Religions - Your Opinion

[Alpha]

I doubt I'm going to cover everything, I'm a little short on time, but I'll do what I can.

In Genesis? ... That's two chapters. You can't honestly be arrogant enough to assume that somebody is referring to two chapters of genealogy when they admit to not having read all of the Bible.

It's clear you take things literally. I used that as an example of much of the unnecessary information of the Bible to counter an assertion that one must read the whole Bible. Try to take not of when I use examples. Look for implications, I don't mean everything as the be-all end-all.

Not at all -- you don't have to have read any of the Bible before you become Christian, if you hear the message from other people. Many, many people became Christians without ever having touched a Bible.

Good to know; so why then why do you keep saying I'm not a Christian when I do as Jesus says and (do my utmost) to love both my neighbour and God? I have not read the whole Bible, but I go to Mass every Sunday, and on Holy Days of Obligation, and hear no less than THREE readings each time, in addition to 13 years of Catholic education, and occasional reading of the Bible in my own time (admittedly, not as much as I should).

You'd assume wrong. Of course everybody who has faith in anything believes themselves to be right.

So who's right? Where's the proof that Christianity is right? It is a matter of faith, and there's no 'better' or 'worse', so why does anyone preach?

Really? It's "the Christian" thing to be involved in a discussion of religion with those who do not follow the same beliefs and never bring up how Christianity is "right"?

It's Christian to not slam the door in their face, and it is NOT Christian to bring up why Christianity is 'right', because that would be disrespect another. Many things are moot, but if you're just going to sit there, laugh at someone's belief and say "nup. nup. nup. you're wrong. you're stupid because you don't believe in Christ as the Savior", then you're just being a jerk, by a lot of standards.

Probably not, but who knows? A lot of people convert because of neighborhood preaching.

A lot? I keep the Mormons at bay with a statue of the Virgin at my door. That's not to disrespect them, it's just kind of annoying every second week.

What's wrong with being zealous about any belief, as long as you're peaceful about it? All too many ignorant people use "zealous" and "fundamentalist" as insults. And the point of the whole exercise would be to spread your belief -- even if you didn't "convert" anybody, you still brought it up, so they might think about it later, consider it, maybe want to learn more about it, etc.

Is it more tolerant to just keep your belief to yourself? In this day and age, everyone has heard of Christianity in all it's variants, so why do we need zealots to try force people in to it? It scares more people than attracts people.

On that note, what's the point of your post to me, or this part of this post, that addresses you, if we both know that at this point, neither of us has changed the other's mind?

Sh*t. What's the point of talking? Maybe someone else is going to read this, or we are going to become more informed about the other's belief. I respect your belief, and I seek to understand it, but I'm not going to change. Debate is one way to understand another.

Where in this thread have I declared my beliefs?

You're a fundamentalist Christian. Right or wrong?

Say, you have a kid. You tell that kid that the stove is hot. You tell him again that the stove is hot, and that he/she should stay away from it. You tell him again that the stove is hot, and it will burn him/her. You tell him/her many more times. But you don't control the kid, and sure enough, the kid puts his/her hand on he burner and gets the crap burned out of him. According to your illogical line of thinking here, that must mean that you don't love that kid.

You say "him" at the start of each sentence, and then change to him/her by the end. Sorry, just noticed.

OK, so thinking for myself for a moment, if God created everyone, and He loves them all equally, then why does He hate them enough to eternally damn them? It is illogical to assume that a loving and merciful God would keep us from that? Seems that you prefer the whole 'vengeful God' thing. Even you must be aware that God has several characteristics. Why emphasise the vengeful part when one can emphasise the merciful part?

I don't sound like a Catholic at all.

This is true.

The indulgences were Catholic, not Christian. Luther's problem was with the Church, and with clergy, doing whatever they wanted to and justifying it through the Bible, then claiming that certain things -- like PAYING THE CHURCH -- would help "repay" a person's debt of sin. You do something bad, you pray a few times (to Mary, something totally against Christianity, but that's another subject) and give the Church some money and you'll be forgiven. THAT is what Luther's 95 Theses were about -- following the Bible and not the Church.

They were pre-Reformation, and thus CHRISTIAN. If Protestantism did not yet exist, then it is improper to suggest that only Catholics participated in this.

Yes, you are right, sorry. According to Luther (among many other things):

Faith alone can work justification, and man is saved by confidently believing that God will pardon him. This faith not only includes a full pardon of sin, but also an unconditional release from its penalties

But this is not something I see as valid. This suggests that Christians don't have to do any good. What is the point of being Christ-like, and showing the Good News by example?

Not in Christianity, they're not.

Do YOU believe that good works are therefore completely redundant?

... it is in Christianity. See, this is where it would have helped to have read the Bible.

That's where it is enough for you to listen to Luther. He thought for himself, and so should you.

Jesus wasn't a Christian, He was a Jew.

So, as a Jew, 'real' Christians should ignore him, and listen to Luther?

PLEASE DO. Please. I want a Bible verse that says that -- like you said -- "WORKS are the most important part of getting your salvation. [sic]" I want a verse. I mean, here, I'll show you some verses that say the exact opposite ...

"Leave some grapes on the vine for travelers and the poor." Leviticus 19:10

"Blessed is he that considereth the poor." Psalms 41:1

"Withhold not good from them to whom it is due, when it is in the power of thine hand to do it." Proverbs 3:27

"Cease to do evil; learn to do well ... relieve the oppressed ... plead for the widow." Isiah 1:16-17

"Blessed are the merciful" Matthew 5:7

"Blessed are the peacemakers" Matthew 5:9

"Whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them." Matthew 7:12

"Love thy neighbor as thyself." Mark 12:31

"This is my commandment, That ye love one another." John 15:12, 17

"In everything I did, I showed you that by this kind of hard work we must help the weak, remembering the words the Lord Jesus himself said: 'It is more blessed to give than to receive." Acts 20:35

"He who has been stealing must steal no longer, but must work, doing something useful with his own hands, that he may have something to share with those in need." Ephesians 4.28

"Comfort the feebleminded, support the weak, be patient toward all men." 1 Thessalonians 5:14

"Pure religion ... is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world." James 1:27

"Let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth." 1 John 3:18

"Beloved, do not imitate what is evil, but what is good. The one who does good is of God; the one who does evil has not seen God." 3 John 11

Good enough?

Alright kid, you need to know what "fundamentalist" means. It means those who take something seriously and literally. If you read the Bible and followed exactly what it says, you'd be a fundamentalist Christian. If you read the Torah and followed exactly what it says, you'd be a fundamentalist Jew. If you read the Qur'an and followed exactly what it says, you'd be a fundamentalist Muslim.

So using "fundamentalists" -- those who follow the religion closest -- as a representation of the entire religion itself (not its followers, but the religion) isn't a bad thing.

It's a huge misrepresentation. Did you know that when Westerners first examined the Buddhist scriptures in India, they assumed that they had no funeral rights, or any kind of death practices. While it is not in their scripture, funeral rites and relic worship was and is a huge part of Buddhism. It is not enough to look at the fundamentalists, who are usually in the minority. How religion is practiced is a far more important mode of anaysis.

That having been said, when the Qur'an tells its followers to kill non-believers, you can't say much else about it.

"Fight in the cause of God against those who fight you, but agress not. God loves not agressors." Koran 2:190

"And they feed, for the love of God, the indigent, the orphan, and the captive." Koran 76:8-9

I've encountered the kinds that try to kill me for various reasons, the kinds that try to kill me -- or simply resent me -- because I don't follow Islam, and the kinds that care more about people than what religion they are. Next time you supposedly go to that open prayer session, ask about the verses that detail the slaughtering of infidels. Of course, before you do that, you might want to do a little reading in the Qur'an ... but then, if you claim to be Catholic, you might want to do a lot of reading in the Bible, too.

Who tries to kill you and when? Don't lie.

Yes, because you see Christian suicide bombers and terrorists attacking non-Christian civilian groups every week, it seems like, right?

And you see a very small minority of Muslims performing those actions, and you denounce Islam as a whole? Tolerance, please. And don't be so sucked in by the media.

I don't make the rules, kid. You want your own rules, star your own religion ... you might as well, seeing as you don't believe Christianity.

I asked you to think for yourself. Please go back and do this, as I'm really interested in your response.

Christians believe that it was inspired by God -- as in, God made sure it was written correctly. Thus, it would be correct and literal.

Give me a Biblical quote for that. Did Jesus even know what he said was going to be codified? Probably not, or he would've written something, right? So why must we think it is literal?

I would love to discuss Creation vs. the religion of Evolutionism with you -- and in doing so, correct your ignorance -- but perhaps another time, in another thread. This isn't the place.

Should you start the thread, or should I? Please note, I believe in a creator God, and accept evolution as an understanding of creation.

It has "missing books" because the Catholic Church says it has "missing books" -- it also has books that the Catholic Church added. Most translations now are extremely accurate to original texts. Christians believe that it was inspired by God, so it doesn't matter when it was written -- hell, it could have been written before the events took place. While I've seen some sad attempts at pointing out "conflicting representations of the same events", the differences are minor, if existent at all and not simply fabricated or misinterpreted (by the individual).

Surely God would not let the Church be wrong about these Biblical omissions and additions?

So you don't have to be Christian if you don't want, and you don't have to follow the Bible ("fundamentalist") if you don't want. Be a "good person". Live how you want. Do your own thang. Just don't call yourself a Christian when you're obviously not -- or even a Catholic when you're obviously not.

That sorta hurts, bro. I've been involved in St Vincent de Paul since I was 12.

The point is, no they don't. Yahweh and God don't tell their followers to slaughter those who don't believe in them -- not as a general rule, anyway.

The point is, yes they are. We have recorded different instructions, but they are the same deity.

Yes. When a holy book states that giving one's life during the slaughter of infidels will automatically grant passage into paradise, it's screwed up.

Martrydom is a Christian tradition too. Did the Crusaders go to Heaven or Hell?

Once again, this isn't the time or the place to correct your ignorance -- or your arrogance.

I think if anyone is being arrogant, it's you, for only accepting one (Biblical) line of thought.

Except for the whole terrorist, suicide bombs, IEDs, slaughtering of infidels, the fact that more than 90% of the conflicts in the last few decades have involved Muslms, etc. etc. ... sure, pretty peaceful.

cf. my previous point.

Explain where.

Mary in the Koran

Jesus in the Koran

"Then We caused our messengers to follow in their foot-steps: and We caused Jesus, son of Mary to follow, and gave him the Gospel, and placed compassion and mercy in the hearts of those who followed him." Surah lvii:27

This is why there is a difference between Catholicism and Christianity. Christians follow the holy book of Christianity -- the Bible. Other religions may follow a mix of between the Bible, certain organizations, and appointed leaders, but that would make them non-Christian. And when said appointed leaders openly state that belief in the Bible is not necessary to follow their religion, it's obvious that their religion isn't Christianity.

Any follower of Christ is a Christian. Are you suggesting that the Catholic Church is non-Christian? You'd have a billion people to disagree with.

That would be overlooking the Bible, though, and the fact that SHE DID HAVE MORE CHILDREN. Jesus had a brother named James.

That's a Protestant belief. Catholics believe in the Perpetual Virginity of Mary, as a general rule, though there is tolerance around this.

Where they'd spend eternity is a fairly big issue, too. Eternity's kinda long, you know.

While I believe in Heaven, neither of us have any certainty that it exists.

While I don't know enough about this to say for sure what the Bible says, I think they are judged on what they DO believe, combined with their actions.

Here you would tell me to "read the Bbile". Just sayin'.

Yes, and there are multiple conflicts between Christians and Jews right now over those holy sites, aren't there? Those Christians and Jews just fighting to the death over ... wait? What's that you say? There are no conflicts between Christians and Jews? They're all between Muslims and Jews or Muslims and Christians? But Christians and Jews share some of the same holy sites -- almost all of them. You mean Christians and Jews DON'T slaughter each other? There aren't many Jewish suicide bombers that target buses full of Christian women and children? There aren't many Christians who drop mortars into Jewish densely-populated civilian areas?

"There have been more devastating wars among so-called Christian states (fighting each another) in the past 1000 years than between so-called Christian and so-called Muslim states."

"Predominately Christian states have killed more Jews and Muslims than predominately Muslim states have killed Christians or Jews."

Get your facts straight, please.

Besides, what is America (a Christian state), doing in two Islamic nations right now?

Oh, well. At least you wait until the end of your post to admit defeat by pulling out "bigot". You had a good run, kid. Maybe next year.

I didn't call you bigoted. Nice try.

Limbaugh ... Are you referring to Rush Limbaugh? You've got to be smart enough to not be referring to Rush Limbaugh while referring to Christian witnessing, missions, outreach programs, and education. You've got to be smart enough to know that Rush Limbaugh is a political commentator, not a religious one. You've got to be that smart. You must be referring to another Limbaugh, of which I have heard nothing.

I apologise for not being an American. How's Fred Phelps? Jerry Falwel (he is who I meant to use as an example the first time around)?

[RagnaToad]

You'd assume wrong. Of course everybody who has faith in anything believes themselves to be right.

There's a difference between believing you're right unconditionally, and re-evaluating your own beliefs/thoughts/knowledge from time to time. Truth is that most hardcore Christians/Jews/Muslims don't do that.

The indulgences were Catholic, not Christian.

That's pretty convenient of you to say. I hope people like you will think the same of Muslims when they stop their Jihad in a couple of hundreds of years.
I wonder...

Jesus wasn't a Christian, He was a Jew.

Just like Muhammad wasn't a muslim.

That having been said, when the Qur'an tells its followers to kill non-believers, you can't say much else about it.

And the Bible was never intentionally misinterpret to justify the killing of innocent people in some foreign country, burning people alive or not allowing people to have a proper funeral?

Keep in mind that the Islam is 600 years younger than Christianity. What were we doing about 600 years ago?

I've encountered the kinds that try to kill me for various reasons, the kinds that try to kill me -- or simply resent me -- because I don't follow Islam, and the kinds that care more about people than what religion they are.

What?

Yes, because you see Christian suicide bombers and terrorists attacking non-Christian civilian groups every week, it seems like, right?

I will refer to what I said about the age of Islam previously in this post.
Plus, you're probably talking about the Jew-Muslim tensions in the Middle East. That's hardly a fair comparison. The Israel/Palestina problem is a world on its own.

Christians believe that it was inspired by God -- as in, God made sure it was written correctly. Thus, it would be correct and literal.

You are generalising here. It is in no way true that all Christians believe that the Bible is meant to be read literally.

So you don't have to be Christian if you don't want, and you don't have to follow the Bible ("fundamentalist") if you don't want. Be a "good person". Live how you want. Do your own thang. Just don't call yourself a Christian when you're obviously not -- or even a Catholic when you're obviously not.

I'm curious. A person who goes to church every day, but does nothing to help anyone whatsoever is better than a person who helps out thousands of poor people, because the latter one (to put it in Christian terms) hasn't seen the light?
And if Jesus wasn't a Christian, wouldn't that make any christian better than he was?

The point is, no they don't. Yahweh and God don't tell their followers to slaughter those who don't believe in them -- not as a general rule, anyway.

It's all about interpretation.
I could say: Yes, they do.
Or I could say: The Quran doesn't either.
(Again, Cf. previous statement in this post.)

the fact that more than 90% of the conflicts in the last few decades have involved Muslms

Were the hell (haha) did you get that 'fact'???
Read some European History and discover... the horrors... of christianity...

it's safe to assume that women back then would have a higher chance of becoming sterile after their first child.

Why?

That would be overlooking the Bible, though, and the fact that SHE DID HAVE MORE CHILDREN. Jesus had a brother named James.

I knew it. James Joyce was the second coming!
No seriously, I forgot about that, thanks. (Not being ironic here)

Yes, and there are multiple conflicts between Christians and Jews right now over those holy sites, aren't there? Those Christians and Jews just fighting to the death over ... wait? What's that you say? There are no conflicts between Christians and Jews? They're all between Muslims and Jews or Muslims and Christians? But Christians and Jews share some of the same holy sites -- almost all of them. You mean Christians and Jews DON'T slaughter each other? There aren't many Jewish suicide bombers that target buses full of Christian women and children? There aren't many Christians who drop mortars into Jewish densely-populated civilian areas?

You're pulling that out of context. And you're generalizing.
It's a pitty that the Islam has such a bad image because of that 1% of nutjobs. I thought you were better than that.

By the way, what's up with the arrogant 'kid' thing?

And if you can use the muslim terrorists as evidence for the Islam being a bad religion, so can anyone else with Christian nutjobs.

[GypsyElder]

So you haven't even read the holy book of the religion you have so many problems with. I'm just getting the situation straight here. Is that correct? Those damn "Bible-thumpers" should just keep to themselves, it's wrong to say that non-Christians won't end up in Heaven even though that's what Christianity states, etc. ...

No, not correct, I never said I had a problem with the bible at all. My whole thing on the, “in my mind it’s wrong” to say that only Christians will go to heaven, is that I don’t believe that, plain and simple. Not that It is wrong for them to be Christian( believe that they are the only ones or whatever), because I could care less , which was my whole point in the first post in this thread. I believe in god and that’s it, I believe Jesus died on the cross for our sins...ect..

If somebody presents a convincing argument for ANY issue, I hear it out -- not out of courtesy, but out of curiosity. I want to know more about it. And if they present a good, informative argument, they might convince me to check it out for myself, which might lead me to change my stance. If I don't change it, I will come back to it with a stronger belief in it. This has happened to me in regards to religious, political, ethical, and every other type of issue.

Well, not everyone is curious, I happen to be one of those. I find that Religion is taken way too seriously. Parts of some religions are exactly the same in others. So tell me what is it exactly, that you would be looking for in these visits, that will actually make you change your mind completely ,that will make you change your entire religion?? I think not just for me but anyone, It would take A LOT. And If someone can convince you that easily, then you obviously didn’t have full belief in your religion to begin with. And when I say that I mean maybe aren’t completely sure, like Agnostic or people who try out different religions because they really don’t know. To believe in something is to trust it to the fullest. To un -trust something like religion would take a lot for me, not just someone knocking on my door. That’s like saying you would decide to not trust your best friend because someone said not to, or they said you shouldn't.

In that case, it's very ignorant to claim that people of any specific religion will never question or re-evaluate their own beliefs. Of any belief, period, not just religions.

First of all I’m only speaking of religion here. I think religion is probably more of a sore subject than anything else, including abortion and other political views because it is one of the main things we have full control over and harder to convince.. Second, I don’t see the people who come to my door re-evaluating their beliefs from what I say either. And I do recall saying that some people may get something out of it.

Where did I claim that one religion was right and others were wrong, or that I belonged to or followed any specific religion at all? Please point that out to me, would you?

In the same sense I can ask you , Why the need to stand up for Christianity so strongly when all I did was say what I thought on that one post. This is an opinion thread. I think you’re taking when I said : “to say this would imply that everyone should be Christian, to literally. I meant that I don’t think you have to BE Christian to go to heaven, which I probably said before.

Not bad. If you feel that you're right and don't have to listen to anybody else's beliefs, you do that. You don't have to listen to anybody else -- you believe that your beliefs are right, and you're going to stick to them, no matter who tries to talk to you about their beliefs. Of course, this is the same thing that you have a problem with Christians/Christianity for -- believing that their way is the only right way -- but it's different for YOUR way, right?

Again, never said that I had a problem with, Christianity, I'm not trying to attack the religon in any way. Which by the way wouldn't make any sense since I already said I’m not big on religion . I just posted my opinion to what was said , and it was I don’t think it’s true.

And you’re damn straight I don’t listen to anybody else, and that’s my whole point. It’s something almost everyone does, It’s no different for MY way at all. I don’t force my beliefs on anyone or preach to others,because once again, I really don't care.

[Cheesevixen]

In my life I have collected many little facts that have turned me away from religion. Like if you put the human race in clock terms we would be considered as seconds, or if you look at the earth as a whole we only make up 4% of the universe, and our universe only makes up about 10% of the whole galaxy. IDK...I watch too much Nova. Knowing that I make such a minuscule impact on the earth I don't believe a God would think it worth while to keep an eye on me and spank me when I am bad. It just doesn't make sense to me. I am no more than a whisper to this world, and I would like to spend the little time I have on this earth concentrating on what makes me and my family happy. Just living a descent life is good enough for me, and if there is a God than I would hope he not think me evil for simply wanting to live an average loving life.

So I guess I have become an atheist in a way. Where I used to be a bit agnostic. I have heard so many religions copy-cat each other over and over, and try to one-up everyone in their righteousness, or even just the ones that pity me for believing what I do. That's not for me. I don't want to judge others by what they believe, nor do I want to follow a herd. I don't need to be told how to be happy and live a fruitful life. I know what makes me happy, I'm not afraid of what is after this, and I am confident things will always work out.

[Locke4God]

It's funny that I'm a political, financial, moral, and social conservative, because fundamentally I have one big difference that sets me apart from the vast majority of those place themselves in that category.

I'm a complete and utter athiest.

Am I evil? No I'm a really good guy, and I actually I love religion and think we need more of it, because I fully believe that the moral lessons and social structure it provides are deeply important to the fabric of any society. Without it, things have a habit of falling into chaos.

But that being said, religion merely serves several base needs.

• It provides us answer to the desperate human question of what happens when you die, and it provide a comfy answer that there is a glorious heaven of which you truly belong. Nice.
• Most important to me, and the reason that I love it, is that it provides moral boundaries. It says don't cheat on your spouse, don't abuse your body, don't lie, don't kill, and on an on. Those are good qualities and need to be promoted as much as possible.
• In ancient times esspecially it answered the questions of the universe. What is the sun? Why does it rain? These were things that previous to ancient Greek society could never have been understood, and religions provided grossly inaccurate guesses.

There are other functions of a religion, but these are the main ones, and if you just look for a moment with Athiest eyes at these, you'll see that were there no god, these pretty simple tools of a social institution. If you choose to believe they're rules of a higher power, then more power to you, but there's nothing inhuman about these goals.

My main take on Religion is that it's bound in a perfect little self fulfilling bow. It's completely impervious to denial by those who believe. I could create life in front you and it would simply be gods will, or perhaps more often a perversion of his will. And forget simple commodities as proving that evolution is real, or that alien life exists. Those foundation shakers are easily incorporated or dismissed outright.

Consider if you will though that through the course of time, god has continuously moved. He began on a hill top or in the weather, but in later centuries, once it was better understood what natural phenonmenon actually were, god moved the clouds or into space. But then we reached those as well and it became necessary for god to simply exist everywhere, within us, around us, and yet inperceptible to us. Again impervious to denial.

If you ask me and you apply Hakim's Razor to the issue (the idea that the simplest solution is correct) then the concept of residual energy in the void of space that emits plaza balls that went on to form stars & consequently planets and life, is way easier to accept than the idea that a great and magical being decided to flash us into existance.

Perhaps the most troubling part to me though is that religous people assume that god actually likes or pays attention to the them. Why would you think that?

We already know that the Earth isn't even the center of our own Solar System, much less the universe, which was of course a founding concept of a lot of religions. That we were so special that god placed us at the center and cared for us. But we are of course not at the center, and yet gods devotion to us was never questioned along with that revelation.

Supposing we were created by some higher power, why would we be any more than pets to him, or a biological experiment just to see what would happen. Why couldn't god be an uncaring observer. Why this image that he's some nurturing do-gooder who wants nothing more than for you to prove your worth to him so that you might join his angels in heaven and suckle on his nurturing teet for all enternity.

Or what if he's just a cold bastard who kicked you out of heaven, wiped your memory of the place and has subjugated you to the terrors and torment of mortal life? I mean really, what do you know. Hell, he could have founded your religion just to fool you into thinking you had a purpose when in fact your just floundering around wasting time. How would you know any different?

You couldn't. And what's more is that there are hundred's of religions. Each one of them is completely devout and commited, fully certain that they are correct, and yet by simple logic, at most only one of them would be. That means the majority of you out there are in fact wrong right off the top, even if any type of god exists.

So the question would be, why in the world I trust any of you? Why would I accept any religion over another when the vast majority of them clearly must be incorrect?

The only logical thing to do is be an athiest. Again I support the moral value of faith, and I don't seek it's end, but in the end, it's petty, weak, and devoid of critical thought. And so I'll commit myself to being the best person I can be, and live my life honorably. But that's all there is to it folks.

[Jeordam]

last night, but I didn't have enough time to adequately express the thoughts that came to mind. Hopefully I'll be able to articulate my thoughts today. And hopefully this multi-quote thing works....

It's funny that I'm a political, financial, moral, and social conservative, because fundamentally I have one big difference that sets me apart from the vast majority of those place themselves in that category.

I'm a complete and utter athiest.

Am I evil? No I'm a really good guy, and I actually I love religion and think we need more of it, because I fully believe that the moral lessons and social structure it provides are deeply important to the fabric of any society. Without it, things have a habit of falling into chaos.

Ok...you're an athiest, but you're a political, financial, moral, and social concervative. Right on....like you, I have many of the same view points (concervative) as you do, but unlike you, I'm a Christian. And not just a Christian, but one of those hard-core types. However, my viewpoints on "worldly" matters do not originate completely from my belief system, but instead are rooted in other ways (much akin to your situation).

But that being said, religion merely serves several base needs.

• It provides us answer to the desperate human question of what happens when you die, and it provide a comfy answer that there is a glorious heaven of which you truly belong. Nice.
• Most important to me, and the reason that I love it, is that it provides moral boundaries. It says don't cheat on your spouse, don't abuse your body, don't lie, don't kill, and on an on. Those are good qualities and need to be promoted as much as possible.
• In ancient times esspecially it answered the questions of the universe. What is the sun? Why does it rain? These were things that previous to ancient Greek society could never have been understood, and religions provided grossly inaccurate guesses.

In regards to your first point, religion does provide an answer to the question of what happens after you die...however that is not necessarily a comforting answer to receive. Not everyone goes to heaven after all. All have the opportunity, but not everyone decides to. Besides which, no matter which side of the debate one resides upon, after death comes the judgement. Most feel uncomfortable with that notion...

As per your second point, I agree....religion does provide moral boundaries and codes of conduct (both do this & don't do this examples).

As per your third point, I agree...to a point. In ancient times, god/gods were used to explain things about the natural world which they had no knowledge of or couldn't understand. Do you think much has changed in the thousand of years since? In many cases, we have exchanged one God with a belief which necessiates as much faith.

There are other functions of a religion, but these are the main ones, and if you just look for a moment with Athiest eyes at these, you'll see that were there no god, these pretty simple tools of a social institution. If you choose to believe they're rules of a higher power, then more power to you, but there's nothing inhuman about these goals.

You are right....there are other functions of religion, but I wouldn't necessarily label these as the main ones. From your point of view, they very well may be, but also understand that you are looking at the situation from the outside. It may seem that you are the impartial observer, but lacking an internal perspective, I believe that you are overlooking some aspects.

My main take on Religion is that it's bound in a perfect little self fulfilling bow. It's completely impervious to denial by those who believe. I could create life in front you and it would simply be gods will, or perhaps more often a perversion of his will. And forget simple commodities as proving that evolution is real, or that alien life exists. Those foundation shakers are easily incorporated or dismissed outright.

Ok...This was the part that I wanted to get around to. Let me state some background on myself. I am a scientist by trade & education. I've been in the scientific field for better than 15 years now. I've got degrees in biology & chemistry, and I even have my Masters in Business. My professional career has been dominated by working within the scientific community. But in addition to all this, I also have a minor in Biblical Theology. One would think that these two worlds are incompatable, however I can personally state that they are not. You mentioned three "foundation shakers" that I would like to speak on.

The first was creating life. I'm going to assume that what you had in mind would be creating life from non-life. After all, we see the creation of life all the time in the combination of sperm/egg. Although its often regarded as the miracle of life, it is in fact the "oldest trick in the book". Instead, life from non-life is something that we have never been able to duplicate. Some may say that it is a matter of time until it happens, but as a scientist, I'm not so sure.

We can duplicate protein systhesis, or combine DNA sequences. We can even clone cells and make duplicates. However we have never been able to actually create life from non-life. We have never been able to create a cell from the "raw materials". We have never been able to get even the simplist of life forms to "spring out" of our laboratories. But lets say that some day, some brilliant scientist manages it. What then? Foundation shaker...? I would still say no. Why? Because it didn't happen randomly. Some scientist planned it out...it wasn't a random convergance of fate/chance/whatever which produced life. Someone in their wisdom created....

The second "foundation shaker" which you mentioned is evolution. Ok...without getting hung up on semantics and for any Christians reading this don't get all twisted. Evolution is a real and true event. However let me qualify that by saying micro-evolution is a real and true event. Animals adapt to their environment and over time begin to specialize. Survival of the fittest does occur. However macro-evolution has not been seen or evidenced. We do not see the gradual change in one species to another. A bird may adapt its beak over time to get the little insects on an island, but ultimately, its still a bird. And then just to complicate matters, the entire Life-Origin theory rests upon abiogenesis. As mentioned in the first "foundation shaker"...that is the weakness of the theory, and ultimately its death blow.

And the last "foundation shaker" mentioned was alien life. Scripture does not mention either way that there is life on other planets. Am I open to the possibility? Sure. Whatever...its neither here nor there to me. Do I think that they are visiting earth & taking off and anal probing people? No. Do I think that alien life may just be bacteria floating around some pool of whatever on some random planet? Maybe...who's to say. Either way, it doesn't really shake anything. In centuries past, humans thought that the earth was the center of the universe, and everything revolved around it. I'm not so foolish as to think that this would be the case in this instance either.

Consider if you will though that through the course of time, god has continuously moved. He began on a hill top or in the weather, but in later centuries, once it was better understood what natural phenonmenon actually were, god moved the clouds or into space. But then we reached those as well and it became necessary for god to simply exist everywhere, within us, around us, and yet inperceptible to us. Again impervious to denial.

I find this....odd. Did God move...or was it simply our understanding of God which moved? Much like a child which at first doesn't understand a situation and just makes things up as they go...and then a child which does understand the situation. The event itself is fact, but mearly the understanding which has evolved.

If you ask me and you apply Hakim's Razor to the issue (the idea that the simplest solution is correct) then the concept of residual energy in the void of space that emits plaza balls that went on to form stars & consequently planets and life, is way easier to accept than the idea that a great and magical being decided to flash us into existance.

Hmmm...I think that you may have painted yourself into a corner. Hakim's Razor actually supports a God. Why? Because the random conflux of events to happen in a universe which just happen to produce the right environment which just happened to produce life....all by chance, is far more complex a solution than a God who created life.

Perhaps the most troubling part to me though is that religous people assume that god actually likes or pays attention to the them. Why would you think that?

So just to point out, you have crossed over into a theological realm here. Before, we were speaking about the nature and existance of the intangible in a universe which is tangible. Now, we are actually speaking of the nature of God....and God as perceived by Christians. The long and short of it is this. Love. We could explore this concept further if you want.

We already know that the Earth isn't even the center of our own Solar System, much less the universe, which was of course a founding concept of a lot of religions. That we were so special that god placed us at the center and cared for us. But we are of course not at the center, and yet gods devotion to us was never questioned along with that revelation.

Who says that it was never questioned? I, myself, have thought through this very thing. But two concepts have floated to the surface multiple times. The first was that when Earth and everyone on it was created, God spoke it into creation. God was pleased, but it was just so much construct. However when God created humanity, Adam was breathed to life by God. There's something far more intimate about that. The same goes for when Eve was created...God specifically made her. Right there says special to me....humanity was more than just a construct that was spoken into existance. Humanity was created intimately and specifically by God...to such a degree that the Bible records that God actually came down to earth & walked with humans "in the cool of the day".

It should be noted that was the first time that God came to earth to walk with humans. Much later, the same occured under different circumstances. The overall goal was the same, but it was demonstrated much differently. You mentioned devotion...would you not agree that a good example of devotion is sacrificing something of value for someone else's gain?

Supposing we were created by some higher power, why would we be any more than pets to him, or a biological experiment just to see what would happen. Why couldn't god be an uncaring observer. Why this image that he's some nurturing do-gooder who wants nothing more than for you to prove your worth to him so that you might join his angels in heaven and suckle on his nurturing teet for all enternity.

Again, we are well into the theological realm, but let's keep going....

Do people regard their children as pets? Do scientists who do experiments/studies with humans regard them as simply animals? No, they do not. Why? Because there is something more happening. Humanity is not just animalistic in nature. Instead, there is something else going on. Humans are self-aware. We are capable of abstract thought that can be expressed either through advancements in technology or the creation of art, music, or literature.

You mentioned the image that "he's some nurturing do-gooder who wants nothing more than for you to prove your worth to him..." Actually, in the case of Christianity, you have it backwards. Its not me having to prove my worth to God. I don't have to do good works, unlike what the other faith systems of the world require. Instead for Christianity, Jesus already proved my worth by dying for me.

Or what if he's just a cold bastard who kicked you out of heaven, wiped your memory of the place and has subjugated you to the terrors and torment of mortal life? I mean really, what do you know. Hell, he could have founded your religion just to fool you into thinking you had a purpose when in fact your just floundering around wasting time. How would you know any different?

The answer that first comes to mind is probably one which would make you toss your hands into the air and roll your eyes with a "oh, that same old answer" thought on your lips. I don't believe the above to be the case because of my faith. This is why the Bible is so important, because it spells out the circumstances of "how" and "why" and doesn't leave me floundering around wasting my time. I know that this doesn't really hold any water for you, but its kind of the best that I can do. That and to reitterate the fact that God loves me...so the cold bastard characterization doesn't really come into play.

You couldn't. And what's more is that there are hundred's of religions. Each one of them is completely devout and commited, fully certain that they are correct, and yet by simple logic, at most only one of them would be. That means the majority of you out there are in fact wrong right off the top, even if any type of god exists.

Ok, now you've traveled into the "which one is right" area of faith systems. I would challenge you to not look at the depth of the devout or even the sheer numbers of believers, but instead upon the faith system itself. Without getting down to every single one of them, there is one faith system in the entire world which says that God scrificed for humanity, and not humanity sacrificing for God. In all instances, it is humans who are seperated from God (for various reasons), and it is humanities responsibility to overcome that seperation...whether that is through good works & deeds...having plenty of children....overcoming the unwanted through a series of good lives...whatever. In all the cases except for one, its humanity who is doing the work. In Christianities case, it is God who has done the work, and its up to humanity to choose to accept it.

That, right there, is the differentiating factor between all the faith systems of the world.

So the question would be, why in the world I trust any of you? Why would I accept any religion over another when the vast majority of them clearly must be incorrect?

Its not me that you have to trust.

The only logical thing to do is be an athiest. Again I support the moral value of faith, and I don't seek it's end, but in the end, it's petty, weak, and devoid of critical thought. And so I'll commit myself to being the best person I can be, and live my life honorably. But that's all there is to it folks.

But here's a question for you...is the logical decision always the right decision? Even logic must give way eventually. It is illogical to love someone, yet we as humans do. Just to say it, I take exception to the characterization that in the end, the moral value of faith is petty, weak, and devoid of critical thought. The reason being is that faith is neither petty or weak. This is evidenced by the fact that people die for their faith. Whether its some Christian missionary in the jungle who gets killed for preaching (this would be a martyr), or someone who blows themselves up (not an example of a martyr, but a fool), their faith is neither petty nor weak. As for devoid of critical thought, I would say that it isn't the faith itself that is lacking critical thought, but instead the individual who has that faith.

I've been taught over a very long time to critically think through what I believe...either in the scientific realm or that of the theological. The Bible even supports this by saying that we (Christians) are supposed to study our faith so that we can give an account as to *why* we believe. That study smacks of critical thought. Many see faith as a crutch holding up a person. I would challenge this thought. Instead, see faith as the mortar in a wall. It fills in the gaps between the bricks...it strengthens and supports where the bricks cannot go. Furthering that analogy, which wall is stronger? The one of bricks alone, or the one with both the bricks and mortar? Is it so logical to assume that I can live my life honorably on my own, basing my actions/decisions on my own worldview which I know to be flawed (since we can safely assume that we all acknowledge that we make mistakes)?

Or is it far more logical to base our actions/decisions upon something which hasn't changed over time?

This has been a really good post, and I'm thinking that this reply is *way* too long...but well, its a big topic. I hope that someone has read it, but I know that for me, typing it out reitterated some concepts for me.

~Jeordam

[Unknown Entity]

Without it, things have a habit of falling into chaos.

Okay, firstly: I'm an atheist, and I love religion too because you learn about the cultures in different parts of the world, and what people believe in, and what motivates them day to day, still keeping their faith in an unseen power.

But. Never would I ever say that religion stops things falling into chaos. Look back in time, and you'll find many wars and/or much blood was shed because of religion. No religion is refined into one set of practices or beliefs. I pick two Christians from a crowd of people, and one believes you have to go to church every Sunday to get your place beyond the pearly gates, and the other believes they can do whatever they like and still go to Heaven because God will forgive them anyway. That is just a small example, but something like that would have started a war a couple of hundred years ago.

I'm not saying that without religion, there will be no wars. There will always be some atheist, douchebag dictator to screw everyone over and brainwash people into thinking he/she is the boss.

I'll admit it helps stop chaos when a five year old won't go to bed, and you tell him/her that God will rip their toes off if they won't go to ****ing sleep.*

Perhaps the most troubling part to me though is that religous people assume that god actually likes or pays attention to the them. Why would you think that?

Faith. You'd be surprised how strong it can be if you're a believer.

* I've never used that one, nor do I intend to. ¬¬;;

[ShootingStar]

I'm taking a class in religion right now at my university. It's a comparative class, which means that we look at the different world religions, and even some minor religions, in a positively-critical and open-minded way. I find it quite refreshing. It's amazing how much culture and history influences the religion of a particular area. It's also very interesting how similar religions are. All of them, even if they don't worship something or someone, seem to have some revelation, some answer for life. Personally, I try to be open-minded about everything, but I suppose that I don't really practice any religion.

[Messiah]

Im more of 'cross believer' -
I believe partly in the Big Bang theory, i don't think that a big explosion happened and here we are, but i do believe that something like that must have happened.
I also do not believe in any kind of god, i believe that there is definetley some sort of higher power. (Maybe something to do with politics?) we are definitley being controlled and driven to do something.


100th post!

[RagnaToad]

Just wanted to point something out about the evolution thing.

I don't see how believing in a God stands in the way of believing in scientific stuff like evolution.

And I don't see why being a Christian equals believing that dinosaurs never existed...

[Jeordam]

Just wanted to point something out about the evolution thing.

I don't see how believing in a God stands in the way of believing in scientific stuff like evolution.

And I don't see why being a Christian equals believing that dinosaurs never existed...

In my (rather long) post, I noted that there is actually a degree of differentiation within the "evolution" world. The easiest way to put it is micro and macro evolution. Micro-evolution would be considered adaptation to environment & survival of the fitest. Macro-evolution would be considered one species giving rise to another over mutation changes over time.

Besides the fact that there is no evidence of Macro-evolution, and everything we know of as scientists tell us that mutations are bad, and extremely difficult to replicate in offspring, it just seems very unlikely since we don't see it today.

Specifically within a Christian context, the theology of the Bible and the belief in macro-evolution are like oil and water. They cannot blend & coexist. There are several different reasons for this. The first is that the Bible is specific that the animals that were created were reproducing after their own kind. Its subtle, but its there.

The second part is that there are many instances of the geneologies in the Bible...you know, the parts that are all "so and so lived xxx years, and had sone so and so who lived xxx years..." and on it goes. Well here's the thing, those geneologies trace all the way back to Adam....as in the *first* human. There is no transition in the language to speak of a transition from an actual person into a mythical figure. Adam is regarded as the start of it all.

As for being a Christian and seeing dino bones...dinosaures existed and ran around the earth. There is no conflict with the Bible or theology or anything along those lines. Why they deny their existance in the face of the *actual* bones sitting in a museum...especially when there is no conflict, I would chalk up to ignorance of the individual. It is not a weakness in the faith.

~Jeordam

[Sasquatch]

As Dodie16 mentioned, Behemoth is discussed in Job 40. Leviathan is also discussed (as Final Fantasy fans, I'm sure we all know those names), and dragons are mentioned multiple times. Of course the word "dinosaur" isn't mentioned in the Bible -- the word was invented in 1841. While most people think of winged, fire-breathing creatures when "dragon" is mentioned, that's because all they've known for "dragon" is overblown stories and a mix-and-match of body parts from dinosaurs. It would be the same thing as somebody describing "fish" as a flying fish with the legs of a mudpuppy and a mouth like piranha. And wouldn't that be freaky?

Christians that follow (and know) the Bible don't attempt to deny the existence of dinosaurs. As Jeordam pointed out, that'd be the fault of individual ignorance, not of faith or of the Bible.

A belief in God is not mutually exclusive to a belief in Evolutionism. A belief in Christianity, however, is.

[RagnaToad]

A belief in God is not mutually exclusive to a belief in Evolutionism. A belief in Christianity, however, is.

Not necessarily.

The Bible is a book that contains His Story, not History.

Being a Christian does not mean you think everything written in the book is what actually happened back then.

They're stories from which you can learn.

Of course Jesus didn't make a blind man see, it's a metaphore for helping a criminal get back on the right path. There are numerous stories like these.

Thát is what makes the Bible such a popular book. The lessons. Or that's how it should be read at least. Through the course of time, less intelligent people have always interpreted written works in a wrong way. The Bible and the Curan being the most famous examples in these days.

[Jeordam]

...<snip>...

Being a Christian does not mean you think everything written in the book is what actually happened back then.

They're stories from which you can learn.

Of course Jesus didn't make a blind man see, it's a metaphore for helping a criminal get back on the right path. There are numerous stories like these.

...<snip>...

for snipping out a bit of your post, but this portion is what I wanted to comment on.

I'm choosing my words carefully here, so everyone, please forgive me if I say it wrong or offend someone. It is certainly not my intention to.

If a Christian doesn't believe what the Bible says....then what is the point of believing at all? The Bible is not some theological buffet...where you can walk along and take what you like, and leave the rest. Of course, there are very specific instances where Jesus is telling a story with a moral point (a parable), and there are instances of poetic language where the author is clearly not being literal...but in both of these cases, it is *very* clear.

In the example that was used by Ragnatoad, there is no literary evidence that Jesus healing the blind man was a metaphore for getting him "back on the right path". Instead, it is a story of Jesus *actually healing* a blind man. Speaking as a Christian, why would I want to believe in a God who *can't* work miracles.

To further this thought, the Bible speaks of God holding the sun in its course through the sky so that Joshua & the tribes could defeat their enemies. Do I believe that this was done? Yes, I do. Why, because the Bible doesn't express this as anything but what it is, and then my God can do whatever needs to be done.

Or was there a world-wide flood....or an *actual* Adam & Eve in The Garden of Eden....or when Lazaras died, and Jesus brought him back from the dead (which he also did for a little sick girl). Do I believe that these things (and more) *actually* happened...*and* that leassons can be learned from them?

Yes, I do. If you're going to believe in something, why not go full out for it? In for a penny, in for a pound (as they say).

~Jeordam

[Jeordam]

Why can't getting somebody on the right path be considered a miracle? Why does everybody generalize medicals into some huge magic trick, like making a blind man see or raising the dead? People who think that way are the reason why everybody seems to think no more miracles happen. Well think about this, God gives everybody freewill, and therefore, can't interfere with our daily lives in a big way, but little by little, tiny miracle after tiny miracle, he effects everything.

I never said that getting someone on the right path shouldn't be considered a miracle. I've seen and known people who have denied anything to do with God and Christianity specifically who after years finally came to know Jesus Christ. It was most definately a miracle, however I believe you are mistaken in the belief that miracles cannot be characterized as "some huge magic trick". And as you said, there are some who think that miracles don't happen now adays...however I can personally tell you that they do. And its not just the subtle ones, but instead the "magic trick" ones also happen in today's day & age.

There is a flaw with your logic equating free will and God's activity in our lives. The presence of free will does not conflict with outside interference, anymore than it does between humans. God can certainly interfere with our daily lives...that doesn't take away our free will, but instead just modifies what can choose from.

The bible doesn't express this as anything but what it says it is because it expresses everything in metaphorical terms. Perhaps when the bible talks about God holding the sun in the sky, it was really talking about an exceptionally bright full moon, or more light at night due to the movement of the northern lights.

Wait...can you point out to me the place in the Bible where it says something along the lines of "Everything within this text is phrased in metaphorical terms." I would be most curious to read such a passage. This would be especially interesting to note since the dates & references within the history sections of the Bible are reinforced by outside references.

Hmmm....even the writers of the Bible knew the difference between the sun & a full moon.... If it was the moon standing still in the sky & they were able to see because of that, they would have said so. And then as per the northern lights....we're talking present day Isreal here. They are *way* too south to see the Northern Lights.

You're not supposed to go full out because a lot of stories in the bible don't make any sense in meaning that they're physically impossible. The world is not a magical place, and it never was. Magic isn't real. However, when stories are told, people fabricate them and make them magical, because then they're remembered. The point was never to believe them at face value. The point was to just have them live on.

Hmmmm....since when does "physically impossible" limit God...who *literally* spoke existance into creation? I believe in a God who does not have to work within the realm of the physical laws of the universe. I don't really know how to comment on the whole "the world is not a magical place, and it never was..."

Even as a Scientist, I know enough to realize that not everything in this world is explained away through science or physical universal understanding. As a (fictionary) philosopher once said "Logic is the begining of wisdom, not its culmination." Wisdom is not limited to what can be explained away through natural means. Shall I provide examples for you?

As for the magical stories being magic-ed up...just to be remembered, there are many stories in the Bible which have no "magic" in them...yet they are remembered. The example of Ruth & Boaz comes to mind....or Queen Esther....or Rahab...or Hannah. Each of these stories carries a huge lesson and theological point of interest...yet there is no "magic" (term as you have utilized in this post). Again, you say that the point was never to believe them at face value. How did you come to this belief? What education and study led you to hold this ideal as truth?

Those stories, and the ones containing extraordinary attributes, have all survived. Their survival is not determined so much by their literary qualities, but instead by the fact that its the Word of God.

~Jeordam

[Che]

The bible is a collection of inspirational stories meant to serve as a guideline on how to live a good life. If you look at any type of religion, they have basically the same thing.

This is where things go wrong. People take the shit way too seriously and start believing everything written to be exactly true, and something that should be taken with the utmost seriousness.

Then you have shit like this: YouTube - Brain Washing ( Jesus Camp ''Highlights'' )

Then you have wars started because all those kids in that video are fucked. People like that grow up and don't use things in the bible as guidelines to live a better life, so they don't. They take them way too seriously and end up doing exactly the opposite. They ruin other people's lives with their selfishness and ignorance.

Religion is getting out of hand. What man needs to do is begin to terraform Mars, possibly the moon if we can control the lack of atmosphere, or create one. AND GTFO

[Josh_R]

Like Locke and others I am also a atheist that loves religion simply because it gives you some insight on others belief's.

You're not supposed to go full out because a lot of stories in the bible don't make any sense in meaning that they're physically impossible. The world is not a magical place, and it never was. Magic isn't real. However, when stories are told, people fabricate them and make them magical, because then they're remembered. The point was never to believe them at face value. The point was to just have them live on.

I agree with Clint on this.All religious writings are all handed down stories that was eventually put into writing so beliving that they was fabricated is a logical belief...

Religion like many things is an opinion but some people take religion way too seriously such as those in the middle east they hate us and started a war because they despise our countries christian beliefs. The war in Iraq is a religious war and noone will win....

[Alpha]

Religion like many things is an opinion but some people take religion way too seriously such as those in the middle east they hate us and started a war because they despise our countries christian beliefs. The war in Iraq is a religious war and noone will win..

Do you really believe that? I think the whole 'religion causes war' argument is very redundant. War has a multitude of causes. Religion is one, but I'd argue that religion is used more by leaders in fragile societies who are attempting to create an 'us versus them' dichotomy. Resources, inequality, ideology; these are far more prominent causes of war, especially in the modern world.

As for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, one can blame them just as easily on the personal beliefs of George Bush, who said that he made the decision to invade Afghanistan "after a lot of prayer", as on Osama or any other Muslim radical. But I still think resources (Oil; for the Americans) and ideology (liberalism, brought about through globalisation or 'cultural imperialism'; for the Muslim extremists) are more significant causal factors. Religion is still there, however.

[ViveLaVive]

Im a catholic, and i personally think that religion was created to help people, no matter what the belief is. now this isn't every atheist im talking about(i hate generalization) but many Atheists i know are pretty arrogant about these things. i understand that you dont belive in a god. thats fine. but sayng people are loons or insecure or just stupid to belive in god is unexceptional. everyone is entitle to an opinion or belief, but please keep it clean. that goes for the religious to!

[Unknownangel]

I'm Mormon/LDs I love religions.I like to learn more about other.I like mine a lot.With out it my like would suck.It help a family a lot it made my mom and dad more happy then they ever would be and many other people I know.Yes we have wars because of them but they are the most important thing everyone has religion even if they don't think they do.It help people lives makes them think that they are important and thats life is important. It brings friends and family together.I don't care if people don't like the religion I have because its makes me who I am and many other things in the world.And to me thats really important.

[Muramasa89]

I am an Atheist personally. I do not mind any Religion, providing they keep themselves to themselves, and stop trying to convert people. I find it sad that people can willingly force a belief upon people (I.E. Jahova Witnesses), and to be fair I believe you deserve all the hatred and insults you get by doing so. I also hate it when people actually try to prove Gods existance. How can you prove someone's faith? You cannot. Stop wasting your time, thinking you're right.

[Reverend Red Mage]

I am an Atheist personally. I do not mind any Religion, providing they keep themselves to themselves, and stop trying to convert people. I find it sad that people can willingly force a belief upon people (I.E. Jahova Witnesses), and to be fair I believe you deserve all the hatred and insults you get by doing so. I also hate it when people actually try to prove Gods existance. How can you prove someone's faith? You cannot. Stop wasting your time, thinking you're right.

I don't think the word "atheist" should be capitalized... it's not a religion or a system of beliefs. It's a negative stance regarding belief in gods, nothing more. Problems arise when people attempt to associate more with it.

If I said I didn't mind religion, I'd be lying. Religion was a necessary force in ancient times when people needed comfort and explanations about life and transcendentalism. The need is still there, but with numerous strides in scientific and psychological thought, it is steadily dwindling. If it is entirely possible to be good without a belief in some manner of cosmic sky fairy, then let's eliminate all the unnecessary pluralities that, to this day, have been an impediment to the advancement of human civilization.

[Muramasa89]

I don't think the word "atheist" should be capitalized... it's not a religion or a system of beliefs. It's a negative stance regarding belief in gods, nothing more. Problems arise when people attempt to associate more with it.

What does it matter if it should or shouldn't be capitalised? I quite often capitalise words I don't need to. Or are you some politically correct person? And if you're willing to start an argument over a capital letter, then yes, problems will arise. I think I'll stick to saying "Atheist" thanks. Negative stance to belief in Gods? Hah. Then religion to me is a negative stance to Atheism and that christianity, islamic, judaism should not be capitalised. You act as if Atheism is a BAD thing.

[Reverend Red Mage]

What does it matter if it should or shouldn't be capitalised? I quite often capitalise words I don't need to. Or are you some politically correct person? And if you're willing to start an argument over a capital letter, then yes, problems will arise. I think I'll stick to saying "Atheist" thanks. Negative stance to belief in Gods? Hah. Then religion to me is a negative stance to Atheism and that christianity, islamic, judaism should not be capitalised. You act as if Atheism is a BAD thing.

You're proving my point. Atheism is a negative stance; by no means a "bad" one, just the same as theism is not a "good" or "bad" stance.

I just said I don't think atheism should be capitalized, because it's not a proper noun/religion. Capitalize it if you want if you want to go crazy-go-nuts with the shift key, I don't care.

I'm not looking for an argument, either. I stated my opinion. If you disagree with me, fine, but you're probably wrong.

[Muramasa89]

I just said I don't think atheism should be capitalized

Then get off my back and life your own life. Simple as. Did you need to bring something as pathetic as that up? I am well aware it isn't a proper noun, and should old be capitalised upon the start of a sentence.

The topic at hand is religion, not the correct spellings of it.

[Sasquatch]

War has a multitude of causes. Religion is one, but I'd argue that religion is used more by leaders in fragile societies who are attempting to create an 'us versus them' dichotomy.

Thank you. All too many people don't realize this -- more often than religion being an actual "cause", it's used as a "cause" by leaders who manipulate the religious teachings and use them for justification. This has happened to many, many religions over history.

But I still think resources (Oil; for the Americans) ... are more significant causal factors. Religion is still there, however.

While this argument is commonly used, the fact remains that the United States hasn't gotten a drop of oil from Iraq that wasn't bought on the market for the same price that everybody else pays for oil from Iraq. Petroleum prices have gone up since the start of the conflict, and Iraq, as oil-rich as it is, is only a drop in the bucket (or barrel, if you will) compared to some of the surrounding nations -- Saudi Arabia, Iran, Kuwait, etc.

I am an Atheist personally.

Soft or hard? As in, do you just not believe, or do you believe that there is no god? There's a difference.

I do not mind any Religion, providing they keep themselves to themselves, and stop trying to convert people.

So you're alright with other people having different beliefs, as long as they don't tell anybody that their beliefs are different. On the same note, I'm alright with other people being a different color, as long as I don't have to see their skin.*

I find it sad that people can willingly force a belief upon people (I.E. Jahova Witnesses) ...

"Jahova Witnesses [sic]" force their beliefs on people? Wow, I never realized that. I mean, from my experience, I've had them come to my door and want to talk to people, to spread their beliefs, but never with guns, forcing their beliefs upon me. But I guess they do it differently where you live, huh?

... and to be fair I believe you deserve all the hatred and insults you get by doing so.

So you claim to not have a problem with religions or religious people, but you do have a problem with them telling others about their religion, and you don't have a problem with people hating and insulting those who talk about their beliefs. On the same note, I don't have a problem with black people, I just have a problem with them showing me their dark skin (I have my own skin, don't bother showing me yours!), and I don't mind if other people hate and insult black people because of their dark skin.

I also hate it when people actually try to prove Gods existance. How can you prove someone's faith? You cannot

But lemme guess, you have no problem when people try to disprove the existence of a god? What's wrong with people trying to find evidence to support their faith?

Stop wasting your time, thinking you're right.

... Really, kid?

*For those of you who don't realize it -- and yes, I know there will be some -- this is complete sarcasm, meant to show the irrationality of the argument that "you can be different as long as you don't show it". I have no problem with any skin color.

...then let's eliminate all the unnecessary pluralities that, to this day, have been an impediment to the advancement of human civilization.

Of course! And let's ignore the fact that religion has been the cause of advancement of human civilization more often than any sort of "impediment". Let's ignore the fact that it was religious institutions that provided education to most of history's greatest scientific and philosophical minds, it was religious institutions that financed research and invention, it was religious institutions that pushed for advancements in every facet of science, mathematics, and culture. Let's only focus on the fact that a few specific leaders of a few specific religious institutions used their religion to suppress a few specific beliefs.

[Muramasa89]

Soft or hard? As in, do you just not believe, or do you believe that there is no god? There's a difference.

Hard. I believe in no higher entity, or whatever you wish to call God.

So you're alright with other people having different beliefs, as long as they don't tell anybody that their beliefs are different. On the same note, I'm alright with other people being a different color, as long as I don't have to see their skin.*

No. Too many times I've had people blurt out that Christianity (oddly I haven't had this from any other religion) is correct, and the only way you should live. Living anything else is wrong, and you're doomed to Hell. Okay; I get the point that you believe that. But I couldn't give a crap. Leave me alone. Yet they persist.

"Jahova Witnesses [sic]" force their beliefs on people? Wow, I never realized that. I mean, from my experience, I've had them come to my door and want to talk to people, to spread their beliefs, but never with guns, forcing their beliefs upon me. But I guess they do it differently where you live, huh?

I never mentioned guns. There are many forceful ways, and don't necessarily require harming a/the person. Maybe force was the wrong word. But still, they come to your door as you said, and they talk about God. Maybe, just maybe, they don't care? Rather than trying to convert everybody, just let them live their lives. If they wanted to join your religion, they'd seek YOU out.

So you claim to not have a problem with religions or religious people, but you do have a problem with them telling others about their religion, and you don't have a problem with people hating and insulting those who talk about their beliefs. On the same note, I don't have a problem with black people, I just have a problem with them showing me their dark skin (I have my own skin, don't bother showing me yours!), and I don't mind if other people hate and insult black people because of their dark skin.

Again, a problem with them putting their faith upon a person who perhaps might just want to be an Atheist? Put it this way, since you used a racial example:
You throw racist comments; you deserve the same back. Karma, effectively.

But lemme guess, you have no problem when people try to disprove the existence of a god? What's wrong with people trying to find evidence to support their faith?

Did you read my post? You cannot prove someone's faith. So of course I have a problem, with BOTH proving and disproving.

... Really, kid?

Please. Stop using derogatory terms as an argument. You get nowhere. And you do not know my age. So don't assume stuff. My point is valid, you cannot be right or wrong with religion (such as proving or disproving) since it is a matter of what you believe.

[RagnaToad]

Too many times I've had people blurt out that Christianity (oddly I haven't had this from any other religion) is correct, and the only way you should live.

What? You haven't had this with any other religion? I suppose muslim fundamentalists who kill their neighbours for being jews (and vice versa) are not religious people? I'd say every major religion has its extremists who don't tolerate people that give the same God a different name.

But still, they come to your door as you said, and they talk about God.

I see the problem. No, wait, I don't. What's wrong with telling people about your own religion?

Again, a problem with them putting their faith upon a person who perhaps might just want to be an Atheist?

I hope you've never tried to explain someone why God does not exist. If you have, that would make you a hypocrite.

[Imposter]

Question:

I've often heard it said that compassion is a driving force for most evangelism in religion, (It is noted however that also domination is a means as well, seen in Ragna's post above.) the illustration of trying to save someone from a terminal disease has been given. If you had a cure would you not try to give it to them? Even if they didn't think they were sick you would try to explain it to them?

I've never really seen evangelism in other religions except for Christianity (that covering the broad spectrum from Protestant, Roman Catholicism, and even the JW's and Mormons.) That could be though because I'm not surrounded by many other religions where I'm from.

So sure it might be that it is annoying having people come up to you and try to convert you but in their mind's they are trying to save you aren't they? Knowing that this may be the case what is the best reaction?

[Sasquatch]

Hard. I believe in no higher entity, or whatever you wish to call God.

In that case, your beliefs take as much faith as anybody else's. Why argue about theirs?

No. Too many times I've had people blurt out that Christianity (oddly I haven't had this from any other religion) is correct, and the only way you should live.

How many other religions have you been exposed to? How many times have you "had people blurt out that" their religious beliefs are correct, no matter what they are?

Of course people think that their beliefs are correct. Everybody does. Nobody says, "well I know this to be false, but I'll believe it anyway".

Okay; I get the point that you believe that. But I couldn't give a crap. Leave me alone. Yet they persist.

Just like you come into this thread and discuss your beliefs. How terrible of people to discuss their beliefs! And how utterly vicious of them to want others to share those beliefs!

I never mentioned guns. There are many forceful ways, and don't necessarily require harming a/the person. Maybe force was the wrong word.

Ya think? I've never had anybody "force" me to listen to their religious beliefs -- except, of course, for Evolutionism.

But still, they come to your door as you said, and they talk about God. Maybe, just maybe, they don't care? Rather than trying to convert everybody, just let them live their lives.

... You're serious, aren't you? Wow, that's just ... sad. I'll try to make this simple. Everybody thinks that their own beliefs are correct. Everybody would like others to hold the same beliefs. This is especially true when those beliefs include one of a highly unpleasant eternal life for those who don't hold the same beliefs. They're trying to help you, and all you can do is bitch that they make you go through the inconvenience of answering your parents' door.

If they wanted to join your religion, they'd seek YOU out.

Of course -- because every one of the nearly seven billion people in the world knows full details of every religious belief. I mean, there's just no need to teach anybody anything, since if they wanted to learn it, they'd teach themselves!

Again, a problem with them putting their faith upon a person who perhaps might just want to be an Atheist?

They're telling you about their own beliefs and wanting you to learn more about them and believe them as well. They're not forcing you to do anything -- not even to listen to what they have to say. If you want to be arrogant in your ignorance and refuse to listen to the beliefs of others (while still calling those others "closed-minded", undoubtedly), that's your call, but don't expect to never be called out on your hypocrisy.

Put it this way, since you used a racial example:
You throw racist comments; you deserve the same back. Karma, effectively.

Except that people don't choose to be certain races and can't convert to another. The racial analogy worked for one situation, but completely fails in your attempted usage. Not only that, but also, you are arguing that it's fine to throw racist comments and insults back at somebody who merely discusses their own race.

Did you read my post? You cannot prove someone's faith. So of course I have a problem, with BOTH proving and disproving.

So you're admitting a lack of support for your beliefs. This reveals your ignorance of religion and petty, childish hatred of it as exactly what it is.

Please. Stop using derogatory terms as an argument. You get nowhere.

Yet, I haven't stopped, nor will I. Some people here know that I call many people "kid", depending on the situation. Deal with it.

And you do not know my age. So don't assume stuff.

Of course -- because the lack of maturity and intellect in your posts, along with the "89" in your username, point to absolutely nothing. Besides, as I have explained to others before, I use "kid" as a reference to maturity, not as to how many years one has spent on this earth.

My point is valid, you cannot be right or wrong with religion (such as proving or disproving) since it is a matter of what you believe.

Then quit bitching about people who believe differently than you. You can have a problem with people discussing their religious beliefs or you can not, but it's hypocritical to only have a problem with people discussing beliefs that you don't share.