There is No God
Original Source: There is No God (And You Know It) by Sam Harris (thanks to Anna for the link)
The following is an excerpt from An Atheist Manifesto, to be published at www.truthdig.com in December.
Somewhere in the world a man has abducted a little girl. Soon he will rape, torture, and kill her. If an atrocity of this kind not occurring at precisely this moment, it will happen in a few hours, or days at most.
Such is the confidence we can draw from the statistical laws that govern the lives of six billion human beings. The same statistics also suggest that this girl’s parents believe -- at this very moment -- that an all-powerful and all-loving God is watching over them and their family. Are they right to believe this? Is it good that they believe this?
No.
The entirety of atheism is contained in this response. Atheism is not a philosophy; it is not even a view of the world; it is simply a refusal to deny the obvious. Unfortunately, we live in a world in which the obvious is overlooked as a matter of principle. The obvious must be observed and re-observed and argued for. This is a thankless job. It carries with it an aura of petulance and insensitivity. It is, moreover, a job that the atheist does not want.
It is worth noting that no one ever need identify himself as a non-astrologer or a non-alchemist. Consequently, we do not have words for people who deny the validity of these pseudo-disciplines. Likewise, “atheism” is a term that should not even exist. Atheism is nothing more than the noises reasonable people make when in the presence of religious dogma. The atheist is merely a person who believes that the 260 million Americans (eighty-seven percent of the population) who claim to “never doubt the existence of God” should be obliged to present evidence for his existence -- and, indeed, for his benevolence, given the relentless destruction of innocent human beings we witness in the world each day. Only the atheist appreciates just how uncanny our situation is: most of us believe in a God that is every bit as specious as the gods of Mount Olympus; no person, whatever his or her qualifications, can seek public office in the United States without pretending to be certain that such a God exists; and much of what passes for public policy in our country conforms to religious taboos and superstitions appropriate to a medieval theocracy. Our circumstance is abject, indefensible, and terrifying. It would be hilarious if the stakes were not so high.
Consider: the city of New Orleans was recently destroyed by hurricane Katrina. At least a thousand people died, tens of thousands lost all their earthly possessions, and over a million have been displaced. It is safe to say that almost every person living in New Orleans at the moment Katrina struck believed in an omnipotent, omniscient, and compassionate God. But what was God doing while a hurricane laid waste to their city? Surely He heard the prayers of those elderly men and women who fled the rising waters for the safety of their attics, only to be slowly drowned there. These were people of faith. These were good men and women who had prayed throughout their lives. Only the atheist has the courage to admit the obvious: these poor people spent their lives in the company of an imaginary friend.
Of course, there had been ample warning that a storm “of biblical proportions” would strike New Orleans, and the human response to the ensuing disaster was tragically inept. But it was inept only by the light of science. Advance warning of Katrina’s path was wrested from mute Nature by meteorological calculations and satellite imagery. God told no one of his plans. Had the residents of New Orleans been content to rely on the beneficence of the Lord, they wouldn’t have known that a killer hurricane was bearing down upon them until they felt the first gusts of wind on their faces. And yet, a poll conducted by The Washington Post found that eighty percent of Katrina’s survivors claim that the event has only strengthened their faith in God.
As hurricane Katrina was devouring New Orleans, nearly a thousand Shiite pilgrims were trampled to death on a bridge in Iraq. There can be no doubt that these pilgrims believed mightily in the God of the Koran. Indeed, their lives were organized around the indisputable fact of his existence: their women walked veiled before him; their men regularly murdered one another over rival interpretations of his word. It would be remarkable if a single survivor of this tragedy lost his faith. More likely, the survivors imagine that they were spared through God’s grace.
Only the atheist recognizes the boundless narcissism and self-deceit of the saved. Only the atheist realizes how morally objectionable it is for survivors of a catastrophe to believe themselves spared by a loving God, while this same God drowned infants in their cribs. Because he refuses to cloak the reality of the world’s suffering in a cloying fantasy of eternal life, the atheist feels in his bones just how precious life is -- and, indeed, how unfortunate it is that millions of human beings suffer the most harrowing abridgements of their happiness for no good reason at all.
Of course, people of faith regularly assure one another that God is not responsible for human suffering. But how else can we understand the claim that God is both omniscient and omnipotent? There is no other way, and it is time for sane human beings to own up to this. This is the age-old problem of theodicy, of course, and we should consider it solved. If God exists, either He can do nothing to stop the most egregious calamities, or He does not care to. God, therefore, is either impotent or evil. Pious readers will now execute the following pirouette: God cannot be judged by merely human standards of morality. But, of course, human standards of morality are precisely what the faithful use to establish God’s goodness in the first place. And any God who could concern himself with something as trivial as gay marriage, or the name by which he is addressed in prayer, is not as inscrutable as all that. If He exists, the God of Abraham is not merely unworthy of the immensity of creation; he is unworthy even of man.
There is another possibility, of course, and it is both the most reasonable and least odious: the biblical God is a fiction. As Richard Dawkins has observed, we are all atheists with respect to Zeus and Thor. Only the atheist has realized that the biblical god is no different. Consequently, only the atheist is compassionate enough to take the profundity of the world’s suffering at face value. It is terrible that we all die and lose everything we love; it is doubly terrible that so many human beings suffer needlessly while alive. That so much of this suffering can be directly attributed to religion -- to religious hatreds, religious wars, religious delusions, and religious diversions of scarce resources -- is what makes atheism a moral and intellectual necessity. It is a necessity, however, that places the atheist at the margins of society. The atheist, by merely being in touch with reality, appears shamefully out of touch with the fantasy life of his neighbors.
Comments
I think it is interesting that faith is the same thing.
You start by being a parent of a little girl. You look into her eyes and you say: surly there must be a God. That part is easy. Nobody can witness a miracle and deny God.
Then something happens and she is hurt, maybe you never see her again. Faith still believes.
Put it like this: We don't have a word for people who don't believe in love. "Cynics" maybe or maybe that is just the word for the noises people who hide from love make when in its presence. But love doesn't require proof. It can't be proven. It requires faith…Faith in another person, in something greater than yourself.
I don't read the bible much. But I remember in the New Testament I learned that God is love. And that is enough for me. And, if we believe these statistics, most people. How can someone hide from love? Seems like they should have a name for people like that.
God is love, eh?
"I have wiped out many nations, devastating their fortress walls and towers. Their cities are now deserted; their streets are in silent ruin. There are no survivors to even tell what happened. I thought, 'Surely they will have reverence for me now! Surely they will listen to my warnings, so I won't need to strike again.' But no; however much I punish them, they continue their evil practices from dawn till dusk and dusk till dawn." So now the LORD says: "Be patient; the time is coming soon when I will stand up and accuse these evil nations. For it is my decision to gather together the kingdoms of the earth and pour out my fiercest anger and fury on them. All the earth will be devoured by the fire of my jealousy. "On that day I will purify the lips of all people, so that everyone will be able to worship the LORD together. My scattered people who live beyond the rivers of Ethiopia will come to present their offerings." Zephaniah 3:6-10
The obvious must be observed and re-observed and argued for.
In that case, then it's not by definition obvious, is it?
So religious faith is love? What about Bush's faith or Osama's faith? They both seem genuinely convinced that a higher being is looking down on them to do his bidding. How exactly is that kind of faith less valid than yours? Faith is not about love. It is about self-deception.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-deception
Thanks Norm - good stuff.
That's exactly the point he is arguing- it should be obvious, but through the haze of religion most people don't realize it.
physics and philosophy fail to explain love.
religion fails to explain evil except as "oopsies an accident."
i believe neither. my fellow academics boastfully put their faith in science as if they're using only their perfectly-tuned brains, and it makes me wanna yell. dogma is the problem.
Anyone who believes in God, given the chance to ask him something, most likely would ask "Why"" "What was the meaning?"
So religion doesn't explain anything, does it? If there was a god, what is his plan? Based on observation, it seems like... The Truman Show. Bare with me, people... Perhaps god was bored. And he wanted to make people, by making the universe, and watch our every move like a really big Truman show except with no actors at all. All real emotions, all the time.
:\
Why would God help us? I don't see why he would. Why would god keep us all for eternity somewhere? There are plenty of us to go around, and if we all go away, he can make us again. Frankly, I think he would get bored after a few billion years, not to mention eternity.
If there were a god, he would exist in a perfect form. Being perfect, he doesn't need the company of lesser beings.
Some people just need to get their facts straight- Not that I believe in god, but if there was one, this is the only way he could exist: Not in man's image. He's god. All-powerful, All-seeing, All-knowing, Everywhere. God could only be perfect. He wouldn't need a nose (what the hell does he need to breathe anyway? can't he make air inside his lungs if he really needed it? He does not need eyes (being all-seeing) does not need a brain, he doesn't need a body, or any physical form whatsoever. By definition, god created the rules of survival, of physics, of everything, if he existed. So he shouldn't be bound by them, or he would be his own little paradox.
One thing is for sure, he wouldn't have needed to create life himself, and place on earth. The universe is so incomprehensibly large, that life could have occurred, in at least one spot for certain, by itself. And god, being all-knowing, all-powerful, and whatnot, could have created the universe in such a way that all this shit could happen on its own, and made sure that it happened in such a way that the dinosaurs were wiped out, letting mammals dominate, and thus man, in a way that is entirely perfect and planned. And why then, would we need to talk to god? In his infinite wisdom, wouldn't it be an insult to suggest anything to him, or to say anything other than "hey", which is a waste of the precious time he created? Because wouldn't he have planned out the things you wanted to say, or know billions of years beforehand that you would have said it?
God isn't plausible. Something more plausible is the idea that the universe must come into existence in such a way that leads to it's end, and rebirth, over and over. There are many ways the laws of physics could have been arranged, but from the beginning there was only one way that would actually work, one way that would create stars, planets, life, and I assume AI. To either be the final puzzle piece in a perfect universe or have some role in aiding it's destruction. Whether or not earth is part of the bigger picture or not, I don't know. But I don't see why not. Perhaps our planet has just the right makeup, gravitational pull, and history for intelligent life to thrive.
We are, by no means, insignificant tiny specks in this universe. It's simply easier to see the larger world around us than it is to see the smaller one beneath us. By looking to god we are putting are pride in the wrong place. All-powerful, all knowing... It does not come from some mystical facet of the imagination. It comes from a collection of thought accumulated over thousands of years from beings that have been evolved over billions of years from that first amino acid in the sea, and from trillions of years of physical evolution before it. Can no one see the huge weight that we, as life, have on our shoulders? Everything that has happened, big and small, has lead up to one moment- The present, and you.
Even the most basic premise of most religions--that "God" created a world and placed "mankind" in it and he has a specific plan for us that is the "right" way to live, even that suffers from some pretty obvious flaws. Like, how do we know "the Plan"? Easy right, just ask your local religious leader--uh oh, wait, there are 100's of different religions, and even among those each religion divides itself into sects, synods, divisions, orthodoxies--and they all have varying versions of "the Plan". Are you saved by faith? by works? by praying in the right direction? Do I decide on one by how pretty the church is? Or by the one that has the most members? That would be the democratic thing to do--go with the majority, right.?
Wait a minute, if God has a plan, how come he did such a lousy job of letting us know what it is? Did he intentionally do that to be sadistic? Did he just have a lousy PR guy? Gee, if he's so powerful and all knowing, you would think he could at least get that part right--letting us know what he wants from us--since supposedly the consequences are so great--you know , like eternal damnation, and burning in a lake of fire. Well lets go with Christianity because that has the most members. The churches that consider themselves Christian are: African Independent Churches (AICs), the Aglipayan Church, Amish, Anglicans, Armenian Apostolic, Assemblies of God; Baptists, Calvary Chapel, Catholics, Christadelphians, Christian Science, the Community of Christ, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints ("Mormons"), Coptic Christians, Eastern Orthodox churches, Ethiopian Orthodox, Evangelicals, Iglesia ni Cristo, Jehovah's Witnesses, the Local Church, Lutherans, Methodists, Monophysites, Nestorians, the New Apostolic Church, Pentecostals, Plymouth Brethren, Presbyterians, the Salvation Army, Seventh-Day Adventists, Shakers, Stone-Campbell churches (Disciples of Christ; Churches of Christ; the "Christian Church and Churches of Christ"; the International Church of Christ); Uniate churches, United Church of Christ/Congregationalists, the Unity Church, Universal Church of the Kingdom of God, Vineyard churches and others. This could be a problem because I don't think the Lutherans, the Mormons, and the Shakers really all see eye to eye; not to mention the Monophysites and Nestorians.
i think greg makes some good points on if there were a god where his place would be. it seems to me rediculous how many details different religions have . i also never understood why if there was a god would he have made mostly false religions and one true one. however, i dont think the existence of "evil" is a very good argument against the existence of god, there are many hypothetical explanations possible. in the book synchronicity by carl jung, jung states something to the effect of the strictures of the scientific method (i.e. a phenomenon needs to be repeatable etc to be given creedence) inherently means we are going to miss things, and so science cannot explain everything (his book was not about religion but about "meaningful coincidences")
Let's ask the obvious question then. As an atheist, are your moral judgments completely objective? Are you completely secure in your ability to observe the world without bias? Is your humanism solely the result of careful reasoning? I suspect that a truly honest person would say "No" to any of these questions. Hopefully any honest and thoughtful Christian would answer the same. But if I as a Christian come to the same conclusions regarding the freedoms and dignity of life as you do then why must I prove myself to you and why must you prove yourself to me? Are we so obsessed with whether we know the 'truth' that we are incapable of connecting with those that agree with us on the most basic of principles? I don't worry about whether you accept Christ or not because I know he accepts you. I ask myself though why you need me to justify my tolerance. In the end, love simply is. If you need a scientific explanation of it, so be it. I just ask that you abstain from hypocrisy by clinging to the 'certainty' of science while condemning the perspectives of those who would disagree.
Well...Either you believe in free will as I imagine we all do , Or you believe that fate is mapped out for you. If we have free will,than perhaps,God cannot intervine on our befhalf.
Love's the result of a mix of drugs released into your body made by your body when certain thresholds are passed. for instance: hot lady/guy, smiling at you. why does love exist: to make you go giggly and show all kinds of signs with your body to attract the attention of the body of affection. If lucky that body will react about the same and soon you'll be making out.
Sometimes it seems to me that atheists have more faith than believers. The best argument I've ever heard for a god is actually the Simulation Argument, but the thing is we really don't know either way (and to be honest it doesn't seem like an important question to me). I always say to people I'm agnostic, which essentially means that I don't know how many gods there are, whether there be 1000, 1 or 0.
Distaste asks are an atheist's moral judgments completely objective, and of course he is correct when he concludes that they are not. But it doesn't follow that they are therefore only equal to the Christian's judgments. It isn't a question of whether they are correct or not, but rather if the method he is using to come to those beliefs is more reliable than that of the Christian who comes to his based on nothing more than faith. I contend that they are. Now it doesn't matter if the atheist and the Christian have different beliefs. There is no reason why they can't be tolerant of each other, that is until we come to deciding public policy based on those beliefs. The Christian to the extent that he bases his belief on faith that they are correct rather than on evidence and logically sound arguments will in general reach inferior solutions. Let me be clear the atheist is not asking the Christian to justify his beliefs unless those beliefs are the basis for public policy. It is then and only then that he asks for proof, for reasons that go beyond because God told me so when I prayed, or it's written in my book. To argue that those of us who value reason and the scientific method over faith are clinging to some belief that our methods provide certainty are missing the point. We are only saying that our methods are more reliable than the Christians faith based method, and if the Christian wants us to accept his conclusions he'd better be ready to prove them. The arrogance and the hypocrisy lie not with the atheist but rather the Christian for it is he who says he 'knows' with no evidence. It is he that is clinging to the certainty of his beliefs, while condeming those who don't share his fantasies, and asking them to accept laws based on those same unproven beliefs.
Wow, I really liked this article and a lot of the comments seem really good too. I think I have to agree with Greg's the most. If there was a god that did all this "stuff" would he really care to interact with us?
There is only nature. Nothing outside of it. From the sublime to the worst bullshit. The things we believe are, on the whole, irrelevant. They are just relevant to us. If we all disappear tomorrow from a meteor strike, will that be god's will? If so, what's he do for an encore? Start over? He's god and would have forseen all this pointlessness unless he's somehow less than god, and so all this belief stuff is only relevant to us. Don't take it personally; it's all just nature.
Speaking of God, anyone seen this - http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20051006/tsaltafp/mideastbritainusiraq_051006214432
If it's just all nature then why are we held to not act naturaly? My nature is to want to fornicate w/ every hot female I see. My nature is to want to fulfill every selfish desire I have. By nature I could kill somebody if I didn't like them. Cats kill for sport, not just for food, all the time. Why would it be wrong for me to act that way if it is all just nature? That is a poor man's arguement for a mind that cares not to think for more than himself.
I will try to give my view as to why people question the existance of God. The reocurring argument I see is this: If there is a God then why does he allow bad things to happen? First, this is not an easy question to answer, and I do not claim to have all the answers. I think first we need to acknowlege that all evil that happens to others by others, in the name of God or not, is acted out by people of their own free will. God does not do these things. They were carried out by people in the name of God, and sane people can recognize this and condem those actions and atrocities. As far as catostrophic events.....well here's my thought. People always say we don't live in a perfect world, which is true. I believe that this world at one time was a perfect place, but with the fall of man, so came the fall of the Earth. At this point God has not left us, he has just given us free will to do what we want. He can not stop evil things from happening, because if he were to stop the most hanious forms of evil, he would have to stop the smaller petty evil as well. Thus putting us in utopia. Think about the most evil thing that has happened in your life. What about the second most evil .....the third and forth and so on. If God needs to interceed for one of those, then he needs to interceed for all. As an example, take a murder. Somehow between the time the gun is fired and the bullett enters the body. God needs to turn the bullet into a butterfly. Bad things happen because if God stopped all evil we would live in a perfect world. According to the Bible, which I believe, the Earth will be restored to its "perfected" state when Christ returns. If you have read this far thanks for reading. Peace.
Mr. 4pain:
Your nature is to have inherited an evolved neo-cortex that inhibits the impulses of your more primitive brain parts. Or, assume you didn't, and you are a non-social species, who could never live in a society with other humans, even then: in a new born baby, even a worm, there are various urges and drives that strike balances amongst themselves. No one urge runs riot at the expense of all the others.
Stop playing stupid.
You don't have all the answers? You don't want to have any of the answers.
You dont want to have any of the answers!
I think the author is on to something in saying that the term 'atheism' is misleading because it only refers to the absence of dogma. But, as a nonbeliever, I have to say that in this thread and elsewhere, the most abrasive dogmatic tracts I've seen have been in opposition to religious faith.
The author of this essay was close, but I think it's more accurate to say that each and every one of us, at the end of the day, can only be an agnostic. None of us knows, but we each hold to a certain truth from which we will not be swayed, and in some ways it doesn't matter if that truth comes from the Bible or from science and philosophy textbooks. For example, the evolution debate. Just as there are plenty of...let's call them inconsistencies...in Genesis and the creationist view of the universe, there are in fact many gaps in our understanding of the theory of evolution. Not to say that those gaps should be filled in with an 'intelligent designer' as though God were putty, but that we should realize that our basic understanding of this world will always evolve and that the beliefs the scientific community currently holds will eventually be refined, expanded upon, and altered. That is what makes secular reasoning an improvement upon a faith-based creation story, not its inherent accuracy, but that science is not static and is open to improvement. Those of us with no research experience who only know biology from books and high school classes take Darwinism on as much faith as Sunday schoolers take God Did It, and yet we (myself included in this) will defend it with the same fervor we find so distasteful from the Bible thumpers.
As the essay pointed out (thanks Norm for posting it), the stakes are too high for religious and secular tenets to be put on the same relativist plane, so maybe I'm just arguing semantics here. But it does seem important to remember, in the midst of the fight against dogma and the theocracy this country is threatening to become (has become?), that by retreating into the nasty rhetoric we're so sick of from the religious right in order to attack those believers not trying to legislate their beliefs onto others only encourages them to support those who do.
I know my God. Apollo is my God. Each and every day, barring clouds, He manifests himself in His glory.
What is so special about el/allah/iehouah?
Why is it always the God of the Jews?
Is it the ten commcandments? "No God before me."
How about after Thee, then?
Let's kill Jehovah, and move on to a really cool God.
Like Apollo.
Cure4Pain-
He can not stop evil things from happening, because if he were to stop the most hanious forms of evil, he would have to stop the smaller petty evil as well. Thus putting us in utopia.
But if that is true, does that mean God doesn't ever intervene - no divine miracles? Those who believe God spared them, healed them, rehilbilitated them, intervened in their lives are wrong? I thought miracles were supposed to be divine proof of God's existence?
How can it be that is the hand of God? What about when God doesn't save your child's life no matter how much you pray? What then? Either he intervenes or he doesn't.
My other question is this:
If one religion is the only way to God and all the others are wrong, why does God allow children to be born into families of the wrong religion? If a child is born in a tribe out in the jungle somewhere where the only people that child will ever know pray to the Sun God (or whatever), how is it fair that person goes to hell? It's so arbitrary.
I asked a similar question as a child in a Baptist private school and got a swat for it. But never an answer. (my question then was: If a baby is born on a desert island with no bible around will the baby go to hell?)
Gillian, as usual, your arguments are spot on.
In my philosophy class there was this pretty heated argument between a christian student and an atheist student. The christian kept falling back on "it's a matter of faith" instead of tring to answer very valid questions on doctrine. And the debate kept going around in circles and our instructor went onto another subject.
My thing with religion is that I am not and never was the kind of person that could just take things on faith. I need to reason things out to believe in it. It needs to make sense to me. If religious people could make a reasoned case for their beliefs and doctrine they could possibily persuade/convert me. But it's like they think reason and logic is a temptation from the devil and either I take their word on faith or nothing. It's always seemed to me that they feel threatened and don't want to explore too much in territory of their beliefs.
Maybe they have the same questions as I do and don't like to be reminded of their doubts cause they've never taken the time to reason out their beliefs. So their faith is very shallow and it's a constant struggle to maintain it.
Taking the time to reason out their beliefs doesn't mean they have to come up with all the answers instantenously or even have answers for all of the questions.
"I'm agnostic, which essentially means that I don't know how many gods there are, whether there be 1000, 1 or 0."
**[The above was] Posted by Christiaan at October 7, 2005 02:01 AM
You left out atleast one important number: The square root of -1 god or the undeniable imaginary god. As a good agnostic, the only god I believe in is the imaginary god. Does this make me an athiest? Not according to Greg's excellent post. But I think one needs the imaginary god to get to Greg's point of view...I could almost hear him saying it:
"All-powerful, all knowing... It does not come from some mystical facet of the imagination.[but it does] It comes from a collection of thought accumulated over thousands of years from beings that have been evolved over billions of years [mainly human art] from that first amino acid in the sea, and from trillions of years of physical evolution before it."
[the Above was]Posted by Greg Haworth at October 6, 2005 10:45 PM
The imaginary god is inbetween the "billions of years". It's speculation driven by natural selection and more pertinently understood by us humans through art. You can't leave religion out of the evolutionary equation. Religion is like a fire under our asses. Today it forces those that know science to share science with the us ignorant folks or we all go back to the dark ages or oblivion.
I've often wondered who is the perfect athiest. Maybe the clan of apes that successfully meet their needs as needs arrive. But science says some day they pick up a tool and make art. This leads to pronouced astract thinking. Bigger brains. Better tools. And more thinking. Hypothesis. Blunders. rethinking. Civilization. Murders. Punishment. Mass murder. Wars. Laws. Peace. Love Stories, not just those between the physically attracted but including those love stories between those old and tender minds poetically endeared. Imaginary gods came from art. The bible is art. I know it's obvious, but not to the creationist. We need to shift the date of art from 6000 years ago to nearly Lucy's 3.5 million year old home in Ethiopia. Evolution is powerful theory, but Lucy is powerful fact.
The imaginary god is all inbetween the perfect athiest and the righteous. We needed them both in history. The prudent naturalist and the wildly speculative kooks. That's why I like the Athiest. They always win my prudent mind. And the religious keep them hoppin' mad. And I enjoy the progress. But I can never be truely comfortable in this purgatory called agnosticism; I have wild mood swings. And my anger is rarely directed at the Athiest, but at the imaginary god I can't seem to shed-- it keeps me thinking.
But I wonder if we humans have come to the point at which we must shed the imaginary god. Because we have the ability to destroy ourselves through war and through environmental denial. And there is no room at home for people to think over 6 billion humans live in Australia.
Thanks for all the posts. I'll shut my cake hole for now.
dante Why do you think there is or should be miracles today? The bible doesn't claim there is. You could say God helps providentially.
We are not to judge here who goes to heaven or hell. But you are to judge what is right or wrong. Life isn't fair, just ask Jesus, he was crucified and he never sinned.
Reason and logic is found throughout the Bible. Have you not read it? For instance, the Bible showed science things that weren't proven true until recently comparatively. The earth is round not flat, wash your hands/body to keep clean, do your bathroom duties away from where you live, the oceans have currents, the list goes on... Stuff we take for granted now as common knowledge, but was radical stuff not too long ago in many societies. Just more proof that an all knowing God directed the writings of the Bible.
Mr. 20-terra, What ever you just wrote makes no sense at all. Do you even read what you are copying and pasting? If you would have read my post you would have seen that I don't claim have the answers and I don't claim that I can even come close. So what you are saying is that our evolved neo-cortex provides us what? In fact your very post has been proven incorrect by science. In the 1960's experements were done on monkeys. They had electrodes attatched to there brain which were connected to a switch. When the switch was turned by the monkey it would fire the pleasure sensation in the monkey's brain. Similarly a switch was provided to despense food when turned. The monkey opted to turn the pleasure switch repeatedly until it died. What about the dude in South Korea who died from playing 52 straight hours of Starcraft?(which isn't that bad of a way to go) We aren't as evolved as you give us credit for.
A friend of mine pointed out something kind of obvious. It is not God or Gods or Godess that makes problems like religion war or ostracism, it is man. Tolerance of other people's beliefs is a basic necessity. Without respect of others, then there is no need for us to exist. Somewhere along the way people s/d, "Well, my god is the bestest and you're stinks!! You need to believe or you'll DIE. That's right that's right, you'll go to HEELL". The pagans did the same thing when the Christians showed up at first. Again, it comes back to respecting the beliefs of others. In my religion you have to come to us to join the religion. And if you don't want to then you can do it by yourself b/c we cannot possibly stand in the way of you and deity. It's absurd. So whilst everyone else is scrambling to establish the "rules of worship", what is deity doing?? They are laughing and thinking how humourous it is that we, their creation, is spending all this energy. Also if a child is born dead, does it go to help. I truly do not care if you believe in deity or not. What I care about is what you do with that knowledge. If you hurt another in the name of your religion or lack there of, then I have a problem. He's another question: If God gave man free will, then why are we punished for exacting that free will??" I have heard so many times that man was given free will. If he was than why can't we have 4 wives?? The answer is always the same, "you can choose to live the way you want but you will go to hell for it. You should live like God wants you to live." So it's really no choice at all. Like Bill Hicks said, "Believe or Die. Thank you for giving Lord. For all those options."
Another rebutle to this is, "Well, God is our parent and don't you punish your children when they do something bad??" My answer is why can't you teach instead of punish. If you sin and you truly repent then you avoid the consequence. You avoid the responsiblity. With karmic ideas you reap what you sow (yes, it's biblical), but you don't have to repent. What I am saying is that by repenting and being forgiven you are removed from receiving the just punishment for the crime. So you know that if you repent to heck with consequences. And punishement all the time doesn't teach. It just means no, not right now. Eventually if you punish for the same thing, over and over you will learn to either not do it b/c of the consequence or you will find some way around it. Morgan Freeman, in SE7EN says, "It's easier to beat a child than it is to raise it." But God must know best...right?? And with the advent of religion I think we as a species suppress our needs and instincts. If you can accept that humans want to fornicate and look at nekkid bodies, where does this desire come from?? Satan?? Ok, got one for that too. Ask: Did God create ALL things Answer: Yes, (of course) Ask: Did God create evil?? Answer: Man did by turning away from God
Then: GOD DID NOT CREATE EVERYTHING.
To me, when Eve and Adam "turned away" from God they were wanting the knowledge of Good and Evil. God had the knowledge of good and evil, why not man. I've heard that he wanted to "spare" man from evil. But mighty God couldn't stop the serpent. He wanted to test man?? Which brings me to something else.
Is God omnipotent?? Always a "yes" on that one. Then why are you trying to save my soul?? God already knows how the race turns out. He knows how many people are going to be saved. Nothing is changed by efforts trying to convert people. God already knows who is going to be save, who will make the change in their life, what the catalyst is. So why all the effort??
At any rate, believe what you want. Celebrate when ever, but stop forcing your religion into my government and my house. Thanks.
Anon-
"Why do you think there is or should be miracles today? The bible doesn't claim there is."
Uh, you're joking, right? What about moses parting the sea, immaculate conception, water into wine, resurrection? You don't think that's miraculous or divine? I think most Christians would disagree with you.
I went to a private religious school, so yes I've read the bible and I don't remember anything about it mentioning the earth being round. The church used to think the planets and the sun revolved around the earth and persucuted scientists for saying that was wrong. They also believed that illness was caused by evil spirits not germs no one at the time could see let alone believe in. So if God hand wrote the bible, he was surely pulling our leg. What a kidder! I could maybe buy the argument that man screwed up Gods message in their divine game of telephone.
But the thing that stands out to me is that neither you or Cure4pain answered my questions.
Jim Witness.....nobody is forcing crap on you. To be quite honest it is secular society who is trying to take out all forms (especially Christian) of public religious expression. You say man created evil? But then you went on to say that when Adam and Eve turned away, they wanted to know the knowege of good and evil. Thus stating that evil already existed before them.....nice try. As for having 4 wives. Nobody is stopping you from doing that. It is the consequences though that you will have to deal with by having 4 scorned woman around. YIKES!!! Wouldn't wanna be you.
Cure4Pain,
um...please go back and read slllooowwwwerr. I skim long things myself and i can recognize the result. I am not saying that man created evil. I hear it alot from different arguments from Christians. That's all. I am merely juxtaposing views to show that these beliefs are merely contradictory. I am not even of this faith so...nice try. I wouldn't wanna be me either with 4 wives at the end of the month!! YIKES!! but why would they be scorned?? ummm... Anyway, that's the for the clarification and furthering the discussion.
dante, I said "today" in case you want to read what I typed once more. Obviously there are miracles spoken of in the past but that all stopped after the apostles died, this is explained in the Bible, which apparently you many need to read again.
You are aware of religious leaders believing that the sun revolved around the earth, so what? They were wrong and they shouldn't have forced that belief on others, but that is just man's ignorance on display. The Bible does not reveal that sun revolved around the earth or other scientific fallacy so you can't blame the Bible, only man's ignorance.
They would be scorned because it is impossible to love all of them equally at the same time. No matter how hard you try or say you can, you would not be able give them the attention they need when they need it. So at best you would have at least 3 of them scorned. It would get ugly real fast. Unless the relationship then between the man and woman is different that that of a traditional marriage. Basicly then you have 3 sex toy baby makers and one woman who you favor more than the others.
This, is the new religion, that I believe that we should all embrace. Flying Spaghetti Monsterism. You can't prove it, but I still believe.
Cure4All,
Are you speaking from personal experience?? Your answer sounded a little too detailed for someone who has just read about it. Unburden yourself my friend. We, are all here for you.
To A. Schilling
'I don't read the bible much. But I remember in the New Testament I learned that God is love'
Are you stupid A.Schilling? or were you just joking. If so it's not funny.
When you say God is love, don't you realize how conditional this love is. First of all they have to be someone from your religon, secondly they have to be somebody who is in the same sexual orientation as as you, thirdly they have to follow the commandment where 8 the rules are pure bullshit. Forthly.... and so it goes on.
Btw the bible allowed slavery. Somebody who allow slave and owns slave are evil by definition because they are treating human as a literally a piece of shit.
To quote Dick Cheney, prob a idol of yours. 'Go fuck yourself A. Schilling'
nfinitfx, Wow, you are way off buddy. Most of you non-Christians base your religious knowledge off of other people rather than Christianity. People make mistakes and sin, that's a fact.
But no where in God's teachings does it tell any Christian to only love fellow Christians, or only love fellow sexual orientated persons, or to take other people as slaves.
Out of the park.
Great stuff
Jimmy I am just stating what should be obvious to all. Not everything is benificial to society just because it is something you want to do. Or because you feel you can not say that something is right or wrong.
Perhaps what many fail to realize is that this debate over the existence of God is one that is best left for the individual to contemplate. I'm an extremely liberal christian but this hostility to people of faith just astounds me. I fully realize the danger that religion poses to public policy. But to see so many express complete disdain for people who choose to beleive I am almost ashamed to say I'm a leftist. I'd rather be wrong, deluded, ignorant, and irrational than to be counted among the condecending and arrogant. I would caution those who so easily lay judgment upon the right wing hypocrites of this world that everyone is capable of self-righteous certainty. Be hostile to religion if you choose but it simply shows you to be of the same vein as those whom you despise.
Peace, Love, and Understanding
Distaste for Dissent-
So questioning your religious beliefs makes us condecending and arrogant? I would caution you who so easily lay judgment.
If you feel you are getting hostile reactions maybe it is because it is a response in kind. What I am supposed to ignore my own questions and defer to your judgement.
Hostility? Judgment? Self-rightous? Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?
Still no one answers my questions from earlier.
To the anonymous poster talking about the imaginary god, or the square root of -1:
The idea of the imaginary god was confusing to me, until I realized what you probably meant. And if I'm right, it was a very good point, and I had to think about how I would put the idea into my own perspective.
Being an artist myself, I'm going to set up my example along those lines, seeing how you discussed art so much in relation to religion.
Imagine if you will, that art is something completely new to you. There are, perhaps, two paintings in existence. (each of these paintings also represent a belief.)
If you have one picture, you can't really know if it's good or bad, but you have no reason to believe that it's a bad picture, because it is the only picture you know to be art. Naturally, you don't want owners of another picture to criticize your picture, because some of it might stick.
A picture is only a good or bad picture if it's placed next to, and compared to, another picture. Only then can it become clear which picture is good, and which picture is bad. (This is my interpretation of the imaginary god you describe)
I try to paint the best pictures I can, and then when I make the judgement, not only can I tell which is the better painting, but I can also be a competent critic when it comes to either of the artists. Over time, I have made revisions to both my pictures, and maybe in the future I won't be able to add anything else.
Some people don't have a picture at all, some people don't like pictures, but most people stick to a picture that has been painted already. Then there are some, who have enough confidence in their judgement to paint their own pictures pictures.
To the anonymous poster talking about the imaginary god, or the square root of -1:
The idea of the imaginary god was confusing to me, until I realized what you probably meant. And if I'm right, it was a very good point, and I had to think about how I would put the idea into my own perspective.
Being an artist myself, I'm going to set up my example along those lines, seeing how you discussed art so much in relation to religion.
Imagine if you will, that art is something completely new to you. There are, perhaps, two paintings in existence. (each of these paintings also represent a belief.)
If you have one picture, you can't really know if it's good or bad, but you have no reason to believe that it's a bad picture, because it is the only picture you know to be art. Naturally, you don't want owners of another picture to criticize your picture, because some of it might stick.
A picture is only a good or bad picture if it's placed next to, and compared to, another picture. Only then can it become clear which picture is good, and which picture is bad. (This is my interpretation of the imaginary god you describe)
I try to paint the best pictures I can, and then when I make the judgement, not only can I tell which is the better painting, but I can also be a competent critic when it comes to either of the artists. Over time, I have made revisions to both my pictures, and maybe in the future I won't be able to add anything else.
Some people don't have a picture at all, some people don't like pictures, but most people stick to a picture that has been painted already. Then there are some, who have enough confidence in their judgement to paint their own pictures.
dante, You act as if you have profound questions that have never been asked or answered. If you want answers about Christianity, you read the Bible and find them yourself. You don't seem to be one to take the answers from a person, take them from God.
sorry about that double post, and again for this one. I was waiting for the page to reload, which it didn't.
"So questioning your religious beliefs makes us condecending and arrogant?" One, it was not a blanket statement in regards to atheists so don't attempt to frame it as such. Two, why do you need to question "my" religous beliefs? They're mine, not yours, and no one elses. I suggest you concentrate more on your own beliefs or lack thereof. You don't agree with mine? Fine, but what does that change? It won't end war, it won't end poverty, it won't change a damn thing. I suggest you find something more constructive to worry about than my relationship with God.
Distaste for Dissent
Discussions like these are a necessary evil. I'm sure it is uncomfortable for a person of faith to see their religion stacked up against reality or all the other religions that exist today or have existed in the past, but these people need to have their consciousness raised desperately.
We need them here in the real world with the rest of us. The time for pussy-footing around this human catastrophe are long gone.
Humanity deserves more dignity then this.
Humanity deserves for this hostility to be directed at real problems, not at the ultimately futile attempt to secularize 6 billion hearts. This isn't about faith or the lack of it. This is about people taking on the traits of absolutism whether they are on the right OR left, whether they beleive OR don't. Moral certainty, arrogance, and fixed perceptions are the threat.
Here's my small contribution, from my latest post at Daily Rev (for the full text go here.
Comedy lovers of the over-40 set will recall the great Flip Wilson and his "the devil made me do it!" gag. Now we have the same story from a slightly different angle.
Actually, of course, this is very old news: we've known for years that the Sacred Cow of Crawford gets personal orders through the heavenly chain of command, telling him to kill, attack, slaughter, torture, occupy, and oppress. That, after all, is the way God works—you could look it up, it's in all His books.
Faith is double-plus good!
Anon(s) -
You know, I never proclaimed them to be profound questions, just unanswered questions.
If the answers to those dumb, silly questions were answered in the Bible I wouldn't be asking them. And if they were, please tell me what chapter and verse to look up, so we can discuss it.
As for asking God or Jesus, he's not talking to me. And never did. So that kind of leaves his followers left for me to ask.
Anon again, the one who said there is only nature, and no other anon posts.
Wow, it's been a long time since I've heard all these mind-numbing arguments. I'll never even glance at this mental masturbation again. I'll just repeat myself and go.
There is nothing you can come up with that is not natural. There is nothing truly unnatural (that's an ethical term, so the only unnatural things are just violations of ethics). I mean it. A skyscraper is not unnatural; it's just a further articulation of a constructed thing, like an anthill.
So if you believe in god, fine; gods are artificial constructs, too, and they are thus natural. But they are entirely dependent upon our existence, and disappear when we do or when we stop believing in such constructs. Don't reverse it. Don't with a straight face say that god created nature. It's more than you know and more than faith can garauntee.
Am I espousing a belief? Nope.
Religion appeals to your heart and steps way back from the mind, so if you're a true believer, there's only one thing I can say to you. Congratulations, you've opened up your heart to something that was specially prepared for you by other people. Now go to school and open up your brains in exactly the same way. Goddammit go learn, so you don't live the rest of your life as a sheep.
There were 2 things that struck me when reading the article and then the comments. The First was in the article where it mentioned that we dont need to be an Atheist to not belive in gods like Thor and Zeus. This is a little sad, these gods have just as much place in this discussion because they had their own stories. Their stories might not fit with the Christian view of the world but they teach us about the world just as much as Christanity does. Not like a science text book but in the facts that you can't gain knowledge without sacrificing something(even if it's just time spent in school, Odin with his eye being the other exteam), or that you have to work hard to earn your place(the 12 labours of Hercules). Thats what Religion should be teaching us, providing examples of how the world works, and it's also something Christanity seems lacking when it comes to the modern world. Thats why those religions gain no followers, our world has moved past those stories, and it's moving past the Christian ones as well. The other point was the argument that an Atheist has to arrive at has morals by carefully reasoned thought. Thats so unreal, after 1500 years of christains running society our whole view of the world is based in it some what. If you need an example, most of our Laws are derived from the 10 Commandants, murder, theft, and so on. At this time whether we want it or not some of our ethical views are based on what was once religious views. Well I just wanted to throw my thoughts in.
One only needs to read the tone of all these arguments by atheists to understand that they are angry about something. VERY angry. Perhaps they are angry because the Right which is mostly Christian elected our present embarassing-imbecile-of-a-president. THat is understandable. But almost all of you sound not only unnaturally angry, but naiive. You all equate God with the Christian idea of him. How foolish and small minded. Have you ever travelled anywhere outside of the Western World? Christianity is only prevalent in half of the world, and the less-populated half, by far. You are all giving Christianity way too much power in thinking that by 'defeating' the Christian conception of God you are 'defeating' God. You take the most simplistic parts out of the Bible and say, "here, see how stupid this is?" In most cases you are right. But spirituality in life, a belief in something more than what is tangible for us, that is so much more vast than what you are arguing against. There is a huge difference. To me, it sounds like you are all desperate for all of us to give up our belief in... rather than God let's say something supernatural. Why? It only takes one miracle to make a man give up his atheistic beliefs. How many people feel that a miracle has happened in his or her life? I personally know many. All non-Christians. To me it sounds ridiculous when you are saying, 'these evils exist so how can God exist?' How arrogant. Do you really believe that we as men know what the universe is really about? Or that we CAN know? Please. Just look at how BIG the universe is (or how big we believe it is ). Just that one tiniest part of our tiniest bit of tiny knowledge. Are you really so arrogant as to think we have it all figured out now?
One only needs to read the tone of all these arguments by atheists to understand that they are angry about something. VERY angry. Perhaps they are angry because the Right which is mostly Christian elected our present embarassing-imbecile-of-a-president. THat is understandable. But almost all of you sound not only unnaturally angry, but naiive. You all equate God with the Christian idea of him. How foolish and small minded. Have you ever travelled anywhere outside of the Western World? Christianity is only prevalent in half of the world, and the less-populated half, by far. You are all giving Christianity way too much power in thinking that by 'defeating' the Christian conception of God you are 'defeating' God. You take the most simplistic parts out of the Bible and say, "here, see how stupid this is?" In most cases you are right. But spirituality in life, a belief in something more than what is tangible for us, that is so much more vast than what you are arguing against. There is a huge difference. To me, it sounds like you are all desperate for all of us to give up our belief in... rather than God let's say something supernatural. Why? It only takes one miracle to make a man give up his atheistic beliefs. How many people feel that a miracle has happened in his or her life? I personally know many. All non-Christians. To me it sounds ridiculous when you are saying, 'these evils exist so how can God exist?' How arrogant. Do you really believe that we as men know what the universe is really about? Or that we CAN know? Please. Just look at how BIG the universe is (or how big we believe it is ). Just that one tiniest part of our tiniest bit of tiny knowledge. Are you really so arrogant as to think we have it all figured out now? How is it that speaking from our small view of our small world we can determine or even define what is absolute.
" Are you really so arrogant as to think we have it all figured out now?" No we have never claimed that we have it all figured out, something it is not so easy to claim for the religious community. And are you so arrogant to think that substituting God for I don't know adds something to the conversation. There is nothing wrong with saying I don't know, and continuing the search for knowledge.
(sorry about the double post)
How is it that speaking from our small view of our small world we can determine or even define what is absolute.
Quote: How is it that speaking from our small view of our small world we can determine or even define what is absolute?
Response: Our own knowledge is the highest authority we will ever know. I think it's pretty clear that if there was a god, he hasn't talked to us in ages, and I don't see why he would start any time in the future.
You go with what you have, anything else in impractical. And what we have, for all purposes, can be considered accurate.
To describe knowledge as small on the scale of the universe is naive, because the universe itself cannot think; only minds can think. And as far as minds go, the life that supports knowledge is doomed to be confined to a terribly small space compared to what is out there. But like I said earlier, don't assume that life comes so small. We are gigantic. To overcome gravity, and survive in a world of life that has accomplished the same, the numbers of cells working together (which are still utterly complex compared to the things around us) is unfathomable.
While life may not be the largest product of existence, it is certainly the most complex, and should never be taken lightly.
Galaxies can't appreciate their own beauty.
The Flying Spaghetti Monster is not imaginary. Prove me wrong.
Cure4Pain, um..I really don't have anything to say except that people accepting responsibility for what they've done and the declaration of the right and wrong have nothing to do with religion.
Can a person be moral and NOT be religious?? Why do I always hear the "no"...hmmm..why not.
This relates back to something said earlier, that the establishment of religion was a natural process.
I think that yes, we do have something in us that seeks a higher power, but I think that it is meant to allow us to be governed by eachother, not by god. So that we can have the idea to set up the early forms of government, for better survival.
We know that this occurs in nature, with bees, ants, and alpha males. Humans, gifted with the ability to imagine, sought something beyond.
The closer we get to a perfect human government, the less we will need god.
I'm interested to see what other people think about that one.
Hello all. I have read all of the above comments as well as the original arguement. I have to comment, and it is going to be long. Pull up a chair or tell me to f*ck off (well, not literally, please). I have tossed around many of the various religious ideas available to mankind for many years now, including athiesm, agnostity, christianity, buddism, muslim, ect, ad naseum.
At the end of the day, it is Christianity which holds my mind captive. I notice that all of the above posts which speak negatively regarding Christianity, are little more than matchstick opinions derived from supposed common Christian Dogmas, taken out of context and without proper prior understanding and learning, from an inconsistant variant base of "believers" -- most of which are evangelical in nature and are no less bias'd than DC lobbyists.
What I am trying to say is, most of the posters above seem to have a simplistic and ultimately disdainful view of what they think is the Christian "faith".
I'll try to explain my particular view -- which is shared by many, most of whom remain silent most of the time (for reasons that would need a face-to-face as well as a large chunk of time to adequately impart to most citizens of the civilized world who don't already understand it).
Let me first talk about Parenting. Why parenting? Well, because the concept of God which true Christians harbor is, of course, a parental figure for all of mankind.
There are differing types of parenting, and many books of the subject. Without going into intricate detail and subcategorization, let me just touch on 2 distinct camps in this arena. These are the "Lead them by the hand(or drag them by the nose) and shelter them from all evil" method and the "Let them learn it on their own, even suffer if need be, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger" viewpoint.
A big problem today -- which many an athiest sees clearly in this nation -- is the overbearing/micromanaging parental model. In testosterone-rich males this often manifests as the super strict father figure who -- in his blind righteousness -- often ends up driving his offspring to do exactly that which he fears most. The overly regulated human being, once he/she has the power/ability/knowledge to do so, rebels against that which they have come to despise. The pornography industry, for instance, owes a lot to the strict Southern Baptist Father Figure, if you know what I mean.
In the estrogen-filled mothers of this society, especially those who are single or in highly disfunctional relationships, this micromanagement often takes the form of ...well...micromanaging. The mother will shower (or drench, if you will) the child with so much "love" that he/she will become "spoiled". The child will be completely sheltered from all that is even possibly "bad". All responsibility or expectancy for the child to actually THINK for themself is completely removed from the equation. The mother has an opinion on everything, and that opinion is not just the right one, but it WILL be the one that the child adopts and knows, PERIOD. The far-far left fringes of our society, as well as the gay/lesbian population(please don't be offended, it isn't the only factor just a significant one, and that isn't the point of this discussion anyhow), as well as the booming psychotherapy/counseling industry all owe a lot to these mothers.
The other form of parenting mentioned above, is the "let them learn it on their own" parenting model; which is not to be confused with the "let the TV teach them it" parenting model, which is an entirely different subject. The "let them learn it on their own model" has the basic theory that each person is in fact different from every other person, in ways which every other person has no way of fully comprehending, and even if we could or someday do, the neccesary tools to deal with those differentiations in a structured fashion durable enough to be applied to parenting, simply do not exist. As a toddler, for example, the idea here is if your kid thinks its fun to put rocks in his mouth, let him! Feed him well, keep him healthy, make sure he gets all his shots...don't keep needles lying around, don't put deadly chemicals in the carpet or leave the cabinet to said materials unlocked, don't leave the child completely unsupervised, or sitting in a field of poisonous mushrooms, ect. If you notice the kid reaching for something which has a high probability of choking him, take it away, but otherwise LET HIM/HER LEARN IT THEMSELVES. This model has many advantages. It grows smart, savy children who are well adapted and well prepared for the world as adults and who can function quite nicely without the need for psychotherapy or narcotics addictions. Once in a blue-moon a tradgedy will happen. A kid will choke and suffocate on a rock, and maybe the babysitter wasn't trained in CPR like she told the parent(s) (becuase if the the good practitioner of this parental model was around, they WOULD have gotten that rock out of the childs throat, one way or another). Now now, I hear some of formulating arguments to this. But please hear me COMPLETELY out before you allow your higher mental functions to become preoccupied with the various ways to "slam me" for failing to fully illustrate what is to become, as you will see, only a little example to get the ball rolling. Moving on, in that tragic case, 1 kid loses his life. Hence the term, "the world is not a perfect place." Now don't get this particular choking death confused with the infant-toddler choking death statistics, which are mostly generated from defective/neglective parenting, which is NOT the model which I am talking about here at all. Remember I'm only speaking of 2 opposing parental models, I'm not mentioning the other types, here. Now, in MOST cases, with the "let them learn it" model, if that kid would have choked on the object. The parent, knowing CPR and being prepared for this likely circumstance (because of their chosen parenting method) would get the item out of the childs mouth, OR force it down their throat...WHATEVER IT TOOK to get the child breathing again. The child would be in a bit of pain if the object came out, or would need a trip to the doctor for a stomach pump if the item went in, but (and here is the important part/point) one thing would be crystal clear in that childs mind -- DO NOT DO THIS EVER AGAIN. In that one instance the child has learned, for itself, the reason why putting strange objects into your mouth is a no-no. This same example can be modified and applied to kids of ALL ages who may have a problem with EATING to fast. The micromanaging parent model would constantly nag and bitch and complain and punish and try and get the kid to stop eating so damned fast. And as soon as the kid was not supervised, he/she would eat as fast as they could in rebellion. Then of course if they choked, there would be nobody there to save them! In the "let them learn it themselves" model, however, the kid would have no reason to rebel, never having been told to eat slowly. That child would have noticed that their parents eat slowly, but probably not thought much about it. Well, one day that child may choke on a fish bone because they were eating to fast. The parent, knowing CPR, would once again save the childs life whatever it took (even perfoming a trech if need be), and the child would have then learned, for life, "holy shit, I need to eat more slowly!". Holy shit, indeed.
What about swimming. Well, many kids are afraid of water at some point. Having gotten it in their head somehow or another that deep water is dangerous or scary. The micromangment model would either scold and punish and threaten the child "LEARN TO SWIM!" (in the testosterone version) or dote and fawn and attempt to guilt or coerce the child (in the estrogen version). Please remember again, there are more than 2 parenting models, I am just talking about these 2 specifically so that I can MORE quickly get to the friggin point about God. Now, how do you teach a kid to swim with the "let them learn it themselves" model? Well there are other methods, but some children are just too darn stubborn, and would (and many do) just grow up never having learned to swim...now come on, THAT is a tradgedy. So with those stubborn kids, how do you teach them? Well, at the right age, assuming the kid is physically fit and not mentally retarded, you take them to the water and you throw them in...not the shallow end, either. You don't tell them you are going to do it -- you don't want to psyche them out, because their brain would just get in the way of insticts once they were in the water. Trust me, from first hand experience, any kid that is too damn stubborn to be taught any other way, is NOT going to just sink and drown. The kid will flap and wail and yell and bitch and complain, but in the end, he will figure out how to NOT DIE...a billion years of evolution originating from the SEA did not create a water-helpless race, as so many seem to think. It is only our own misguideness about subjects such as "fairness" which leads us to disbelieve in that ability. Worst case scenario, happens sometimes, the parent misjudged the situation, didn't CORRECLY try other methods to teach the child to swim, first. So the parent has to hop in and bail the kid out. Maybe give a little mouth-to-mouth to bring him back around. Doesn't happen very often, despite hearing about it in the news from time to time.
What all this has to do with God should be clear to some of you, but I'll explain anyway, since I've come this far. No clear-thinking rational, EDUCATED Christian actually believes that the earth is only 4,000 years old, as some believe the Bible claims. Science has PROVEN otherwise. Nor do said clear-thinking rational Christians dis-believe dinosaurs once existed. I can hear many of you clamouring now, "But the bible says ..." Ok listen. The Bible is the result of man writting down, as best he could, what he was able to intepret and understand from God. Does God LIE? no, but he sure as rain does speak metaphorically, figuratively, and in terms which the listener can somehow comprehend. Therefore, regarding the "jealous and vengeful" God of the old testament. It is neccesarry to understand the mindset of the people back then in that area of the world. Look in some primitive countries today and you will find the same values. They VALUED servitude. Being a servant to one who you considered greater than yourself was a priviledge, an HONOR, a dream come true for many. When the people of Biblical days opened their minds and searched for GOD, they had specific things in mind which they wanted to find (not unlike today), and those specific things are the channels which God had to use in order to lead to them to the ability to prophecise. When the Bible tells us that God said to the people of old that he is a vengeful and jealous God, it simply does not have the same MEANING to us today as it did to the people back then. I was watching a documentary about a small country somewhere... I think it was near India...where their culture is still quite similar to how it has been for thousands of years. In that culture a person does not dream of becoming a rock star or an actor or a professional athelete or a lawyer or a doctor or president, on the contrary such thoughts (if they could be applied in some way) would be considered quite shallow and foolish. What a young boy dreams of in this country is growing up to someday serve a righteous master, usually a political or spiritual leader whom they believe has a connection to a higher power, which they themselves simply do not posses, and that the honor and prestige they earn from serving that master may bring them joy in this life and the next. Am I saying this is a WISE way to live your life, that these are the things we should be focusing on? No, of course not, but I am just trying to illustrate the mindset of the "people of God" in Biblical days. That was their mindset! If you were a servant, you were inferior to your master, not just figuratively, but actually, inferior! This meant that the more you could do for your master, the more chance you and your lineage had of gaining greatness from God as a reward for your obediance. You see, it isn't that they were "confused" about things such as heirarchal society, but rather they were quite confident in their beliefs, and thus were completely incapable of understanding or accepting things as we see them today. Just as we today are still incapable of understanding things as we will in future generations. And so, when you have a people like that, who need to have hope and reassurance and guidance in order to continue to progress and eventually (generations later) come to understand things as we do today, and you're God, how do YOU talk to them? Do you see the point? God had to talk to them on levels which they would believe, so that they could receive the good messages he had for them. And so yes, a lot of that took form in ways which -- wihtout in depth analysis and reference using not just the whole of the Bible, but also historical evidences, other scriptures that were not cannonized by the catholic church, and extensive knowledge of ancient Hewbrew/Greek Language/dialect -- seem quite contradictory to our view of "love" today.
The same type of confusion exists today! You probably won't agree with this, but understand, I really do KNOW that GOD talks to people, in this day and age -- everybody, in fact. Whether we realize it or not. If someone who is in tune with God, hears the still small voice (it's not english, people), recognizes it for what it is, and comes to a revealation about a subject, they will write what they have heard in terms that they believe will most move people to an understanding or at least a curiosity to understand, in order to convey a message they think God would want them to convey. Does this mean they are right? Does God really want that? I'm not God, not my place to say, but it is irrelevant, what is relevant is the good, the bad, and the ugly which this creates, and my current point which is this -- LOOK DEEPER before you write off Christianity as "crazy". While you're at it, look deeper at Greek Mythology before you write IT off as crazy, too. Becuase God has most definately given us free will, and this means that he is using the "let them learn it themselves" parenting model. Some of you ask "How can God let horrible suffering happen, how can God let babies die in their cribs and old people drown in New Orleans, if God is really love!?". The answer is simple...becuase this temporary existance we know here, this "life", isn't really all there is! People may cry and be hurt and sad when a loved one dies, but that doesn't mean that it is ACTUALLY such a tradgedy. It is just our viewpoint of it. Life is eternal and ever-changing. Science has even proven that matter cannot be destroyed or created, just transformed. That person who died has just gotten cuts in line! Death is not the end of the world, and THAT is how God can allow things like this to happen. Because we have to have free will and learn it on our own, or we are slaves. He will let us run into the street and get hit by a truck, stay in a city and get drowned by floods, or go to war (for whatever supposed "reason" we claim), all because of the parenting model which he uses, which is the only way which can truly claim that the child (thats us) has free will.
Now, I hear some of you people getting ready your "well then what about hell and eternal suffering and burning" arguments. Just chill those out, ok? There are a plethora or religious viewpoints within judeo christianity regarding "Hellfire", not just the hardcore fire-and-brimstone versions that the athiests serve up as proof of a non-loving or non-existant God. My personal belief, and once again this is a belief held by many other Christians, and I dare say a silent majority of them, is that there are ongoing consequences in life for everything, and that won't end here or after here, heaven or "hell". The Bible is open to much intepretation, but only one intepretation if it is to remain in harmony with itself in terms of its description of God as a loving God. I simply do not have the time or space, here, to go fully into the rational or explanation and Biblical evidence for this view right now...but I will summarize it as follows: We humans are creatures of habit. We learn by repitition, patterns, and the more we exist, the more we become set in specific patterns and ways. We all know the old man who drinks his life away at a bar, reminiscing about the "good old days", bitter and disappointed with life. How about the homeless people who actually choose to remain homeless rather than get a job? Or drug addicts, pornography addicts, the list goes on and on. There is a point within our pattern learning lives, in which we simply no longer WILL choose to change. We still have the ability, free will is ours, but we will just WILL NOT ever change. So, with that in mind, try to understand "hell" and "damnation" as I do. Damnation comes from the word Damn, to damn something, like a river. Putting a Damn on a river stops it from flowing, or "progressing". To be damned means you can no longer learn, change, and progress, BECUASE YOU CHOOSE NOT TOO! You see, God wants us to always learn, change and progress. And God has places prepared, for all of us, where we can live and - even with all our unique personalities - be "happy" while learning and progressing. Places for after this life. What varies here is the definition of happiness. To a heroin addict, happiness is a needle. To a sadistic murderer, happiness is a knife and a victim. To a high-level politician, happiness is saying and doing the right things, true and good or not, to get re-elected. Now think of spending eternity doing these things, because that is what makes you happy. God is going to give you that! Trust me on this, he is! Each person is judged on their own merit, and given "heaven", to them. God warns us of evils of the world becuase he loves us, and he WANTS us to have the EXACT same definition/view of happiness as he does, so that when we depart this world, we can live in a place WITH HIM. And be happy WITH HIM, and THAT is heaven. Every other place is just varying degrees of the true meaning of happiness. And there are more places than just 2, by the way, and that is not coming out of my ass, it is Biblical. God wants us to be happy, and so he will give us what we want, whether it is good for us or not. And the only thing that this lifetime is for, is for us to choose what we want, and tell him, and we do so every day with our actions, with our words, and with our thoughts and desires. The patterns we learn and obide by here on this earth are what define what our definition or happiness is, and therefore determine where we will end up. What God tries to warn us of, is the self-deception that happens when we do certain things, "sins". That we may think our version of happiness is one thing, but it is really becomming/has become something else entirely, and that's what determines how we end up.
So, do I think gay people or abortionists are going to hell? Absolutely not. I think that is an over-simplification of God, not taking into account God's grace and understanding. I do NOT, however, think that -- as a society -- we should condone or glamorize the two acts as completely normal and acceptable. Listen, if you, as a person, want to take the life of a child which is in your possession...to be more specific, in your stomach...then you can. Why? becuase our society does not agree on the definition of life, or when it truly begins, it is not a man-made law that doing such is illegal. It is NOT the responsibility of Christian American to legislate our personal beliefs, forcing them on others...that is completely misguided and wrong, and as you should all be able to clearly see now, it is NOT the way God does things. You will deal with what you have done in your own mind, with the light God has given you, and it is nobody else's place to drag it into the legal system.
The above is just a small bit of the light which the Lord has given unto me, and even my full understanding (which I cannot possibly convey) is but a sliver of the light which remains to be revealed in the eternities to come, and that is what being a Christian is all about. Learning, changing, thinking, understanding, accepting, loving, and most importantly, patience.
Quote: Life is eternal and ever-changing. Science has even proven that matter cannot be destroyed or created, just transformed. That person who died has just gotten cuts in line!
Response: You can't apply the transition of a 'soul' into the afterlife in terms of physics and scientific principles. When your brain dies, it is no longer capable of thinking. If your thoughts could exist without a brain, why are we even here to begin with?
When your dead, you can't really care about the fact that you will never be alive again, so by all means it's good enough as it is.
Part of "learning on our own" is developing skills that benefit our survival, and describing death as something totally RAD just doesn't seem to be logical in that argument. Oh boy, I can't wait to die! Crib death?? LUCKY! Why not ME?!
God doesn't have to have any role whatsoever in natural selection. It seems to better fit Atheism.
"I think it's pretty clear that if there was a god, he hasn't talked to us in ages, and I don't see why he would start any time in the future."
This is exactly my point when I say that we think too much of ourselves. Which way would you expect him to communicate with you exactly? A giant megaphone in the sky? People who have never met a Christian thinks what they consider to be 'god' talks to them and everyone they know. It is foolish of us to think that we would automatically know if God was communicating to us if he was. What if one needs faith in order to hear him? These are not just buzzwords, these are actual philosophical questions.
' And are you so arrogant to think that substituting God for I don't know adds something to the conversation. "
I am trying to get you all to acknowledge the difference between the Judeo-Christian type of God and the existence of any kind of spiritual entity or substance or event. You can write off one perhaps easily for many of the aforementioned reasons, but it's not so easy to dimiss the other. The spiritual element of human culture exists globally, regardless of race or culture or continent.
I respect your statements on the subject, but I fail to see the point of the sarcasm and cynicism?
Oh, yeah. I'm sorry about that. Sometimes I think I'm being funny by exaggerating a point, but I forget that to some people I'm being an asshole.
Quote: This is exactly my point when I say that we think too much of ourselves.
Response: Just to be clear, the reason I mentioned it was just the opposite. We put our faith in someone that (I believe) doesn't exist, and that you can't communicate with.
So, we need to take more pride in ourselves, our past, and our knowledge, because (now this is what I was really trying to say) we are the highest authority we will ever know.
As for communicating with god... This would mean you are built to send, and receive, telepathically. If all humans are this way, could we communicate with each other telepathically?
Honestly, I think that if god existed, (and I explained this in my first post) he would not need to communicate with us. Everything would have been laid out already so he would not have a need to tell us anything (and we have more than enough proof that he doesn't tell us anything), and since god has infinite wisdom, to suggest anything to him would be offensive. You don't need to tell god anything, because he would know anyway, and not being bound by time, would have known since before you were even born. If that is true, then he knows the future, and is happy with it, and his work is done.
DavidG,
Bravo! Well done!
CarlaG
The above reply was to Greg Howorth, not Anon-y.
"I'm right and your wrong", seems to pretty much sum up this thread. Wow, what a learning experience.
Distaste for Dissent really sums you up.
Everyone has their own beliefs. As you spout your ideas, we do also. If you don't want to talk to people who may disagree with you then why even post here?
-----Distaste for dissent-------
As pig-headed everyone appears to you in your right or wrong, black and white world, that is how you appear to them.
This is one of those debates where NO ONE will come down from their position to either put faith or not put faith in God or religion.
This issue seems to always spark such debate and gives people the opportunity to flex their intellectual muscle. Just accept the fact that this is one of the times where people will not change anyone's thinking and with that said, you cannot expect anyone to come around to your way of thinking on a matter such as this. Faith in a higher power is a deeply personal choice and no one should attempt to change that either way.
just my two pennies :)
... ever hear of the forbidden experiment? Well, reverse it and you have society... so... we're kind of making all this up. Fun stuff. You are not just you. You are influenced by the accumulated perception of reality your particular culture has come to. The all inclusive accumulated perception of reality is called "secular" the narrow self-serving perception of reality is "ecclesiastical".
But either way, it's a product of ourselves...
internos invenit.
Which existence would you like to create today?
dante, Fortune Cookie. I was appealing to a sense of sarcasm regarding the futility of this argument. Either way I doubt you've destroyed anybody's beliefs or that this thread has spawned a revival movement. I've merely attempted to point out the hypocrisy of absolutist positions. Somehow you say I view the world as black and white. If your preference is to attack me, whatever. Has the irony of my pseudonym escaped you as well?
Distaste for dissent, I wasn't aware there was an argument happening until you just pointed it out. I was, rather, under the impression that rational adults were sharing their feelings and beliefs with others, in relationship to the topic of athiesm as originally posted in the article being responded to.
The point of conversation doesn't have to be an attempt to convert someone's belief system or bring them to a particular faith. Sometimes, the conversation itself can be the only reason for it's existance.
p.s. I'm not sure what you got out of my above post, but I certainly hope that your statement about the the hypocrisy of absolutist positions wasn't in reference to me. You may not understand this, but I'll say it anyhow -- My belief system is as far from rigid and absolutist as any that exists, and certainly more open to growth and future factual inclusion or change than the beliefs of the standard Athiest.
I have really enjoyed reading this thread and have read similar threads on other forums in an attempt to understand those who believe in God. What frustrates me somewhat in any of these discussions is that in a long post, many interesting questions are left unanswered, so I will ask only one question and I'm addressing those who believe that God answers their prayers. Why does God only respond to some people's prayers? Are some people more worthy of having their prayers answered than others?
Well, one more question, lol... As to the last point made that there is not an argument happening here puzzles me, so I looked up the meaning of "argument" and found the following definition: "a discussion in which reasons are advanced for and against some proposition or proposal".
Jo Ann
Jo Ann. My honest opinion? God already knows what you want, and what you NEED. God CAN work miracles in your life, but in order for that to happen you need to be A: in tune with the holy spirit. How do you get in tune? Simple, don't hurt others, don't have a self-centered mentality, and don't try to explain-away your faults as acceptable and circumstancial. In other words, have a heart and mind which are as close as you can bring them (with our limited and greedy nature) to that of Jesus. When (not if, and this happens every single day to everybody) you have a self-centered thought , or say something inconsiderate, or do something that was not fair or right, recognize it as such. That doesn't mean persecute yourself for it, or make a blood pact never to do it again(you can't live up to that), or hate yourself for it, but just recognize it, and admit that to God. That is the meaning of confessing your sins.
Then, when you pray, thank god first and foremost for the ability to breath, to live, to think, to love, to have this opportunity to recieve his grace and mold your spirit into a righteous one. And then pray for things which are NEEDED, not WANTED. Do so with a full knowledge that what you are asking for is righteous, and that if it fits into God's plan, he will give you it.
That's it. 99.9% of the time, God won't answer your prayers in the way you expect it. You may not get a promotion at work, even though you feel your family desperately needs the extra income. But if you keep a hopeful and respectful attitude toward God, even when your prayers aren't answered in the way you wanted, that act of faith will bring you blessings in areas which you weren't expecting, and that is the true answer to your prayers. You might get offered a job somewhere else, which you hadn't even considered. Or perhaps one of your children will get a great scholarship break that you didn't expect to be so generous, or maybe you will meet someone who is very knowledgable about finances, and has good advice which -- if you choose to follow -- would help you get by better.
The point is to understand that all we can do is be human, and do our best, WITHOUT knowing the plan, or the way, precisely, trusting that there is a higher power which does know the way, and isn't going to let us fail as long as we have trust in him, and show that trust with a hopeful, positive, and obedient lifestyle.
A lot of people think that is a foolish and sheep-like way to lead a life. However, I have found that there are many beautiful things in this existance, that in fact the beauty far outways the ugliness. People speak of how many people die each day or suffer..but look at how many more people DON'T die and suffer each day. That is a clear indication to me. Another thing is this. Had I known about my parents, what I knew once I grew up about them, I would have listened to them a lot more as a child, and done what I was told. Having learned that lesson, it is easy for me to apply it to our current situation with God. It's a preparation for the great future ahead, and the only thing it hurts to follow the precepts and rules of God, is our selfish pride...if we let it.
P.S. notice I didn't say it was a requirement to join a church, to vote conservative, or to denounce gay marriage. Those are things people choose to do, for various reasons, right or wrong, but they aren't a requirement for hapiness in this life or the one to come.
David, if God knows what we want and what we need, why does he allow innocent little children to be tortured by psychopaths. That little child who is being raped needs God. Where is he? I do not believe that there is a God, never have. One need not believe in the trinity in order to be a good person. Warm regards, Jo Ann
Maybe god is with the person doing the torture. Maybe god exhibits all ranges of emotion, from psychopath pervert to loving and charitable.
The real question is why does god have morals? What does he need them for?
But considering he does, maybe god only has the power to create the universe but not to butt in. That's why he sets up such a high reward and high punishment- so the decision can be clear- because he can't strike you down.
Or does he even care? Like I said, why does god have morals? Humans are the only ones that need them, and it just so happens that they're the ones that made them and enforced them. So maybe heaven and hell don't exist, but somebody completely human wanted us to believe they did.
If you're religious and you agree that sometimes life isn't fair, you should probably be able to admit that God isn't always fair either. Morals are a product of survival characteristics inherited over a very long time. God is alive. God's survival is assured. If you have any fault in your god then you have to ask the question: Who created god? And if you think God cares when a baby dies, that's sounds like a fault. He doesn't care. He doesn't exist.
As a person of faith I don't look to God and ask, "What have you done for me lately?" I don't look in my wallet and say "Damn your stingy." I don't go to class and say "Could you please strike down my professor?" One thing I do though is look at my son and say "Thank you". I say 'thank you' because I am alive, because the Lord has given me strength and hope. He has given me direction and compassion. When I was five I thought that money was the absolutely greatest thing. Money was a way of exerting control over the environment and getting what I wanted. I thought that becoming rich was my life's ambition. I went to Sunday school, I doodled during sermons but as I got older I had a falling out with God. I asked that same question, "What have you done for me lately?". It took a while but eventually I came to realize he wasn't there to make my life perfect, he was there to help me understand the imperfections, the pain and to give me the strength to do his work. We don't need God to provide for us, we need to provide for others. This is the call for compassion, love, and community that Jesus preached of. This message has been manipulated and twisted by people over the ages for their own wicked ends. But we shouldn't dismiss the wisdom that he preached simply because of them. He was a radical who turned the image of a hierarchial society on it's head. He lambasted the hypocrites and the wealthy. He raised the poor above all others. If someone could say without a doubt that there is no God, I would still be astounded by the revolutionary concepts that Jesus raised.
DistasteForDissent
"We don't need God to provide for us, we need to provide for others. This is the call for compassion, love, and community that Jesus preached of. This message has been manipulated and twisted by people over the ages for their own wicked ends. But we shouldn't dismiss the wisdom that he preached simply because of them. He was a radical who turned the image of a hierarchial society on it's head. He lambasted the hypocrites and the wealthy. He raised the poor above all others. If someone could say without a doubt that there is no God, I would still be astounded by the revolutionary concepts that Jesus raised."
Hallelujah!! Too bad the ugly-stepchild of Christianity is allowed to represent all of Christianity only because they have aligned themselves with the modern day Pharisees to gain power.
Jesus was a bleeding-heart liberal. Amen.
A yarmulke is a cap worn by Jewish men and boys while praying or talking to imaginary beings. Would you not dismiss as ridiculous someone who wore a tin foil hat to ward off aliens. Both the Jewish men and boys who believe in a god and those who believe in aliens are equally sincere, equally convinced of the reality they imagine, and equally ridiculous. Do either deserve respect for their irrational beliefs. I don't think so. It doesn't follow that everything they believe is irrational they may get along well in society if their irrational beliefs don't play any important role in their decision making, but those who believe in imaginary beings and in miracles are always suspect. They have a mental block, they lack critical thinking skills in some areas.
Ad hominem attacks of tin foil hats and dunce caps? What society would you have us live in? A utopia where the 'intellectually superior' tell those less capable what to do with their lives? Let me guess, the dictatorship of the proletariat is your aim and your rationality will be the vanguard.
I'll pass.
A little humility would go a long ways towards making your making your rationality more palatable. Until that trait meanders into your personality by divine means or perhaps a simple epiphany of personal insight I doubt you will have much luck understanding people of faith.
A little humility would go a long ways towards making your rationality more palatable. Until that trait meanders into your personality through divine means or by a simple epiphany of personal insight, I doubt you will have much luck understanding people of faith or the world.
I appologize for the repeat post, it was unintentional.
Yes, but I kinda prefer the tinfoil hats. Because that's closing something off, whereas religion is opening something up.
As an atheist I enjoy my privacy. I know that my personal thoughts will die with me, and my thoughts can only be known to me.
There are a lot of people I can think of that I don't want to judge my mind, least of all God. The same way that I could tell a vegetable anything, I think I might make a tinfoil hat to ward off god.
Hey, you're right... They are the same.
Do either deserve respect for their irrational beliefs. Perhaps I could have been more precise. It is their beliefs I don't respect, and their judgment I don't trust.
I use 'my' tinfoil hat to boost the signal. But to each his own I suppose.
That comment was in response to norm, I didn't expect Distaste to post the same thing three times as I wrote it. :) I made the same mistake. there's no response from the post button, usually it refreshes or something.
Anyway, I don't consider the scientific method to be law. If I go against it I can still get the right answer. There are some things that you can use the scientific method to prove, even though it's not needed.
Even if I use the scientific method, I will still discover the absence of God. Unless there's a miracle, it won't be something that can be scientifically observed.
Ah, but if you look more closely, all three of Distaste's posts are considerably different variations.
Someone having trouble making up his mind? Your embarrassing edits have been exposed!
(And Distaste, THIS would be an ad hominem, not what you referred to in your post! Look it up.)
I acknowledge that and accept that you need proof. I personally don't think a 'lack of proof' excludes the possibility. I won't make the claim that my faith is solely the product of rationality or irrationality but of a choice and of a self determination to disbelieve in my own ability to perceive everything. This is where personal bias I think makes it's presence known. What my standards are and what your standards are will simply never be reconciled. I doubt that this personal choice excludes us from having a rational discussion regarding a plethera of other issues. The danger that I see is when we completely remove doubt about our own perceptions. Militant politics only works when you can completely dehumanize the opposition.
anon (?) Embarrased by my own attempts to refine my post? Sorry, but I'm not going to apologize for trying to put my most thoughtful effort into my post. If you look, 2 are identical, the 1st was sent in error. (notice my removal of the term ad hominem) Newsflash, I'm human. I apologized for the repeat. Now please either get a life or perhaps a pseudonym so that others can hold you accountable as well.
And if you need to think too hard, yes the above post was me, Sherlock.
Wow, what a successful hijacking of the thread!
No, they are all different. Read them again...
Anyway, that was a minor gibe, DFD... Ended up a homing missile, nonetheless!
You want me to adopt a handle? How about Anon-X? That's very slick.
(I've always wondered about the posting delay. It's been a part of OGM for a very long time. What causes it, Norm? Doesn't really bother me, I'm just curious.)
It's too bad that Distaste, views the attacks as personal they are not. They are attacks are on what I consider irrational beliefs, for example that miracles occur, that there is a god involved in our day to day life. If you don't require that your supernatural beliefs should be used as the basis for public policy I have no argument with your holding those beliefs, but then I already made that point. Here is what I believe and it requires no belief in anything supernatural.
Anon-X Not to dwell but the last two are identical. Put the effort into it and actually compare them lest you look dishonest and gasp foolish.
How perceptive, Anon-X, I hadn't noticed that all 3 posts were different. I suppose it's good to see DistasteForDissent edits out some his/her more judgemental and self-rightous comments, but not all unfortunately. Jesus would be very disappointed with your tone, DistasteForDissent. ; )
I would like to add...
DFD, you suffer from the Christianity Meme.
And my goodness, please don't make me trudge through your post. It's already hard enough stomaching your ignorance. How about -- the last sentence, repeated words and phrases you deleted, various grammatical errors that were altered, period and question-mark placements, etc.... ugh.... it's all there! I'm too lazy to quote you. YOU wrote it, YOU check it out! And if you call me foolish or dishonest again I WILL quote it. All 3 different, they are...
PUT YOUR DUNCE CAP BACK ON! This is Norm's house, mate.
What a disappointment. I asked one question, a direct question directed towards those who believe that their God answers their prayers. Anyway, I recieved one direct response from a non believer, Greg, (at least I THINK it was a response to me, but not sure as he was addressing a believer..hmm), and another response from DFD that had nothing whatsoever to do with my question. I won't try that again. Everytime I have ever asked believers a direct question, they respond by avoiding the question.
And, yes, as a newbie here, I discovered that after hitting the post button, there is a delay. The first time that this happened, I thought, oh no, I'm losing my post, and I discovered that I could still copy it, and hopefully save it. However, upon waiting patiently, I discovered that my comment had actually posted. Therefore, DFD, I know what you did, which wouldn't have been that big of a deal, really, had you only told the truth the first time and admitted that while your first post was posting, you thought that it had not posted and so took the opportunity to change what you wrote. Either that, or you really are purposely spamming the thread.
Anyway, DFD, I waded through your last response to my question about how if your God already knows what we need, then why does he allow psycopaths to hurt little children. I discovered that what you posted was not a response, but just an opportunity for you to express your views. Very disappointing.
Best, Jo Ann
I also had some sincere questions directed at those who believe in God that were never answered, just made fun of by our dear Christians.
As an agnostic, it doesn't really matter if there is a God or not. I still have to get up and go to work in the morning. But I've been revisiting the idea that maybe there is a god but it is not all knowing as everyone presumes - just much more knowing than we are. Could even be a scientist. "I wonder what will happen if I do this?" That god seems a lot more plausable. As for the why - All that comes to mind is Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy. Again my best proof for god - Man may have never made it this far without devine intervention. The belief in God is a crutch for many to help them get through their day to day lives. Unfortunately it may also be humanities undoing, it is having a cripling effect on the ability of societies to get along. The worst part for the individual of embracing the idea that there is no god. The idea that you are out here on your own, It's frightening - especially when you've been conditioned your whole life to believe otherwise. That leap for a believer is just as intimidating as a leap of faith for a non-believer. I know if I ever completely give up on God I will imeadiately create an immaginary friend or at least get a dog to discuss my personal life changing decisions with. (Yes, I know it sounds crazy AND I ended a sentence with a preposition - but I've always been a rebel.) So at this point we can't prove or disprove god. What we can do is try and talk the rest of humanity into making decisions that are based in logic not theology.
Lots of interesting posts - didn't read them all - but was glad to see the Giant Flying Speghetti Monster made an appearance. He's a favorite.
About ending a sentence in a preposition, I know a joke about that, which I have recounted below, although this joke has been around for a long time and most of you have probably already heard it. It's off topic, but as there don't seem to be any sincere direct responses to sincere questions, just as well post jokes. (I'm not referring to Blue Sky, whose response came across as quite sincere to me, but it wasn't a direct response to any of the questions that dante and I have asked)
A freshman just arrived on campus at an ivy league school and he was looking for the library. He saw someone who looked like an upper classman so he walked up to him and said, "Excuse me, but do you know where the library is at?" The upper classman looked back at the freshman and said, "At this school we don't end our sentences with a preposition."
"Oh, I'm sorry," said the freshman, "do you know where the library is at, Asshole?"
Jo ann and Dante, I've answered every question I've felt directed at me thus far. If you want to ask more or get clarification, that is fine -- just try to ignore the Christaphibic posters responses whenever they get out of line, if it bothers you that much.
^^ChristaphObic.
Right on, DavidG, for being a good sport! I had intially directed the post to Cure4Pain but really any Christian that would take the time to answer my questions would be appreciated. You seem to approach the matter of God from a logical and reasoned manner, from what I gathered from your earlier (and loonng) post. I think you'd be the perfect person to direct my questions to.
Here was some of my earlier post:
Cure4Pain-
"He can not stop evil things from happening, because if he were to stop the most hanious forms of evil, he would have to stop the smaller petty evil as well. Thus putting us in utopia."
But if that is true, does that mean God doesn't ever intervene - no divine miracles? Those who believe God spared them, healed them, rehilbilitated them, intervened in their lives are wrong? I thought miracles were supposed to be divine proof of God's existence?
How can it be that is the hand of God? What about when God doesn't save your child's life no matter how much you pray? What then? Either he intervenes or he doesn't.
My other question is this:
If one religion is the only way to God and all the others are wrong, why does God allow children to be born into families of the wrong religion? If a child is born in a tribe out in the jungle somewhere where the only people that child will ever know pray to the Sun God (or whatever), how is it fair that person goes to hell? It's so arbitrary.
I asked a similar question as a child in a Baptist private school and got a swat for it. But never an answer. (my question then was: If a baby is born on a desert island with no bible around will the baby go to hell?)
My thing with religion is that I am not and never was the kind of person that could just take things on faith. I need to reason things out to believe in it. It needs to make sense to me.
And just because I am agnostic doesn't mean I am not open to the possibility of God and don't wish there was one sometimes. But God doesn't exactly make it easy to believe in him with all the suffering in the world. And it would be nice if he ride down on his cloud and tell the people killing in his name to knock it off. Or at least show his presence so that the reality of God is settled once and for all.
I extend an invitation to all Christians to set the record straight or interject your ideas but I'd like it to be a discussion, not a lecture about how I am bad cause I don't have faith like you.
Dante said everything so perfectly that I cannot add anything more. Maybe, just maybe, this time some Christians (maybe David?) will respond to the questions without any sarcasm, just a direct sincere response to a direct sincere question. Am I getting my hopes up for nothing?
My 2 cents:
Here's something a friend of mine said that I found interesting.
According to the gospel (covered more so with the lesser known gospels, like the gospel of Thomas), escentially Jesus taught that to be closer to God man must be like the animals, in that they rely on God for what they need. (more like tribal people, I think?) And when they are not they can't hear the voice of God.
When there are tsunamis, for example, the animals always sense danger and go to higher ground. My friend thought that might explain our lost connection to God, that God does warn his creation of impending disaster but we can no longer hear the warning.
Don't know what I think about that but I thought it was an interesting explanation.
Dante, JoAnn, Hannah, and whoever else. Thanks for lifting the thread out of the gutter.
I'm more than happy to explain -- as best I can in this forum-based fashion -- my beliefs on the questions posed.
First question, regarding God's intervention and divine miracles. A quick aside for perspective...
First you have to start with a true understanding of what Jesus taught is the actual nature of God. To sum it up, God is the SOURCE of all light in the universe (therefore), he is the head of all things, the cell from which creation stems, the "master architecht" of matter, and spirit, if you will.
So, there you have a being which can be described as omnipotent and omnipresent...yet, in order for him to save us from damnation, (remember, damnation isn't some God-inforced punishment, it is a self-imposed "damning" of our progress, like a river which is damned, we get stuck and cannot progress further), God had to send one likeun to us, the first and brightest morning star creation, Christ, to earth, as a man. Jesus is said to be the only begotten son of God, meaning the only direct descendant, and thus can be said to be "one with God", some churches actually even treat him as though he IS God. Are they wrong? Are they right? Symantics all, bottom line, Jesus is who we turn to / talk to for communion with God, and the Holy Spirit is what we listen to for our answers. All of us stem from God, as the source of all light (light = truth/intelligence = life), but only Jesus stems DIRECTLY from God, a true son.
So what does this teach us about God? Well, the Bible puts it quite nicely in several places, stating things to the effect of "Gods ways are not the ways of man.", "God confounds the minds of the wise with the strange things of the universe" (reffering to they who believe themselves wise, or are thought wise, because of their worldly learnings). In other words, he is on a higher level than us. Therefore, Jesus is at once our translator, our ambassador, and our defense attourney, when it comes to our relationship with God. He is truly our savior.
So, with that perspective. How is it that so many of us expect God to intervene directly on our behalf, as told of in the days of the old testament, before Jesus was given as our savior? Put to rest the idea that God himself is likely to intervene because you ask it of him, in some miraculous water-to-wine fashion. Yes, there are times when part of Gods eternal plan is for one person or another to become a great prophet for the people, or to lead a people out of bondage, or to be a savior for mankind, and in this case God will use his agency to intervene (usually in the form of other men, being led by the whisperings of the holy spirit, when possible, otherwise via divine beings, "angels", when neccesary...the archangel Michael is recorded performing many such tasks in the Bible...and some theologians have theories that seem to indicate that Michael is actually Jesus before and after his walk here on earth, once again, symantics). Just try to understand life from a macro perspective...those people, those miracles, isn't very many of us, and it isn't very often. The people to which Biblical, old testament miracles happened to in the past, and to a less obvious way still do happen to some in the present, aren't normal everyday spirits. They are choice spirits, who were chosen before birth, and given spiritual preparations particular to their duties here on earth, in order to fulfill a specific function in the timeline of mankind with regards to God's plan.
* For most men, the Bible says, we cannot have an absolute knowledge of God (know factually, scientifically, that he exists), or free will is nullified. *
Afterall, if you really knew that God existed as so many people ask and pray for and wonder why it cannot be (I was once guilty of this too), then would you not of course follow every single rule and precept...the same way you obey the speed limit when there is a cop behind you on the freeway? How then, is that free will? It isn't. That is the purpose of faith. And it is called faith FOR A REASON. That doesn't mean you are to have BLIND faith, there is a massive difference between FAITH and BLIND FAITH. You use the living God (whisperings from the Holy Spirit, directly into your mind) and the lessons you believe yourself to have learned from scriptural teachings, to test your faith, to try things a certain way, which may be against your instinct and supposed "better judgement", and you follow what your heart tells you. If the result of your choice bears good fruit, you have taken the first step, and you test it some more, and some more, and that is how you build a personal testimony of the savior. If you're wrong (and many are, many times), you're wrong... it isn't the end of the world, your pride isn't that important (really, it isn't) it is just more evidence of how disconnected we are from God, and how much we need forgiveness and salvation, in the end.
God doesn't want pilferers who loiter around him and pick table scraps when they can, pandering and pacifying whatever they think he wants them to like special interest groups in Washington DC. He wants spirits who have been tried by fire, and proven themselves desirous of righteousness...and spirits like that simply cannot be molded here on this earth IF it can be scientifically proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that God exists in that fashion. There would be no free will with which to mold us.
What intervenes for most men in day to day life, is the holy spirit, which works in us, we are the hands and tools of God in that way. When a rapper wins an MTV music award and stands up and thanks God...some people may consider it ludicris (pun intended), but in actuality they truly do owe what they have gained, to God. The light of intelligence and creationism that God has given each one of us, which works in us, is what allows people to craft works of talent and brilliance. The fruits of those works, whether they be good or evil, are what decide whether or not we have been "Good stewards of the fields which we have been given", in the end.
Therefore, when people thank God they are alive, (they lived through a flood, etc), they are being accurate, but not in the sense that most of the believe.
Did the miracles of the old testament truly happen as written? I believe many of them very well may have. Yet, there is no way of scientifically proving it...and most rational people, whether they admit or not, seriously question or just plain disbelieve the validity of those stories. That fact is what allows us to retain our free will. If David Koresh would have parted the earth and taken his cult accross the chasm via levitation...escaping the impending FBI raid on the compound, it would have all been caught on film!! There would no longer be any doubt for any of the civilized world of the existance of a supernatural being, and our free will would be completely nullified within a matter of a few generations!! THAT is why miracles of that kind cannot happen today! But God KNEW all of this beforehand, that is why the NEW testament teaches us these things, that God doesn't deal with us in the same manner after Christ, as he did before Christ. Revealations also speaks about the last generations of mankind before the return of Christ... about the natural disasters and diseases and other tradgedies such as immorality and children becomming wholly disobedient and without respect for their parents. All of these things are coming to fruition now, slowly but surely. Does this mean I think we all better stock up and build bomb shelters, "Armageddon is coming!", no of course not. I have no idea whether it will be in 10 years, or 400, but I do have a faith, a belief, that it WILL happen, simply because of the other things which scriptures AND the whisperings of the holy spirit, have confirmed in my mind, when I am obedient, seeking, patient, longsuffering, and accepting toward God...that is to say, when I soften my heart to his message, instead of allowing pop cultures hard-hearted mentality rule my thought process (which I am guilty of continually)...and thus test my faith through trial and success or error. I am nowhere near able to receive God at any given time, or in full...just ...little sparks of light when I am just good ENOUGH to get a little of it.
Now, second question. About Churches and each of them claiming they are "the right one".
It is simple really. Read Revealations and you will hear it from the horse's mouth, so to speak...NONE OF THEM ARE THE RIGHT ONE, they are ALL wrong, in some way. Revealations teaches us clearly, each church has some of the light of truth in it, but also many untruths...and it can never be any different so long as we are what the Bible says we are...fallen, sinful beings. No matter how much light and truth we have, it only takes one spark of untruth to slowly corrupt a doctrine until it is full of obvious untruths to the mind of the outside observer! And this is what you have today, this is why so many people are completely freaked out and against the idea of Christianity...because of all these friggin churches that conflict with one another!
I know where you are coming from on this, you have to believe me when I say that. Do I belong to a church? Yes. After much research and soul searching, prayer and patience, I did finally choose to join a specific church. Do I believe that this means I have chosen 100% correctly and that my obligation to seek the fullness of truth is over, and that anybody who has not chosen my church is in dire need of salvation? No, thats preposterous, and it is an unfortunate viewpoint, spawned as a side effect of our self-indulging, pompous, instant-gratification based society, the populace of which are the very same members of every church. Once again, it could not be otherwise, and the Bible predicts it would be so in this day, all of it.
Oh and Hannah, about what your friend said.
I too have had heard similiar theories at some point in time, from various sources. Personally, I believe there is some truth to it, but we have to be careful in how we choose to act upon that truth. God does teach us to be "childlike, with a fullness of hope and joy", and in that way, one can clearly observe the similiarities between an infant, and a young tiger cub, for example. Both are energetic, innocent, and without cynicism or wrath or jade. Both have fully open minds during the early developmental years, absorbing massive amounts of knowledge about their surroundings, the workings of their little bubble, etc.
In that way, I believe that we need to re-open our minds and our hearts to God, and practice/test the answers we believe we percieve, to hone the ability to communicate with God...the way that a child would hone the ability to place one foot in front of another to walk...slowly, repeatively, never completely giving up until the day is reached when we are running.
JoAnn and Greg,
God doesn't cause little children to get hurt by psychopaths by doing nothing...the psychopaths must choose their path and if it be evil, God must allow evil to occur...otherwise he wouldn't be God who gives free will to his children. He cannot break the rules of free will (psychopaths included) in order to save a child or anyone else for that matter who unfortunately gets in this person's path.
That is why evil is allowed to be....if God took away evil's free will, then he'd have to take good people's free will as well. And how fair would that be to anyone? The whole purpose of life is to gain a body and have free will, otherwise we WOULD be robots or sheep as you call it. It's not being a sheep to choose a good path whether we believe in the end results or not. At least we got to choose it.
No, it's not good that children get hurt, but how blessed they will be by the Lord after death to have endured such pain and suffering in this crap we call life. Jesus suffered on the cross, he DIED for US. And yet isn't he most revered and most holy above all God's children??? Surely He is and he didn't let some people hurting him stop him from understanding God's plans, or stop him from believing and having faith that his Father knew what he was doing by allowing him to die at hands of bad men.
Just a little tidbit. Sorry if I don't make sense to any of you.
Davidg, in your estimation, who is closer to god, the Atheist that has read the bible and believes in evolution or the fundamentalist Christian that read the bible and does not believe in evolution?
Oh and by the way Greg, on your post where you say:
"Or does he even care? Like I said, why does god have morals? Humans are the only ones that need them, and it just so happens that they're the ones that made them and enforced them. So maybe heaven and hell don't exist, but somebody completely human wanted us to believe they did."
Who's to say God the Father was never human himself and therefore knows more about morals than even we do and thus has set up a system of morality which he tells us through a set of scripture written by prophets which are God's chosen vessel of communication to multitudes? What if HE too was human as we know it, but is now a glorified resurrected human.
Just because God doesn't talk to us in a way WE choose doesn't mean he doesn't talk to us at all. Most of us just don't listen or just don't know he's talking to us. It's something we have to learn how to hear through faith and belief, and is not something given to those who don't even care either way.
Just a thought.
CarlaG-
Thanks for responding to our questions. (DavidG, I'll be reading your long response when I get home from work).
I'd like mull some of this stuff a bit but I do have another question for you. There are many religions, who all claim to be the only true way to God. So who is wrong and who is right? Why doesn't God make it clear which religion is the right one? Why keep us guessing? Especially when so many people kill and die for their religion.
Which part of evolution? The part where known species have evolved or died off via natural selection, the earth is billions of years old, and dinosaurs once roamed it...or the part where it is assumed humans come from apes, even though there is no "missing link" to proove it?
And the answer to your question regardless is: You did not provide enough data. It doesn't matter as much that a person call themself Christian, than whether or not they listen to the promptings of the Holy Spirit, and believe in such promptings, that is, they believe in a living God, and not just a past-tense book about him (The Holy Bible). Now, I personally believe that great people of all faiths have listened to the promptings of the Holy Spirit and therefore believed upon God, whether they understood it as such, or not. Ghandi, for example. Or perhaps more mundane figures such as Abrahalm Lincoln.
If the case is that god is human, that you have to ask the question, "who created god?". You would need to ask this question in any case where god has a physical form, or is not all knowing and all-powerful.
Because, it makes even less sense for the creator of existence to be a product of his own creation than the idea that a creator could exist in the first place.
God, truly, would not need to be human. It's easier to see if you actually realize what we are ourselves. You have to put aside the idea that we are beautiful, because it is simply a survival characteristic to interpret each other as such. Our bodies are channels for excrement. Our limbs, to help the natural forces of the universe propel us. There is no god that would want to limit itself to this form, and there is no god that could switch between forms, because the human mind is too limited to contain the infinite knowledge God would need.
It simply can't exist within this reality. God has no need to reproduce, it is without gender.
dante, I did go into detail on that question in my post above which you were gonna read when you get home. The first one made by me today, October 11th.
Greg, good questions.
What CarlaG is just touching on is a deep belief system that would take a lot of time and scriptural evidence to go into thoroughly. Suffice it to say that what she means is that our current form is a highly imperfect one. However, the Bible does say that we were created in God's image. It is a belief of a specific group of Christians that God does indeed have a physical form, that is, a form which contains some matter. To say what that form is precisely, what its capabilities are in regards to interacting with the elements of the universe, or why God would want to "limit" himself like that, is beyond the scope of this conversation and for all intents and purposes it is not fully known.
The theory basically says that each of us, humans, we have always existed in the universe, as has God. The difference being that all we have been before now, is scattered instances of energy formerly known only as "intelligences". God gathered us, breathed into us his light, giving us light and life in the process, making us a living spirit. At that point he divulged the plan to our spirits, and upon agreeing to do so, we each came/come to earth in human form. First Adam and Eve, and by natural birth every one of us after that, with still more waiting their turn as we speak, until the last human child is born on this earth. That we do not seem to "know" this, that is, remember this, is a rule which we agreed to upon coming here, all part of the plan of free will, as touched on in my first post today, above.
The point of all this is to mold us into spirits which can properly withstand the "eternal fire" of God, that is to say, his light and truth, so that after this life we can be given perfect bodies of life, and continue along God's plan, the specifics of which are not really important to us at this time, but can be summed up as a "plan of happiness" for us.
its complicated, and it is faith based. As I stated above, a faith has to be cultivated. One must test their faith in small steps, in the way instructed by scripture, and slowly line upon line, precept upon precept, come to understand more and more of the plan of Salvation. It isn't something that can just be put in some post, or in a scientific thesis or marketting analysis charts and graphs. True truth cannot be explained, it can only be revealed. Thus is the meaning of revealation. So even though I typed all of this, I have to say unfortunately, that it isn't an ANSWER to your questions, just my beliefs regarding them.
Dante,
You wrote: "If one religion is the only way to God and all the others are wrong, why does God allow children to be born into families of the wrong religion? If a child is born in a tribe out in the jungle somewhere where the only people that child will ever know pray to the Sun God (or whatever), how is it fair that person goes to hell? It's so arbitrary."
Well, the LDS people believe that no they won't go to hell #1 because there is no hell only a spirit prison of sorts where people are being taught by Jesus himself and #2 because of baptism for the dead. Meaning those who had no opportunity to learn the full gospel, will learn it in heaven by Jesus and then those of us still here on this earth in the LDS faith (sorry but they are the only ones who believe in this stuff), baptize them by proxy.
That is neat when you think about it...everyone eventually WILL hear the gospel whether dead or alive. There will be a millenium with Christ on earth and guess what will be happening? Tons of work for the dead. Interesting. They even mention baptism for the dead in the New Testament. Why would they do that if there was no such thing back then? That is how the LDS believes. And that is how God saves those who have not or cannot hear the gospel. For those who do hear the gospel and rebel, not sure what will happen to them but I do know the LDS do the work for them as well after they die so perhaps there is a second chance for some form of eternal life. Sounds fair to me.
And children under age 8 automatically get the highest of the highest glory if they die before age 8. But children who go through trauma still as adults have a choice to let it destroy them or break free from it with God's help. Perhaps God allows bad things to happen to see if someone will choose light or dark. Just look at the book of Job. God gave Satan free reign to do anything to Job except kill him. And Job never faultered on his faith and look at the reward he got after his trial was over??? But then again, you'd have to believe in the Bible for this story to have much meaning.
Posted by: anon on October 11, 2005 02:28 PM "Davidg, in your estimation, who is closer to god, the Atheist that has read the bible and believes in evolution or the fundamentalist Christian that read the bible and does not believe in evolution?"
I just have to comment on this question...what if there is a Christian church so to speak that believes that evolution is in fact a method God uses as part of his creation plan??? They are not your average evangelical fundamentalist church. I happen to belong to such a church. Won't mention it here.
All around us there is matter that can not be destroyed, only changed by manipulation. Big Bang or not, someone somewhere had to form this matter into a creation. So what if some creatures evolved over time. Their original cell structures didn't really change all that much because God didn't program them to do so. They just improved in order to adapt to environmental conditions because maybe God knew what would happen with pollution and the sun heating up, etc because he knows all right?
Perhaps evolution to an extent within similar species is part of God's plan to prepare the creatures for an onslaught of environmental changes that God purposely also created. Of course he'd make a way for his creatures to adapt to change.
In fact, I believe that the earth was created millions of years ago, that dinosaurs did reign here at one time but I also believe that they were destroyed to make room for humans as we know them and that Adam walked 4000BC AFTER many of these changes had occurred. God time is not equal to earth time. Says so in the Bible. 1000 man days - 1 God day. Therefore if God created the earth in God days, that would be 7,000 years at least. But once again, perhaps the earth was already an existing matter formed millions of years ago and He took that existing matter and began forming it into what he wanted for man to live in and 7,000 years later, waalah! Earth with man walking on it. But then you get into the semantics that DavidG talks about when you start a topic like this.
But not all Christians are fundamentalist anti-evolution people.
David: Thanks for that explanation.
However, I have a distinct view of what god would be, even though I am an atheist. So I still don't agree that that belief is correct not on the basis that god simply doesn't exist, just that that's not how he would exist.
There are too many extra steps with most of these things.
But anyway, considering god has a physical form- Is he really really big, or teensy tiny small? I'd say he's small. Because, as large creatures we know that if we pick up something really small, we might crush it. And god seems to be a very delicate being. Thoughts?
Anon- What you describe is a theory called "intelligent design". It pretty much admits that all science is correct, but it still all points to design by a higher being.
It's a huge step forward in terms of religion. Except the theory I know to be intelligent design doesn't factor in christ as more than just a really cool dude with respectable ideas at the time.
But your church still calls him the son of god and such? Does it follow the bible in all the ways except the ones pertaining to science?
Anyway, go you. I can tolerate that kind of religion. It's closest to my idea of how a God would work. I don't know about Jesus being a son though, but I do know that a god under intelligent design would probably know the effect of his existence on humanity.
For it is my decision to gather together the kingdoms of the earth and pour out my fiercest anger and fury on them. All the earth will be devoured by the fire of my jealousy. "On that day I will purify the lips of all people, so that everyone will be able to worship the LORD together.
I feel God is contradicting the whole notion of freewill. How can you say you let people have freewill so that they won't all love God because God programmed them to, but then create all this anger and fury to make them do what you want them to do in the first place(love and worship you...through threats mind you) and kill off the ones who do not cooperate. In a sense, that is a complicated version of the same exact thing.
It's almost like that story of the city man who visits someone in a rural part of a country and asks him to buy his farming machines so that the farmer can produce more, therefore have more money when selling, and buying off lands and other farmers to work for him, then move to a city to get a higher paying job, struggle to get a raise, and finally save a ton of money to be able to retire and do nothing...when that is just what he is currently doing. It's the same shit in different cans like Maher said.
"Which part of evolution? ...or the part where it is assumed humans come from apes, even though there is no "missing link" to proove it?
Posted by DavidG at October 11, 2005 03:42 PM
Yeah, David, that part. You go on to mention 'living god' and 'holy spirit' and of course the 'holy bible'--all weird human constructions. And yet, you say there are no "missing links" to prove we have common ancestry with the apes. You can't think of any archeological findings that significantly raise the chance that man and ape have common ancestry? And you want me to "trust you" in your brand of faith?
What does it mean to be close to god? To study god's work--nature? Or to reach blindly to the stars and beyond to the realm of unmeasurable souls by asking incremental questions based on things humans learned going from monkey (or earlier) to human. Trust me, David, you and I have more faith in science than we do of heaven or hell or notions of god. That stuff from your long long post on patriarchal 'Live and learn' sounds like an adaptation of mother nature's natural selection. Your views do seem extremely flexible. And with fast and loose interpretations of the bible, you can find agreement with many people including atheists shy of an admission of god. I had thought that you might be heading in the same conclusions as the athiests depending on how many "missing links" you need to pluck before you realize you don't need that hair.
Jo Ann, Greg, Dante, and whoever else. This is in response to God’s Will.
Jo Ann, in one of your posts you questioned God’s Will, in retrospect to His allowance of children having to endure torture and rape, among other things. You questioned his presence in the midst of all these perverse actions.
Greg, in one of your posts you stated that perhaps God does not have the power to butt in, and that God isn’t always fair.
Dante, in one of your posts you spoke of God intervening, of divine miracles, and unanswered prayers.
I would like to respond to each one of these posts with what I would consider one of the best examples of the perfect answer to each one of these questions. It can be found in the Book Of Job. Job endured a multitude of horrendous things, and was left in despair to endure such hardship alone. God was silent, and his wife and friends were of no comfort. Yet Job held strong to his enduring faith. When Job’s wife told him to renounce his integrity and curse God and die, Job did not sin with his lips. He instead responded to his wife, stating the most important point I have read through-out the bible, when it comes to the question of “WHY, Why God, Why this, Why that, WHY?”
Job states to his wife, “Shall we indeed accept good from God and not accept adversity?”
What an amazing response. Job was in the midst of such misery, and what we would consider as Pure Hell, Job still did not question God. Instead Job gave Honor to God, trusting Him and having completely faith in Him.
Bottom line Job was saying to his wife. We serve a God who has the right to do whatever He does and is never obligated to explain it or ask permission. Job finds nothing wrong with what he has had to endure. Job understands the equality of receiving good gifts from God and the confiscation of such good gifts; as well as the equality of good and evil.
Who are we to demand that God do “Our Will”, or to “Serve Us”? We need to remember that God has a game plan that is beyond our comprehension, and hard times like the ones we endure, or the ones we hear of others enduring, notwithstanding.
“It is easier to lower your view of God than to raise your faith to such a height.” – Robert Alden.
“Some theologians have done that these days. Their theory is called Open Theism. In brief, here is the sum and substance of that theory. Because bad things are happening to the good people, then God, because He is good, did not know they were gong to happen and therefore would never have allowed such to occur. He would not cause such a thing. And so, depending on how we respond, God determines what He will do next. That is heresy. Omniscience doesn’t learn. Omniscience doesn’t discover.” – Charles R. Swindoll
Psalm 115:3 “But our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases.”
God does NOT have to explain himself, bottom line!
I recently was informed of one of the members of a church I used to go to a couple years back, who lost her two children in a car accident. She was on her way to take her two boys to school, going at a speed of 55 mph, and lost control of her car when her eldest son asked her to look at a picture he had drew. Both children were killed instantly, and she only had scrapes and bruises.
The first response to this tragic accident was heartache, and sorrow for this mother’s loss. The second response is to question the outcome. And the third response is to get angry, and when angry we have to have something or someone to blame. So of course if we do not understand the Sovereignty of God, we seek to place blame somewhere or on someone. Instead of just accepting the fact that things happen, and often times these things do not have a definitive answer, and are without logic. It just is, plain and simple.
The one’s that have experienced a loss of a loved one, or have endured trauma, whether minor or immense, only need two things. Sympathy and comfort. Nothing else. It’s simple, but for some reason we with our question, our anger, our need to blame; can’t just be a friend and keep our views to ourselves. So instead of asking, questioning, and blaming; we need to just “JOIN THEM.”
I hope that by sharing a bit from various sources and examples, as well as viewpoints it will have helped to give a better understanding of “WHY.”
I have been guilty of asking that question repeatedly, but what it boils down to is my spirit being humbled each and every time I ask that very question, “Why”, that I am reminded that it’s not the why that’s important, it’s the WHO that’s important. God is important, the people who have endured hardship are important, the lesson is important, the love is important; Not the Why!
I wish you all well, and I hope that if anything you have received something from this post that has touched you in a positive light. As I felt led to share a tid-bit of what I think should be the focus, instead of what should be the question. And to me, that’s Love, Friendship, Learning, Faith, and Patience. Whatever it may be that we feel or believe, what one thing we have in common is we feel and believe; whatever that may be.
Dante wrote:
"Thanks for responding to our questions. (DavidG, I'll be reading your long response when I get home from work).
I'd like mull some of this stuff a bit but I do have another question for you. There are many religions, who all claim to be the only true way to God. So who is wrong and who is right? Why doesn't God make it clear which religion is the right one? Why keep us guessing? Especially when so many people kill and die for their religion. Posted by: dante on October 11, 2005 03:39 PM"
Again, it goes back to free will. If everyone was told outright what church was true, then they'd not really have much choice, correct? However, the following may shed a little light on what the Bible teaches to be the points of a true church.
Heb 13:8 Why these points are all important (Read first) You can read at any bible online site at no charge I think. Bible Gateway is one I think.
Now, I did not say that churches couldn't have some of these factors because many of them do and they still teach good things. What I'm saying is the supposed true church must have ALL of these factors. So seek for a church with all these points and you just might have something to go on.
Anon above. (06:24pm)
Thanks for the response.
If you want to get technical, everything in our reality which we give a word to has the connotation of weird human constructs. When the earliest scientists, philosophers, and explorers began to talk about the possibility of the earth being round instead of flat...it was something strange and unproven (even though scriptures had said it thousands of years prior). I never said trust my brand of faith, I said trust that I was being honest with you about my beliefs, that is all.
Listen, of course my beliefs are going to seem compatable with science and other highly likely theories! Why? Becuase I believe the Bible does have much truth in it, and really is writings made by men who were listening to the Holy Spirit of God at the time. What you dub "fast and loose" intepretations[of the bible], others dub the "correct" intepretations. The only "loose" part about it is that I don't cling nonsensically to many of the "official" conclusions which were established by people with less resources and knowledge than mankind of today, passed on by secular establishments, and defended errantly for the sake of the "weird human construct" of TRADITION.
What does it mean to be close to God? That is a question you have to answer for yourself, if you have the desire to. To me, it is the realization that not everything worth believing can be scientifically proven, and the experiences I have had since that realization, which lead me to conclude that there is more than just smoke and mirrors to this whole "scripture" and "God" stuff, a lot more. It is being watchful and mindful of the small bits of truth which you have come to have faith in, regardless of their provability, in order to cultivate the seed of faith within your heart, so that it grows and strengthens, in order that -- frankly -- I might be that much more ahead of the game when we hit overtime, if you know what I mean. It's preparation for the future, its having a hope for the future that is more than just a positive outlook, more than just "ohwell, I'll be dead so it won't matter". It is truly trying to determine -- without letting P.R. bullshit or prideful denial get in the way if and when I hear the still small whisper of the Holy Spirit -- what exactly it is trying to tell me, and what I might do in my life to take advantage of that information.
Do I DISBELIEVE that humans came from apes, no of course not...I don't know, nobody does. If science ever emphatically proves it, I'll most likely believe it.
Some people say that God is vengefull and jealous because of the things which he said or did in Biblical stories of the past...or because of laws given by prophets, such as stoning people to death for small crimes. Yet, no such law holds place today. If God were that way, would he not send prophets with sufficient influence and power to change the laws of today? Many Christians denounce any information that they deem as suggesting God has changed from the historical figure painted in the old testament. Actually, it is we humans who have changed, and thus God has altered the way he deals with us accordingly. When your child is three years of age, you don't let him drive a car...when he is 16 (for most), that changes. That doesn't mean that you as a parent have changed or gone against your word, it just means that the child has changed and it is a new season, a season for different information to come to light.
There was just no way that the ancient peoples of the earth, during the scriptural times, could have possibly received the vastness of the truth as it relates to our understanding today, from modern day science! Just no way! So God told them what they needed to hear...not unlike the Oracle told Neo what he needed to hear in the Matrix...regardless of it's supposed "truth".
"Blasphemy!", many a catholic, baptist, etc, might say. But I don't hold dear to manmade tradition and false draw conclusions, I hold dear to the real and living God which I have the priviledge of sometimes being guided by, which when combined with study of ancient scripture and due diligence and thoughtful prayer and consideration on the subject, yields fruits of truth which snap into clarity for me, and this is my faith. As it is the faith of many a silent Christian. Honestly we're usually too busy living our lives to get involved in heated debates that ultimately end up little more than ammo for the heard hearted unbelievers. I just happen to be working out of town these last 2 weeks, and have a lot of extra time on my hands.
People who don't have an interest in putting for the effort, denying their carnal desires and prideful ego of center stage for a season, and really giving prayer and study and obediance and honest try...those people may see a spark of truth in something when they hear it from a believer, but they usually will find a way to explain it away, attack it, or write it off as delusional. It is just a choice we all have to make.
A wise man once said that "All Truth is first violently opposed, then ridiculed and finally accepted as self-evident." That rings true to a degree, but it seems to me that truth is more often ridiculed first, then violently opposed once it becomes apparent that the ridicule has done little to rid us of its nuisance. I find it a more fitting observation that this process has been an ongoing, revisionary process for Christianity all over the world, for centuries now. Right now we seem to be in a ridiculing stage of things which used to be considered self evident in this nation...at the times of our founding forefathers. Eventually this is going to get violent. As papists like Bush continue to declare that he makes his decisions based on his faith, and liberals and patriots from coast to coast begin to grow weary of the game played with the nations of world on our behalf.
What makes this discussion a little complicated is that different Christians, depending upon which religion they are, interpret the Bible differently. David, you mention Adam and Eve and say that no one can prove the evolution of man. What are your thoughts on Cro-Magnon Man, who is anatomically identical to modern humans and who existed some 10,000 to 40,000 years ago? Do you figure that Adam and Eve lived in a cave and painted pictures of bison on the walls? Cro-Magnon Man is not a theory, it is fact. I have been to the caves in France and it is fascinating to feel the sense of history in those caves. I don't understand why Christians do not want to accept the evolution of man from ape. I don't understand why you accept the concept of evolution of all species except for man. I get very excited reflecting on evolution and the big bang theory. I have never felt a desire to believe in a god. However, most people feel much more comfortable believing that there is an afterlife and they interpret the Bible in a manner which suits their own logical conclusions. Isn't it wonderful that there are so many religions to choose from? What's interesting is that each person fully believes that the conclusions that they have drawn are the Word. There are so many different held beliefs around the globe, each designed to suit the needs of each particular culture. It is my firm belief that these are constructs of each believer's mind and that there is no God. As someone said earlier in this thread, when it comes to the Greek gods or the Roman gods, we are all atheists.
Warm regards, Jo Ann
Jo Ann, my above post should kind of clarify my position on the whole "evolved from apes" thing. It isn't that I disbelieve it, it is simply that I don't know if it is true or not, and I brought it up because I was asked about my views on evolution. Well, I brought it up to pinpoint that so many who believe in evolution will cling just as emphatically to their belief that man came from apes, as believers do that we were created by God, even though neither is scientifically provable. Also I wanted to hint at -- but I guess I didn't do a good job in doing so -- the idea that maybe the ideas aren't diametrically opposed to one another. Who is to say what methods specifically, God used to create us or prepare the earth for us? Who is to say that the Cro-Magnon man wasn't just an animal, like an ape? Given a spirit of life, sure, but not a HUMAN'S spirit of life. Perhaps God prepared the bodies physically for awhile before he sent the first human souls into them. The whole "7 days" thing cannot be proven to be literal...once again, it is something that could be told to our ancestors, who knew nothing about evolution, which they could comprehend and believe...meaning recieve. Anybody who insists that every (or even most) word of the Bible is to be taken literally simply does not wish to complicate their simple-minded faith...and that's cool for them, as long as (as has been pointed out so many times) they don't try to legislate their belief onto the nation(s) of this planet.
By the way, David, we must have both been posting almost simultaneously as I posted my last response before having seen your post above. It is true that believers will believe no matter what logic is used and it takes faith to believe. I cannot accept anything on faith. If someone else believes in Christ, the Bible and God, that is fine with me. I am only curious what brings them to believe these things. The only time I get upset is when Christians attempt to force their beliefs upon others and get involved in politics.
David, I appreciate your sincerity and your kindness and desire to communicate. I have learned from this thread what I hoped to understand. Thank you.
Warm Regards, Jo Ann
Because of the posting delay, you are probably wondering about how I am responding. My last post was meant to respond to your 7:51 pm post. Anyway, we will just have to agree to disagree. I have no need or desire to try to believe and you truly believe and it is all good, particularly because you feel that peronal beliefs should not be mixed up with politics.
Best, Jo Ann
Quote: "it’s not the why that’s important, it’s the WHO that’s important. God is important, the people who have endured hardship are important, the lesson is important, the love is important; Not the Why!"
But still, the belief in god has only ever answer the question of "How?", but never even came close to "why?". And there are plenty of atheistic beliefs that explain how.
And if you agree that God can deal good and bad, regardless of whether or not you are bad yourself, how does the love even factor into it?
I said that god wouldn't be fair, because he would have no need for morals. No need to love. He only has need for his goal with all this, what you describe as "why?".
Surely a god capable of infinite wisdom would realize that human attachments such as compassion are foolish to get involved with if you're trying to concentrate on the bigger picture. It would be far more work than is necessary. It would make him feel guilt, and that's a feeling he can turn off.
God's job is to get it done whatever way is possible. God is just time. Time keeps everything moving, and time will tell how it starts and how it begins. Time has no morals, it just makes things happen the way they have to happen. You can't pray to time, and time can't answer you.
Time, is physical. We can see it's effects, but we can't see time. Any observable effects a traditional God produces can be seen as a product of time if you wish.
How does this not make sense?
Well, Greg, looking at it as a God is time stand point we then have to ask, "What is the purpose of time? Why would there be any time at all if there were no God with a purpose for it? What would be the point to it? There is no point to any life at all without some purpose behind it.
That is what makes sense to me...to have purpose.
Without existence, there is no time, space, reason, for anything to not exist, so from it comes time, and space. To define space, there must be matter, and to define matter there must also be absence of matter. To define time, there must be movement, and to define movement there must be physics.
From there, it all comes down to in what way the universe can exist. It cannot have a definite beginning, because it needs to be self sufficient. So it must exist in a way that it begins, covers all physical possibility, and then ends in such a way that it repeats again.
Inevitability. Einstein's question was whether or not god had a choice in the creation of the universe. The answer is no, existence is simply the most important thing. The only role of "God" would surely be to maintain this existence. Life is a product of it, and does have a purpose.
The purpose isn't clear even to me. I think it's to understand, not because we can, but simply because we will. Everything elaborates, and everything dies. Maybe the expansion of space is timed to let knowledge run it's course, before the white board is wiped clean, just like all physics seem to allow for us to better manipulate the world around us and survive.
Let me reiterate on part of that. We will not answer everything because we have to, it's just something we will do. And this understanding is a necessity in a perfect universe.
As long as we are alive, we will find more answers, and become more perfect. Even if we find out that we don't have to know about all this, we will still exist, so we will still try to understand the world we exist in.
Like I said earlier, it is because the universe itself can't think. It can't appreciate its own beauty. So it all exists for us. For the purpose to exist, continue to exist, and to have existed.
There is all this stuff in the universe because the development of life is very improbable. Everything happens for maybe just our one planet. But we shouldn't disconnect ourselves from the rest of the world, we're part of it. The greatest creation of it.
So much has lead to us, and so much lays ahead. Life is the most elaborate form of matter in existence. Of course we have a purpose without god.
DavidG-
Thank you for your explainations. I can tell you did alot of soul searching to arrive at your beliefs. So please stick around this site, we need your thoughtful answers.
Why does God test us if he created us. I guess I mean that wouldn't he already know our hearts? If someone is not sure of God's existance but does good things anyway cause they think it's right and just, are they less important to God than someone who believes in him?
No matter how much light and truth we have, it only takes one spark of untruth to slowly corrupt a doctrine until it is full of obvious untruths to the mind of the outside observer! And this is what you have today, this is why so many people are completely freaked out and against the idea of Christianity...because of all these friggin churches that conflict with one another!
Ain't that the truth. Also I would add that in my experience many Christians focus on things that aren't what Jesus preached. Even though I'm agnostic, I can appreciate the truth in what Jesus taught. Instead of preaching the "good news", when I was a teenager they focused on banning library books and rock bands and trying to shut down our school dances because they were sinful. One time a older woman walked by me and some friends playing card games outside and she started telling us how we were going to hell (I think cause we were playing cards??) and she was SO angry and scary with spittle flying everywhere. And I remember thinking she was crazy. If I were Christian I would be so mad that people would do stuff like that and tarnish the religion in the eyes of bystanders. If I believed in Jesus with all my heart, I would do my best to counteract that kind of thing. So when people have experiences like that and there aren't any counterbalance they wonder if THAT is what this Christian thing is all about and they say "no thanks".
I went to a religious private school growing up and had at least read the bible so I knew Jesus wouldn't of focused on silly things like that. There were much more important things he focused on like social and economic justice, caring for each other and speaking out against the pharisees, etc. So I wonder things like, if Jesus said "Blessed are the peacemakers", why I don't see Christians marching along side of me at peace rallys. We need you there. As I hear TV Christians rail against "welfare queens and lazy poor people" and Jesus said he would "judge us on how we treated the least amoung us", I wonder why Christians don't speak out against the modern day pharisees. I guess I wished more people lived their beliefs instead of just preaching them on Sunday. If I, who is unsure of the existance of God, can do those things because it is right and good, then surely it would be no problem for Christians who should do it because Jesus asked you to. It's getting damned lonely out here and the world is getting pretty scary. Where are the Christians when we need you to counteract the corruption of your faith that is being used to further evil agendas. People of faith thoughout our nation's history have fought for social and economic justice in the footsteps of Jesus. Where have they gone? Is it that Christians don't want to stand up against the political party they think will give them power?
David,
"Which part of evolution? The part where known species have evolved or died off via natural selection, the earth is billions of years old, and dinosaurs once roamed it...or the part where it is assumed humans come from apes, even though there is no "missing link" to proove it?"
There is plently of fossil evidence supporting common ancestry of all creatures on earth. I don't know why people get so freaked out over humans ascending from moneys. Monkeys are just our closest "cousins" but we are related to all creatures on earth. Hey, but why just focus on the fossil record when DNA evidence further supports the fossil record. Human DNA is roughly 98.5 percent identical to chimpanzee DNA.
"It isn't that I disbelieve it, it is simply that I don't know if it is true or not, and I brought it up because I was asked about my views on evolution. Well, I brought it up to pinpoint that so many who believe in evolution will cling just as emphatically to their belief that man came from apes, as believers do that we were created by God, even though neither is scientifically provable."
Those who study evolutionary biology are not "clinging to a belief", which makes it seem as though it equates with religion. Religion and science are NOT the same thing, although I think both start out with the same question, "How did this universe come to be?" The difference with science is that nothing is taken on faith. If a particular theory is disproven, scientists aren't scolded and ostracized, they win awards and are written about in history books.
A friend of mine made a good observation one time and I wanted to share it with you all. She said that you can bang you head against a wall until your head gets bloody. Or, you can step back from the wall and realize that there's a door there.
Just wanted to share.
"There was just no way that the ancient peoples of the earth, during the scriptural times, could have possibly received the vastness of the truth as it relates to our understanding today, from modern day science! Just no way! So God told them what they needed to hear..."
[Posted by DavidG at October 11, 2005 07:51 PM]
Nice post, DavidG. You seem good hearted and if you'll excuse me for saying, you seem an evolved christian--subject to change. I listen to you and I'm subject to change; You listen to me and you are subject to change; I believe this with my heart and mind.
I just want to make one point. If you believe that faith/religion can change as science changes our perceptions, then you cannot ask, "why ask why" without asking "why". You'll never make progress in understanding god's creation.
Perhaps you are right saying the closeness of god is personal. But that ignores the people around you. Myself, I ask, is davidg a reasonable fellow? And the answer is yes, as long as he tries to understand the world we both inhabit so we may cooexist--we get some ethics and boundaries and I can respect where your faith has taken you.
But god works strangely. I think Katrina was a natural phenomenon. You/others might believe it was a sign from god that we were not prepared. We might agree that Katrina's force is due to global warming and never ask if it chanced upon NO or was sent by god--we can agree to disagree as long as we understand the science that suggests or doesn't suggest the magnitude of Katrina is due in part to environmental imbalance of humanity.
But how do we agree on the issue of global warming if we can't agree on the issue of "common ancestry"? We both need to hear from scientists concerning the environment. We need to know the change in average temperature and how it relates to the polar ice caps ...are rising tides and a warmer caribean and the inadequate levees the reason for catastrope? We can't just pray, we have to ask "why"? Otherwise we are ignoring nature or god's work.
Like other's said, evolution is amazing. It should compel us all to look carefully at nature on many other issues. Religion needs to be refined today as unlike the past, we have the ability to destroy the whole human race. This is new in the context of evolution. Religion must evolve in the context of science. But Davidg, Science must teach from what it sees and measures, not from pure speculation. If I could reconcile religion and science, I would say that prayer is studying the world god gave US. Thanks for your replies, David. Hope you find time on your next trip and inbetween the lines.
Thank you everyone for the great posts, and sorry for my flippant post earlier. It wasn't really meant to be an answer to Jo Ann's question but an explaination of how hard it is for people to question what they believe on both sides. DavidG's post on 10/11 was especially good and accurate description of the trinity. Regardless of what you believe Thank you for trying to understand each other. It gives me hope. To those hardcore believers in revealations. It doesn't have to be that way. This same scenerio has been playing itself out through human history (population increas followed by a crash), it is a cycle but...We have free will, science and good minds, we can break the cycle, we can choose to get along and not to fight. We can choose to control our own populations and be good to each other.
Just want to throw out another idea, what if God is growing and changing just as humanity is.... Think about it - When the jews were the chosen people God was pretty demanding and punishing. But then Jesus came down and said I have but two rules...
I am an agnostic, so I'm therorizing about an awareness I am not sure exists, but I am obsessed with thinking about these things because if we do destroy each other over religion, that would be an ironic tragidy considering all the holy texts speak about the wrongness of killing. I don't want to see armegedon and I don't want my son to live through it either. When I pray - I pray for evolution :)
But killing is ok if that person prays to a different god than you do.
I really hope it isn't morals that make people turn religious. As an atheist I have lots of morals. I believe killing your own kind is one of the most terrible things you can do. I typically see war as one step away from cannibalism.
Death has a purpose, in that all life must die in order for higher forms of life to survive. But murder is causing death for the sake of having someone dead. It is truly wrong.
Dear Blue Sky, I want to second what you said. It is refreshing to see people with different belief systems communicating on a high level instead of attacking one another. I am an atheist, in that I do not believe in a God, however, I am not a hard-core believer that there is no purpose to life other than to just be born, eat, sleep, defecate, procreate and then die. I feel that it is important for the Democratic Party to open its arms to Christians. More and more, Christians are drifting towards the Republican party because they do not feel that they are welcome in the Democratic Party. I have always viewed Democrats as those who represent the people versus corporate interests, and the people include Christians.
Warm Regards, Jo Ann
nowadays it's all about liberal or conservative. As if there's no such thing as a conservative democrat.
Yeah, I don't like those labels which insert this huge divide between all of us. Most people cannot be placed into one of two boxes, either liberal or conservative, which leads to the "either you're with us or agin us" kind of mentality.
Ha! I agree.
Let's start a new political party. We can call it the None of the Above Party.
Yes, I have to agree that I do not like being divided and conquered.
The latestNBC News/Wall Street Journal pollshows only 28% believe U.S. headed in right direction.
I say we join forces.
actually the poll said 40% not 28% disapprove of bush
Poll: Americans Want Bush Impeached
Bush isn't god...