An essay thing

I have a few friends who are gradually being 'won over' by Christianity, so this evening I've just been writing up a few thoughts to fire at them- appreciate any feedback on the issues raised inside, I know they're not new or anything but still.. :smile:

(You might want to save as, instead of clicking on this directly-)
www.snarkpit.com/pits/leperous/anti-christianity.doc

:eek: wowzers, no damned wonder you were distracted..

i really do not have time to read all this, but i wish you luck..

i have issues of my own about religion, and you might actually share some of them, but i cannot articulate them any better, than i can ordinary forum posts, so.. i will not... for now.

i am rather disturbed with how the religious sects, seem to be recruiting more people, bordering on nuisance with their actions.. anyways.. i wish you luck.

I think it might be time to hire a few more moderators. :biggrin: But seriously, This isn't gonna get pretty, so lets just try and fend that part of the discussion off for as long as possible.

First of all, there are a great many points in there I agree with totally, but I do not believe that Christianity, in its essential spirit, is at all evil. The problem with any religion is people being raised to believe in it; thus, they have no idea of the kind of thoughts or experiences were necessary in the process of the faith's realization. This tends to create die-hard, overdramatic and childlike beliefs and morals in the religion for generations to come.

However, you yourself seem to misunderstand some of the concepts you talk about.

"You surely cannot believe in the concept of hell as a place of infinite punishment if you believe in a god of infinite love"

Since ANY long lived religion has gone though very different times, the people at different points in history have had varying spiritual desires. The image of Jesus as a friend to all the kiddies and someone who loves unconditionally, etc., is a result of a periods of loneliness or loss of faith by people in themselves. The image of hell is one created so that the people would be afraid of wrongdoing. Christianity says a lot of exaggerated things to achieve means that are not directly apparent, and a lot of people take them too literally and twist them.

"Men and women were not created equally; he is a he and our father, and women were created from a man."

Once again, a failure to understand the origins of religion. Picture this: you live in a roughly tribal society, in which the men make decisions and fight (things very important to a tribe) and where women stay home and care for children. Though many later religions/philosophies, including Islam, referred to God as something without gender, you can see that when you live in a society like that, you picture God as a man.

On a more obvious note, there is no respectful way to refer to an object without gender in English.

"[size=13]To me, he appears malevolent (towards mankind in general), psychotic (various OT stories- e.g. the Flood) and insecure (for requiring us to live for him and testing people?s faith)."

To be frank, for that comment, may I be the first to say f**k you. There is little more you could possibly have written to be more disrespectful and ignorant to what you speak of, and when you do that, your essay becomes meaningless.

Your six reasons, which provide any and all explanation as to why people would want to be Christian, provides a nice document of motives for the greedy, selfish, and childlike to believe in Christianity, and trust me, I don't buy that. There are also those who actually see through the load of bulls**t that has clung to the Christian faith over the years to its true message, and believing in that can better their lives. One of them is me.

[size=13]
"Why is there evil and sin in the world? If you say that it?s a result of having free will, I will ask you why god, in his infinite power, could not create us with a simple physical or mental inability to sin. After all, I want to fly, but despite free will I have been physically denied; and some people will be born into this world but never hear of Christianity, and despite free will they have been ?mentally? denied the chance to learn about Christ. How is this different from, say, stopping someone from thinking about doing something bad by making them unable to do so? Why does god deny us some things we want with our free will but apparently not others?"

Obviously, I could sit here and drone on about the necessity of balance and proportion in the universe, but I think you're already well acquainted with the concept.

"[size=13]Original sin stems from Adam and Eve eating the apple and gaining ?knowledge?; it would seem that sin stems from free will and having knowledge of the world. Why is this wrong? Or is it a hint that questioning Christianity is wrong..?"

You're not seeing the meaning of Genesis, or pretending not to; it talks about innocence versus experience. It would have been very easy for Adam and Eve to just live eternally in total ignorance and meaningless bliss, but that is a foolish and somewhat harmful way to exist, as Genisis also points out. Gaining the knowledge of Good and Evil gave man the choice between right and wrong, and that's what's important.

"[size=13]Would that make him more infinitely loving and basically ?better? than your god?"[/size]

[size=13]No. This is one of many other statements that I find completely repulsive in this rant. I don't think you're putting this in the right perspective, and honestly I don't think you want to. After all, you're an 'enlightened atheist'.[/size]

[size=13]I can't say I believe totally in Christianity, but you just insulted damn near everyone in my family with that essay, down to the last drop. Thus, I am willing to give as much respect in my responses to your words as you were willing to give to those who you are talking about. I'll write more later.[/size][size=13]

[/size][/size][/size][/size]

Lep opens can-o-worms

i'm off to bed, keep it to a dull roar guys, its 1000 miles from here to D.C. and i intend to do them all tomorrow..

no earth moving posts please..

nite/nite all

Yup you did open a can-o-worms lep, I really dont know what to say, you present a strong argument, but just as some constructive criticism, do mention the ups of christianity adn then argue why they are wrong. Basically what this all boils down to is people's views on Human kind.

I dont believe in god personaly, but at the same time im a hypocrite, i find myself praying to some ultimate figure for cumfort, but thats the reason why i believe that Humans created God out of fear and ignorance for pure cumfort, some friend that you can talk too when times get hard.

And just as you said, the idea of an afterlife is very appealing to me. But once again I believe that the human mind is very primitive, and thats why the human mind is very unstable, hence the prophets, where they men of god, or were they really just crazy people like there are today? the truth of the matter is we will never know, unless we travel back in time.

So in short, I can stand behind you argument lep (im not sucking up) what you said is what Ive been contemplating for years, but never really had the guts too express it. Just the only difference between us is I dont think religion in general is "wrong" its a person's preference, and if they find cumfort in the religion then thats them, It prevents them from going crazy. (I was going to say something else but it might raise up too much muck) but all in all, good argument.
-omega

Very interesting read, if I do say so myself. I've never been one to openly trash any religion, soley because I feel that if there is something that helps people understand their world and gives them comfort, there is no real harm in it (this is of course, on a personal level. Wars being fought over religion because a problem of social interaction/control issues).

Not that I don't like reading why other people feel so negatively about religions. I just don't see the point of trying to sway someone away from a belief.

Yes. I think any way of thinking that can help you do good is a positive one, no matter 'flawed' it may be to the 'enlightened' mind. There are different ones to choose for different people.

I chose to be rude to Lep because he chose to be rude to a very wide range of people, many of them very dear to me. Obviously, with an issue such as this, it does nobody any good to push and see who can win a stubbornness contest (see: penis fencing, c**k jousting, dick-duelling contest), so I apologize.

I think the problem is, not only here but with many other individuals, when they think they are attacking or rebutting on a religion, they are in all actuality attacking the idea of God in general, some of the things you said are rather offensive in any sense. I completely agree with the words Cassius stated in his previous post. I myself am not Christian, nor do I consider myself part of a religion, but I have ideals, but they just don't totally agree with what most religions have to say.

I'm personally not offended by things you have stated because I've built up an immunity. However, I know people who follow faith blindly and confuse that with religion. Because all a religion is, are your ideas and opinions on creation and is also means for you to understand your existence. You?re talking about people who follow blindly.

The people, who wrote the bible, wrote their interpretations of what they witnessed, or so claimed. To attack one religion out of hundreds, simply because there are, you feel, insufficient evidence doesn?t mean the religion it?s self, or God, is wrong or evil.

But you just attacked people?s ideas and their figure of worship; which is uncalled for.
I think I understand what you were getting at, but your essay just turned into all out attacks on the very ideas of religion and God.

By the way, Islam isn?t a religion, it?s a place. The Muslim religion, believe it or not, is very close to other religions. Christianity is just another interpretation of the same beliefs. Saying that you should choose one over another is a moot point in it?s self. The stories in the Bible, Curran, and the book of Judaism all have the same concepts, just explained through different stories. If you had stopped watching the five o clock news and talked to some Muslims you?d know this. You?re also confusing human ignorance as religion. To say that people buy into the bull s**t portions of religions makes the religion its self wrong is ridiculous. When the religions were first created, whenever they were created, whomever created them (the groups of course) got together and dissected their current situations and came to their own conclusions of how things are, the fact that it?s a religion just means other people felt the same way. Yes, things have been lost in translation, but the underlying message is the same. The way you perceive it is from the backwards ass angle.
Such as the analogy you ?quote? is completely twisting the ideas it?s challenging. Saying if you choose the wrong box you?re screwed, because there?s a bomb, is saying that in life you have absolutely no guidance whatsoever; meaning that you yourself cannot make a choice between heinous acts and decency.

sigh
This topic is too touchy for many people to talk about, also it will go nowhere, Lep will rebuttal with his opinions, and possible piss someone off, and then that would lead to other arguments, so this thread really has no point.

That?s how I see it anyway, no hard feelings :biggrin:

You want feedback? Ok, well here it is. Please, do not take my criticisms personally if you can avoid it. I tried to stick to the issues. <O:P></O:P>

I find your arguments generally unconvincing and irrelevant to the issue. Lets go point-by-point. Your origional text is default colored and italicised. My comments are green. edit: It appears that some of the formatting got buggered, but I hope who is saying what is obvious from context.<O:P></O:P>

Christians often look at the good points to their religion, so here are the bad ones, just so you can see both sides to the argument!

Moot points/questions about god:<O:P></O:P>

These are labelled ?moot? as God is an idea which we cannot question, through design rather than <wheres the rest of this sentence><O:P></O:P>

First, people question God all the time. You yourself have questioned God as you are an atheist. Second, why does that supposed inability to question God make these following points moot? In addition, you are trying to make these following points as part of your argument, so why do you want to make them moot? <O:P></O:P>

An aside, I hate the word moot since the original and true definition is nearly the exact opposite of its commonly used definition. By origional definition the term moot means ?open for debate?, but by common usage it means ?irrelevant?.<O:P></O:P>

<UL style="MARGIN-TOP: 0in" type=disc>
<LI class=MsoNormal>You surely cannot believe in the concept of hell as a place of infinite punishment if you believe in a god of infinite love<O:P></O:P> </LI></UL>
A lot of Christians these days don?t actually believe in hell as a literal place, or if they do they think of it in the following way: the act of sinning separates you from god, and being far from god is the ultimate suffering, so essentially people who sin are causing their own suffering and God doesn?t intervene because of free will. <O:P></O:P>

<SPAN lang=EN-GB style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: lime; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Further, who ever said God was all about love only? </SPAN><O:P></O:P>

<UL style="MARGIN-TOP: 0in" type=disc>
<LI class=MsoNormal>How can you have free will if god is ?all knowing? and knows what you?re going to do anyway?<O:P></O:P> <O:P></O:P></LI></UL>
This is the same basic argument as saying, ?How can you believe in free will if everything is governed by the laws of science?. The same counter arguments apply. <O:P></O:P>

<SPAN lang=EN-GB style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"><O:P></O:P></SPAN>

<UL style="MARGIN-TOP: 0in" type=disc>
<LI class=MsoNormal>Why should you ?live for god? if he?s infinite?<O:P></O:P> <O:P></O:P></LI></UL>
To achieve happiness and enlightenment, perhaps? To have a purpose in life? That?s the neat thing about believing in a God ? you automatically get a purpose in life for free. What do you live for? The betterment of the human race? Having a good time? Making ends meet with no in particular purpose at all? Why is what you live for any better than living for a god? What does being ?infinite? have to do with anything? <O:P></O:P>

<UL style="MARGIN-TOP: 0in" type=disc>
<LI class=MsoNormal>Why does god not reveal himself ?directly to us?, like he supposedly used to do?<O:P></O:P> <O:P></O:P></LI></UL>
Why should he? Do you mean to imply that God should come by and pull out a bag of tricks every few years or so? Who are you to tell God what to do? You imply that since you can?t predict God?s actions that he is false. Further, a large number of people would claim that God has ?revealed himself? to them personally through various means. You would call them hallucinations or lies, but then again you have the same response to the biblical stories, so you have failed to make a contradiction.<O:P></O:P>

<UL style="MARGIN-TOP: 0in" type=disc>
<LI class=MsoNormal>Men and women were not created equally; he is a he and our father, and women were created from a man.<O:P></O:P> <O:P></O:P></LI></UL>
<SPAN lang=EN-GB style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: lime; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">You have two basic arguments in this sentence. First, you argue that since God is traditionally characterized as a male, the Bible is biased against women. Second, you argue that the biblical difference in how man and woman were literally created contradicts the notion that all people are created equal. </SPAN>

<SPAN lang=EN-GB style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: lime; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN>As has been pointed out, the English language lacks a good neutral gender pronoun. Do you really think that Christians believe that god has male genitalia? Or, if he encompasses everything, that he somehow doesn?t also encompass womanness? Even God is somehow ?male? (what is the definition of being male vs. female in these sorts of situations, anyways?), why does that discriminate against women?

Your interpretation of the declaration of independence is flawed. In a literal sense, people are not created equally. We are not all exact clones of one another, and that?s a Good Thing. I believe, as do most people including the courts, that the spirit behind the phrase ?All men [and women] are created equal? is not that people are literally created equally, but that no person is inherently superior or inferior to another person, and that discrimination against people based on gender, race, class, etc is wrong.

Your argument here requires a literal take on the phrase. If women were indeed created from man as it says in the bible, would that make them inferior? Hell no. The circumstances of how someone was created has nothing to do with anything. Heck, women give birth to all babies, so one could argue that men are basically created from women. Trying to apply moral standards to literal things like this is silly. <O:P></O:P>

<UL style="MARGIN-TOP: 0in" type=disc>
<LI class=MsoNormal>Why do you need the bible and other people to convince you of his existence; surely his existence alone should be enough<O:P></O:P> </LI></UL>
This is a very good point. You could base your entire argument off this. However, I would bet that your friends think that they are ?feeling God?s existence? and that?s a major reason they are converting. Whether their feelings are truly from God or are just psychological thingamajigs is open for debate.<O:P></O:P>

<UL style="MARGIN-TOP: 0in" type=disc>
<LI class=MsoNormal>It is surely his fault that we sin<O:P></O:P> <O:P></O:P></LI></UL>
You offer no logical support for this statement. Further, if you believe in free will, then if you sin it is your own fault, not God?s. Sounds like you are trying to pass blame to God that belongs on mankind. If you don?t believe in free will, then everything is God?s fault at some level or another. In that case, it is not a far stretch to think of God as some sort of amorphous force of the universe that is all-good even though ?bad? things happen. Sort of like how you could argue that the forces of nature are good and beautiful even though animals kill each other, etc.<O:P></O:P>

To me, he appears malevolent (towards mankind in general), psychotic (various OT stories- e.g. the Flood) and insecure (for requiring us to live for him and testing people?s faith).<O:P></O:P>

First, why do you think that you can psychoanalyse God in terms of human psychology? Second, if you believe the Bible, it would seem that God has done more good for mankind than bad. Why do you think that the moral standards of humans apply to God? Third, a lot of Christians do not think of the stories literally.<O:P></O:P>

Moot points/questions about Christ:<O:P></O:P>

The anti-god ideas above are against the idea of his existence; Jesus supposedly being a real person is much harder to question about. There are simple ?Tavern questions? that, conveniently, can?t really be answered, such as why is more of his life not documented in the bible. His purpose was to be a way for us to be forgiven by god, which we cannot really ask ?why? about. The best we can do is to question his very existence, but apart from the bible itself all we have a few shreds<O:P></O:P>

That you not question the will of God is a postulate of Christianity, much like that it is wrong to kill a person is (I hope) a postulate of your moral code. Postulates are those unprovable yet intuitive ideas that a person?s internal logic is based on. You can?t make a logical argument for or against it. For example, a serial killer could say that nothing is wrong with killing people, and there is no logical way to argue that he is morally wrong since his basic postulates differ from yours. Certainly you could bring up the fact that from an objective standpoint if everyone killed anyone at will, society would not function, but you could not prove that it is morally wrong.<O:P></O:P>

As an atheist I am prepared to accept that he may have been a real person. But if Jesus did do the things he?s said to have done- cure a Leper, turn water into wine, and perform various other miracles- does that automatically make him into something supernatural? What would you think if David Blaine started to do these things and said he was Jesus? Fulfilling a prophecy of the appearance of a messiah isn?t enough either, especially when only two of the gospels detail his birth, and disagree on the details (seeing as neither writer was there). Dying on the cross and coming back to life, then? There seem to be a lot of conveniences at this part of the story- having nails through your palms instead of wrists, not having your legs broken, a conveniently donated tomb complete with inescapable boulder, and guarding soldiers being scared off by angels and never being heard from again.<O:P></O:P>

Here you bring up an excellent point ? just because Jesus did certain things does not necessairily make him the son of God. For the sake of example, lets pretend that there was IRREFUTA

One thing I want to make clear, that few people realize, is that saying 'yes' or 'no' to the existence of a god/God is not a 'its just my opinion'. The belief in a God always comes from one's personal experiences in life, and you assert your belief in God, you have to explain what in your life caused you to do so.

As with many others of this day, I came to believe in God by spending a lot of my time in nature; it's a strange thing, and I can't exactly explain it, but damn near everyone who chooses to live their life hiking in forests and the like comes to believe in a God, from Chris McCandless to ancient tribes in the wild.

Do you have knowledge of why every single religions person in the world
believes in God? Didn't think so. Lets not make broad generalizations
about the reasons why people start believeing in God then.

The large majority of people in the world believe in a God. Thus it
makes sense that the large majority of people who go out in nature
believe in God. Perhaps a disproportionate amount do. However, saying
that near everyone does is flat out wrong. I have met several
outdoorsmen and mountaineers in my life, and many did not believe in a
God. Heck, what about the Buddhist sherpas which live in the himilayas?
They dont believe in a God (well, at least not what most of us would
call a "God").

To be honest lep, I'm rather dissapointed in your arguments for many of the same reasons mazemaster has deliniated. You reveal many misconceptions about "christianity" , and faith in general. I am a christian, yet my own faith is of the most abstract nature. I take practicaly nothing in the bible for literal truth.

From a purely practical stand point, the exsitance of God is completly irrelevent to the issue of religion. people believe because it helps them to cope with life. I believe because it gives me strength and provides a firm basis for how I feel I ought to conduct myself in the world. If I am wrong... big deal. I will have had a good life regaurdless, and I will die without fear.

I feel that the attitudes you have expressed come from way too much contact with "fundimentalist" christians. I cannot stand such people! they are blind, closed-minded, and touchy as hell because deep down they know that their form of faith is a house of cards.

I agree with Cass about the affect of nature. dispite my knowledge of science in general, I cannot help but feel the presence of god in the wilderness. I know that the earth is around 4.5 billion years old, I know that life probably evolved from the very first primitve collections of protines around 4 billion years ago. To me all that just increases my sense of wonder.

in short, you are thinking far to literaly. in that way you seem as ignorant as those with blind faith.

Personally, I dont beleive in any divine being. This debate might be a big big for the likes of me, but I'll try anyway. The reason (I think) people beleive in religions such as christian/jewish/muslim is because:

• People are afraid of the unknown. The ultimate unknown is death. So of course, people will come up with theories about what happens when you die, this turns into a heaven/hell idea.

• People are curious. They want to know how everything was created, and to a caveman 10,000 years ago, what other explanation could there be, apart from gods creating everything?

My beleif system is based mainly on science. Nothing is based on the will of any sort of god or all-powerful being, everything that happens is purely the result of what happened previously. I beleive, on the "what happens when you die" issue, that you die. Over. Simple as that. Life and intelligence is simply an attribute of the correct grouping of chemicals. When the brain, where the intelligence happens, dies, there is no more intelligence. This of course leads to me having a lot of apathy, even pessimism, but it seems to hold as I've never had any evidence to the contrary.

Thats the basic reason why religious debates tend to be so heated: No evidence to the contrary. Religion is formed around the world, not the world around religion, so it is logical that there should be no evidence to the contrary of religion. Whatever evidence is found, religion changes accordingly.

/rant

You surely cannot believe in the concept of hell as a place of infinite punishment if you believe in a god of infinite love<?XML:NAMESPACE PREFIX = O /><O:P></O:P>

Well, the definition of hell is having seen God and then being taken away, so that you can no longer see him. Surely then its possible that they can co-exist since God forgives those who repent: people could go to hell and the to heaven again... maybe.

As for the nature of belief, the very word belief infers that there are no hard facts or evidence. For example, did the police "believe" Dr. Shipman was guilty - no, they knew that he was guilty. The nature of any religion depends on belief, which in turn depends on possible contradictions from other beliefs.

people believe what they want to believe... i may not be a christian, but the morals written in the christian bible are a pretty good set of rules to live by. i mean, things can only improve if they truly believe in that sort of thing! ive always believed that you should do what makes you and everyone around you happiest. and christians bring good will to themselves and others... so who cares if they think they're going to heaven? or a hell? i wish i were able to believe in such a croc... the concept of my conscious turning into nothing frightens me!

i say just let them be... if, at all, encourage them. all my christian friends are awsome

Hey you can't just go and dismiss other peoples belief sytem with 1800 words. If you have a faith its said that you tend to live longer too. (The intervention of god or wishfull thinking?! :smile: ) Anyway I'll give the document a read today as I have some free time.

By the way, Islam isn?t a religion, it?s a place.

No, it's not a place. It's a religion.

The Muslim religion, believe it or not, is very close to other religions. Christianity is just another interpretation of the same beliefs. Saying that you should choose one over another is a moot point in it?s self. The stories in the Bible, Curran, and the book of Judaism all have the same concepts, just explained through different stories.

This is that insipid "patronise the heretic" attitude. I'm sure many Muslims would not take kindly to you subsuming their beliefs under Christianity. The Koran is not the same as the bible; Prophet Mohammed is not the same as Jesus.

I have some sympathy for the view that, in fundamental emotional/psychological terms, most religions and indeed most non-religious forms of spirituality share a common subject matter and proceed from the same sort of "fellow feeling". But no matter what I might think, I have an obligation to recognise and respect the genuine variety of religious beliefs.

i slept well thank you all :smile:

i must say tho, that mazeman has finally settled the issue of "LONGEST" post, i didn't think the system capable of such.

i disbelieve any concept of god, in any sense of the word.

i believe its entirely possible to live a good life without the concept.

i believe that religion in itself, is a good thing, for the most part anyways, because many of the things they believe in, i share, but without the Deity connotations.

the concept of an "ALL MIGHTY" is just to grasping at straws mentality for me to accept, i would sooner believe in world peace, than venture down that path.

Deities aside, religion has benefits, but if misused... religion has been the basis for almost all of humanities atrocities of note.. check into the causes of the dark ages for reference if need be.

but, bottom-line, the fact that this topic has advanced this far shows me

snarkpit is maturing.

Oh my, you people are cleverer than I thought And for the most part maturer when it comes to it!

Cassius, I couldn't really care less if I offended you as I just tried to make some points and that's your problem if you don't want to think about them! I don't get offended when my Christian friends try to tell my why it's right, although I do to some extent when they try to get me to go to church or a talk for the umpteenth time. I certainly wouldn't be offended if someone here posted a positive arguement, but yes I would try to pick holes in it.

But apologies if I gave the impression I thought there was a problem with Christianity in general, I meant to say I thought the beliefs are wrong (but not harmful)

Aaaaanyways it's a quick essay-thing for someone in particular and is only meant to give an overview for some anti-Christian/religion arguements, thanks for all the feedback, I'll go over it when I get a week off or something :wink:

Wow. Suddenly, Snarkpit's smart :smile:

DesPlesda said:
Wow. Suddenly, Snarkpit's smart :smile:

Since when wasn't it?

Good point. Let me rephrase: All of a sudden, Snarkpit's become an intellectual stomping ground/mapping community/goon forum!

DesPlesda said:
Good point. Let me rephrase: All of a sudden, Snarkpit's become an intellectual stomping ground/mapping community/goon forum!

Yes, apparently leperous thinks i'm a "forum goon" when he made that news tid bit about the snarkpit game (tm) at xmas.

Riiiight, in response... no hard feelings meant at all, of course- the 'Tavern' reference is to a Christianity discussion group I go to every week to talk about similar things. But just because I don't have a religion it shouldn't mean I'm not allowed to voice my thoughts as vocally :wink:

About the concept of hell- yes I am aware that modern Christians believe it to simply be a place without God. But if you die that's it, and apparently there's no way to repent. I have to convert when I'm alive, and if I should see the pearly gates and realise I was wrong that's not good enough.

Point taken about men > women, I was being a m0ng :biggrin:

Crono, the point about the bombs in the boxes wasn't referring to living life without guidance, it was about living forever in heaven.

The points in 'why are people Christian' are not meant to each be good enough, but they're often good enough at convincing people to start believing- the person in particular this is aimed at is particularly convinced in the martyrs.

Maze, some excellent thoughts there :biggrin: But in particular, you've used the standard Christian line that you have to have sin if you want free will, but I don't see why that it is true, and why there has to be a balance. Why could we not be created with a simple inability to sin, or at least stronger subconscious 'strings' stopping us from doing so? What's wrong with my 'I want to fly but I can't' analogy? There are several people in my life who I love, but I do not even come close to hating anyone (and I'm pretty sure I'd still love those people if there was no hate in the world). But anyway, I stand by most of the other things I said, and have dropped a few as I have misunderstood :smile:

Tracer, why is your faith more 'personal'? Have you encountered Christianity but rejected it, or come to the conclusion that there must be a god etc.? The people I've talked to aren't particularly fundamental, they don't take it literally, although one of my good friends does think all the stories have some kind of literal truth. Got him worrying right now over the passge in one of the gospels about thousands of saints rising out of their graves and appearing before people after Jesus was crucified

Oh and Maze, why don't Jews believe that Jesus was the son of God? Why are they wrong about Christ being just another prophet?

The way I see it, religion is a good way to get people to behave well in society. Idealy, people would do good things and be nice people just because they want to.

Can anybody give me a reason why it is not better to live a good and honest life because you want to, and know that it is the way to behave, and not because you feel like you have to obey some higher being and will in effect gain some eternal reward in heaven for doing so, and an eternal punishment for not doing so?

As a born again christian, I just want to say...

I believe the Bible completely and to it's literal meaning. I believe the Bible we have today is the bible God wants us to have today. We only sin by the law it says in the Bible, therefore those who have no opportunity to find out are not held responsible for their 'sinful' actions I.E Younger kids, tribes etc.

The only other thing I would say is If I'm right, I go to heaven, people who don''t believe don't. However If i'm wrong and say, you Lep, are right what do I really lose?

But there were some good arguments there Lep.

:smile:

G

Can anybody give me a reason why it is not better to live a good and honest life because you want to?

Well, said, Jeff. When it comes down to it, that's about how I see it. I want to be a 'good' person not for God, not for my family or friends, maybe slightly for Maggie (;)), but primarily for me because I want to be.

I think the biggest key to religion (or lack thereof) is respect. I don't necessarily agree with your views, but extreme cases excepted, I will respect them. I greatly appreciate it when the same courtesy is extended to me. And for the most part, it is.

If I have some daunting task ahead, and one of my Christian friends tells me that they're "praying for me," I feel honored to have that level of support, because I know that while the act itself doesn't have a whole lot of meaning to me, I know that it has far greater meaning for them - and that in turn means a lot to me.

My only gripes with organized religion is/are:
1) the general lack of freedom in coming to ones own beliefs - often times it's just a matter of being raised the way your parents were raised and taught to believe what they believe (this isn't necessarily good or bad in itself, but I see religion as highly personal, as noted in the next point, and think people should be more accepting of others finding their own path).
2) I see religion as a personal experience, not an organized body. The concept of "the church" bugs me. There's no reason people shouldn't be able to get together and share their faith, but I think when there are organized panels within that faith deciding what to believe and not to believe as a whole, there are lines that have been crossed. Obviously, it comes down to an individual's choice whether or not they follow these guidelines, but I think a more personal take on religion is better than a large-scale "this is what my church believes" attitude.
3) those that twist it for personal gain and use in attacking others. Otherwise there are some wonderful things that have come out of religion, and I can't argue against that. Plenty of good things have come from plenty of good places.

Hmm. Longer than I planned. Hopefully my ramblings make sense :smile:

lemme see if i can make some sort of sense, since everyone so far has been able to, at least to some degree.

my biggest complaint i guess about religion, is the assumption the believers have that i must believe too, or somehow i am evil.. they have no room at all in their narrow outlook for another kind of good, that in itself has been the key reason i scorn it so strongly.

also, when people tell me that they will pray for me, i find that so insulting, i just cannot stress the level of how insulting it is, as if i really needed their prayers.

also, everyone assumes that the words "god bless you" is somehow an acceptable farewell statement, to assume such just insults me to no end.

The symbolism displayed in todays religious sects is bordering on the criminal.. there are several churches throughout this state alone, that seem hell bend on creating the largest church in the land, i have to wonder, exactly where all this influx of cash has come from.. there is just no honest way known to acquire funds capable of building a million dollar church.

also, (and i cannot or will not confirm this for personal reasons) but i hear that religious sects do not have to pay taxes in the USA, that is horrible, the thought of all that money and no one paying a cent in taxes, while we on the outside are taxed into the poorhouse.

in texas (and illinois) are two of the biggest crosses in the whole world, millions must have been spent on them, and for what? symbolism again? the money could have been better spent on feeding hungry children, or housing them.. plus, the assumption that everyone wants to see them...

anyways, i realize that for the most part all my reply sounds like a rant, but its honestly how i view it.. if someone thinks its nothing more than the raving of an ignorant, please refrain, i do not need reminded of my lacks..

Gav said:
The only other thing I would say is If I'm right, I go to heaven, people who don''t believe don't. However If i'm wrong and say, you Lep, are right what do I really lose?

If you're right, I lose, along with the other 4 billion people alive today who aren't christians. If I'm right, no-one loses. :wink: Gav, do you take what the bible says about the nature of the world literally too then? (how it came into being and how it has 4 corners, i.e. is flat)

With regard to all the issues surrounding hell, and in particular the damnation of babies and other innocents, I think Dante gives the best statement of a traditional orthodox Christian position. In the Inferno, Virgil explains to Dante that damned souls are not punished by God or anyone else. His exact doctrine is highly subtle, but here is my rough interpretation:

The course our life on Earth is a time during which we severally develop our characters. This is the period during which our nature is open to change. Once we die, the fundamental natures of our souls become eternal and are incapable of change. Only if we our nature is good enough are we capable of benefitting from purgatory and salvation. It is not that God withholds His mercy from the souls of the damned; rather, He cannot change their fundamental nature (for this would be like erasing their very identity). The souls of the repentent, though capable of receiving mercy, require assistance in the form of God's grace.

To be damned is to be sundered from God. There are various ways in which one can become damned; these correspond to the various ways in which one's soul can turn away from God. In the case of babies and virtuous pagans, their souls are not capable of turning to God because they have not had a chance to develop a character that is receptive to grace. However, their lives are free from blemish and so they are condemned to exist very much in the same way that they did on Earth. The only difference is that, as immortal souls, they possess certain special knowledge - including the knowledge that God exists. Thus their existence is one free from outright suffering, and as pleasant as an Earthly life, but they despair for they know that they are forever incapable of entry into paradise. Their only sin is that they did not hope for better things; they are allotted in eternity as much as they hoped for in life.

The virtuous pagans and the innocents exist in limbo, just outside "hell proper". As Dante journeys further into the pit, he encounters progressively more heinous sins and corresponding degrees of "self-inflicted" misery.

The whole of the Comedia is well worth examining for a sublime yet humane statement of the traditional Christian view. Even if you are not Christian there is a powerful and instructive allegorical message.

Gollum said:
Once we die, the fundamental natures of our souls become eternal and are incapable of change. Only if we our nature is good enough are we capable of benefitting from purgatory and salvation. It is not that God withholds His mercy from the souls of the damned; rather, He cannot change their fundamental nature (for this would be like erasing their very identity).

I get what you're saying, but I have a problem with this paragraph and the blatant assumptions it's making :/

What's the problem with it then?

Well, it's an interesting idea that seems to hold water, but I can't see what teachings/quotes/wut it's based off. It's surely just as valid as saying God is vengeful too :wink:

It's a personal view (Dante's), based upon the long-standing religious doctrine of the time (about AD 1300). It's not really based on any more authoritative sources - the Comedia ("Divine Comedy") is itself probably one of the most influential books ever written!

Well worth reading in my opinion. I recommend the translation by Dorothy Sayers, unless you can read the original Italian. The Paradiso can be a bit tedious, but it's worth reading to the end.

Gollum said:
It's a personal view (Dante's), based upon the long-standing religious doctrine of the time (about AD 1300). It's not really based on any more authoritative sources - the Comedia ("Divine Comedy") is itself probably one of the most influential books ever written!

Well worth reading in my opinion. I recommend the translation by Dorothy Sayers, unless you can read the original Italian. The Paradiso can be a bit tedious, but it's worth reading to the end.

so much for my suggestion that you read "Little House on the Prairie" .. you just don't know what lite reading is do'ya mike :biggrin:

Whatever your thoughts on religion, you cannot simply pass it off as a destructive, backward force. A lot of todays institutions of law, politics and education are built from religious roots and the morals we use (including non-Christians such as myself) are based on religion. You simply wouldn't have society as we know it today without organised religion IMO.

The argument should not be about whether religion is "real" or otherwise, its about how we interpret and exercise our beliefs in a considerate, peaceful manner..

Sorry, but this is a thread about our dear Lep challenging the legitimacy of Christian beliefs so that he can undercut the spiritual growth of his friends, because atheism is so much better and 'more enlightened'. At the same time, he throws some criticism at Christianity for its evangelism and prostyletism.

The fact that you fellows are all attacking his beliefs, same as he attacked ours, is no good. As most of us have stated, any faith is good, so long as it does not create negativity. Obviously, Christianity has its means to make amazing positive change, as does Islam, as does atheism.

So instead of telling Lep that he's got a friend in Jesus, tell him to keep it in his pants until his friends are creating armed militias (no matter how hilarious it is to see British people with guns). I don't think this should be a 'well my god could beat up your god' contest.

IN reply to Lep's point about the creation and 4 corners of the earth,

I do believe that God spoke and the earth was created. God is Omnipotent.

God was speaking (I am now reffering to the part in Revelation, although their may be other instances in which he refers to the earth with 4 corners.) to the Church in vivid imagery, and it was necessary for him to explain that, the WHOLE world was going to be included in this vision, and to do that he used the phrase that would be understood at the time. The literal meaning was whole world, bearing in mind this instance was in the middle of an incredibly symbolic vision. God used visions and reams that often needed interpreting. But events that actually happened I take as happened.

With that attitude, seems like you're more likely to be the one going round with 'armed militias' :rolleyes: Why are you so angry? What is wrong with questioning your religion?

Yes I am challenging your religion's legitimacy, because there are huge inconsistencies if you actually bother to study it. Was Jesus actually God or just a man without sin? Why does Judaism refuse to accept that Jesus was the son of God, despite making all the prophecies, being the chosen people of God, etc.? How can you believe the bible when it's half a collection stories from seemingly insane 'prophets' which you can't really take literally, and when it's blatantly been changed and mistranslated over the ages? (cf. the last section to the Gospel of Mark)

-Orph, the problems you have are with the church as far as I can tell, not with god. I myself do not belong to any particular church. any organization of people christian or otherwise becomes twisted from its purpose in time, most particularly in a capitalist society. the largest of churches have generaly lost sight of their faith in a flood of material gain. it also sounds as though most of your experience is with what i call "rapid christians". these people are always throwing religion in your face and behaving in the most ignorant boorish evangalistic manner possible. people like this are what gives faith a bad name. I believe that everyones path to god and eternity is different. there is no one "way". if you want a jesus quote for that try this on for size. "in my fathers house there are many rooms"

Lep- I was raised christian, but fortunatly for me my father is also a scientist who raised me as such. It might be correct to say that I have rejected the church, but not christianity. my faith is highly personal because I have thought about it and devloped many of my own ideas rather than accepting some standard line form whatever church.

Oh and in responce to the thing about the taxes, I believe that churches are subject to the same rules as any non-profit corporation, which makes perfect sense. after all, even if they build huge buildings, nobody becomes a millionair through the church, except maybe TV evangelists .

I would say, 95% of "churches" suck.

The following is a way of showing the value of religion without a beliefe in a god of any kind - it is not meant to be an attack on religous people.

Imagine there was a society where there is no religion, but people are paid money if they are honest and well behaved - do you think this would result in a society that was overall better behaved and more honest/moral? Well pretty obviously yes.

Now obviously no society could ever afford this - but what they can do quite easily in a pre-science era is 'invent' a god who will reward them after death (something people are either affraid of, or can be easily convinced to be affraid of with ideas like 'hell') if they behave well in life. Perhaps the god will favour them in life as well (it's not hard to make people think that totally random events are down to something they did). Again, in a pre-science era, the god can be used to explain a great deal of otherwise unexplainable occurances, making it easier for people to believe, and therefore more likely to conform to the idea that good behavoir = reward.

Like this, the society will become more honest at almost no cost to itself, i.e. religion is a valuable aspect of society. To me, that seems like a feasable way that the concept of religion could have come about. The way I see it, this makes religion a good thing without there needing to actually be a real god - it's simply a beliefe in the concept that can encourage people to do good things when they otherwise might not have.

If people don't believe, well nothing is lost, and they live their life as they would have done. For people who do believe, it may make them into 'better' society members, and that can only be a good thing. It's win-win. People often say 'but there are so many wars caused by religion' - who's to say that if there was no such thing as religion, the less moral members of society would be starting wars about things they don't now, because they wouldn't attatch so much value to 'being nice' and 'trying to get along'.

I'm not saying there are no downsides to having religion, and I don't believe in some kind of higher being, but I am able to see the good that religion can bring about. I do not think that it is anybodies place to tell somebody else that they shouldn't believe in god or become a christian/muslim/whatever - if they want to believe in something now that most of societies values are based upon, fair enough.

But I still maintain that it is better to do good things because you personally want to, not because a 'higher being' does :smile:

this thread is like... setting a new snarkpit record for integrity of the topic! /me claps for lep

but yea... like i said earlier, your friends' lives can only improve with christianity. as much as we may know its BS, if they're capable of believing it... i say more powa to em.

Tracer Bullet said:
-Orph, the problems you have are with the church as far as I can tell, not with god. I myself do not belong to any particular church. any organization of people christian or otherwise becomes twisted from its purpose in time, most particularly in a capitalist society. the largest of churches have generaly lost sight of their faith in a flood of material gain. it also sounds as though most of your experience is with what i call "rapid christians". these people are always throwing religion in your face and behaving in the most ignorant boorish evangalistic manner possible. people like this are what gives faith a bad name. I believe that everyones path to god and eternity is different. there is no one "way". if you want a jesus quote for that try this on for size. "in my fathers house there are many rooms"

you are probably right, as long as everyone here understands, i really don't know anyone well enuff to be singling anyone out.. its just how i view it all.

i am not attacking religion, because it exists, i am only ... well i am not sure exactly what my goal here is, other than to put my 2 cents in somehow.. i am not trying to convert, pervert or any other vert.

also, i have met people who truly have faith, and they liked me just the way i was.. no praying for me, no insulting whats so ever.. it was almost enuff to make me believe, their god truly did them right :smile:

anyways, i meant no harm to anyone at SP

Bah, if there's one topic I despise it's religion. To me it all comes down to personal faith. If someone wants to believe in something, let them. However, that person has no right to infringe upon others' beliefs to tell them what they are doing wrong or that they are going to hell or whatever.

'Spread the good word' my ass. Nothing makes me cringe more than when people play off their beliefs as the one and only and it's their personal job from God to save the rest of us from damnation. I am Catholic, and no amount of your bulls**t will change that fact. I don't care what you think about your religion compared to mine. I let you practice your's, let me practice mine.

So Lep, I would think the best course to take here is to not try and change their beliefs. What you should do is to tell them to cram their missionary work up their asses, just like you should about your personal beliefs. Keep them personal :razz:

Leperous said:
With that attitude, seems like you're more likely to be the one going round with 'armed militias' :rolleyes: Why are you so angry? What is wrong with questioning your religion?

Let me break it down for you Lep: you've just trashed my own mother as ignorant, morally and mentally inept, selfish and thoroughly un-enlightened. Shall I now politely and calmly engage you in quiet discussion upon your qualms about a religion which you have little concept of? I don't really think so.

You can question what I believe in any day of the week, dear Leperous, but you will do it politely and you will do it with respect, otherwise it has no meaning to me as being anything but a resentful insult.

Lastly, you seem to have done little to actually understand my post. There is no 'smarter' religion, no spirituality supermarket. "Oh, you got Islam today? Always a solid choice." No.

Leperous said:
Yes I am challenging your religion's legitimacy, because there are huge inconsistencies if you actually bother to study it. Was Jesus actually God or just a man without sin? Why does Judaism refuse to accept that Jesus was the son of God, despite making all the prophecies, being the chosen people of God, etc.? How can you believe the bible when it's half a collection stories from seemingly insane 'prophets' which you can't really take literally, and when it's blatantly been changed and mistranslated over the ages? (cf. the last section to the Gospel of Mark)

First of all, I would like to make it clear that I have bothered to study it, having been confirmed when I was thirteen and having gone to church nearly every Sunday since. For this same reason, I couldn't tell you about Judaism, because I've never really gone into it very deeply.

To the rest, Lep, that's called evolution. Do you think I would have a 'better' and 'more solid' or 'enlightened' belief in Christianity had the Bible not changed a word since it was first written down? Should I follow the laws from thousands of years ago and half a world away? The Bible, admittedly, has changed little over time for various reasons, but I said that for you to understand. You can't trash religion without understanding its origins and dynamics.

As for the insane prophets, I would ask you why you consider them insane. Why, because they liked to preach? Aren't you committing the same folly?

Lastly, I believe in that part of Christianity which applies to my life, nothing more, nothing less. It was written in a different time, but some values still do apply to my life.

cure a Leper

hmmm, maybe if you believed in him, he might solve all your problems leperous..

forums are bad at he best of times for communicating ideas, but oh dear.

if i say that i believe in god, it would be safe to say that every one of you would have a different idea of what it was that i actually believe. some may picture an old guy with a big white beard, sitting on a throne, surrounded by fluffy white clouds and little cherubims. if you have that image of god, then thats what YOU believe in, not me.

even athiests, Lep, will conjure up some sort of image or concept, and having read through your .doc, i see that you would be quite right not to believe in the image that you have.

[edit] would someone care to define the term 'believe in', because if it's the same as 'believe god exists', then doesn't that mean that the devil will get into heaven?[/edit]

fishy said:
forums are bad at he best of times for communicating ideas, but oh dear.

i see that you would be quite right not to believe in the image that you have.

you know, these two statements are IMO, the only two completely unbiased sentences in this whole thread.

we would be wise to listen and learn.

/me bows to a master spokesperson.