Religion (1 Viewer)

[Cade]

In hopes of creating mass-chaos.

EDIT: If you share Creed's religion, post what religion that is.

 

[Running in Circles]

uh oh.

<---Agnostic btw I am, however...reading a book called 'Conversations with God', its really good...and its quite a lot more believable than what the bible or the kurahm (no idea how that's spelled) or any other document like says about having to be good or you'll go to hell or some other similar place.

If God gave you free will, why would he favor one choice over another? Doesn't that defeat the whole purpose of free will?

aaaand I'm outta here before I get flamed into oblivion

 

[BlackObsidian]

Conversations with God is a good little book providing you take it on a philosophical level rather than an actual account of real events.

Right now I'm almost at the end of The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. Again a wealth of information, all of which is factual rather than the "There is a teapot orbiting the sun but it's too small for telescopes to see. I know it cannot be proven but I believe it to be so because I have faith..." arguement

 

[Running in Circles]

[offtopic]Is agnostic in italics because I voted for it or is Cade playing with our minds? o.o

 

[Cade]

[offtopic]Is agnostic in italics because I voted for it or is Cade playing with our minds? o.o

Yes.

 

[jin]

you know what is also good? The Bible.

 

[Generel]

Am I the only jew?

 

[Running in Circles]

The only time I've ever even touched that is when its sitting in the desks in motels, and I reach in to grab something that I put in the drawer next to it.

 

[BlackObsidian]

The Bible's good but I much prefer fact over fiction

 

[Running in Circles]

who says the bible is fact? nobody was around to witness a lot of those things.

 

[RedBema]

My,my, my...

who says the bible is fact? nobody was around to witness a lot of those things.

Your kidding right? "Nobody was around..." What about all of the men and women that archeological/historical/evidence have proved were living during "those things." I could sit here and list thousands of proof that people actually did exist during "those things," lol... Josephus for one, is a famous Jewish historian who lived during some of "those things."

Obsidion, please inform me what is "fact" to you. If Scripture isn't, then what is, and why is it?

I am sorry if I may come across sharp, it's just that I hate whenever people speak proudly about religion without having any knowledge of what they are saying. (Speaking against a religion whenever they have no idea what they are arguing against.)

 

[Headcrab]

Mormon and no i dont have several wives, mormons dont do polygamy, and no we dont own cocacola or pepsi or whatever it is

 

[Running in Circles]

@Bema, I'm mostly talking about the earlier parts such as Adam & Eve and such...thousands of years before humans developed writing.

mormons dont do polygamy

My mom's side of the family is mormon (she isn't mormon herself, she got babtised when she was younger but hasn't belived in the religion since her teens), but one of my great-uncles (My mom's half-uncle or something, not sure) is one of the head people in some mormon cult up in Ogden (north of Salt Lake City) that still practice polygamy.

But no, most mormons don't practice it...but it is still around nevertheless.

 

[BlackObsidian]

Obsidion, please inform me what is "fact" to you. If Scripture isn't, then what is, and why is it?

I see "fact" as first hand, documented account of something. If a person cuts down a tree and is observed by another person who documents it and the document is handed down over 2000 years in its original form then it is fact.

If on the other hand a person hears a rumour of the fact that a man may have cut down a tree and then proceeds to tell the story of this man whilst adding to/removing from the story everything which goes against what he wants people to believe over centuries and then after this game of "Telephone" (for the benefit of US guys who may not know the we call it Chinese Whispers in the UK) this story gets translated from another language, tweaked, changed, edited and watered-down it is no longer fact, it becomes fiction BASED upon fact.

There is indeed proof of such persons existing historically, however proof of what they may or may not have said and done is not so.

If I found a book that said a person in history (who could be proven to exist) had sent a teapot into space to orbit the sun, but that this teapot cannot be seen by telescope, however the teapot is the reason for all life on our planet what is to prove it otherwise?

God is a teapot my friend, nothing more.

I hate whenever people speak proudly about religion without having any knowledge of what they are saying.

And PLEASE don't assume that everyone on this board is an un-educated child. Some of us are intelligent adults who no longer follow a "belief" system that has been forced down our throats from birth because people before us have not had the intelligence to question the validity of the religion.

 

[Spunge16]

Agnostic , i dont have time for religion

 

[DrZap]

I am sorry if I may come across sharp, it's just that I hate whenever people speak proudly about religion without having any knowledge of what they are saying. (Speaking against a religion whenever they have no idea what they are arguing against.)

Not to sound sharp, but Bema, my friend, sometimes YOU sound like the one arguing in the dark. I am glad that you are zealous about your beliefs, and I do not disparage them, however, from all your collected musings about religion in these forums, I get the feeling that you have never questioned the "truths" in the Bible. To you, it seems, the Bible is sacrosanct, true because it is the Bible. That, my friend, is an epistemological circle. No document, however perfectly written, can possibly be its own witness. You will never prove the assertions contained therein by quoting another section of the book!

In addition, you will never bring agnostics "to heel" with the brilliance of your words. Most people who reject religion have already assumed "Defensive Stance," which is impervious to "testimony."

And PLEASE don't assume that everyone on this board is an un-educated child. Some of us are intelligent adults who no longer follow a "belief" system that has been forced down our throats from birth because people before us have not had the intelligence to question the validity of the religion.

Whilst I am soapboxing, I will make a few comments about Black's comments. Some of us on this board, my friend, are educated adults who have dug deeply into the belief system(s) presented to us in our youth and have, indeed, questioned the validity of religion. Indeed, you and all agnostics need to accept that there are some deeply religious people who are following their beliefs with their eyes wide open, questioning everything, but cherishing the nuggets of brilliance which are buried in the admittedly enormous overburden of blind belief and ignorance.

Ultimately, the proof of the existence or non-existence of "God" is an impossibility. It comes down to accepting or rejecting the evidence presented to you and the arguments for and against that evidence. My beliefs will never be swayed by your unbelief, so dont try. On the other hand, I accept your choice to follow your beliefs and have no need to sway your with my statements of belief.

btw, there is no such thing as a true Athiest. To be so implies that you have PROVEN God does not exist. The only way you can definitively proove that is for supreme evidence to "speak" to you and deny that a supreme being exists. Accepting that supreme evidence puts you in the position of believer of the Anti-argument, but still beholden to higher authority. The best you can do is to reject all the arguments in favor of God's existence, which makes you agnostic, an unbeliever.

Lastly, this is not the first time this poll, or one similar, has been tried herein. I refused then, as I refuse now, to "vote." If you ask me privately, I will gladly disclose what I believe, but I will not stand in a crowded marketplace and compete with the din of contention raised by the labels we assume.

 

[BlackObsidian]

Whilst I am soapboxing, I will make a few comments about Black's comments. Some of us on this board, my friend, are educated adults who have dug deeply into the belief system(s) presented to us in our youth and have, indeed, questioned the validity of religion. Indeed, you and all agnostics need to accept that there are some deeply religious people who are following their beliefs with their eyes wide open, questioning everything, but cherishing the nuggets of brilliance which are buried in the admittedly enormous overburden of blind belief and ignorance.

I agree with the fact that there are many adults on the board with a high enough IQ to make intelligent decisions and choices about their own beliefs and ways of life; that has never been questioned by me. I actually suggested the same thing to Bema regarding "pigeon-holing" on here.

While I agree that some people walk through their lives being "enriched" by their religion and having their eyes wide open, sometimes open eyes serve no purpose when it comes to organised religion. For example there are a LOT of different areas of various religions which are open to interpretation and indeed abuse by those who would seek to USE others' religious beliefs for their own use, whether their eyes are open or not.

Ultimately, the proof of the existence or non-existence of "God" is an impossibility. It comes down to accepting or rejecting the evidence presented to you and the arguments for and against that evidence. My beliefs will never be swayed by your unbelief, so dont try. On the other hand, I accept your choice to follow your beliefs and have no need to sway your with my statements of belief.

"evidence" is exactly that though. It's a PROVEN fact which is not deniable, thus logically it should be accepted if it is indeed a fact.
Your belief is no different to any other religious person and I'm not here to persuade you away from your belief or anyone else for that matter, I'm just expressing the fact that I think the world would be a better place if people started realising that while religion can indeed bring happiness into people's lives, it can also cause more devastation than it's worth, especially when good people are being conditioned to do evil things "in the name of (insert deity here)

The sole reason I decided to post was because I knew that the entire thread would be filled with people's opinions and I wanted my own to be known also.

btw, there is no such thing as a true Athiest. To be so implies that you have PROVEN God does not exist. The only way you can definitively proove that is for supreme evidence to "speak" to you and deny that a supreme being exists. Accepting that supreme evidence puts you in the position of believer of the Anti-argument, but still beholden to higher authority. The best you can do is to reject all the arguments in favor of God's existence, which makes you agnostic, an unbeliever.

Incorrect.
An Atheist says that there is no God.
An Agnostic says that there is no way to be sure either way.

One can be an Athiest by examining all evidence presented, both in favour of and against a higher all-seeing deity and making a decision that based on the evidence examined, the likelihood of this God is so unlikely that a decision is made to reject it.

In order to be Agnostic, one would follow the same as above but at "decision time" they would say "Well there's no way to be sure so I won't make a decision, I'll sit on the fence and see what else comes up"

Science is "The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena." and normally ends up with a conclusion being drawn based on what's available and changed as and when new evidence or fact becomes available.
Most Atheists are so because they follow the scientific view of life coined by Darwin, however as these people are "scientific" it follows that they (and indeed I!) are happy to take on-board any new evidence and change an opinion when it becomes necessary to do so, as was the case when the world changed from being flat to being round.

 

[RedBema]

Without going through the extra efforts of quoting everyone's comments of which I am about to interact with, please bear with me.

Zap, I don't ever recall ever using "circular reasoning" whenever I present my meagle attempts to argue that the Bible is true. If I did, it is something that came out naturally, and was not intended for this time of boards discussion. If I am speaking to someone who may view Scripture as having some truth, then yes, I will use Scripture to explain Scripture. However, when possible, and for discussion, I tend to stray away from that.

If you are referring to the God and Evil discussion in the "Place for your Head" forum, then yes, I used Scripture to explain my thoughts, but that was because we began with the statement, "Let's just say that for arguing purposes, that God is God, and His Word is true..." Other than that, I use my best attempts and Philosophy and Apologetics without getting to out of hand.

Religion always causes debate, and for the most part, I do my best to keep my emotions out of it. I would say that I usually do a pretty good job, and always try to do a good job, because the last thing that I ever want to be is one of those nut-case Christians who have no idea how to interact civially in a religion debate.

Black, if I offended you, I apologize. I was not directing my statement towards you, but mainly to RiC. RiC, I did not mean to offend you as well, but the statement seemed very childish and uneducated to me. To simply make a statement that there is no way to know that people existed in those days is quite ridiculous. I have personally flown to Israel to do research myself on the historical times around when Jesus lived. I was only "saved" about 5-6 years ago, whenever I was 18. So I am not a "church goer" since I was born, nor am I following something that was forced down my throat. I believe because I believe God loved me enough. I do not believe because I have simply found enough evidence, or had an ooey gooey feeling. I believe by faith. And that, is why people can never understand. But yes, the evidence and such does help cushion the belief. But I am man, and finite.

Zap, I will say this about your athiesm argument, and that is, that I agree with you. I do not think that one can be a true athiest, because you are disproving something that you have no proof to disprove. If I personally do not believe that there was ever a purple tree in 100 B.C. (just making this up...), then why would I even post in a forum to argue against it? If it doesn't exist, then it doesn't exist. To proof that you don't believe in something, well, that to me means that it probably exists in your mind, it's just that you do not follow it. But to disproove it's existance all together is another thing.

Zap, you are a lawyer, and you were probably taught that evidence is never conclusive. This plays a big role in every aspect of your thinking, especially religion. It took me a while to come to terms with this. I was recently in a class to where they taught the same thing, and I wondered over it's possibility for days and days before coming to the conclusion that heck, it may be true.

I really am beginning to wish that I had not entered into this conversation. I never really get anywhere and at the present time feel as if I lost my true reason to debate in the first place....not to win, but an attempt to show the logicality of Christendom.

 

[1twelve2]

not a poll option, but i am a spiritual person, not a religious person. i have a program i work to bring me closer to a god of my understanding, and i like him. He plays WoW, likes fast cars, and he wants me to be happy, joyous and free.

 

[BlackObsidian]

Black, if I offended you, I apologize. I was not directing my statement towards you, but mainly to RiC...

Zap, I will say this about your athiesm argument, and that is, that I agree with you. I do not think that one can be a true athiest, because you are disproving something that you have no proof to disprove. If I personally do not believe that there was ever a purple tree in 100 B.C. (just making this up...), then why would I even post in a forum to argue against it? If it doesn't exist, then it doesn't exist. To proof that you don't believe in something, well, that to me means that it probably exists in your mind, it's just that you do not follow it. But to disproove it's existance all together is another thing.

I grew out of being "offended" with stuff many years ago when I realised that the "PC Brigade" as I like to call them are sticking their noses into everything humanly possible and I wanted to distance myself from them.

For instance people complaining that they are asked to remove a niq&#257;b before taking a driving test (how TF does the instructor know that you are who you say you are if all he can see is your eyes?) or the guy who was refused entry on a plane for wearing a t-shirt which "may have at some point caused offence to one or more passengers" etc

So... er... no need to apologise!

I like a good debate tho which in the case of this thread is handy

Atheism isn't about proving or disproving anything, it's about making a statement based on the evidence available...

If I were to see two guys living in the house opposite mine holding hands, hugging and spending time together I could look at that evidence and say to myself, "those guys are gay"

It may actually be the case that they're not gay at all, they may be bisexual. Or one of them may be handicapped and the other helping him out by holding his hand. Or one may be grieving and the other comforting him etc

BUT I may not have had any additional evidence in front of me and may have decided that they are gay based on the evidence I'd seen.

In that scenario I have made a decision as an Atheist would with the existence of God... All evidence points toward the fact that they are gay/god does not exist.

Had I said "I don't know if they're gay or not and can't see how I can know based on the evidence I've seen, thus I won't make a decision" I'd have made a decision as an Agnostic would have in regard to God's existence.

Oh and just to clarify, I'm not against "God" in the sense of a purley Christian God - My definition of "God" is in all forms, God, Allah, Yahweh etc. Basically "organised religion"

 

[DrZap]

Oh and just to clarify, I'm not against "God" in the sense of a purley Christian God - My definition of "God" is in all forms, God, Allah, Yahweh etc. Basically "organised religion"

My cheeky friend, if you are going to insist on precision in thought, then please be precise. There is a world of difference between "God" and "Religion". God, (postulating a supreme [being, force, influence], which is sentient and who cares about humanity) is an entity. Religion, on the otherhand, is an organization built by humans to do homage to the God they accept. Whether or not he was a Prophet of God, Isaiah had a very real point, "this people draw near to me with their lips and with their mouths do honor me, but have removed their hearts far from me and their fear toward me is taught by the precepts of me." (Isa 29:13)

I weigh in with the anti-religion forces when it comes to condemning the butchery and inhumanity foisted on others in the name of some God, whether it be the heathen human sacrifices, the Roman Inquisition or the Jihadists of today. Anyone who can condone murder in the name of God, is not religious. He is not even fully human!

One of the most influential philosophers of the last couple of centuries was Friedrick Nietzsche, who stated boldy, "God is dead." He has been roundly excoriated by the Christian press, making Fundamentalist's top ten Most Wanted list in the 70's, as he teachings were being mangled by the free-think crowd. Both sides in that debate had it dead wrong! Nietzsche was NOT declaring the Atheist mantra. What he was doing is pointing out that the God CREATED BY RELIGIONISTS was fiction, had never existed. In fact, Nietszche was deeply religious. He had had significant ephiphanic experiences which convinced him that there was, indeed, a supreme being and that GOD knew and cared about Friedrich Nietzsche.

Black, I did not say that one couldn't be Atheist. You have put the case very succinctly and well. What I said was that one couldn't be a True Atheist, one who KNEW as opposed to one who chose to accept the sum total of the evidence he had, to that time, examined. To you, the evidence is overwhelmingly on the side of No-God. To Nietzsche, and many others, it swings the other way.

Black, Bema (both of whom, I admire btw) the danger with taking a "Here I stand, I shall not move" stance (on either side of the position) is that there is far more undiscovered evidence than that we have, to this point, examined.

Please understand that I am a scientist. My forum name is earned! I won't tout my credentials, but they exist. The scientific method is a wonderful tool, but it is not the only way of knowing truth. Read some Sonnets long enough to understand that some truths are emotional, not logical.

The real test of a person's philosophy, Atheist or Deist, is NOT what he believes, but how he acts, his behavior in interacting with humanity as it exists. I close with my favorite poem:

No man is an island,
Entire of itself.
Each is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less.
As well as if a promontory were.
As well as if a manner of thine own
Or of thine friend's were.
Each man's death diminishes me,
For I am involved in mankind.
Therefore, send not to know
For whom the bell tolls,
It tolls for thee.

-John Donne 1624

 

[BlackObsidian]

Just a quick point (I shall return later to post properly) I have much respect for those articulate enough to argue a point without resorting to insults and anger and both Zap and Bema are in my list of respect. Both of you have valid viewpoints and I'm always interested in what you both have to say; Bema perhaps moreso but only because I've know for a long time that he is a Pastor but he doesn't find it neccessary to try converting everyone all the time.

In fact, I think many moons ago Bema and I had a similar discussion on religious belief

 

[Ccomp5950]

At one point I was a Christian Apologist myself, I even debated with a rather unsetteling atheist on the feasability of Noah's ark and used science and math to prove that it was feasible. Now I tend to believe that most of the Genesis story is a parable. The important parts of course are written by first hand or second hand accounts. These accounts were of course unchanged as seen by the fact of over 5000 copies spread out through out the first 9 centuries and very little difference between them (punctuation, spelling of proper nouns). The Chinese Whipsers doesn't play into it because even today we are going back to the original greek text, or more specifically we are going back to manuscripts which are backed up by other manuscripts which were copied from other manuscripts which all say the same thing therefore we can say with absolute certainty that the manuscripts we have are accurate to the originals. The accuracy of roman history is more questionable then that of the accuracy of the Bible.

This is ofcourse simply my opinion. For your own sakes I honestly hope I'm wrong.

Edit: Grats black on 1,500th post.

 

[BlackObsidian]

Ooh 1500 indeed!

Black, I did not say that one couldn't be Atheist. You have put the case very succinctly and well. What I said was that one couldn't be a True Atheist, one who KNEW as opposed to one who chose to accept the sum total of the evidence he had, to that time, examined.

Um.. By the same token does that mean that one cannot be a True Christian, True Jew , True Buddhist etc based on the lack of "knowing"? I know a few people who would get physical with me if I said to them, "You are not a True Christian because you lack proof of your belief... Everything is BELIEVED to be true"

I mentioned before that I don't hold an "I shall not move" stance with my belief or lack thereof. In fact I spent quite a few years looking into different religions to find one that suited my own opinion on the world, our purpose here, nature et al... I started by questioning my parents choice to believe in something and why it was so and then I decided to look into why others believe other things. I looked at Christianity, Muslim, Atheism, Agnosticism, Wicca and even Satanism to try and find out what drives people to these beliefs.

The closest I came to a belief I really thought was great was Eclectic Wiccan at one point. I love nature, I love our planet, I love the ideals behind it and I believe in the power of the human mind. The one thing I didn't believe in was that a male and female God would help with your chants and spells because you are showing reverence for nature, thus Wicca Eclectic to begin with and then pretty shortly afterward, discarded by me.

I then spent many years as an Agnostic. I looked at evidence for and against a God and could find no solution either way so I continued to sit on the Agnostic fence and waited.

The turning point for me was actually through reading science websites, books and nature programs on tv. Everything in nature, EVERYTHING! seems to be designed. It seems to be there because someone deemed it to be so. Initially I started to lean toward Creationism because it seemed a logical path for my thoughts but I then stumbled onto Natural Selection and everything for me clicked into place...

While I now class myself as an Atheist, I DO 100% believe that in the beginning there was likely to have been an entity of some type who drew-up the laws of our known universe, just as people draw-up pieces of code to create fractal images. There is just too much evidence toward the fact that without some kind of guidelines, it's EXTREMELY unlikely that our galaxy, let alone planet would be able to create the exact conditions with which we need to live.
What I DON'T believe in is that this entity is any longer with us, or that he guides us all, or that he listens to everyone simultanously, helps people through tough times, smites people down who do not believe in him, causes earthquakes and tsunamis to kill millions and likes the fact that mankind revels in it's own ingenuity when turning normal decent people/children into weapons for their own earthy crusade in his name... I mention children in this paragraph because I was recently witness to possibly the worse form of child abuse I've ever seen, all in the guise of "doing the lords will" - Pastor Becky Fischer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Camp) !!

As stated earlier, I am more than happy to change any point of view I currently hold; it is not set in stone and nor is it a guide to my life, it is nothing more than a background thought to me.

 

[alucard]

Hmm I was beaten to posting this, and many other of my points, but I'll say it anyway.


"What I said was that one couldn't be a True Atheist."

Using that logic, someone can't be a True Christian because they can't prove what they believe is true.

Also, I think it would be intresting if people posted not only what they believe currently, but what religon they were born into.

 

[Generel]

All these posts!!!!!!

TLDR any of them!

 

[Erol-Tob]

Atheist... If Taoism was on there I would have selected that.

All of the following is purely my opinion, I really couldn't care if you like what I say or not. I am saying what I think and if you don't care what I have to say skip to the next post.

I am not a religious Taoist, more of a Philisophical Taoist, having read the Tao Te Ching, I strongly believe in the philisophies explained in the book, most of it is simple logic such as, treat others as you want to be treated, and stay humble. One of the main reasons I chose Taoism is I don't believe in things such as "If you do something bad(sin) you will go to hell"; In my opinion Hell and Heaven are a facade, and nothing more than a guide towards your faction per se. Meaning if your goal is to live a great 'afterlife' you should do good. Most people believe the bible should be followed word for word, I believe the bible was meant to be questioned, and not to be a rule but a guideline. The whole point is to tell you stories for you to differentiate between good and bad. There is a moral to every story and that is the key point in the bible. I also think Church is waste of time, you don't need to go to a Church to worship your eternal being, I say eternal being because I don't believe in God / Muhammed / Buddha or whatever, sure there might be an eternal being, but I am not concerned with that because I believe in Reincarnation and everyone is an eternal being, if you lead life you will be Reincarnated as another being, every living thing is great and destined for greatness, whether you lead a good life or a terrible one you will be reincarnated regardless. I believe everyone is equal, men; women; animals; whatever your interpretation of a living thing is.

I don't want this to be a big block of text so i might separate. Just remember you should always be humble and treat others with respect regardless of race, gender, sexual preference, personality or any other characteristic.

 

[DrZap]

Black, that was superb!

Very erudite. Very reasonable. Very rational.

To all of which I only add that except for the details of the dogmas, it is very similar to the position held by Saul of Tarsus prior to a (perhaps fanciful) journey he took.

Black, my friend, that is not a believer's snobbishness speaking, just a bit of cheek from a (rather senior) scientist who has come to understand how little I really know. I am open to wondrous experiences, even if they push me off well considered and long cherished positions.

 

[ooomx]

Jews are known for passing down their history from ancient time by word of mouth. They made it part of their education, because their history was who they were. Once they had a writen word scribes spent thier entie lives making sure that the scriptures were copied just as they found it. True no one was around to write about Noah and Adam and Eve but the story was told over and over generation after generation until they got the writen word.

Moses wrote Genesis, he was a highly educated man and was able to write the spoken word. He also was able to write the first 5 books of the Bible. About 25 years ago the Dead Sea Scrolls were found that had portions of the the Old Testimate and after hundreds and thousands of years they matched. So to answer your question the Bible is fact not fiction is was writen about people who lived just like you and me. It talks about their good times as well as their failures. Just because a person says he or she is a Christian doesnt mean that they are free from making mistakes or doing the wrong thing, what it does mean is that they are doing their best to live a life that is surrendered to Christ and with his help thw two will do better job than one person by themselves.
Sorry about the sermon, but you asked.

 

[alucard]

This post doesn't reflect my religious beliefs so much as disagreeing with ooomx's interpenetrating of the previous posts in this thread.

ooomx-When people say fiction, they aren't referring to whether or not people acted in the way the bible says, they're referring to their disbelief in an active God.

"Just because a person says he or she is a Christian doesn't mean that they are free from making mistakes or doing the wrong thing, what it does mean is that they are doing their best to live a life that is surrendered to Christ and with his help thw two will do better job than one person by themselves."

I've never heard someone say otherwise.

 

[RedBema]

I am one semester away from earning my BA in Biblical Studies, I have visited some of the most "holy" physical areas in the entire world, and have read through the entire Bible only to discover this...

I really do not know anything, and cannot prove anything by evidence or even logic.

Evidence will never prove anything as valid. Why? Because new evidence can always come out to convert the paradigm into another direction.

However, even though I may not "know anything by evidence," I do know and believe in the God of the Bible. Do I believe by evidence? No.... Do I believe by logic? No.... Do I believe by influence? No... But I believe by faith. And though many may disagree with my "Here I stand, and I shall not be moved" stance, I will never move nor faulter from it. From what I have found, evidence has never proved the existence of God, nor will it ever, but it does compliment it.

Some may say that I live by a stubborn philosophy, but I call it faith. "Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. (Hebrews 11)

I realize that I am nothing, just a drop in a bucket, just a whisper in the wind. My life on this earth will end, and the world will continue to live on. But this life isn't about me, nor has it ever been. I believe that it is all for the glory of God.

And now I leave you with the words to one of my favorite songs:

[John 3:30 / Galatians 6:14]

How could I stand here
And watch the sun rise
Follow the mountains
Where they touch the sky
Ponder the vastness
And the depths of the sea
And think for a moment
The point of it all was to make much of me
'Cause I'm just a whisper
And You are the thunder and...

I want to make much of You, Jesus
I want to make much of Your love
I want to live today to give You the praise
That You alone are so worthy of
I want to make much of Your mercy
I want to make much of Your cross
I give You my life
Take it and let it be used
To make much of You

And how can I kneel here
And think of the cross
The thorns and the whip and the nails and the spear
The infinite cost
To purchase my pardon
And bear all my shame
To think I have anything worth boasting in
Except Your name
'Cause I'm a sinner
And You are the Savior and...

This is Your love, oh, God
Not to make much of me
But to send Your own Son
So that we could make much of You
For all eternity

Steven Curtis Champan

I personally am interested in taking this discussion to the afterlife. Black, Zap, and others, what do you think happens to us when we die? Reincarnation? Heaven? Nothing?

 

[someoneorsomething]

I myself am baptist (not the crazy ones who were going to funerals saying the soldiers are going to hell).

I say that as long as you beleive there is a god (alla, budah, ect) that that is what it is about.

I beleive that if i did go up to heaven (or whereever) and budah is sitting there. I dont think that he would send me to hell because i was misinfomed. I know if i was a god (i know sacreligious) and someone came to me and was good his whole life or tried to be and happened to beleive in another higher power because he didnt know better. I would let him in.

So IMHO its better to beleive and be wrong, then to not to beleive and be right. Because if you dont beleive and are wrong you are going to spend eternity in hell.

But if there is no God and you beleive you really loose nothing....if that makes sense.

 

[RedBema]

Someoneorsomething,

What you are speaking about is known as Paschal's Wager, it states,

Either God exists or he doesn't.
Which alternative will you wager on?
You can't avoid choosing one or the other;
you have embarked on the wager already.
A refusal to choose carries the same result
as choosing that God does not exist.
What if you choose to bet that God exists?
If you win, you win everything;
if you lose, you lose nothing.
Make a bet that God exists.

I, with all do respect, think that it is crap. I don't believe, nor do I think that anyone should believe it in order to be what the bible calls "saved," because "you can win rather than lose..." And personally, I don't think that it amounts to a hill of beans. God (of the Bible) doesn't want our logic alone, nor does He desire our wagers. He desires our faith. Faith is far different than a wager.

While I am on this, I need to make a statement about universalism, because it seems that many people have Christianity mixed up, or Christianity mixed up with other gods.

To be a biblical Christian, (if words still mean anything), you must believe in One God, that is, the God of the bible. He is Triune in His nature, that is, He has three persons in His God Head. They are the Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit. Each Person of the Godhead has His purpose. You must believe that He loved you enough to send His One and only Son, Jesus to die for your sins. Not only did He die, but He rose again on the third day, only to return again one day, a day which we are still awaiting.

If you state that you believe in the biblical God, as well as in Allah, then you are by no means a biblical Christian, and don't expect to be able to enter heaven, (at least the heaven that I believe exists, which is the only heaven). God makes it clear that you are to have no other gods before Him, and that He alone is God.

Think about it. If you believe in everything, in every way, and believe that "all roads lead to heaven," then something in your logic is very messed up. Jesus said that the ONLY way to heaven is through Him. There are no other ways. Thus, if you are a universalist, in order to keep your religious thinking sensible, you either must,

A. Not involve Christianity in your circle of Religions, which kind of blows your logic out of the water

or

B. Twist the Scriptures to make them mean what you want them to mean. (Take them out of context) which thus forfeits all sensibility in your logic again

or

C. Become a Christian, solely, which again blows out univerlasim.

Needless to say, I think universalism, or the belief that if you believe in any higher power, then you are okay, is crap.

Please note, yes, these are statements made from a Christian, and thus, resemble Christianity therein. I do argue one sidedly, but how else am I supposed to argue for my faith? lol.

At least these are my two cents.

 

[bakshi]

Why isnt the best religion out there listed ?? You guys know scientology is the best one out there. Who doesnt love aliens and spaceships.

 

[Erol-Tob]

Why isnt the best religion out there listed ?? You guys know scientology is the best one out there. Who doesnt love aliens and spaceships.

i seriously rofled

 

[2drakkon2]

This is a hard one for me...

I really don't know what I am. I believe that in the begenning of everything there had to be something that started our universe. Before our Sun, was even created, before there was anything in our universe.

I do belive in Darwin's theory of evolution. I have spent some time looking into a lot of religions, such as Chrisitanity, and Buddahism, and many more. I really don't belive any one of them is true.

I belive that religion, in itself is a GREAT thing. If you choose to believe in Christianty, I don't mind. I don't have any problems with any religion. But the way the many of our society use it, religion becomes a excuse to kill.

Any human, as I believe DrZap said, that would intentionally harm another human being, for any reason is just not a human being, as we (as a civilization) are supposed to be. Using a religion as a excuse to kill, other people is just abusing religion.

Also, the group of people that protest Soldier's funerals, are using the bible's and any other "holy" book, out of context. I'm sure when the first parts of the Bible was being written, they did not intend for what they were writing to be used like that.

I think I am Agnostic, I do not believe either way. I'm just sitting on the fence, for a major discovery to sway my thoughts.

Well, that's just what I think about it. I am 14, and don't have nearly the education of most of the other posters on this thread.

As for the afterlife, I am undecided. There is no evidence either way. There are reports of people who have had near-death expereinces, who said they went to Heaven, and said it was a wonderful place, they could see God, Jesus, and everything that was said in The Bible (I think).

 

[Roguish]

Not really sure if I'm Protestant or Christian, Other

I believe in the Bible but I don't believe in going to Heaven if you're good or going to hell Hell if you're bad or Free Will to do good or bad in the first place or any other man-made doctrine "proven" with scripture out of context.

 

[Running in Circles]

There are reports of people who have had near-death expereinces, who said they went to Heaven, and said it was a wonderful place, they could see God, Jesus, and everything that was said in The Bible (I think).

If I had a near death experience, I could also say I went to heaven and saw two freshly baked apple pies playing a game of chess and a cat walking on its hind legs serving the pies some coffee. Does that make it true? absolutely not.

 

[BlackObsidian]

I personally am interested in taking this discussion to the afterlife. Black, Zap, and others, what do you think happens to us when we die? Reincarnation? Heaven? Nothing?

Interesting... There are a couple of ways to interpret your question Bema my friend...

From a religious perspective I could assume that you mean our essence, sentience or "soul" in which case I have to say I don't think anything happens. Our consciousness ceases to exist... We expire and all that remains of us is other people's thoughts and snapshots of our life.

From a scientific perspective you could mean the energy within the human body in which case I believe that, in line with the Law of Conservation of Energy our energy is simply transformed into other forms or transferred into other systems. In essence we become whatever we are transferred into.

 

[RedBema]

Black,

Do you personally believe that man has a soul? Some inner moral agent that knows the difference between right and wrong?