This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
My Quandry with Judeo-Christian Beliefs
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Skreeran
So your job is to argue with people, while trying to not be a homicidal maniac?I'm not a homocidal maniac, and I don't have to try not to be one (personal issues aside).
When I say "Keep my cool" I mean that I have to resist the urge to outright call people stupid or ignorant, even if I feel like they are (not you, but there are definitely times that it's occurred in various religious debates). I do my best to use logic as my weapon of choice, rather than letting my emotions get the best of me.
Atheism has treated me like dirt. Yet I still make the effort to be polite. You can too.As I said in the above sentence, I try to.
Again, here we go: Sticking all religions ever with evangelical and fundamentalist beliefs. The vast majority don't and have never physically harmed people, or are as prejudiced as you make out.
Historically
religion has done those things, and you cannot deny them. My great-great-great-great... and so on grandmother was hanged as a witch at the Salem Witch trials. There have been several inquisitions, crusades, religious persecution, and so on in the past.
Modern, progressive religion
has come past those times, but religion in general has hurt people historically. I consider myself lucky to have been born in a time where my deconversion from Christianity ended in severe depression, rather than being lynched.
So if people use 'reasoning and logic', and still come up with religion, what then? It's what happened with me. Granted I'm still a high school student, but I haven't met with much proof showing God to be false and a lot more showing Him to be in existence.And yet you still cannot prove God's existance, can you? Logic would dictate that one should not believe to be absolute truth something that they cannot prove.
Saying "Observation and reasoning make me think that this is likely, so I believe it's probably true" is logical, but I've never met a theist who said there was "probably" a God.
Um, do you live in the modern world? Religion hasn't been free of criticism for a long time.And yet at least 45% percent (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationism#cite_note-Gallup2007-122
) of Americans believe that "God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so."
More criticism is necessary, apparently.
And yet there still is no evidence that God doesn't exist, I've seen almost zip arguments that were well put together that showed God to be false.No evidence? There's plenty of evidence. Take the conspicuous absence of miracles (at least miracles on par with any given book of the Old Testament). If you mean "You can't prove God doesn't exist," then I can't prove the Naaru don't exist either, but I still don't pray to them.
If you want to read some good, organized arguments against theistic gods, I'd reccommend that you read
The God Delusion
by Richard Dawkins, who is more intelligent and well-spoken than I.
Post by
Skreeran
And I'd rather not live in a world where little 2-year-old girls can have their heads bashed against wagon wheels until they die
I thought that when your religion was "proved false" that you wanted to nuke the world. Wouldn't that be just as horrible?After I learned religion to be false, I began to believe that morality was a lie as well and I became a nihilist. I wanted everything to die because it all was useless, worthless, and perishable.
It's taken the better part of three years for me to come to terms with life. I don't think life is worthless anymore, and I don't think that people should suffer uneccessarily.
Post by
Monday
More criticism is necessary, apparently.
No, this isn't a religion's problem as a two pronged human-are-sheep and humans-are-morons.
Take the conspicuous absence of miracles (at least miracles on par with any given book of the Old Testament).
I see too many miracles to believe that argument. It means that God doesn't need to take a large hand in keeping His church alive.
And yet you still cannot prove God's existance, can you? Logic would dictate that one should not believe to be absolute truth something that they cannot prove.
I don't believe it to be an absolute truth. Faith is what I use.
Saying "Observation and reasoning make me think that this is likely, so I believe it's probably true" is logical, but I've never met a theist who said there was "probably" a God.
Then they are lying. Nobody knows 100% that God exists. We just believe very strongly.
Post by
717621
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Skreeran
No, this isn't a religion's problem as a two pronged human-are-sheep and humans-are-morons.Christianity, Judaism, and Islam (the Abrahamic faiths) tend to teach Biblical literalism.
Most Christians that I have met believe that ever word of the Bible is true. They believed that in Washington, a blue state, in Texas, a Red state, and even where I lived in California, the bluest state on the map.
Biblical literalism may lead sheep astray, but since I can't attack the sheep, I'll work to bring down the shepherd.
I see too many miracles to believe that argument. It means that God doesn't need to take a large hand in keeping His church alive.Well lucky you. I bet those kids with bone cancer and those mothers who saw their babies butchered in front of them were praying for a miracle too.
I don't believe it to be an absolute truth. Faith is what I use."Faith" can mean anything from vague belief to absolute blind faith.
Can you quantify your faith? You cannot give empirical, non-anecdotal evidence that God absolutely 100% for sure exists, but do you have any doubt?
Or is the God Hypothesis simply your favored theory and you accept the small possibility (from your perspective) that you could be wrong?
I have much more respect for the latter position than the former.
Then they are lying. Nobody knows 100% that God exists. We just believe very strongly.And that's why I argue with them. Most people take God's existence for granted, and I do my best to remind people that there is doubt.
So if people use 'reasoning and logic', and still come up with religion, what then? It's what happened with me. Granted I'm still a high school student, but I haven't met with much proof showing God to be false and a lot more showing Him to be in existence.And yet you still cannot prove God's existance, can you? Logic would dictate that one should not believe to be absolute truth something that they cannot prove. And you cannot prove that God does not exist, yet you believe that to be the truth.I can't prove the Naaru don't exist either, but I still don't pray to them.
Post by
HiVolt
More criticism is necessary, apparently.
No, this isn't a religion's problem as a two pronged human-are-sheep and humans-are-morons.
With all due respect, Funden, if religions are what is driving those scientific and historical inaccuracies, then they absolutely need more criticism. It may not necessarily apply to progressive religious thoughts- at least the ones that don't claim scientific evidence- but it does need to be applied to the fundamentalist thoughts(the ones that try to replace scientific evidence with doctrine).
People are indeed sheep- but they don't need to be led towards the wolves' den when there's a meadow in the other direction.
Post by
Cambo
I wasn't gone
that
long was I? :P Thou were absent for a few pages, I didn't want to think you created a kerfuffle then backed out lol
Come on, Cambo, you know what I mean by blanket rule. The rule of creation applies to everything in it's ideology. Is god not included in the term "everything"? If he is not, why? And yes, I understand it doesn't make it true because one person says it- but, what I'm saying is if we're going to apply the rule of creation to absolutely everything, why do we leave god out of that?
I am not up to speed on the creation
ideology
as such, but I imagine it applies to all natural creatures in the universe, since there is some evidence of creation, but no evidence of God being created or just always existing. Of course the origin of God can be questioned, but not with any authority or assurance because well... nobody knows.
Well, you implied it with your saying "these religions have done much good," etc. Of course, I'm paraphrasing, but you also said that the term "unnecessary" is relative. I was just attempting to highlight that relativity against your argument(the "doing good" part). With the good also comes the evil, is what I'm saying. So if a car repeatedly has problems with a particular mechanism (*ahem* catholics *ahem*) you completely write off all automobiles and call the whole industry into disrepute? Or if in your personal work experience you were late a few times, punched a customer once, you should never be allowed to work at all?
Define 'you people'. I am a high school graduate and college dropout. I didn't spend more than a semester in college, and I graduated right around 30th in my class with a ~3.5 GPA. I'm by no means gifted in the area of intellect, as I would see being gifted, anyway. All I do is read about subjects that interest me. People 'like me' do not have any kind of a monopoly on knowledge. It is there for anyone who wishes to pursue it(and have the means to view/hear/etc. it, but that goes without saying). By 'you people' I mean those who question and or oppose judeo-christian 'religion'.
X-thousand years of human social advancement I would like to point out that we aren't as socially advanced as we'd like to think we are. Sure, instant e-mail is better than post mail, but Africa is still rife with poverty, hunger and disease while western nations strip the continent of its wealth.
...if God has license to neutralize people at will with no repercussion, how does that affect free will, as Patty brought up earlier? Free Will is non-control. But it doesn't promise immunity from repercussions of human actions. Nor does it promise that you will live in perfect health and wealth and die at 100. We'll again visit a family example. As a child, you can pretty much wander where you want, touch what you want, act how you want. You aren't programmed in a robotic fashion. Your parents may make some modifications to your surroundings to keep you contained for your safety. If you continually pull out the bag of flour and spread it across the kitchen floor your parents are likely to initiate punishment as guidance for you to modify your behaviour. The difference with God however, is that He knows the desires and motivations of your heart and He doesn’t like it if your actions are greedy and you are aware that you will hurt somebody else.
Yes, there are still answers we don't have, but what is so wrong with saying "We don't know, at least for now"? OMG COMMON GROUND! I totally agree, this is what I have been trying to communicate here. Christians don’t know everything, but we have just as much right as ‘you people’ (see above) to question and theorise and dream fanciful ideologies. I consider everyone equal in this manner. Of course I think I know some things you don’t, because I claim to have met a deity, but I don’t think of you (or anyone else) as inferior. I apologise on behalf of all Christian people who may have directly or indirectly insinuated that they are ‘Holier/higher/better than thou’
As to the second part of your post- who verified these "approvals"? Men- probably the men that were granted the "approvals". Or if not them directly, their own disciples- biased observers. You are correct. A majority of the time it was biased, but there are hundreds of accounts of non-believers being present in certain circumstances in which unexplained supernatural things occurred, and without any coercion these non-believers testified as to the presence of God and most probably the humility of the believers. I can dig through my library at home and supply you some accounts if you’d like.
Post by
324987
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Monday
Or is the God Hypothesis simply your favored theory and you accept the small possibility (from your perspective) that you could be wrong?
I believe absolutely
nothing
100%.
Well lucky you. I bet those kids with bone cancer and those mothers who saw their babies butchered in front of them were praying for a miracle too.
Most people don't pray when faced with death. They think "Oh crap," if it's quick, and then they die. If it isn't quick, then maybe they do pray. Perhaps God wants them back with Him.
E: OMG COMMON GROUND! I totally agree, this is what I have been trying to communicate here. Christians don’t know everything, but we have just as much right as ‘you people’ (see above) to question and theorise and dream fanciful ideologies. I consider everyone equal in this manner. Of course I think I know some things you don’t, because I claim to have met a deity, but I don’t think of you (or anyone else) as inferior. I apologise on behalf of all Christian people who may have directly or indirectly insinuated that they are ‘Holier/higher/better than thou’
This ^^
Post by
HiVolt
I wasn't gone
that
long was I? :P Thou were absent for a few pages, I didn't want to think you created a kerfuffle then backed out lol Oh no, sir, I always try to at least follow the kerfuffles I create. hehe
Come on, Cambo, you know what I mean by blanket rule. The rule of creation applies to everything in it's ideology. Is god not included in the term "everything"? If he is not, why? And yes, I understand it doesn't make it true because one person says it- but, what I'm saying is if we're going to apply the rule of creation to absolutely everything, why do we leave god out of that?
I am not up to speed on the creation
ideology
as such, but I imagine it applies to all natural creatures in the universe, since there is some evidence of creation, but no evidence of God being created or just always existing. Of course the origin of God can be questioned, but not with any authority or assurance because well... nobody knows. Indeed. Nobody does know. I know I can't disprove god, so I don't try. I only try to give logic and scientific evidence to support my non-belief.
However, proving that god exists seems to be something that religious people also cannot do. So, where does the endless cycle of belief vs. non-belief end? Well, when someone turns up being right, it seems. If I live to see the apocalypse of any religion come true, I'll certainly admit my defeat. But, therein lies the problem with it- I can actually be disproved.
Religious answers to natural phenomena tend to hinge on the fact that you can't disprove them, so even in the face of overwhelming evidence against- 2+2 is still fish...
Well, you implied it with your saying "these religions have done much good," etc. Of course, I'm paraphrasing, but you also said that the term "unnecessary" is relative. I was just attempting to highlight that relativity against your argument(the "doing good" part). With the good also comes the evil, is what I'm saying. So if a car repeatedly has problems with a particular mechanism (*ahem* catholics *ahem*) you completely write off all automobiles and call the whole industry into disrepute? Or if in your personal work experience you were late a few times, punched a customer once, you should never be allowed to work at all? No, I write off that automobile. If any other autos give me problems, I'd write them off as well. I've done the research necessary to know what the fundamental beliefs are in most major religions, and I find them all to be incorrect in some capacity. Sure, I don't know what some religions entail, and if I were to find them enlightening in some way that atheism hasn't been, I might be inclined to change my ideas. You could say I've read the Carfax for most religions, and have decided to buy only one of two that I actually test-drove(if you consider atheism as a religion that is). Yay, metaphors!
Define 'you people'. I am a high school graduate and college dropout. I didn't spend more than a semester in college, and I graduated right around 30th in my class with a ~3.5 GPA. I'm by no means gifted in the area of intellect, as I would see being gifted, anyway. All I do is read about subjects that interest me. People 'like me' do not have any kind of a monopoly on knowledge. It is there for anyone who wishes to pursue it(and have the means to view/hear/etc. it, but that goes without saying). By 'you people' I mean those who question and or oppose judeo-christian 'religion'. I'm sorry, I just thought you were implying that I've(not necessarily me personally, but non-believers) had some sort of knowledge available to me that you(again, not you personally, etc.) don't.
X-thousand years of human social advancement I would like to point out that we aren't as socially advanced as we'd like to think we are. Sure, instant e-mail is better than post mail, but Africa is still rife with poverty, hunger and disease while western nations strip the continent of its wealth. Those Western nations are at the very least trying to noticeably combat those problems, which is much more than we can say about what god has noticeably done for them. (Yeah, I know the argument. God guiding the good, etc., but I'll stick to the idea that it's man's endeavor rather than god's, as that is what is most evident.) Sure, we may get it wrong from time to time, but that goes with being human.
...if God has license to neutralize people at will with no repercussion, how does that affect free will, as Patty brought up earlier? Free Will is non-control. But it doesn't promise immunity from repercussions of human actions. Nor does it promise that you will live in perfect health and wealth and die at 100. We'll again visit a family example. As a child, you can pretty much wander where you want, touch what you want, act how you want. You aren't programmed in a robotic fashion. Your parents may make some modifications to your surroundings to keep you contained for your safety. If you continually pull out the bag of flour and spread it across the kitchen floor your parents are likely to initiate punishment as guidance for you to modify your behaviour. The difference with God however, is that He knows the desires and motivations of your heart and He doesn’t like it if your actions are greedy and you are aware that you will hurt somebody else. But, how does the "nipping-in-the-bud", so to speak, of the problem allow the person inciting the problem the free will do so? Free will is indeed non-control, but removal of problems is definitely control as is the induction of rules against certain behavior.
Yes, there are still answers we don't have, but what is so wrong with saying "We don't know, at least for now"? OMG COMMON GROUND! I totally agree, this is what I have been trying to communicate here. Christians don’t know everything, but we have just as much right as ‘you people’ (see above) to question and theorise and dream fanciful ideologies. I consider everyone equal in this manner. Of course I think I know some things you don’t, because I claim to have met a deity, but I don’t think of you (or anyone else) as inferior. I apologise on behalf of all Christian people who may have directly or indirectly insinuated that they are ‘Holier/higher/better than thou’ Well, I very much appreciate your apology, and I'm glad you've got some common ground with me on this idea. There are far too many religious folk I've met who didn't share that, and it is very refreshing to see it stated. Thank you.
As to the second part of your post- who verified these "approvals"? Men- probably the men that were granted the "approvals". Or if not them directly, their own disciples- biased observers. You are correct. A majority of the time it was biased, but there are hundreds of accounts of non-believers being present in certain circumstances in which unexplained supernatural things occurred, and without any coercion these non-believers testified as to the presence of God and most probably the humility of the believers. I can dig through my library at home and supply you some accounts if you’d like.I would like to see the accounts, but I'd like to try and find as many as I can on my own(I'm totally not a super nerd :P). But, I will say that I will likely take them under extreme scrutiny- as I would with any account of the unexplained or supernatural. If I find any that are compelling to me, I'll post them. If you want to post some of the ones you've found, feel free to, but I probably won't comment on them(the scientist in me dictates that I find as much evidence as possible before making my claims).
Post by
Skreeran
I believe absolutely nothing 100%.Well good, we can agree on that then.
Most people don't pray when faced with death. They think "Oh crap," if it's quick, and then they die. If it isn't quick, then maybe they do pray. Perhaps God wants them back with Him.Many of these settlers who I keep referring to were intensely religious people, and I can almost guarantee you that they were begging for help from God as they saw their babies literally butchered in front of them.
But I have to cut this short. Basically my entire argument consists of "I think that theists are wrong, I think I have good reason to believe that they are wrong, and I want to make sure that arguments against religion are brought to the public eye because I want people to think about it."
Post by
Monday
Basically my entire argument consists of "I think that
a
theists are wrong, I think I have good reason to believe that they are wrong, and I want to make sure that arguments against
religion
atheism
are brought to the public eye because I want people to think about it."
With the edits, this is basically my position. We'll agree to disagree, right?
Many of these settlers who I keep referring to were intensely religious people, and I can almost guarantee you that they were begging for help from God as they saw their babies literally butchered in front of them.
People aren't exactly rational* when faced with death.
*Rational being praying to the deity they believe will save them.
Post by
Cambo
However,
proving that god exists seems to be something that religious people also cannot do
. So, where does the endless cycle of belief vs. non-belief end? Well, when someone turns up being right, it seems. If I live to see the apocalypse of any religion come true, I'll certainly admit my defeat. But, therein lies the problem with it- I can actually be disproved.
I agree with you to a large extent, however proving that God exists is possible, but difficult. Most christians live a life of theological thought, no personal relationship with God, so it is hard for them to back up their beliefs with real life experiences. I could stand face to face with you and regale you with my various encounters with God, and I am sure it will be difficult for you to prove me wrong, but I accept you may not believe me (note the differences of those).
I've done the research necessary to know what the fundamental beliefs are in most major religions, and I find them all to be incorrect in some capacity. Sure, I don't know what some religions entail, and if I were to find them enlightening in some way that atheism hasn't been, I might be inclined to change my ideas.
Full credit for you for researching. An issue with scholarly religious texts is that they include alot of theory but no life, very little which can be used as encouragement in times of personal troubles. They tend to be picked over and regurgitated by man, so often what the deity-person is trying to convey gets skewed after a few centuries.
If you are in a relationship with a person, you probably agree with me that a joyful, open, spontaneous relationship is much better than one in which you need to wear certain clothes, eat certain foods, be a certain way, or only on special days, get to be 'intimate' or close with your loved one.
I would like to see the accounts, but I'd like to try and find as many as I can on my own(I'm totally not a super nerd :P). But, I will say that I will likely take them under extreme scrutiny- as I would with any account of the unexplained or supernatural. If I find any that are compelling to me, I'll post them. If you want to post some of the ones you've found, feel free to, but I probably won't comment on them(the scientist in me dictates that I find as much evidence as possible before making my claims). Fair enough. There have been times in history where God visited the earth and did some stuff, mainly to correct the church. One of these was accounted by a minister called Duncan Campbell, whom God sent to the place to oversee the movement. There are MP3 recordings of his sermon on sermonindex.com, called 'When God Stepped Down'. It can be difficult to understand with his prevalent scottish accent, but the sermons hold a very interesting account of how and why God came to that Scottish island.
This all probably sounds far fetched to you, but I encourage you to give them a listen. In the very least it will broaden your perspective.
Post by
Monday
Cambo, I'm just curious, but what religion are you? Obviously Christian, but what sect?
Post by
Cambo
Cambo, I'm just curious, but what religion are you? Obviously Christian, but what sect?
A little info. I'm a 25 y/o white male New Zealander. I was pentecostal/charismatic but I stopped going to church a year a go because it was too much pressure to be 'supernatural' and 'miracle vendor' kind of thing. My christian walk with God was totally shattered but somehow my faith in God is still intact. I first went to church when I was 9, got baptised because it was a popular thing to do but I eventually had a supernatural encounter with God a few years ago which really shook the religion out of me.
If you define 'christian' as somebody who goes to church, then no, I'm not a christian. I adhere to most of the beliefs, but I am primarily run by ethics, morals and love for others, not religion. I still have difficulty 'loving Jesus', as most of my encounters have been with the Father and the Holy Ghost. But I consider that to be something that I will have to walk out during my life.
Post by
Monday
I define Christian as somebody who worships Christ.
So just a general Christian then? No specific sect?
Post by
Cambo
No, no sect.
Are you insinutating that I'm a strange robed religious zealot?
Or did you mean what
denomination
?
I think I worship Christ. Depends on the definition of worship. I believe in who He is, and what He did. But my perspective on Him is based on a vision I had of Him as an authority figure, not as a gentle, meek lamb. So I fear Him greatly, but I haven't got a 'lovey-dovey' relationship with Him like some christians profess. That's ok that they do, but some have made it sound like I was dysfunctional because I wasn't all soft and gooey about Him.
A problem is that some people are narrow-minded and think that there is only one way to worship and serve God/Jesus, but there are many. Each person's relationship with God is as personal and tailored to them as they are so individually different to everyone else. That's the beauty of true christianity. It's a personal relationship. Not 300 people filing into a building on a Sunday to sing boring songs.
Post by
Monday
My apologies, I was under the assumption that sect/denomination meant the same thing. I have researched and concluded that I was wrong.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.