If you are a creationist, don't even bother debating the validity of Evolution

[squealpiggy]

The basic premise of religion is this: There's something wrong with being human. You need to be fixed of this problem by experts. For a price.

[K-Nan]

The basic premise of religion is this: There's something wrong with being human. You need to be fixed of this problem by experts. For a price.

Oh, shut up. There is such thing as a belief in the spirituality of religion, without the institutionalized, dogmatic approach.

You are generalizing so much.

[abadger]

The basic premise of religion is this: There's something wrong with being human. You need to be fixed of this problem by experts. For a price.

An interesting view. I would argue that that similar sentments underpin our current media and goods consuming culture.

[BrooklynBomber]

The basic premise of religion is this: There's something wrong with being human. You need to be fixed of this problem by experts. For a price.

Ofcourse, and looking at the people I have to agree with a part of this premise.
Religion was invented to have some sort of order and more or less unified rule set by which the people should live by. Not a bad thing, considering what kind of ****s people used to be, really.

[Don Corleone]

You never answer a question directly.

I didn't get my belief from anyone else, or partly from a religion for that matter.
From myself I aquired it.
And by over-simplifying it, you managed to make me out as a complete and utter lunatic only rivaled by Christians.













(Joke)

I didn't oversimplfy it, I got is strictly from a post a few months ago, which you yourself said you believe in.

A made up belief with no history or origin. And yet you question Christianity, without your "belief" having any foundations...I can understand someone being an atheist, but making up your own belief and then critisizing another, c'mon now. I would alsso understand if you didn't bash Christianity and yet still believed in what you believe. But people like you are called hypocrites. On what structure is your belief more truthful then mine I would like to know...Why is your belief, able to avoid scrutiny and Christianity not? Just curious

[The Noose]

You always talk about how you're respectful of other people's beliefs, but you're not. This is why even though I don't really believe, I hate to get labeled an atheist. Because most of you are abrasive know it alls. And because most of you are so ignorant of the fact that what these people have is FAITH. Maybe you should look in the dictionary for what that means. It doesn't connect with your laid out, logical approaches.

Most athiests never get into discussions about God and religion becvause they have no interest in it.
Just like most religious people dont preach about their faith.

The problem is that these debates about religion and evolution etc arent about faith. They are about science. And only 2 or 3 posters know enough to actually discuss it.


I think religous faith should be respected in the same way we would respect the opinion of a man who tells everyone how beautiful his wife and kids are.
(but this is an internet forum, and people tend to act like *******s now matter what the topic is)

[tyson]

I didn't oversimplfy it, I got is strictly from a post a few months ago, which you yourself said you believe in.

Yes you did. Here is what I said;

The opposite of popular opinion, in this case Christians.

"The greatest action is not conforming with the worlds ways."

I believe in the concept of a "God", but not in the sense of a biblical God.
Soul is something we all have, that is undisputable when you look at all the human beings and all the animals that behave and react differently to things.

Sometimes you can "feel" the presence of another person, even if that person if a complete stranger. Some people can give you a chill down your spine. Some people just makes you feel comfortable being around them.
That would be "aura".
Animals are far more developed than us spiritually, proven by the fact that they sense things way before we do. A dog can sit by the door and wait for his owner 10 minutes before he walks in the door.
A dog can suddenly become aggressive against a random guy walking down the sidewalk for no reason. If that happens, you know that that person has something dark in him.

Some people you feel connected with, mostly the opposite sex because we tend to pay attention to their signals more. Perhaps you have experienced finishing people's sentences before they barely have a chance to start it.

What does that mean?

When I say I believe in "God", I actually talk about the spirit, the energy we are all connected to. We have all the capability to be very spiritual and powerful and we all have the capability to pick up intentions, thoughts and feelings...
But only if the mind is still and quiet. The mind is like water, when the wind blows on it, you can't see the bottom because of the waves.
But when it is still you can easily see the bottom.

"The greatest achievement is selflessness."

I believe the Holy Spirit is a great description of what I'm saying. God is everywhere, sees everything, follows you in all places...
You are connected to this Holy Spirit, as well as everyone else.

Hope this explains what I believe, if not, feel free to ask questions.

A made up belief with no history or origin. And yet you question Christianity, without your "belief" having any foundations...I can understand someone being an atheist, but making up your own belief and then critisizing another, c'mon now. I would alsso understand if you didn't bash Christianity and yet still believed in what you believe. But people like you are called hypocrites. On what structure is your belief more truthful then mine I would like to know...Why is your belief, able to avoid scrutiny and Christianity not? Just curious

Tell me, is my idea of "God" far fetched compared to yours?
You try to argue here that because a group of people, with political interests, gathered selected texts to form the New Testament, your religion have a solid and undisputable foundation.
You call me a hypocrite because I say the Bible is full of ****. You believe in something that is unprovable, and that's fine.
But you also point to the flawed Bible as the reason you believe. Which is why I'm here winding you up.

I would be okay if you had the sense to say something like;

"Yeah, that passage in the Bible is fairly cruel and evil. But after all, humans wrote it, with some agenda of their own, so I don't accept each and every word as the word of God. But I still believe in God and the words of Jesus."

But it's like an ego thing for Christians; Somehow they think their faith is less if they question something the Bible says. (Which the Bible probably says)

[Don Corleone]

Tell me, is my idea of "God" far fetched compared to yours?
You try to argue here that because a group of people, with political interests, gathered selected texts to form the New Testament, your religion have a solid and undisputable foundation.
You call me a hypocrite because I say the Bible is full of ****. You believe in something that is unprovable, and that's fine.
But you also point to the flawed Bible as the reason you believe. Which is why I'm here winding you up.

I would be okay if you had the sense to say something like;

"Yeah, that passage in the Bible is fairly cruel and evil. But after all, humans wrote it, with some agenda of their own, so I don't accept each and every word as the word of God. But I still believe in God and the words of Jesus."

But it's like an ego thing for Christians; Somehow they think their faith is less if they question something the Bible says. (Which the Bible probably says)

That's the problem. You look to Christianity as it was strictly brought up upon political roots. That is a mis-conception. Also you should realise that the Christian faith accepts the original Jewish texts which we call the "Old Testament" because the foundation and structure of Christianity starts thousands of years before the New Testament.

I don't like the fact that whatever pig says, you are there right after him and claiming the same alleged contradictions as him without fully understanding them. More or less, I am still explaining what you see as contradictions, really are not, but rather a failing attempt to read the texts and examined carefully and properly which you are failing any attempt to do. I am moreover critisizing your bashing of the Bible, because you are playing it safe since no one can really examine what you have to say. Why should you question my faith, and I cannot question yours, (also with the fact that there's no real way to question your's other then it has no foundations or scriptures to be tested for any divinity or prophecy, or even a hint of it holding a basic structure at all.)

I'm not saying it's wrong to believe in what you believe in, but rather it's odd that your being a hypocrite because the Bible can be tested by checking for errors, yet you have no scripture or anything to that nature which can be examined like the Bible does, or which can be tested to see whether your faith is what you say it is. The Bible is critisized because it contains words that can be read to understand its basic background and teachings. So to bash Christianity under the ideas that Christianity can be further examined rather then a belief with no foundation is very odd to say the least...

[abadger]

Most athiests never get into discussions about God and religion becvause they have no interest in it.
Just like most religious people dont preach about their faith.

The problem is that these debates about religion and evolution etc arent about faith. They are about science. And only 2 or 3 posters know enough to actually discuss it.


I think religous faith should be respected in the same way we would respect the opinion of a man who tells everyone how beautiful his wife and kids are.
(but this is an internet forum, and people tend to act like *******s now matter what the topic is)

I can respect the faith of an individual, no problem. The problem I do have is that religious ideas have an alarming tendency to spill over into the secular world. Right now the West is apparently engaged in a war with Islam because some Islamic people decided that to show how great their religion is they would start blowing stuff up. It goes both ways too, the portrayal of these terrorist activities as being endemic of all Islam, as opposed to just a few maniacs, is a direct result of the US being an extremely fundamentalist Christian country, so much so that it's presidents are de facto required to believe in God. The result of the religious ideas on both sides being so deeply embedded in their respective cultures is that we now have a world that appears as if it could tip over into outright war really quite easily. It's easy to say that atheists should respect people's faith, but when unverifiable ideas that come from old books start affecting geopolitics, it really is very worrying.

There are less extreme examples too. The Catholic church still opposes condoms and in Africa actively campaigns against them, undermining efforts to combat the spread of HIV and AIDS. America refuses funding to charities that advise on or provide abortion in Africa too. Obstetricians have been murdered in the USA and clinics blown up by religious fundamentalists, stem cell research is opposed by the US government, The Silver Ring Thing preach abstinence as the best method of birth control, delaying the date the kids who sign up lose their virginity, but increasing the incidence of unwanted pregnancies and STDs among them too. Christian groups like Christian Voice in the UK actively campaign against ****sexuals being employed as things like policemen. Really the list goes on and on.

Religious faith is fine, but for me it is about time that if religious people want the non-believers to respect them, it's about time that they acknowledged that that's exactly what it is: faith, a personal choice to believe that should have no place in the public arena whatsoever. By and large, from Osama Bin Laden and President Bush on down, they don't, they behave as though their religion gives them the right to decide things for all of us. I think this is why so many people have a problem with the religious worldview.

[tyson]

That's the problem. You look to Christianity as it was strictly brought up upon political roots. That is a mis-conception. Also you should realise that the Christian faith accepts the original Jewish texts which we call the "Old Testament" because the foundation and structure of Christianity starts thousands of years before the New Testament.

I understand people's need to believe in something, to seek out a higher power, or father figure if you will, to guid and aid in difficult times. (And to blame as well)
And I understand that there have been thousands of religions everywhere around the world, even before Christianity, which makes it kind of ridiculous to suggest that it was based solely on political roots.
But it's reasonable to say that people who craved power has actively been using religion as a form of mind/behaviour control.

Look at how powerful the church has been up until the last couple of centuries. Look how powerful the Catholic Church is right now.
People have demanded insane amounts of power in the name of religion, or do you disagree with that?

You disregard what the Old Testament says about killing, stoning and all kinds of insane stuff, claiming it's the New Testament that's the real deal because that's after Jesus and all that.
But when it is pointed out exactly how the New Testament was created, you again speak highly of the Old Testament.
Was OT also the words of God?

If so, why does it state that the Earth is merely a few thousand years old?
And why doesn't any Christian stone people who work on Sabbath?
(Which, by the way, was originally on Saturday, not Sunday, according to many Christians)
I mean, it says you shall do so in The Bible, doesn't it?
Again, you would be left alone if you said something like "Humans wrote it, with some agenda of their own, so I don't accept word for word in the Bible. I do, however, believe in God and Jesus."

I don't like the fact that whatever pig says, you are there right after him and claiming the same alleged contradictions as him without fully understanding them.

Squealpiggy is smart. He speaks logic. Logic and religion doesn't fare very well, so that's why you don't like it.

More or less, I am still explaining what you see as contradictions, really are not, but rather a failing attempt to read the texts and examined carefully and properly which you are failing any attempt to do. I am moreover critisizing your bashing of the Bible, because you are playing it safe since no one can really examine what you have to say. Why should you question my faith, and I cannot question yours, (also with the fact that there's no real way to question your's other then it has no foundations or scriptures to be tested for any divinity or prophecy, or even a hint of it holding a basic structure at all.)

I don't question your faith. I question the close-minded approach to the Bible, and religion for that matter.
But what do you mean by me playing it safe? How do you want me to say stuff in order for you to examine it, find flaws and pick it apart?

You can question my faith. I do all the time myself.
See, the difference here is that I have my "faith" based on my understanding of the world, not based on something someone claims is true because those who wrote it said God told them.
My "faith" is likely to change if I learn new things that contradicts my current view. I don't care how it really works or why, I just accept what is, and my "faith" is currently coherent with things I see around me.

The Christian faith in the Bible is not coherent with the current knowledge on how things really are, but due to close-mindedness or something, Christians just don't want to accept that.
Religious people are much like stubborn children who refuse to go to bed even when they can barely keep their eyes open.

I'm not saying it's wrong to believe in what you believe in, but rather it's odd that your being a hypocrite because the Bible can be tested by checking for errors, yet you have no scripture or anything to that nature which can be examined like the Bible does, or which can be tested to see whether your faith is what you say it is. The Bible is critisized because it contains words that can be read to understand its basic background and teachings. So to bash Christianity under the ideas that Christianity can be further examined rather then a belief with no foundation is very odd to say the least...

I already explained how my "faith" works and changes, but it's laughable that I need to have a scripture of it in order to have my faith validated. You can bash my faith as much as you like, or question it, like I do with the Bible.
You find it laughable when I say animals are more developed spiritually than human beings. My answer to that is; look around you. Explain in any other way how it is possible for animals to sense things long before they happen.
I never said they had more potential spiritually, just that we are not very developed.

There are people in this world who can move things with their mind, people who can regulate their body temperature with their mind, people who can set things on fire just by focusing their energy.
Sometimes you think about someone and then they call.
Spirituality I call it. God or the Devil many religious people call it.

You see, to me it's more likely that Jesus was one of those people who were developed spiritually than he being the son of God, the almighty creator who cares equally about everyone (after a certain people in a certain area, of course!).

"What I can do, you can do- and more!"
To me, that's a hint that we can learn all the stuff he's doing ourselves, but how?

"Faith can move mountains" - You need to believe it yourself in order to be able. There is no trying, you either do or you don't.

If this characther named Jesus existed, then he was an extraordinary man, no doubt about it.
What I wonder is what he drew in the sand...