6 ppl killed in Israel w/ car bomb or some sort, Islamic nations hate America because we help protect Israel and we are the world's superpower, believe it or not, some day it will be 10 nations of Europe instead and the leader of those 10 nations will unite the Islamic and Jewish ppl, its all in the Bible

And please, before you write stuff, look at what I've written, you may find that some matters have already been settled.
i could say the same thing about u kashun

Berkylvania
What does Osama Bin Laden have to do with the US invasion of Iraq? You're kidding, right? This whole thing started when those people who thought they would go straight to heaven slammed what were essentually bombs into the twin towers.

Which, if you've been paying attention, you will notice the recent Congressional investigation has established that Iraq and Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11.


And please, before you write stuff, look at what I've written, you may find that some matters have already been settled

Read some of the things I've posted on religion before you start posting threads that have been done a million times in the past. Frankly, there are must better athiests than you on this board who are more credible and eloquent debaters when it comes to this topic. Perhaps you should try reading some stuff by Bottle.

Once there was a pool of water. The pool of water found itself in a hole. The water exclaimed, "Incredible! This hole is shaped exactly like me! How can this be possible??? It must have been made just for me!"

Oop, what religion are you?

Sorry I'm just expressing my opinion on this topic. I mean hey, that's what the forum is for isn't it?

And I'm a Christian although I do believe that any sort of spirituality is good spirituality. I also very much believe in freedom of religion and believe in peoples freewill to be athesist if they feel they must.

Sorry, gotta go, I'm sure you're all very disappointed.
Anymore comments should be telegrammed, and I'll get back to you later.

Sorry, gotta go, I'm sure you're all very disappointed.
Anymore comments should be telegrammed, and I'll get back to you later.

Sorry, I intended to reply a while ago, but my comp crashed.

"How could there not be a god?"

Well, there's multiverse theory, quantum machanics, and the Ceasar thing, that's just stupid, man. It's fairly obvious that Jesus did exist, but there isn't any evidence, and definately no proof, that he "rose again from the dead"

I would also like to point out that, although those people may have been just bad apples, religion was the worm.

And I would like to point out that you shouldn't be blaming all religions. It has been exclusively monotheistic religions who started wars in the name of their God. Polytheistic peoples have been in wars, true, but not in order to convert their enemies. Those wars were fought for political reasons, not spiritual.

Sorry, I intended to reply a while ago, but my comp crashed.

"How could there not be a god?"

Well, there's multiverse theory, quantum machanics, and the Ceasar thing, that's just stupid, man. It's fairly obvious that Jesus did exist, but there isn't any evidence, and definately no proof, that he "rose again from the dead"

I would also like to point out that, although those people may have been just bad apples, religion was the worm.

And I would like to point out that you shouldn't be blaming all religions. It has been exclusively monotheistic religions who started wars in the name of their God. Polytheistic peoples have been in wars, true, but not in order to convert their enemies. Those wars were fought for political reasons, not spiritual.

i disagree, hinduism is a polytheistic religion, pakistan is islam but that doesnt matter, Britain split them up because of their religion, they dont mind except for the ppl that were of lets say hinduism and were stuck in pakistan, they fight over kashmir for the ppl of religion there

Before my rant begins, I'd like to point out I'm agnostic.

While I dont think religion is a bad thing, what *really* pisses me off are all these 'I'm-so-much-holier-than-thou-so-let-me-show-you-the-'light' idiots, as well as all those fundies who preach death towards all non-believers

As I sit back and realize how many wars religion has started, I slowly feel myself slipping into darkness and anger against religion, yet I know that religion isnt truly evil (tho so many idiots have used it as their vice)

Whether you can understand this or not, I have come to accept this little piece of truth.

All ethics are based in moral convictions.
Moral convictions are usually shaped by our religious faith.

No, religion is NOT free from its share of bad acts.
Neither is atheism.

The point of this is not a debate about whether religion has led to some horrid acts against another person. No one has ever said that it hasnt.
This thread was intended to make people QUESTION their faith, and possibly destroy it by making them question religion.

Well not everyone is intended to be something other than a sheep.

And when I said what I did about Faith, I wasnt thinking of the concepts of heaven and hell. Im not Christian. I dont believe in either. However, I was talking about enlightenment and spiritual progression. Thats another commonality in religions. Some believe that the body dies and the soul is judged. Some believe that the body dies and the soul migrates to another existence. This migration can be into another human experience, another earthly experience, or an experience beyond anything humans can comprehend. But again, it is the FAITH in this progression that motivates people to regard their actions against others. Humans are extremely consequence oriented in their actions. That is why the most dangerous person is the one who fails to believe in or care about consequences anymore.

Ok, I'm reading The Crucible for my English summer assignment, and I barely even turn a page before somebody's like "YOU'RE A SATANICAL HEREITC!!! TO HELL WITH YE!!!!" Goodness, why cant we all just get along?

Evoking introduction that doesn't really reach a point.

Also there must be a God! Just think about it.

So I haven't been thinking up to now?

How could our world run in such perfect harmony to sustain life without some sort of creator with a plan?

Because if it didn't, we wouldn't be here.

How come Earth is the only known planet to be able to sustain life in the entire galaxy.

Really? Have you seen all the planets in the galaxy and tested them for their ability to sustain life?

God's presence is all around us. Just stick your head out the window.

Nope, tried that before, didn't feel God's presence.

Are there any atheists or agnostics out there who're willing to participate in a philosophical experiment? What you have to do is to ask God, inside your mind or out loud, if He exists, and if He responds in some way that you recognise as a response, to take that response seriously and seek to find out more about Him.
If He doesn't exist, you've spent a few more seconds of your life engaging in the deeper questions of reality. If He does, and I think He does, then I believe He will contact you, one way or another.
Try to avoid a biased perspective if you do this; none of us can ever be completely free of our biases in this life, but it helps to make it a true search for understanding.
I did this, and my life has changed indescribably :o .

Religion is something that people believe, have faith in. It's totally up to you what religion you want to be or even not having a religion. It's totally up to you. Nobody's forcing you. But religions can mix together, just like races. Although some people discriminate other races and religions, it will be possible if the country has a law, a law to make sure all people of all races and religion mix together, and that any offending remarks will bring them to court. That will definitely work.

Newsflash on WW1... Hitler wasn't in charge for that! Gasp! It caused by an Arch-Duke getting shot in Seribia, by a psycho anarchist.

I think he was a nationalist, not an anarchist.

-----------------------------------------
R j00 b45h|n9 m3j3 6r4mm4r, ph45c|57?
Free your mind! (http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/berkman/comanarchism/whatis_toc.html)
I like big butts!
http://img63.photobucket.com/albums/v193/eddy_the_great/steatopygia.jpg

Are there any atheists or agnostics out there who're willing to participate in a philosophical experiment? What you have to do is to ask God, inside your mind or out loud, if He exists, and if He responds in some way that you recognise as a response, to take that response seriously and seek to find out more about Him.
If He doesn't exist, you've spent a few more seconds of your life engaging in the deeper questions of reality. If He does, and I think He does, then I believe He will contact you, one way or another.
Try to avoid a biased perspective if you do this; none of us can ever be completely free of our biases in this life, but it helps to make it a true search for understanding.
I did this, and my life has changed indescribably :o .

i think pretty much all atheists and agnostics have done what you describe. people seem to think we are non-believers because we just don't think about faith or we've never given it a try, when actually most of us hold our non-theistic views specifically because we have given more thought to these matters than the average religious person.

interesting study: roughly 90% of Americans belong to the same religion their parents raised them to. do all these people really believe they just happened to be born into the true faith, that they really were just that lucky? is there a large component of habit, where they just keep on with what they were raised to? hmm...

Newsflash on WW1... Hitler wasn't in charge for that! Gasp! It caused by an Arch-Duke getting shot in Seribia, by a psycho anarchist.

I think he was a nationalist, not an anarchist.

if u read the post someone said that hitler started ww1, this post was talking about hitler not doing it and an anarchist starting ww1 not hitler

Are there any atheists or agnostics out there who're willing to participate in a philosophical experiment? What you have to do is to ask God, inside your mind or out loud, if He exists, and if He responds in some way that you recognise as a response, to take that response seriously and seek to find out more about Him.
If He doesn't exist, you've spent a few more seconds of your life engaging in the deeper questions of reality. If He does, and I think He does, then I believe He will contact you, one way or another.
Try to avoid a biased perspective if you do this; none of us can ever be completely free of our biases in this life, but it helps to make it a true search for understanding.
I did this, and my life has changed indescribably :o .

Been there, done that, lacked faith in the t-shirt.

if u read the post someone said that hitler started ww1, this post was talking about hitler not doing it and an anarchist starting ww1 not hitler

No, he was a nationalist: "Gavrilo Princip (July 25, 1894 (or 1895) - April 28, 1918) was a Bosnian Serb nationalist who killed Franz Ferdinand"--Wikipedia

-----------------------------------------
R j00 b45h|n9 m3j3 6r4mm4r, ph45c|57?
Free your mind! (http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/berkman/comanarchism/whatis_toc.html)
I like big butts!
http://img63.photobucket.com/albums/v193/eddy_the_great/steatopygia.jpg

i think pretty much all atheists and agnostics have done what you describe. people seem to think we are non-believers because we just don't think about faith or we've never given it a try, when actually most of us hold our non-theistic views specifically because we have given more thought to these matters than the average religious person.

interesting study: roughly 90% of Americans belong to the same religion their parents raised them to. do all these people really believe they just happened to be born into the true faith, that they really were just that lucky? is there a large component of habit, where they just keep on with what they were raised to? hmm...


Been there, done that, lacked faith in the t-shirt.

I'm really sorry you still don't believe, guys (this is not meant as an assumption of gender, by the way!). I think you're both missing out on an amazing life with God, but I know I can't persuade you of that directly. I know most Americans follow their parents in religion, as do most muslims worldwide, same with most Hindus etc.
All worldviews are self-perpetuating, because we examine all new evidence presented to us using our biased minds; our beliefs tend to determine the way we interpret data, so we interpret data to match our beliefs. Because a correct worldview will do this as much as an incorrect one, it's v. difficult for anyone to break the cycle. For me, I think God intervened personally to remove my bias against Him.

I'm really sorry you still don't believe, guys (this is not meant as an assumption of gender, by the way!). I think you're both missing out on an amazing life with God, but I know I can't persuade you of that directly. I know most Americans follow their parents in religion, as do most muslims worldwide, same with most Hindus etc.
All worldviews are self-perpetuating, because we examine all new evidence presented to us using our biased minds; our beliefs tend to determine the way we interpret data, so we interpret data to match our beliefs. Because a correct worldview will do this as much as an incorrect one, it's v. difficult for anyone to break the cycle. For me, I think God intervened personally to remove my bias against Him.

you have my sincere sympathy, and i hope one day you are able to recover your perspective and joy for life. seeing somebody descend into religion is even more tragic than watching a person perpetuate the dependencies they were raised to, and i hope whatever personal troubles led to your condition will be resolved someday.

Been there, done that, lacked faith in the t-shirt.

I'm really sorry you still don't believe, guys (this is not meant as an assumption of gender, by the way!). I think you're both missing out on an amazing life with God, but I know I can't persuade you of that directly.

You're acting as if I'm not believing in God on purpose. Why is that?

Been there, done that, lacked faith in the t-shirt.

I'm really sorry you still don't believe, guys (this is not meant as an assumption of gender, by the way!). I think you're both missing out on an amazing life with God, but I know I can't persuade you of that directly.

You're acting as if I'm not believing in God on purpose. Why is that?

that's always the assumption...atheists and agnostics must just be turning their backs on God. notice the assumption that God is real and that we believe he is real (but we are ignoring that). i find it adorable when they do that.

You're acting as if I'm not believing in God on purpose. Why is that?

that's always the assumption...atheists and agnostics must just be turning their backs on God. notice the assumption that God is real and that we believe he is real (but we are ignoring that). i find it adorable when they do that.

Even Jack Chick?

You're acting as if I'm not believing in God on purpose. Why is that?

that's always the assumption...atheists and agnostics must just be turning their backs on God. notice the assumption that God is real and that we believe he is real (but we are ignoring that). i find it adorable when they do that.

Even Jack Chick?

are you kidding?! Jack Chick is the best of them! for pure entertainment value he is worthy 50 average theists. such a riot, i sometimes read it to get a laugh at the end of a long day.

Everyone chooses their beliefs, or lets someone else choose for them. Do you believe you do not have the choice of what to believe?
I assure you that the joy in my life has greatly increased since I started following Jesus.
Dunno who Jack Chick is, but I do know there are some pretty crazy-sounding people out there claiming to be Christians. Only God knows for sure.

Everyone chooses their beliefs, or lets someone else choose for them. Do you believe you do not have the choice of what to believe?

Bullshit. If you 'believe' in something only because you want to, you're fooling nobody but yourself.

You're acting as if I'm not believing in God on purpose. Why is that?

that's always the assumption...atheists and agnostics must just be turning their backs on God. notice the assumption that God is real and that we believe he is real (but we are ignoring that). i find it adorable when they do that.

Even Jack Chick?

are you kidding?! Jack Chick is the best of them! for pure entertainment value he is worthy 50 average theists. such a riot, i sometimes read it to get a laugh at the end of a long day.

I know, especially his latest one on homosexuals.
But still, to call him or his actions 'adorable'... :?

Everyone chooses their beliefs, or lets someone else choose for them. Do you believe you do not have the choice of what to believe?

Bullshit. If you 'believe' in something only because you want to, you're fooling nobody but yourself.

I'm not expressing myself clearly.
What I was trying to say was, no-one can control what you choose to think, or believe, or decide. Many people can try to influence your thoughts, beliefs, and decisions, but you make the final call, you are responsible for what your mind does. Everyone believes some things without proof, because absolute proof doesn't exist. I choose to believe in and follow Jesus, even though His existence cannot be "proven" to me; you are choosing to believe that God does not exist, though no-one can "prove" He doesn't.

Everyone chooses their beliefs, or lets someone else choose for them. Do you believe you do not have the choice of what to believe?

Bullshit. If you 'believe' in something only because you want to, you're fooling nobody but yourself.

I'm not expressing myself clearly.
What I was trying to say was, no-one can control what you choose to think, or believe, or decide. Many people can try to influence your thoughts, beliefs, and decisions, but you make the final call, you are responsible for what your mind does. Everyone believes some things without proof, because absolute proof doesn't exist. I choose to believe in and follow Jesus, even though His existence cannot be "proven" to me; you are choosing to believe that God does not exist, though no-one can "prove" He doesn't.

No, I'm telling you that I never, ever, 'chose' not to believe in God. How hard is this to grasp? You cannot choose to believe in something.
That would be like saying 'I don't think grass is purple, but I will believe so anyway.'.
If you have to choose to believe in God, you never believed in Him in the first place. And no wishful thinking in the world will change that.

No, I'm telling you that I never, ever, 'chose' not to believe in God. How hard is this to grasp? You cannot choose to believe in something.
That would be like saying 'I don't think grass is purple, but I will believe so anyway.'.
If you have to choose to believe in God, you never believed in Him in the first place. And no wishful thinking in the world will change that.

Exactly. At the time I first chose to believe in God, I had never, ever believed in Him before. This happened in Feb 2000, very late one night, while I was in my room, no mass manipulation, no stirring music, just me and God.
The point I'm trying (poorly) to get across is that every time someone has told you that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and that you need to accept His salvation (or variations on that theme), you have decided that the statement presented to you is false, based on your current experience and understanding, and have chosen not to believe them.

I choose to believe that my body exists. I choose to believe that the information my senses provide to me is accurate, although limited. I choose to believe that logical deduction is valid. I choose to believe that my parents really are my parents. I could go on and on, but I hope you see my point. You believe many statements that have been presented to you in your life, and you do not believe many other statements. Do you think you have no choice in making this distinction?

Ugh... another religion topic (more specifically, a "God Versus Non-believer" topic). Okay, here comes the viewpoint of a sceptical Agnostic, who by the way happens to entirely agree with the moral teachings of Christianity, but that doesn't need to see the omnipotent man up there to give us a reason to adhere to those teachings.

Two big problems I have with monotheistic religions are these:

1) The omnipotence and infallibility of this one God. No matter what you point out to a Christian or Muslim, there is nothing that God or Allah cannot do, and there is no way for him to make a mistake. In the world around us today, we see a very different picture where extremely flawed creations roam this thing we call space and time, kicking the life out of each other, making their very existences miserable and treating everything around them like crap. Quite simply, a deity that can do everything and that can make no mistakes would not create such imperfect beings save as an experiment in psychology. No matter how many times God has tried to communicate to his people, he never does it in such a way that lets everyone equally enjoy a rich and fulfilling life without any possibility of doubt or uncertainty.

That's not to say that maybe God can make things absolutely perfectly. But, if he can, then why didn't he? Is this all just a big game to him? Are we merely the byproducts of the celestial equivilent of Civilisation 2? In which case, is this really the guy of infinate majesty and mercy that the believers pronounce him as, or is he just some space-dwelling roleplayer with nothing better to do with his time; the type which society today generally shuns the human versions of? Maybe he's just cruel, or enjoys seeing the imperfections play out. And in that scenario, is he really the type of guy you want to meet in person?

As a human, I see the imperfections in the world in which I live, and can deduce that whoever's in charge is not as perfect as Islam and Christianity would have me believe. While I have generally accepted the possibility of beings on a higher plane of existence, one of whom may even have made the whole thing, the idea of perfection in these beings is completely ludicrous. So, if a religion comes up with an explanation for the world in its current state as a creator God that either has room for improvement in his craft or may occasionally slip up in his decisions, I will give it serious thought.

2) The Afterlife. What are powerful moral lessons that the bible teaches are constantly being overshadowed by this prospect of reward. Look at the gospels; the most frequent question asked to Jesus is "What must I do to gain eternal life?". Is that not sickening? A guy comes along and suggests that maybe people should try being nice to each other, and all these guys want to know is how to prolong their own existence. And yet, so often it's the very thing that both Christianity and Islam use to "Hook in" prospective followers. Do this, they say, and you will receive an eternal reward in Heaven. You know what kind of people this ropes in? The sort who will do anything for a big enough reward.

Why is the Bible not simply content with giving people guidance on how to live out their lives, how to treat your fellow man with respect and kindness, how to love your neighbour and how to best live in a way that pleases God without this need to every step of the way remind you that "Oh, and you'll go to paradise if you do". It instantly annihilates the credibility of the book as guidance for the human race. Can't there be some other way of simply telling them that "Being nice is a Good Thing" without coaxing them on constantly with the thought that they'll live forever if they are?

The best way to outline this promise by God is subtly. Like maybe somewhere at the beginning of Acts, Jesus's final message could be "The Gates have been opened for those who wish to enter with me" without all the continual promises and reaffirmations. That would put it across without seeming like the obvious attention grabber that it is in the rest of the word.

I regret to say I have no knowledge of the Kurran on this, but I imagine the feeling is probably similar from what I've heard from what Islamic friends I have. Eternal Life is not a reward for good behaviour but an enticement to do deeds to please Allah. Which many Christians, even, would denounce as a means of Buying support, despite the fact that their word itself engages in exactly the same thing.

In the end of the day, the concept of an eternal life appears to me to be a way to try and drag the greedy and self-serving into the ring of the church. "It's like an investment", they say, "You'll be paid back what you lost and then some in God's Kingdom". Well nuts to that. I'm going to follow the sound advice you gave me, but I don't want this bribery to do so. I'm a man of integrity, and you won't find me bought into your way of thinking by this faint promise of immortality.


I reckon the Buddhists have been the closest so far. Maybe I'll go check them out eventually. Until then, I'm willing to accept criticism as the uncertain Agnostic I am at the minute.

No, I'm telling you that I never, ever, 'chose' not to believe in God. How hard is this to grasp? You cannot choose to believe in something.
That would be like saying 'I don't think grass is purple, but I will believe so anyway.'.
If you have to choose to believe in God, you never believed in Him in the first place. And no wishful thinking in the world will change that.

Exactly. At the time I first chose to believe in God, I had never, ever believed in Him before. This happened in Feb 2000, very late one night, while I was in my room, no mass manipulation, no stirring music, just me and God.
The point I'm trying (poorly) to get across is that every time someone has told you that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and that you need to accept His salvation (or variations on that theme), you have decided that the statement presented to you is false, based on your current experience and understanding, and have chosen not to believe them.

I choose to believe that my body exists. I choose to believe that the information my senses provide to me is accurate, although limited. I choose to believe that logical deduction is valid. I choose to believe that my parents really are my parents. I could go on and on, but I hope you see my point. You believe many statements that have been presented to you in your life, and you do not believe many other statements. Do you think you have no choice in making this distinction?

Yes, because each time my decision was indeed based on previous observations and experiences.
I have no experience or observation of God, therefor I do not believe in Him. The only way I could then say 'I believe in God' would be by lying.
The only way you can truthfully change your opinion on something is when you are presented with new information, or when your conviction was weak and you hadn't really made up your mind yet.

What I think you're trying to say is that you can say 'I think that based on my current experience and observations, it is safe to assume that X'. Still, even then cannot say you chose to believe in X, since in order to do so you must already have faith in X.

I agree with most of what kamsaki said, but the first part, about perfect creations, he was wrong. What is perfection? If perfection is peace, the god would be peace, and there would be no wars. Therefore, peace is not perfection. Is the ability to
self maintain perfection? If so, creation is perfect. They feed each other, and, in doing so, creation maintains itself. So maybe Creation is perfect.

I agree with most of what kamsaki said, but the first part, about perfect creations, he was wrong. What is perfection? If perfection is peace, the god would be peace, and there would be no wars. Therefore, peace is not perfection. Is the ability to self maintain perfection? If so, creation is perfect. They feed each other, and, in doing so, creation maintains itself. So maybe Creation is perfect.

Entirely valid point, though I would disagree with the fact that we are successful at self-preservation, given how much we annihilate our own species. But what you're looking at is the idea of our reality slightly fine tuned. If this were a universe of "Perfection", there would be both peace and coexistence and continual self gain and preservation/improvement of individuals and the system and creation as a whole. Because, like I've said, an all powerful and infallable God would be able to do that, no?

Perfection is, very simply, where there is nothing to criticise in a piece or subject. And I think we all agree, there are plenty of things to criticise in the world we live in.

But maybe creation itself is perfect.

Oh, hey, a friend of mine and I came up with this.

Without faith, God is nothing. Once you have proof of something, you no longer need faith. If a person died and went to heaven, that would be definate proof. In the end, if God exists, he can't, and if he doesn't, problem solved.

Yes there are some big flaws, but we were bored.

But maybe creation itself is perfect.

Okay, look at it this way.

I personally think that creation is flawed.

I am a part of creation.

Therefore, either creation is flawed or I, as part of that creation, am flawed.

Neither bodes well for the concept of Perfection, which would seemingly represent flawlessness.

And your idea sounds very much like a spinoff of part of Douglas Adams' Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Which has, of course, already been widely discredited. Nice try though. ^^;

yeah, it was. I just didn't think anyone had read that series.

wait, widley discredited? What did I miss? If it was part of this post, I haven't been on since I started it yesterday.

I have no experience or observation of God, therefor I do not believe in Him. The only way I could then say 'I believe in God' would be by lying.
The only way you can truthfully change your opinion on something is when you are presented with new information, or when your conviction was weak and you hadn't really made up your mind yet.

What I think you're trying to say is that you can say 'I think that based on my current experience and observations, it is safe to assume that X'. Still, even then cannot say you chose to believe in X, since in order to do so you must already have faith in X.

I think we may be having a disagreement about the technical use of words like "choose", "believe", "assume", and so on. I don't want you to pretend to believe in God, but your point about new information is interesting. What new information would you consider to be valid evidence for the existence of the God described in the Bible?

No, it wasn't part of this topic, but the very starting phrase "By Faith I am Nothing" has been refuted before with the very basic Athiestic argument:

Basically, either what the people believe is based on an actual God or it's based on an Idea that someone came up with. The fact that people believe in it doesn't make it any more real. Either God exists or He doesn't. Whether people believe in him or not can't change his presence save in a conceptual manner, just like believing that a million dollars will some day magically appear in front of you won't change the likelihood of it happening.

The concept of "I exist through Faith" just doesn't work. To the best of my knowledge, anyway.

I actually agree with you, but I got bored with yesterday's viewpoint and wanted to see someone smarter than who I was dealing with present my point in a good way and back it up.

Ugh... another religion topic (more specifically, a "God Versus Non-believer" topic). Okay, here comes the viewpoint of a sceptical Agnostic, who by the way happens to entirely agree with the moral teachings of Christianity, but that doesn't need to see the omnipotent man up there to give us a reason to adhere to those teachings.

Two big problems I have with monotheistic religions are these:

1) The omnipotence and infallibility of this one God. No matter what you point out to a Christian or Muslim, there is nothing that God or Allah cannot do, and there is no way for him to make a mistake. In the world around us today, we see a very different picture where extremely flawed creations roam this thing we call space and time, kicking the life out of each other, making their very existences miserable and treating everything around them like crap. Quite simply, a deity that can do everything and that can make no mistakes would not create such imperfect beings save as an experiment in psychology. No matter how many times God has tried to communicate to his people, he never does it in such a way that lets everyone equally enjoy a rich and fulfilling life without any possibility of doubt or uncertainty.

That's not to say that maybe God can make things absolutely perfectly. But, if he can, then why didn't he? Is this all just a big game to him? Are we merely the byproducts of the celestial equivilent of Civilisation 2? In which case, is this really the guy of infinate majesty and mercy that the believers pronounce him as, or is he just some space-dwelling roleplayer with nothing better to do with his time; the type which society today generally shuns the human versions of? Maybe he's just cruel, or enjoys seeing the imperfections play out. And in that scenario, is he really the type of guy you want to meet in person?

As a human, I see the imperfections in the world in which I live, and can deduce that whoever's in charge is not as perfect as Islam and Christianity would have me believe. While I have generally accepted the possibility of beings on a higher plane of existence, one of whom may even have made the whole thing, the idea of perfection in these beings is completely ludicrous. So, if a religion comes up with an explanation for the world in its current state as a creator God that either has room for improvement in his craft or may occasionally slip up in his decisions, I will give it serious thought.

2) The Afterlife. What are powerful moral lessons that the bible teaches are constantly being overshadowed by this prospect of reward. Look at the gospels; the most frequent question asked to Jesus is "What must I do to gain eternal life?". Is that not sickening? A guy comes along and suggests that maybe people should try being nice to each other, and all these guys want to know is how to prolong their own existence. And yet, so often it's the very thing that both Christianity and Islam use to "Hook in" prospective followers. Do this, they say, and you will receive an eternal reward in Heaven. You know what kind of people this ropes in? The sort who will do anything for a big enough reward.

Why is the Bible not simply content with giving people guidance on how to live out their lives, how to treat your fellow man with respect and kindness, how to love your neighbour and how to best live in a way that pleases God without this need to every step of the way remind you that "Oh, and you'll go to paradise if you do". It instantly annihilates the credibility of the book as guidance for the human race. Can't there be some other way of simply telling them that "Being nice is a Good Thing" without coaxing them on constantly with the thought that they'll live forever if they are?

The best way to outline this promise by God is subtly. Like maybe somewhere at the beginning of Acts, Jesus's final message could be "The Gates have been opened for those who wish to enter with me" without all the continual promises and reaffirmations. That would put it across without seeming like the obvious attention grabber that it is in the rest of the word.

I regret to say I have no knowledge of the Kurran on this, but I imagine the feeling is probably similar from what I've heard from what Islamic friends I have. Eternal Life is not a reward for good behaviour but an enticement to do deeds to please Allah. Which many Christians, even, would denounce as a means of Buying support, despite the fact that their word itself engages in exactly the same thing.

In the end of the day, the concept of an eternal life appears to me to be a way to try and drag the greedy and self-serving into the ring of the church. "It's like an investment", they say, "You'll be paid back what you lost and then some in God's Kingdom". Well nuts to that. I'm going to follow the sound advice you gave me, but I don't want this bribery to do so. I'm a man of integrity, and you won't find me bought into your way of thinking by this faint promise of immortality.


I reckon the Buddhists have been the closest so far. Maybe I'll go check them out eventually. Until then, I'm willing to accept criticism as the uncertain Agnostic I am at the minute.

Hi Kamsaki!
I was interested by what you were saying. I think Christianity does give an explanation for why the world is as bad as it is. I do believe God is infallible, but maybe not omnipotent in the way I think you mean. I think when God made humanity, He gave us the ability to make choices, which involves the ability to rebel against Him and treat each other, themselves, and the world, like crap, as you say. I believe God cannot prevent us from doing evil without removing that ability to choose, and as God cannot do a thing and not do it at the same time (this is not a limit on omnipotence, just a denial of a self-contradictory statement), He allows evil to exist FOR NOW. You may disagree with God's decision to make humanity like this, but I see God's decision to allow all the evils of both history and present to continue as a massive statement by God on the value of choice and the reality of human responsibility.
On the whole "Join us and be good and you'll go to heaven when you die" line put forward so often to entice people to a particular religion, I have a lot of common ground with you. I do believe that the spirit of every human being eve created will last for ever, and that those who choose Jesus in this age will get to be with Him forever, but there's a lot more to following Jesus than this. Christianity has been presented this way for too long, but lots of churches have seen this as an error and changed their message accordingly, to something more in line with Christ's teachings. Incidentally, I think eternal life starts in this life for everyone who puts their trust in Jesus; the life starts here, and goes on forever.

Dude, even if he or she had the choice, a perfect being would not even desire to do bad things. A perfect God would automaticaly make a perfect being.

Hi Kamsaki!
I was interested by what you were saying. I think Christianity does give an explanation for why the world is as bad as it is. I do believe God is infallible, but maybe not omnipotent in the way I think you mean. I think when God made humanity, He gave us the ability to make choices, which involves the ability to rebel against Him and treat each other, themselves, and the world, like crap, as you say. I believe God cannot prevent us from doing evil without removing that ability to choose, and as God cannot do a thing and not do it at the same time (this is not a limit on omnipotence, just a denial of a self-contradictory statement), He allows evil to exist FOR NOW. You may disagree with God's decision to make humanity like this, but I see God's decision to allow all the evils of both history and present to continue as a massive statement by God on the value of choice and the reality of human responsibility.
On the whole "Join us and be good and you'll go to heaven when you die" line put forward so often to entice people to a particular religion, I have a lot of common ground with you. I do believe that the spirit of every human being eve created will last for ever, and that those who choose Jesus in this age will get to be with Him forever, but there's a lot more to following Jesus than this. Christianity has been presented this way for too long, but lots of churches have seen this as an error and changed their message accordingly, to something more in line with Christ's teachings. Incidentally, I think eternal life starts in this life for everyone who puts their trust in Jesus; the life starts here, and goes on forever.

Hey, Reactivists, thanks for responding.

It's nice to see my sentiments on the issue of "Buying Salvation" echoed by the Church. While you're entitled of course to believe in your eternal salvation, I don't really think you want to adopt the approach of rewarding self-interests when it seems to contrast so sharply with the rest of the teachings. Anyway

Your explanation for the wrongdoings of humanity is very similar to that I've heard of in the past from others who I've posed my concerns to. While yes, most certainly, I would agree that it is the fault of the decisions of Humankind that have led to the misdeeds that we see around us, the question is, though a simple one, a very difficult one to answer; why? Why, firstly, do humans make the negative choices that they do, and secondly, why does the ability to choose come with the apparent built-in inevitability that is evil? Could a God with the power to pull together a universe from nothing not supposedly create an entirely good-natured sense of decision? I mean, people exist today who genuinely go through their lives with the intent, religiously motivated or otherwise, to help their fellow man, but that doesn't change the sense of free will that they exercise in their everyday choices and interactions, nor is it necessarily a decision they constantly make, but rather an attitude that they may have acquired...

People today understand the value of choice. Or, at least, liberty to make your own choices. Look at the USA, for one; as a nation, it makes a huge issue out of the individual freedoms of its people, and everyone seems to agree that it's a Good Thing (deliberate capitals there). And yet, this sense of choice more often than not leads to the pain and suffering that people across the world experience. Perhaps sin is a message to the people of the world on the importance of human responsibility, as you say (which is a fairly potent insight, it must be said) but it seems to be falling on the deaf ears of those who have been absorbed in that choice and the self-worshipping culture that the evil embedded into the nature of man has led to.

Why must choice bring this negative factor along with it? Can God not allow people to make up their minds and determine their futures with the idea of fellowship and kindness embedded into the forefront of their thoughts? Once again, how can a God with the power to do everything (save through self-restricting clauses; the whole "hamburger so big he couldn't eat it" scenario jumps to mind there) not create a concept of free will that allows humans to treat each other and their world with the respect and kindness that are due?

Perhaps you're right; maybe I do just disagree with God on that front. But I think anyone that could pull together something so complex as the human spirit would be able to grant a free will without the embedded evil that we all seem to have. Maybe we're just a beta version? Like, I don't know, a test experiment to let God work out the bugs of this latest idea of his... >>;

It's nice to see my sentiments on the issue of "Buying Salvation" echoed by the Church. While you're entitled of course to believe in your eternal salvation, I don't really think you want to adopt the approach of rewarding self-interests when it seems to contrast so sharply with the rest of the teachings. Anyway

Your explanation for the wrongdoings of humanity is very similar to that I've heard of in the past from others who I've posed my concerns to. While yes, most certainly, I would agree that it is the fault of the decisions of Humankind that have led to the misdeeds that we see around us, the question is, though a simple one, a very difficult one to answer; why? Why, firstly, do humans make the negative choices that they do, and secondly, why does the ability to choose come with the apparent built-in inevitability that is evil? Could a God with the power to pull together a universe from nothing not supposedly create an entirely good-natured sense of decision? I mean, people exist today who genuinely go through their lives with the intent, religiously motivated or otherwise, to help their fellow man, but that doesn't change the sense of free will that they exercise in their everyday choices and interactions, nor is it necessarily a decision they constantly make, but rather an attitude that they may have acquired...

People today understand the value of choice. Or, at least, liberty to make your own choices. Look at the USA, for one; as a nation, it makes a huge issue out of the individual freedoms of its people, and everyone seems to agree that it's a Good Thing (deliberate capitals there). And yet, this sense of choice more often than not leads to the pain and suffering that people across the world experience. Perhaps sin is a message to the people of the world on the importance of human responsibility, as you say (which is a fairly potent insight, it must be said) but it seems to be falling on the deaf ears of those who have been absorbed in that choice and the self-worshipping culture that the evil embedded into the nature of man has led to.

Why must choice bring this negative factor along with it? Can God not allow people to make up their minds and determine their futures with the idea of fellowship and kindness embedded into the forefront of their thoughts? Once again, how can a God with the power to do everything (save through self-restricting clauses; the whole "hamburger so big he couldn't eat it" scenario jumps to mind there) not create a concept of free will that allows humans to treat each other and their world with the respect and kindness that are due?

Perhaps you're right; maybe I do just disagree with God on that front. But I think anyone that could pull together something so complex as the human spirit would be able to grant a free will without the embedded evil that we all seem to have. Maybe we're just a beta version? Like, I don't know, a test experiment to let God work out the bugs of this latest idea of his... >>;

Hi again!
On the subject of rewards/punishments presented in the Bible, I believe that this is, in a sense, an example of the humility of God. If God were standing on principle, He would only welcome those who came to Him from pure motives of truth and goodness; no-one would live up to that standard. As it is, He even accepts those who turn to Him because they want heaven and not hell; but if they didn't actually accept Him as God, He knows that, and I believe there will be those who think they're sorted who'll have a nasty shock on the Day of Judgement.
On the choice-without-evil idea, I think your beta-test remark may be closer to the truth than you thought. In a way, I think humanity as we see it is a transition stage to what God intends, a humanity that accepts His rule and reflects His love and goodness and wisdom. I think we all have within us a selfishness that is the root of all problems, all social problems, all emotional problems, all economic problems, everything that's wrong with the world (even natural disasters and suchlike can be linked back to the Fall, the original rebellion), and I believe that Jesus Christ is God's solution to this problem of selfishness. However, even God's solution has a limitation, in the sense that it is optional for people to adopt it or not. Everyone who does let God sort their life out becomes part of the solution; everyone who doesn't is still part of the problem.
I know this sounds quite extreme, but we are talking about extreme issues. I hope you want to continue this discussion; tell me if you don't!

that's always the assumption...atheists and agnostics must just be turning their backs on God. notice the assumption that God is real and that we believe he is real (but we are ignoring that). i find it adorable when they do that.

I have never made that assumption, Bottle. I have never thought that those who have come to athiesim or agnosticim through their own searches are "turning their backs on God." God may or may not be real. I have a hunch there's something there, but that's all it is, a hunch, and it's my hunch and in order to live an honest life I must acknolwedge that there is a very real probability that I'm wrong. Because of that acknowledgement, I can not act as if athiests or agnostics are any less valid in their conclusions than I am in mine.

I have never understood your bias against religion. I understand your dislike for the more blatant misuses of it and agree with you that those should be met with education and empathy. However, there is a whole spectrum of faith out there that you seem to dismiss as lightly as you claim theists dismiss your conclusions.

Religion, like any temporal human-made organization, is flawed in the sense that it has no inherant safeguards. Just like nuclear fission or fire, it is a tool, a physical representation and manifestation of a symbolic mythology. It can be abused, certainly, but it can also be used correctly to explore metaphysical questions. It's no more than that and should never be thought as such. The Pope is not God and "The Church" is not paradise or heaven or a higher plain of existance and one should never confuse religion with spirituality or faith. Is your objection to the church or to faith and spiritual speculation in general?

Ugh... another religion topic (more specifically, a "God Versus Non-believer" topic). Okay, here comes the viewpoint of a sceptical Agnostic, who by the way happens to entirely agree with the moral teachings of Christianity, but that doesn't need to see the omnipotent man up there to give us a reason to adhere to those teachings.

Absolutely. The belief or disbelief in "a big man" or whatever guiding principle in no way absolves one of moral responsibility. Principles and ethics function independent from theisim and it's perfectly possible to be a moral person without any belief in a "higher power." In fact, it's almost better in a way because you are forced to honestly establish your own moral principles and choose to adhere to them or not based on your own judgement.


Two big problems I have with monotheistic religions are these:

1) The omnipotence and infallibility of this one God. No matter what you point out to a Christian or Muslim, there is nothing that God or Allah cannot do, and there is no way for him to make a mistake. In the world around us today, we see a very different picture where extremely flawed creations roam this thing we call space and time, kicking the life out of each other, making their very existences miserable and treating everything around them like crap. Quite simply, a deity that can do everything and that can make no mistakes would not create such imperfect beings save as an experiment in psychology. No matter how many times God has tried to communicate to his people, he never does it in such a way that lets everyone equally enjoy a rich and fulfilling life without any possibility of doubt or uncertainty.


That's not to say that maybe God can make things absolutely perfectly. But, if he can, then why didn't he? Is this all just a big game to him? Are we merely the byproducts of the celestial equivilent of Civilisation 2? In which case, is this really the guy of infinate majesty and mercy that the believers pronounce him as, or is he just some space-dwelling roleplayer with nothing better to do with his time; the type which society today generally shuns the human versions of? Maybe he's just cruel, or enjoys seeing the imperfections play out. And in that scenario, is he really the type of guy you want to meet in person?

As a human, I see the imperfections in the world in which I live, and can deduce that whoever's in charge is not as perfect as Islam and Christianity would have me believe. While I have generally accepted the possibility of beings on a higher plane of existence, one of whom may even have made the whole thing, the idea of perfection in these beings is completely ludicrous. So, if a religion comes up with an explanation for the world in its current state as a creator God that either has room

This is again true and one of the places where my personal faith disagrees with a majority of monotheistic religious dogma. My belief is simple in that God or whatever divinity exists is far beyond my power to comprehend at this time. Perhaps that'll change upon death, but frankly, who knows? God is all encompasing, though, and for this to be true, it must also encompass contradictions and paradoxes. God must be able to make mistakes, otherwise that implies there is something God is incapable of doing, which, in a way, defeats the whole purpose of God. It is to be hoped that upon death or transcendence or whatever spiritual revelation may happen (if there is one), that a deeper understanding of these contradictions and paradoxes will prove them to be less contradictory and paradoxical than they appear, but that may just be a pipe dream.

The way I work around this, however, is through personal responsibility. Mankind is responsible for his own actions, not some negative force like devils or Satan. If I make someone miserable, then I myself am responsible for that and must endure whatever spiritual debt may be accrued. The trouble with a lot of religious thought is that it's far too willing to surrender this personal responsibility to these mysterious higher powers. If I do something good, it's because God was working through me. If I do something bad, it's because the devil made me do it. I don't believe that either God or the devil (if either of them exist) take such direct action in this physical existance. Therefore, at the end of the day, any triumph is mine and any failure is also mine and if there is a reckoning after death, some sort of final judgement, I will be allowed to take credit for my successes and must own up to my disasters.

Divinity may indeed have all these powers, omnipotence, omniscience, and omnipresence (I do believe it has this last one because of my personal religious beliefs, although I'm not too sure about the first two). But again, to paraphrase Christopher Durang, "God always answers prayers, it's just sometimes the answer is no." God may be embued with amazing power, but may not choose to exercise it for whatever inscrutible reasons God has. It's easy to say that something we don't like is "evil" on no better rationale than that we don't like it. But what's the better alternative?

It reminds me of a story from my improv comedy days. There was this improv commedian who said that the worst sketches he'd ever done in his life always started with one thought: This is going to be so funny. Sure, God could intervene whenever God felt like it or whenever we asked, but then what would be the point of existance? If we're not allowed to make mistakes, how can we ever hope to learn and make that knowledge ours? A couple of years ago, sleep learning was all the rage. The idea that, if you played information while you were asleep, you would absorb it subconciously and be the better for it when you awoke. Indeed, it seemed to work, but there was a flaw. You may have the knowledge, but you don't know what it means. You can't utilize it, on a subconcious, instinctual, level, although you may be able to quote it back verbatim. The process of learning, the actual formation of neuronal links and whatever accompanying effect this has on our souls, is vital and important in advancing us forward not only as individuals, but as a species. If God had created us already with all that, then what would be the point in creation at all? Or if God stepped in anytime things got tough or mistakes were being made, not only would we grow exceedingly reckless because we would know there's always a celestial safety net ready to catch us, but we would never actually "learn" anything.

I agree with you. The ideas of monotheistic perfection of divinity are troubling and apparently contradictory. Perhaps God is cruel. I guess, in a sense, God must be because he is (at least to my thinking) all things. I believe, though, these are more personifications of God created by man to make an ultimately unfathomable "God" more understandable and approachable. It must always be remembered that personifcations, while they may serve a purpose, are no more than an attempt to limit and reframe a concept in a way that is more accessable and while they may lead to a form of deeper understanding, they only do so at the loss of the much greater picture.


2) The Afterlife. What are powerful moral lessons that the bible teaches are constantly being overshadowed by this prospect of reward. Look at the gospels; the most frequent question asked to Jesus is "What must I do to gain eternal life?". Is that not sickening? A guy comes along and suggests that maybe people should try being nice to each other, and all these guys want to know is how to prolong their own existence. And yet, so often it's the very thing that both Christianity and Islam use to "Hook in" prospective followers. Do this, they say, and you will receive an eternal reward in Heaven. You know what kind of people this ropes in? The sort who will do anything for a big enough reward.

Why is the Bible not simply content with giving people guidance on how to live out their lives, how to treat your fellow man with respect and kindness, how to love your neighbour and how to best live in a way that pleases God without this need to every step of the way remind you that "Oh, and you'll go to paradise if you do". It instantly annihilates the credibility of the book as guidance for the human race. Can't there be some other way of simply telling them that "Being nice is a Good Thing" without coaxing them on constantly with the thought that they'll live forever if they are?

The best way to outline this promise by God is subtly. Like maybe somewhere at the beginning of Acts, Jesus's final message could be "The Gates have been opened for those who wish to enter with me" without all the continual promises and reaffirmations. That would put it across without seeming like the obvious attention grabber that it is in the rest of the word.

I regret to say I have no knowledge of the Kurran on this, but I imagine the feeling is probably similar from what I've heard from what Islamic friends I have. Eternal Life is not a reward for good behaviour but an enticement to do deeds to please Allah. Which many Christians, even, would denounce as a means of Buying support, despite the fact that their word itself engages in exactly the same thing.

In the end of the day, the concept of an eternal life appears to me to be a way to try and drag the greedy and self-serving into the ring of the church. "It's like an investment", they say, "You'll be paid back what you lost and then some in God's Kingdom". Well nuts to that. I'm going to follow the sound advice you gave me, but I don't want this bribery to do so. I'm a man of integrity, and you won't find me bought into your way of thinking by this faint promise of immortality.

Well, here you're straying from spirituality and faith and bringing in religion, which is a whole other can of worms. One of the greatest questions that has consumed man, one of our biggest fears, is what happens when we die. Is that it? Is there simply non-existance and absolute and utter negation of purpose and personality? That in and of itself is a pretty heavy burden to bear for the average person. When you couple it with the obvious disparity between physical existences on this planet, it seems very harsh and cruel. Someone, through no fault of their own, may be born into a situation which in inherantly unfair and inimical to a full life. Slavery, poverty, disability, sickness. All these conditions seem like pretty raw deals if this brief moment of birdflight through a lighted room is all we get. It's no wonder, then, when you couple the unanswerable question of what happens when we die with these conditions, people cling to a notion of continuation and retribution. This is mirrored in the Bible because, at the end of the day, man wrote that book and all spiritual texts. Even if there was a divine spark somewhere in the process, these works reflect mankinds basic fears and concerns. The Old Testament was written by a people with a history of oppression. It makes perfect sense that, if they are trying to form a core of hope in what is apparently a hopeless world, that they would include some sort of "salvation" theory. Yes, this life may suck, but the next life will be better for it...oh, did we happen to mention there is a next life, so don't worry so much about this one? This provides comfort and hope in a situation that may have been deplorable, to say the least.

Is there life after death? Again, who knows? It's possible. It's possible that when we die, we go to Heaven and all our loved ones and pets are joyously waiting there for us to welcome us in. It's certainly a nice idea and very comforting. It's one I currently find very seductive as I watch my Uncle slowly wither away to nothing from lung cancer and see an old family friend struggle against brain tumors. However, in my deepest, darkest, most skeptical heart, I'm forced to admit it's only a possibility and not a very likely one at that. Many would say this is where faith comes in, and perhaps, for many, it does. It doesn't satisfy me, though. So I cobble together what to my mind seems like a more reasonable and practicle solution. No pearly gates. No winged angels playing harps. No final judgement except that which we give ourselves.

Instead, I consider energistics. The things we do resonate, both in who we are and in those around us. This complex resonance is what we, for lack of a better term, "are". It's why we make the choices we make, do the things we do. While our biological selves are indeed a complex morass of chemical impulses, this resonance is what they ultimately act upon. It's the "tabla rasa" that we fill in throughout the course of our lives and it's what exists once the biological impulses stop firing. Again, for the sake of honesty, I am forced to admit this is all assumption, theory, guesswork and only possibility, but it seems right to me intuitively and I've learned the hard way to trust intuition (at least when dealing with metaphysics). It's at least someplace to start, some ground state to progress from. Will this resonance be me as I define myself now? Most likely not. It probably won't want sushi more often than it should or be quite so into online gaming or feel guilty for asking for vacation days at work. It will contain, however, the basic components of myself, the underlying principles that make "me" me in the first place. It's part of a far vaster substrate that I can not consciously comprehend with my current senses.

Again, though, these are only my theories and that's all any of us have to go on. Our own experience. That's why a personal spiritual journey is so important, so fundamental, to whatever this existance is. That's why personal accountability is also key. I don't want God to save me from my mistakes or to be able to blame Satan for my faults. That means nothing I ever do is mine, I never progress, I never resonate and, at the end of this gloriously brief moment of sunlight, I am still as blank a slate as when I started.


I reckon the Buddhists have been the closest so far. Maybe I'll go check them out eventually. Until then, I'm willing to accept criticism as the uncertain Agnostic I am at the minute.

Buddisim is fascinating, both in it's teachings and in it's acceptance of other spiritual paths. And I wouldn't call discussion criticism. You're walking your own spiritual path and you have every right to choose your next step. When you finally come to your conclusion (if any of us ever really do), then the journey will have been honestly yours and it can only be better for your questioning. It's always helpful to stop and ask for directions, but you must always then decide for yourself if you will follow those directions or if you think you can profit more from finding your own way. You may one day decide that agnosticim is exactly where you need to be. You may embrace athiesim or you might find a theistic approach that resonates for you. Whatever stopping point you reach, you will have lived a better life for the simple act of questioning and be more grounded in your beliefs for the journey. You will also me more empathic for the journey's of others and able to revel and wonder in the myriad paths of human belief instead of having to shout down the questions of others in order to maintain your own shaky "house-of-cards" faith.

Hi again!
On the subject of rewards/punishments presented in the Bible, I believe that this is, in a sense, an example of the humility of God. If God were standing on principle, He would only welcome those who came to Him from pure motives of truth and goodness; no-one would live up to that standard. As it is, He even accepts those who turn to Him because they want heaven and not hell; but if they didn't actually accept Him as God, He knows that, and I believe there will be those who think they're sorted who'll have a nasty shock on the Day of Judgement.
On the choice-without-evil idea, I think your beta-test remark may be closer to the truth than you thought. In a way, I think humanity as we see it is a transition stage to what God intends, a humanity that accepts His rule and reflects His love and goodness and wisdom. I think we all have within us a selfishness that is the root of all problems, all social problems, all emotional problems, all economic problems, everything that's wrong with the world (even natural disasters and suchlike can be linked back to the Fall, the original rebellion), and I believe that Jesus Christ is God's solution to this problem of selfishness. However, even God's solution has a limitation, in the sense that it is optional for people to adopt it or not. Everyone who does let God sort their life out becomes part of the solution; everyone who doesn't is still part of the problem.
I know this sounds quite extreme, but we are talking about extreme issues. I hope you want to continue this discussion; tell me if you don't!

'lo again. Last one for now. Feel free to respond, but I won't be able to read it for a good few hours.

I more or less get the gist of your argument, but there's one thing I think I should expand on. I'll horribly oversimplify the situation here and reuse the Beta Testing analogy to point out a difference in perspective here. Imagine you are putting a new word processor with a custom character map through the testing run. Everything's fine, you're typing a document with relative ease, until you get to the Email address, where whenever you type the @ character, it shows up as a ¬. Now, first thing, you notice something isn't quite right. It may have been a once off, so you go back and retry it. If it happens again, you try changing a few physical conditions to try and sort things out, but it may well turn out that no matter what you do, the wrong character keeps getting printed. Here, we see the problem must lie with the background code. The misprint was not one isolated incident; rather, it was something that the program itself hashed up.

The flaws that we see in people today and this Beta Test Creation, if we want to call it that, clearly show that "Errors", by which we mean rebellious, destructive behaviour, sin or whatever (again, vast oversimplification), occur frequently in varying conditions. If it were a computer program, we'd send it back pretty quickly to the manufacturer to get it sorted. It's not the fault of the individual incident in which these errors occur, but the fault of the program itself that runs it, as the continual repetition of these errors demonstrates.

Basically you're saying that when a human acts as God wanted them to, they're helping the solution, but when someone doesn't, they're making the problem worse. Surely, though, these people who are bending the rules are simply exploring and highlighting a very serious error in the basic design of the universe. If that's the case, then it's the people who produce the "Erronous output" that are helping the most in creating a future or a later existence...

While I, admittedly as part of this "Beta test creation", would rather not be subjected to the evils of myself and others, you've got to admit that the message they are sending to God, whoever that is, must be pretty strong. But, on the other hand, it's the people who are doing this that get punished in the end of the day. Doesn't that seem a bit unfair? Not only are they a piece of rejected test data, but they don't even get a part in the final program!

Okay, I'm getting very long on rhetoric here. But maybe, I think, the concept of "Hate Sin, Love the Sinner" should apply to an extent that even God didn't consider, especially when you consider that it's a flaw in his creation that allows them to live the life that they do.

This message is for the religious people of the world.

Remember when, as a little kid, you lost your first tooth? Your parents told you about the tooth fairy, and gave you money so you would't be scared about something you didn't understand. And during Christmas, you were told about Santa Clause, and that he flew around the world every Christmas Eve delivering presents to all the little boys and girls. But only the ones who behaved got presents. These two stories solved problems whithout a real explanation. Then came the subject of death. "What happens when we die?"
"We go to a WONDERFUL place in the clouds where nothing bad can happen and everyone is happy for all of eternity."

But this story was different. It started millions of years ago when people wanted to explain something like "Why is the sky blue?" and they decided that someone must have created us. The simple fact is this: a little white lie is fine, unless it starts wars. Almost every one of history's wars was started because people just didn't understand.


By the way, the sky is blue because the air molecules in the atmosphere bend the sun's light so that only the blue light reaches your eyes.

Oh shut up. Atheism has started just as many wars you ass.
Holocaust...Communism...
Don't act like religion is the sole cause of wars.

And, I would like to point out that it only causes wars when people stop believing the "little white lie"

Oh shut up. Atheism has started just as many wars you ass.
Holocaust...Communism...
Don't act like religion is the sole cause of wars.


while i agree that theism is not the only cause of wars, i would like to remind you that Communism and Nazism are NOT equivalent to atheism in any way, so you can't claim either of those wars were started because of atheism. in fact, i can't think of a single major war that was started because of atheism, though many were started for secular reasons.



And, I would like to point out that it only causes wars when people stop believing the "little white lie"

now you're just flat out wrong. the "little white lie" he was refering to is the belief that we were created by some greater power, a power that continues to be involved with our lives; i think most people could name at least half a dozen wars off the top of their head that were started specifically over the belief in God or conflicting ideas of what the Creator is. so don't try to claim that people only fight wars when they abandon religion or faith...hell, read the Bible and you will find plenty of passages specifically instructing people to go to war, and plenty of references to God's endorsement of violence and battle. Islam can likewise be read to endorse religious wars, as can Jewish doctrine, Hindi tradition, and probably pretty much every other religion there is.

Oh, hey, a friend of mine and I came up with this.

Without faith, God is nothing. Once you have proof of something, you no longer need faith. If a person died and went to heaven, that would be definate proof. In the end, if God exists, he can't, and if he doesn't, problem solved.

Yes there are some big flaws, but we were bored.

the first part of this is right, but we have no evidence or proof that someone went to heaven, we believe that, God wants us to have faith and trust in Him, if you had proof that God was there then it would just be a common fact and ppl would take it for granted, thats not free will, we have to put our faith in Him and then we will know the importance, God gave us a choice, we need to make the right one

about perfect creation, in Genesis it explains why there is war and no peace, God made a perfect creation, and since God gave us free will, Adam and Eve were tempted by Satan, disobeyed God and ate the fruit that gave them knowledge of good and evil, now they knew what evil was, and now ppl sin

I have no experience or observation of God, therefor I do not believe in Him. The only way I could then say 'I believe in God' would be by lying.
The only way you can truthfully change your opinion on something is when you are presented with new information, or when your conviction was weak and you hadn't really made up your mind yet.

What I think you're trying to say is that you can say 'I think that based on my current experience and observations, it is safe to assume that X'. Still, even then cannot say you chose to believe in X, since in order to do so you must already have faith in X.

I think we may be having a disagreement about the technical use of words like "choose", "believe", "assume", and so on. I don't want you to pretend to believe in God, but your point about new information is interesting. What new information would you consider to be valid evidence for the existence of the God described in the Bible?

Yes I have to agree with you on that.

As to what I'd accept as proof of God? Well, Him in any clear form communicating with me. Email would be great. After all, He knows my email adres. :wink: