# For Rakkasan Thread : Theism vs Atheism vs Agnosticism



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

Ok ... please be respectful of others beliefs. This is only a discussion ....

I am intentionally starting this thread with no particular focus ... so it will start and go wherever we take it. 

I am a Christian .... but since 1993 I have studied theory of evolution, intelligent design, and creation science. So I should have lots of input if the conversation heads in that direction.

Soooooooo, why do you believe what you believe or are you looking for something to believe?


----------



## Old John (May 27, 2004)

*Polytheism??*

Well, not to start an argument, but, you kind of left out one other little system, that fits right in there, too. That would be Polytheism. 
I know many Folks who strongly hold that Belief. The ones that I know pay Homage, or Worship, the traditional Ancestral Gods and Goddesses, of the Northern European Folks. Those Gods are known as the Aesir and the Vanir. And Their worshippers are know as Asatru, (True to the Aesir, or Asa-Gods.) Small groups of the Asatru gather about once a month, to celebrate their Traditional Holydays in their Traditional manner. They lift their Toasts of Mead and ale, to honor their Gods and Goddesses and pour out libations to Them, as a Holy Offering

Granted, there are only a maybe a hundred thousand folks who follow that Path, in the USA and across Northern Europe, and the British Isles. And, they are mostly, almost exclusively of the Northern European Heritage.

And, there are doubtless many Folk of African Heritage and other areas of Heritage who follow their own type of Polytheism also, honoring their own African Gods and Goddesses.

I just thought it would be a more complete discussion if Polytheism were included.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Since I think people are holding off...

I'll say that I am, and I think Karen will help, too - be watching this thread.

Two things I would be looking for that would cause delete or possibly more.

1. Beating someone over the head trying to convert them.
2. Insulting anyone else, and all the normal stuff we should not do here.

And it could be an interesting discussion of the same and differences of different belief or non belief systems.


----------



## Karen (Apr 17, 2002)

I have great hopes we all will be able to discuss this topic respectfully, so I'll weigh in.

I'm a Christian, but often feel like a square peg in a round hole as I don't believe in Bible thumping or judging others. I believe we are to tell others about Christ, but not smack them around with it. Rather we are to show God's love, acceptance and forgiveness and respect all people; not just those of our own faith or beliefs. Condemning others, or feeling it's our mission in life to set them straight, with no regards for what _they _believe, or give credit for what faith (or lack of faith) they have is disrespectful, not only to them, but says our God isn't great enough to do what He said He can do. It's why we Christians always come off as hypocrites IMHO.

I believe we need dialogs between different religions and faiths. Although I believe all the Bible has to say about the deity of Jesus Christ, I also believe in respecting and _taking into consideration_ what others believe. It isn't going change what I believe, but it does help us all to understand each other better since we can then see where they are coming from and why they believe the way they do. This stuff of not mixing with other who don't believe as we do is just plain ignorant and distorting what the Bible says. It's their fear of being swayed to believe differently -- which is impossible anyway if you're in a true relationship with Christ.

I think all religions/faiths have value in that they all have something we can apply to our own faith. There is always some characteristic that another faith is right-on-the-money about that we can apply it to our own faith or walk. To not look for that, or be curious enough to find it, is missing some pretty valuable lessons in our own life that can deepen our own faith or just make us better people.


----------



## Scott SW Ohio (Sep 20, 2003)

I don't have a religious faith. I am perfectly happy as a nonbeliever and am not seeking a religious affiliation.

For those of you who find peace and happiness though religious belief, I am glad for you. We all do what makes sense to us to do, and I am not about to judge or argue with anyone who has found something that works.


----------



## BlueRose (Mar 7, 2013)

I have study different beliefs. I surprises me how much different beliefs have in common. 

Most of the beliefs I have studied all teach respect of self and others. Teach by example. 'do as I do'.

We all need to respect ourselves and others.


----------



## stanb999 (Jan 30, 2005)

I'm Atheist.

Because religions questions challenged with logic end up being matters of Faith.
Faith isn't logical tho very real for some. 


For example...
Atheist: Why do you believe there is a god without proof? 
Christian: I believe it and can feel it in my soul that he exists and loves me. I Have a personal connection with him.
Atheist: Your feelings aren't proof. They are just emotions and chemical reactions in your body. For some hard drug users the affect of psychedelic mushrooms can be the feeling of being in the presence of god. Are you certain your god feelings are more than simple chemical reactions?


Points could go on for a while. But in the end the end result is "I have faith". Faith isn't proof, It's the absence of proof that requires faith.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Yes, faith is believing without the proof some need.
That's why it's faith.


----------



## Oggie (May 29, 2003)

I think that this will explain a lot.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/03/how-your-cat-is-making-you-crazy/308873/2/


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Oggie said:


> I think that this will explain a lot.
> 
> http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/03/how-your-cat-is-making-you-crazy/308873/2/


Oggie - while we all love your cat stuff, this is not applicable. So what do YOU have to say on these subjects as a thinking man?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

I find it funny people pooh faith in God but have great faith in science.

They will take great pleasure in telling you all about the flaws with your belief in God but get as mad as a wet hen when you start pointing out the flaws in their faith in macro-evolution. Or when point out to them their science is based in faith. When you point out things their religion can't prove they just say it just needs more study.


----------



## stanb999 (Jan 30, 2005)

watcher said:


> I find it funny people pooh faith in God but have great faith in science.
> .


How do you feel about those theists that tend to lack humility and exude hubris while claiming to be a follower of Christ?


----------



## Oggie (May 29, 2003)

I think that some folks who believe in a higher power occasionally make the mistake of thinking that those who don't believe in one are without morals or ethics.

I know a few atheists who live a very compassionate and giving way. One or two of them seem to live a more Christlike manner than the vast majority of folks who call themselves Christian.

I go to church with my family and we teach Christian history and theology to our kiddos. Currently, it's the denomination in which I was raised: Methodist. But we also attended a Baptist church for a few years.

I see the value in Christian theology, but the paradox for monotheism for me is that, if there is one all-powerful God that encompasses everything, who's to say that the Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, or whatever does not have any valid aspects.

Beyond fairly specific details, the message as to how one should live his or her life is pretty similar.

Of course, the differences are often amplified and distorted by those who seek to use a specific religion, theology or philosophy to gain personal or collective power or control.

I worship and fellowship where I feel comfortable.

But I believe that it is also important that I feel some discomfort when it comes to spiritual matters because that discomfort leaves me open to new ways of appreciating the perspectives of others. I cannot possibly know everything about everything in the same way most religions say whatever they worship does. 

And, while all that might seem wishy-washy to some folks. Rest assured that my core beliefs and the manner in which I hope to treat other people is pretty solid.

When it comes to expressing exactly what that is, there is some difficulty because my spirit life is constantly evolving and hopefully growing. It is my hope that will continue for a long time.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

stanb999 said:


> I'm Atheist.
> 
> Because religions questions challenged with logic end up being matters of Faith.
> Faith isn't logical tho very real for some.
> ...


I hear/understand what you are saying about feelings/chemical reactions. Something I think about when pondering the "why do you believe" is, what is the fruit of your belief, how does your belief come out in living your life. Obviously there are all kinds of fruit across all kinds of belief systems.

One of the most valuable questions I learned in my education (self or otherwise, along my life) was SO WHAT? Navel gazing is fine, but in the end, you gotta eat some supper to see another day...


----------



## stanb999 (Jan 30, 2005)

wyld thang said:


> One of the most valuable questions I learned in my education (self or otherwise, along my life) was SO WHAT? Navel gazing is fine, but in the end, you gotta eat some supper to see another day...


Can you continue this train of thought. The train ended before I completely understood.

If your meaning is as I think it is.

The results of being and acting in a christian manner in my life is proof enough of god.

I would counter this with all the terrible things that happen to other people. Now one could say that "they were in need of testing" or other trials to make them better people.

A most extreme examples of course...
But what say you of child burn victims. Were they in need of the pain and anguish? How about child cancer patients, they suffer so others can learn lessons.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

stanb999 said:


> Can you continue this train of thought. The train ended before I completely understood.
> 
> If your meaning is as I think it is.
> 
> ...


I didn't mean "so what" in dismissive manner, but rather, how does the thinking relate to "how should I live" or "how does this help me live in good relation with other beings in this existence"--which essentially is the Big Question of Nature itself, survival of the fit/preservation of the species etc. 

One thing I have come to respect/appreciate about the idea of reincarnation can apply to your question of child burn victims--our medical technology keeps alive those who would other wise die quickly. Would it not be more compassionate to let them go so they can be reborn anew? Either in this world or the afterlife?


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

One more thing, something I try to keep in mind is the complete random happenstance of my birth into a middleclass white American family. Which makes me stupider than the average human being in regards to the "lessons" of suffering. 

On the other hand I've been through my own hell--and we all have, we just are loathe to admit it because of this stupid Puritan connection between suffering and one's personal moral condition--and have learned exquisite things I NEVER would have learned otherwise. 

Or, cold hard scientifically speaking, stress(suffering) on the body makes it stronger. Put a body in weightless space and it atrophies and forgets how to walk. Seems to me cush and the sweet untroubled thank you Jesus life should be suspect.


----------



## Taylor R. (Apr 3, 2013)

Personally, I identify as agnostic simply because it's as close as I can come to defining what I believe in (or don't).

I believe in doing the right thing simply because it's what a person should do. My way of life shouldn't deter someone else from theirs, and if someone believes it does, it's time for me to sit down and decide whether I'm being a menace or whether the other person or people are too closed minded to see past their own way of life. If they find me offensive simply because I don't agree with them or I'm not doing as they wish, then that is their failing. If I've truly done something to infringe upon their rights, then I am more than happy to apologize.

I believe that my family is the most important thing in the world, and no god, if there is one, would want me to put them second to faith. I control my family's fate in my decisions and I devote myself fully to them. This is a huge part of why I am not a religious person.

I see holidays as a special time to be with my family rather than with any religious significance (which I'm sure bugs some people, but I'm not hurting them in doing so). 

There are certain aspects of many religions that make sense to me, and I think that it's wonderful that people are able to find peace and solace in their god, so long as they don't impede on my way of life in practicing their religion. I despise being evangelized to, though, as I have enough common decency to not walk up to any believing person and tell them that they are wrong and I expect to be treated with that same decency (I'm not talking about asking me a question, I'm talking about responding to my answer with a statement like, "You'll suffer eternal ----ation if you don't let Jesus into your heart.")

My husband identifies with the Christian theology, and my children attend church regularly with him. It's good to have something to believe in, if that's your kind of thing.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

stanb999 said:


> How do you feel about those theists that tend to lack humility and exude hubris while claiming to be a follower of Christ?


You have hit the nail on the head, "*claiming to be a follower of Christ*". You judge a person's words AND their actions with what the Bible says. There are a lot of people doing a lot of nice things which are just as big 'claimers' as the ones you bring up.

I find a lot of people who say such things about others just don't like to hear what the Bible really says. You could easily use your definition to describe Christ. Didn't He show He lacked humility and exuded hubris when He said outright He was the very Son of God; that He was the ONLY way and <gasp> could even forgive sins! He also called people names; vipers, robbers, liars and such. 

The odds are His words would get He'd get banned from here if He were to start posting.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

wyld thang said:


> Or, cold hard scientifically speaking, stress(suffering) on the body makes it stronger.


Not quite. If that were true retired football players and prize fighters would have the strongest bodies on earth. Also workaholics would live forever not drop dead from heart attacks at 50.


----------



## stanb999 (Jan 30, 2005)

wyld thang said:


> One more thing, something I try to keep in mind is the complete random happenstance of my birth into a middleclass white American family. Which makes me stupider than the average human being in regards to the "lessons" of suffering.
> 
> On the other hand I've been through my own hell--and we all have, we just are loathe to admit it because of this stupid Puritan connection between suffering and one's personal moral condition--and have learned exquisite things I NEVER would have learned otherwise.
> 
> Or, cold hard scientifically speaking, stress(suffering) on the body makes it stronger. Put a body in weightless space and it atrophies and forgets how to walk. Seems to me cush and the sweet untroubled thank you Jesus life should be suspect.


I disagree that your birth was random happenstance. It was the culmination of your heredity, heritage, and civilization. As a Human we are amazing in our complexity and simplicity. You didn't need to learn so many lessons due to proper instruction and breeding. Stinks to say it this way... Do you protect the sickly goat in your herd that never thrives, that always seems to need medication and special feed to be fit? Do you save it for breeding? No you let adversity or nature take it's course and that line is ended. Was it god that made the goat suffer ills? Or was it breeding that was lacking in that goat? If it's human the general idea is yes it was god. If it's a goat then no it was poor breeding.

Stress makes a body die early. Look it up! 

True in a weightless environment the human atrophies. We rely on fairy tales and myths to add meaning to our existence hoping in the future that something more is afoot. The reality is too stark. Does the slave benefit for hard work if the only result is death? Does the merchant benefit from fair dealings if there is no afterlife with which to receive his rewards for virtue? 
Of course not, But society as a whole does. So the slave inadvertently benefits the society he is chained by. Maybe that is the reason governments of men have pushed religions in many stripes. To keep the plebes working.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

Correction, TOO MUCH stress is detrimental. Just like TOO MUCH NON STRESS is as well. How we humans are so addicted to black in white in kicking a discussion down the road. 

For every battered football player I can throw up at least five who trained smart and can move mountains. Jack Lalanne is worth a thousand men. Weak argument ha.


----------



## stanb999 (Jan 30, 2005)

watcher said:


> You have hit the nail on the head, "*claiming to be a follower of Christ*". You judge a person's words AND their actions with what the Bible says. There are a lot of people doing a lot of nice things which are just as big 'claimers' as the ones you bring up.
> 
> I find a lot of people who say such things about others just don't like to hear what the Bible really says. You could easily use your definition to describe Christ. Didn't He show He lacked humility and exuded hubris when He said outright He was the very Son of God; that He was the ONLY way and <gasp> could even forgive sins! He also called people names; vipers, robbers, liars and such.
> 
> The odds are His words would get He'd get banned from here if He were to start posting.


Because you asked.
Actually I believe he never existed. He was the culmination of the wild dreams of Paul the crazy but well to do son of a merchant. Paul talked about him being a spirit(not real flesh and blood) except in the letters penned after his death.  He isn't found in contemporary texts or documents except those obvious fakes from the 14th century. Heck Bethlehem the city he was "born" didn't exist in year 0. It became a small settlement in 125AD. See the issue?

I believe lots of things were added in the first 1000 years of the existence of the bible to the point of changing the original meaning. I believe the bible stories were made to suit the rulers of Rome when it was adopted by Constantine. I believe the bible was changed again to make it more misogynistic and give the impression of divine rights to kings in the 1200-1500's. Finally the bible/meanings are being changed again to bring things to match the modern era and science. Hard to "open windows in the sky and let rain in".

This stuff is the old My team vs your team. Or more pointedly. If god is on our side who is on yours?


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

BTW it's not just "stress" that makes a body die early--it's a combination of genes and mental game you bring to the mix as well. Outside force + design parameters + personal management = a life lived. 

I also find the concept of yin/yang along with de-moralizing everything(going beyond good/bad judgements) also really helpful in thinking. Hm, kinda like how nature is, get out of balance and the SHTF.


----------



## stanb999 (Jan 30, 2005)

wyld thang said:


> BTW it's not just "stress" that makes a body die early--it's a combination of genes and mental game you bring to the mix as well. Outside force + design parameters + personal management = a life lived.
> 
> I also find the concept of yin/yang along with de-moralizing everything(going beyond good/bad judgements) also really helpful in thinking. Hm, kinda like how nature is, get out of balance and the SHTF.


Nature isn't in balance... It strives for balance. There is a difference.
Nature is open to and known for sudden huge moves.


----------



## Harry Chickpea (Dec 19, 2008)

In deciding upon a religion, a lot of people follow in the footsteps of people that they trust, or in the lines of family tradition. That can work very well, especially for people who would otherwise become Satan worshipers in families with strict and intolerant God based faiths.

There are some who have a natural skepticism and/or distrust, and blow the whole area off as superstition.

There are some who are ethical agnostics - in that they don't see enough data to make a firm decision on any particular religion or non-religion.

There are those who are so involved with day-to-day life and world affairs that the questions never even arise.

There are those of us who dare to flaunt the prison restrictions of the religion of our upbringing and go upon a spiritual quest - with the idea that spirit trumps organizational requirements. That means asking a lot of hard questions, and it isn't for the faint of heart, for example....

Most religions are dependent upon the concept of a "soul." Without a clear understanding of what that is, and acceptance of that concept, the various rules fall more into a social contract or philosophy category. 

Now quoting from a previous post of mine in a different forum:

Just curious how folks will answer a few questions about the concept of "Soul"-

Identical twins come from the same egg/sperm. If life begins at conception, do the twins have one soul or two? Explain your reasoning.

Conjoined twins have a single body, and sometimes two brains. One soul or two? Explain your reasoning.

Does a clone have a soul? Explain your reasoning.

Do only people of certain faiths have souls? Explain your reasoning.

When a person has dementia or becomes brain dead, where is the soul? Is it trapped in the body or already gone or what? Explain your reasoning.

When a person has a transplant from another person, they sometimes pick up characteristics of that person. Does this have anything to do with the soul? Explain your reasoning.

Since some believe in re-incarnation, can the re-incarnation go back in time? Explain your reasoning.

Jung posited the idea of "group consciousness" and by inference, a group soul. What are your thoughts on that concept? 

How does soul relate to ego and knowledge? Explain your reasoning.

Bonus question:
Can eating too much soul food make your soul fat? 

For myself, I find Christ to be immensely edifying, but am NOT a fan of Saul/Paul who was way too worldly and rule-based for my taste. He organized and promoted and created a structure that grew to oppressiveness, had to break apart, and reform, ad inifnitum. The Christ of the Bible was far beyond and above that. As far as further study in spirituality goes, I have found a more full exploration within a particular branch of Sufi mystic teaching than traditional churches. (Yeah, I know. The common definition of sufi in the west is Moslem mystic, but much of the teaching is FAR older and better defined as world wisdom teachings.)

One aspect of such a path as I have chosen is an inverse proselytizing. In other words, it is better for people NOT to try to follow in a similar path. There are numbers of stories of how sufi teachers kept some people out of a school for years on end or even a lifetime. For those interested in sufi, a good translation of Rumi is a starting place or chance to pick up a flavor.

As others have noted, there is a lot of commonality within various religions. Once you get past clan-keeping and superiority complexes of a particular creed, and forget about any possible reward for a life well spent, the core teachings can be similar (and important).


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

stanb999 said:


> Nature isn't in balance... It strives for balance. There is a difference.
> Nature is open to and known for sudden huge moves.


actually, more than we give it credit for, nature is in balance close enough most of the time. Things we see/label as catastrophic "acts of God" (forest fire, hurricanes) are simply part of the system flow of nutrients etc.

That said, HUMANS judged forest fire as bad, have spent the last hundred years suppressing fire per investment of resources ($$$$$$$) and Bambi eyeglasses. Now we have a forest system getting way out of whack, and what is worse, public opinion sees these unhealthy forests as healthy----> bad info, bad sentimental attachement, bad motives blah blah= comeuppance, nature will prevail.

no wait, not "BAD" rather "un-true"/illusion


----------



## Wolfy-hound (May 5, 2013)

I think that the most important part of most religions can be boiled down to a single commandment.

"Don't be a jerk."

If you follow that, you can't really do most of the rule breaking. Also, if most people would concern themselves more with what THEY do... and less with what OTHERS do, they'd be better people.

It seems to me most of the Christians(AND other religions!) I encounter are far far more concerned with what I am doing, whether they approve of what I am doing and what I am allowed to do by the mundane laws... rather than being concerned with their own actions. I know that's easier by far. It's so much more satisfying to point a finger and shout "See how sinful that person is!" instead of looking inwardly to think "Am I loving my neighbor and upholding the ideals of my beliefs?"

But I also see plenty of other religions doing similar things. "Here's my rules and you'd better obey them whether you believe it or not!"

And even the religions that often tout themselves as "coexisting" and being "tolerant" often fail to extend that to certain others, sometimes it might be gays, men, blacks or Christians. 

But to be fair, I know a LOT of very good people in pretty much any religion you could name. I know good tolerant Christians, Wiccans, Muslims, followers of Budda, Islam, Native American totems, Agnostics, atheists, Satanists, followers of Odin(seriously, two) and one guy who very somberly claims to be a Jedi apostle. And we all get along.

I have had a major question regarding Christian prayer practices, but no one has ever really been able to give me an answer that satisfied me. Many fall back on "That's how it's done." Or the old favorite "You're going to H-E-Double_Toothpicks." So I learned ot really not ask.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

Wolfy-hound said:


> I think that the most important part of most religions can be boiled down to a single commandment.
> 
> "Don't be a jerk."
> 
> ...


I'm really curious what your question is! I guarantee I won't say yer goin to h e l l or thats how its done (gag)


----------



## Wolfy-hound (May 5, 2013)

Okay. First I am not a Christian now... I did study a lot of Bible and religion in school(two different religious schools, through high school) but I no long consider myself a Christian.

In Christian churches, there's often a big deal about "praying for X" who is sick or injured. Growing up, and today, I see it a lot. "We'll pray for you" or "Everyone needs to send up prayers for Bob in this trying time.."

Possible scenario, Bob is very sick in the hospital. Bob does not know the people in the church.

Why? Why pray to God to heal Bob? It's always seemed strange to me. God knows Bob is sick. So God can choose to heal Bob or not heal Bob. God has a plan for all things, yes? So if Bob is sick, then it's part of God's plan. It's not a popularity contest, where God wants to see if enough people will pray for Bob and then he's going to heal Bob, right? People can't use God's powers to heal Bob themselves, they are praying for God Himself to use His powers to heal Bob, correct?

So if you truly believe that God knows all, that God has a plan for everything... isn't it not only strange, but disrespectful to go asking God to change what He's doing and heal Bob instead of whatever God's original plan is? If God will do His plan anyway, then praying won't change the plan... so why pray for Bob to be healed?

I DO understand praying to God for personal guidance and for praising God. Free will means that you can choose to make your own decisions or to ask for help, etc. But to basically "but in" to the plan for someone else just doesn't make any sense to me. It confused me as a child and I was always chastised for asking about it.

I would think that maybe God wants Bob to pray for himself.. or to gain strength through his illness... maybe Bob's illness will lead a Doctor to learn something.. some plan. But I don't think that I should go kind of nagging at God saying 'Hey, I know you've got a plan and all, but I really think that my idea of You healing Bob is a better idea'. 

(capitalization used throughout for respect, if I missed any, it's an honest mistake)


----------



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

stanb999 said:


> Because you asked.
> Actually I believe he never existed. He was the culmination of the wild dreams of Paul the crazy but well to do son of a merchant. Paul talked about him being a spirit(not real flesh and blood) except in the letters penned after his death.  He isn't found in contemporary texts or documents except those obvious fakes from the 14th century. Heck Bethlehem the city he was "born" didn't exist in year 0. It became a small settlement in 125AD. See the issue?
> 
> I believe lots of things were added in the first 1000 years of the existence of the bible to the point of changing the original meaning. I believe the bible stories were made to suit the rulers of Rome when it was adopted by Constantine. I believe the bible was changed again to make it more misogynistic and give the impression of divine rights to kings in the 1200-1500's. Finally the bible/meanings are being changed again to bring things to match the modern era and science. Hard to "open windows and let rain in".
> ...


The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls fairly well establishes that what is considered to be the Bible today was all written before 100 A.D.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/deadsea.html


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

That is a very good question, Wolfy. I know exactly what you mean. I think the only time such prayer is productive is if God desires to express or show himself. The greatest lesson in becoming a Christian is learning to trust God, completely. We never know when it is God's plan to, for instance, heal or not, so perhaps we just make noise. When Jesus taught his friends and followers to pray it was basically, "give us this day our daily bread", and "Thy will be done". Please don't confuse church traditions with living a Christian life. Christ tells us that, when we believe, God gives us the desires of our hearts. What people fail to remember is that, when we truly believe, we desire only his will. When we pray as a group we can only support each other. There is no other power in numbers for our prayers.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

Wolfy-hound said:


> Okay. First I am not a Christian now... I did study a lot of Bible and religion in school(two different religious schools, through high school) but I no long consider myself a Christian.
> 
> In Christian churches, there's often a big deal about "praying for X" who is sick or injured. Growing up, and today, I see it a lot. "We'll pray for you" or "Everyone needs to send up prayers for Bob in this trying time.."
> 
> ...


Yeah, I was always uncomfortable with the thing of praying to God like he was Santa Claus. I think the Lord's Prayer--what Jesus said when his disciples asked him how to pray--is a good example. It's cool to ask God for the right stuff to get through the day, enable us to be loving and bring love to a situation/person, and then in the end, above all, we say YOUR WILL BE DONE. I think it's the Catholics and pagans, wiccans that have the idea of "intention"--we pray with the heartfelt intention of the best outcome for the person so they can be/learn what they were meant to in this life. 

I hear you...when my mother was incurably dying from cancer my family was fervently praying for her complete healing. I prayed that my mom would have a "good death", that we could say goodbye and she would have a "good" transition. Far as I can tell God answered my prayer(heh). Whatever that means. Actually her good death was a miracle because her brain was full of cancer and she should have been a vegetable, but was comfortably lucid till the end...

Yeah, who are we to tell God what to do? but on the other hand it's perfectly ok for people to hope/intend for a person to be as whole as possible, to be loved and progressing positively on their journey. Perhaps prayer is just as much for the pray-er as the prayed about, it's a discipline to order one's mind to BE mindful of love and compassion towards others. 

There is research that shows loving touch and communication releases good chemicals/immune response in both the giver and recipient. Prayer is a way to express that positive thing. 

Thank God he cuts us more slack than we do ourselves, he looks on the heart and goes from there...if we goof up the words he knows what we really mean/intend. IMHO of course haha.

But yeah, God as Santa, no way, yes its disrespectful and arrogant(IMHO) And so many mysterious things afoot--in the end I think praying has more to do with transforming the pray-er than getting God to hop to.


----------



## stanb999 (Jan 30, 2005)

Johnny Dolittle said:


> The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls fairly well establishes that what is considered to be the Bible today was all written before 100 A.D.
> 
> http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/deadsea.html


The dead sea scrolls are the Torah not the bible. 

I don't think there is the contention that the Torah is at least 500 BCE in age.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

Also, Wolfy, I would point out that there are occasions in the story of man's relationship with God, and God's with man, when God changes his mind, or repents. This is very important, in my view, as it shows that God is a living and fluid entity, not completely fixed, that God learns, makes mistakes, grows and evolves.


----------



## stanb999 (Jan 30, 2005)

vicker said:


> Also, Wolfy, I would point out that there are occasions in the story of man's relationship with God, and God's with man, when God changes his mind, or repents. This is very important, in my view, as it shows that God is a living and fluid entity, not completely fixed, that God learns, makes mistakes, grows and evolves.


Like MAN? How strange.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

I think of God as the First.  and he did create us in his image. And, without doing those things, how could he be a living God?


----------



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

stanb999 said:


> The dead sea scrolls are the Torah not the bible.
> 
> I don't think there is the contention that the Torah is at least 500 BCE in age.


uRright

Carbon dating establishes that some of the texts were written or copied in first century AD but little was written concerning church age.


----------



## stanb999 (Jan 30, 2005)

Johnny Dolittle said:


> uRright
> 
> Carbon dating establishes that some of the texts were written or copied in first century AD but little was written concerning church age.


What is interesting is the text that purports to be "New testament" is the oldest of the scrolls. FYI the messiah apocalypse text is dated 200 BCE +/- 50. That would be revelation to KJV bible folk. Paul was taken up to heaven 150-250 years before he lived. :thumb:


----------



## stanb999 (Jan 30, 2005)

To the OP...

See the reason that many of us non-Christians don't or wont respond to postings like this? 

I'm well versed in the issues, Many aren't. Several of the last postings are on the quality of the bible text. Do people question the quality of the translation of Homers Iliad? No most are satisfied with the accounts from the period and posterity. Why is it so different with the bible. IMHO it's Mostly the investment in time and energy people have in faith. As I said early on. Faith isn't something that logic can combat. If people choose to use logic gods, demons, sorcerers, and witches take on a new less real meaning.


----------



## stanb999 (Jan 30, 2005)

vicker said:


> I think of God as the First.  and he did create us in his image. And, without doing those things, how could he be a living God?


Or did we create him in ours?


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

There is plenty of room on this thread for everyone's ideas. I believe we are all alike, seeking to make sense of the world and our place in it. I never think that what is right for me is right for you or another. I have a strong background in science, philosophy, religion and ideas in general. I enjoy it all. I happen to believe in God. And not because I'm ignorant or never thought about it.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

stanb999 said:


> Like MAN? How strange.


or...we are more like gGod. namaste:thumb:


----------



## stanb999 (Jan 30, 2005)

vicker said:


> There is plenty of room on this thread for everyone's ideas. I believe we are all alike, seeking to make sense of the world and our place in it. I never think that what is right for me is right for you or another. I have a strong background in science, philosophy, religion and ideas in general. I enjoy it all. I happen to believe in God. And not because I'm ignorant or never thought about it.


Please don't take my postings as I believe Christians are ignorant for their beliefs.


----------



## Wolfy-hound (May 5, 2013)

So basically, there's no reason to pray to God for someone else, except to make yourself feel good? Because that's kind of a terrible reason. If it's just to remind yourself of how you should feel good towards your fellow man, I think that's more like meditating and less like prayer to God. 

And if you believe that God makes mistakes, then God is not all-powerful and all-knowing, which is a different belief than most I've known. (other than the Flood/Noah thing.. I think) If you think that God could be wrong and your idea could be better, then it would make sense to plead for God to do something for someone else.(i.e. heal Bob)

To clarify, I'm not saying 'See, God doesn't answer prayers', but rather questioning a specific type of praying, which is asking for God to do things for other people. Asking for God to help yourself makes total sense to me, since (according to my lessons) sometimes God is sitting back and allowing a person to make their own decisions and waiting for them to ask Him for help.

As far as the Bible, I don't think most of it should be considered the "Word of God" and mostly it's stuff written by men to further their own opinions and ideas, plus the letters written of personal experiences. There's been way too much of "Let's put this in, but not that..." and people deciding to change things.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

You seem to view "God's plan" as being very linear ,when it is not necessarily so. I can not speak for others, but when I pray for someone I pray for their strength and peace, my own and their wisdom and such. It is not like the script has been written and the editing is done.


----------



## Wolfy-hound (May 5, 2013)

But how does your prayer to God give the person strength and peace? That's what I don't get.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

Wolfy-hound said:


> So basically, there's no reason to pray to God for someone else, except to make yourself feel good? Because that's kind of a terrible reason. If it's just to remind yourself of how you should feel good towards your fellow man, I think that's more like meditating and less like prayer to God.
> 
> And if you believe that God makes mistakes, then God is not all-powerful and all-knowing, which is a different belief than most I've known. (other than the Flood/Noah thing.. I think) If you think that God could be wrong and your idea could be better, then it would make sense to plead for God to do something for someone else.(i.e. heal Bob)
> 
> ...


no, that's not what I meant(if you're talking to me), just praying to make yourself feel good


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

My prayers don't. Simple as that.


----------



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

stanb999 said:


> What is interesting is the text that purports to be "New testament" is the oldest of the scrolls. FYI the messiah apocalypse text is dated 200 BCE +/- 50. That would be revelation to KJV bible folk. Paul was taken up to heaven 150-250 years before he lived. :thumb:


That is something I will need to investigate


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

I have no good reason to believe what I believe, I just can't not believe. I can almost see it, but I can't. It is only faith. I have asked the hard questions and come up with satisfactory, to me, answers. You may not, and you don't have to, but if it bothers you, perhaps you should dig deeper.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Wolfy-hound said:


> It seems to me most of the Christians(AND other religions!) I encounter are far far more concerned with what I am doing, whether they approve of what I am doing and what I am allowed to do by the mundane laws... rather than being concerned with their own actions. I know that's easier by far. It's so much more satisfying to point a finger and shout "See how sinful that person is!" instead of looking inwardly to think "Am I loving my neighbor and upholding the ideals of my beliefs?"


A true Christian should be concerned about your actions. The most basic thing we are called to is to spread the Word. But a true Christian should just walk away if you tell them you are not interested. 

A lot of people who call themselves Christians seem to think its it THEM who saves people and THEY must work and work and work on someone to get them saved. If someone is not ready to accept Christ there's nothing you, me or the world's greatest preacher can do to save them.





Wolfy-hound said:


> I have had a major question regarding Christian prayer practices, but no one has ever really been able to give me an answer that satisfied me. Many fall back on "That's how it's done." Or the old favorite "You're going to H-E-Double_Toothpicks." So I learned ot really not ask.


I'm no expert but ask and I'll see if I can find an answer to satisfy you.


----------



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

I have often wondered why demon possession was so common in the early church age.... and very uncommon if not non existent in this present age. I have searched for tangible evidence for demon possession and there is some. There was a fairly well known psychiatrist named Dr. Scott Peck..... probably best known for one of his books titled The Road Less Traveled. He also wrote a book titled People of the Lie which was a study of evil. Dr Peck was a psychoanalysis having a lot of experience with schizophrenia. Dr Peck was not a Christian but was open to the spiritual. At some point in his practice he treated a patient who had symptoms which suggested something other than schizophrenia and he considered the possibility of possession and arranged with clergy to perform an exorcism.... which was successful in treating this patient. Dr Peck in his books describes in detail this exorcism. He also treated another person for the same condition. Dr Peck was a fairly well known and respected in his profession. As a result of these exorcisms he did convert to Christianity. His descriptions of the exorcisms are quite graphic and convincing if you read them.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

All that we are able to observe is not explainable, and all we can explain is not observeable. You may want to read up a bit on quantum mechanics. I am in no way a physicist, but it is fascinating stuff.

_In the words of Richard Feynman, quantum mechanics deals with "nature as She is â absurd._"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_quantum_mechanics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics


----------



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

vicker said:


> All that we are able to observe is not explainable, and all we can explain is not observeable. You may want to read up a bit on quantum mechanics. I am in no way a physicist, but it is fascinating stuff.
> 
> _In the words of Richard Feynman, quantum mechanics deals with "nature as She is â absurd._"
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_quantum_mechanics
> ...


Yep .... this is often discussed over on the Intelligent Design sites.... interesting that one particle moves causing another to move simultaneously and there is no reaction time.... each particle moves at the exact same point in time !!!!


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

Watcher, the question is stated in post #30.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

In keeping wit the topic of the thread; Watcher and I both claim to be Christians, but in many ways our beliefs are completely incompatible. At one time in my life I would have believed that one or both of us is wrong. I no longer believe that. And yet, I still believe in objective truth.
ETA No offence is intended, Watcher, you just happen to be a good example


----------



## deaconjim (Oct 31, 2005)

I am a Christian because I have studied and given a lot of thought to the world in general, and have come to the conclusion that God must exist for me to exist. I have studied further and reached the conclusion that Christ embodies my understanding of who and what God is. I have reached the conclusion that Christianity is the one true faith.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

Johnny Dolittle said:


> Yep .... this is often discussed over on the Intelligent Design sites.... interesting that one particle moves causing another to move simultaneously and there is no reaction time.... each particle moves at the exact same point in time !!!!


I think it was Feynman who also said, "the only thing I know about quantum physics is, no one understands quantum physics".


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

This is my #2, all time favorite film. #1 is The God's Must Be Crazy. :rotfl:
Suffer through it  
I've not watched it on YouTube. It is new here, so I only hope the link works.

[YOUTUBE]E8s0He0560g[/YOUTUBE]

ETA It appears to work. Its a nerd movie, and mostly just dialog, so don't expect car crashes and gun fights


----------



## thestartupman (Jul 25, 2010)

stanb999 said:


> I'm Atheist.
> 
> Because religions questions challenged with logic end up being matters of Faith.
> Faith isn't logical tho very real for some.
> ...


I think the harder question to answer is "Why do you believe there is not a god without proof?" 
If a person has excepted Jesus Christ as their saviour, they have proof. They have the Holy Spirit that not only dwells in them, but also changes them. If the person truly has the Holy Spirit dwelling in them, there is true proof, because others notice the change that has been done. It is true that it is not only hard for someone to understand without this personal experience, but is nearly impossible for them to understand. The thing isn't only other Christians that see this change, but also, non believers.


----------



## thestartupman (Jul 25, 2010)

Wolfy-hound said:


> Okay. First I am not a Christian now... I did study a lot of Bible and religion in school(two different religious schools, through high school) but I no long consider myself a Christian.
> 
> In Christian churches, there's often a big deal about "praying for X" who is sick or injured. Growing up, and today, I see it a lot. "We'll pray for you" or "Everyone needs to send up prayers for Bob in this trying time.."
> 
> ...


I think it is not disrespectful to pray to God for someone's well being for an illness, or anything else for that matter. I do believe that one should always include for prayers for their soul though. I believe that God hears our prayers, and may answer our prayers if it is His will. The reason I say that it is always important to pray for their soul, is because that is one thing we know that we can pray and be in God's will. I also think it is hard for us to understand that God's perspective of our life and the life of all that have lived, and ever will live on this planet is so much different than ours. We get so caught up in what we call "living". "Living" is what takes place once a person excepts Jesus Christ as their savior. It is something that will last for ever, not just this short time on this planet. This is what God sees. Whether "Bob" dies now, or later is of little significants to God. God is concerned about what happens for eternity.


----------



## stanb999 (Jan 30, 2005)

thestartupman said:


> I think the harder question to answer is "Why do you believe there is not a god without proof?"
> If a person has excepted Jesus Christ as their saviour, they have proof. They have the Holy Spirit that not only dwells in them, but also changes them. If the person truly has the Holy Spirit dwelling in them, there is true proof, because others notice the change that has been done. It is true that it is not only hard for someone to understand without this personal experience, but is nearly impossible for them to understand. The thing isn't only other Christians that see this change, but also, non believers.


No that's an easy question. 
Why do you believe there aren't unicorns, Is it because you haven't looked to see them?
Why do you believe there aren't Alien visitations, Is it because you've not been chosen to be in the group through an abduction?
Why do you believe there aren't leprechauns? Is it because you weren't taught how to see them? 
Believers in the above can see them and get the treasure or forbidden special knowledge from their association with the magical creatures/aliens. I can site tons of books on the subject, drawings and other proof. Proof I might add that isn't 2000 years old in a dead language. Proof that is written in English with testimony from the actual people involved. Some will be recordings of their very words on video.

Does their feelings about seeing them change your mind? Why not. It is the same "proof" you offer me. Accepting aliens, Unicorns, and Leprechauns into your life is proof enough for believers.... Why not you?


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

I am agnostic. I don't see any compelling evidence for a Sky Being. Looking objectively at the natural world, one does not come away with the impression that there is an omnipotent being who is concerned about us, or with suffering in general. So be it. :shrug:

I think most religion is superstition mixed with wishful thinking. Who _wouldn't _want to believe that when we die, we go to Paradise and are reunited with our lost loved ones? In streets made of gold, etc.? Who _wouldn't_ want to be believe that by making a burnt offering or repeating a certain prayer, we might entice the gods to do our bidding? Wishing doesn't necessarily make it true, however.

I think any time humans stray from reality, they run the risk of coming to great harm. I agree with the philosopher who said that people seldom do evil more thoroughly and cheerfully than when it's based on religious conviction. I think it's quite risky to base one's decisions on statements and prophecies (perhaps taken out of context?) in a 2,000-year-old manuscript of questionable origin. But ... we all pays our money and takes our chances! 

I tend to believe religion is a crutch for the weak-minded, but at the same time, I'm an American. No matter how foolish and ill-advised I find your beliefs, I'll defend to the death your right to believe ... because that's what Americans do. By the same token, I wish you would refrain from trying to enact laws that force me, a nonbeliever, to behave in accordance with your religion. Unless I'm breaking someone's nose or picking his pocket, I should be free to follow the dictates of my own conscience, just as you are. 

And while we may not know with any certainty who or what "God" is, it's generally pretty easy to discern what "Good" is. I try to stick to "Good" and leave the arguments over "God" alone, since it's unlikely they'll be proven conclusively, one way or the other, in the foreseeable future.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

vicker said:


> In keeping wit the topic of the thread; Watcher and I both claim to be Christians, but in many ways our beliefs are completely incompatible. At one time in my life I would have believed that one or both of us is wrong. I no longer believe that. And yet, I still believe in objective truth.


There are somethings which can have shades of gray. Look at what Paul said about eating meat from animals sacrificed to idols. But there are somethings which are black and white. 




vicker said:


> ETA No offence is intended, Watcher, you just happen to be a good example


As Eeyore would say "Its nice to be noticed."


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

stanb999 said:


> No that's an easy question.
> Why do you believe there aren't unicorns, Is it because you haven't looked to see them?
> Why do you believe there aren't Alien visitations, Is it because you've not been chosen to be in the group through an abduction?
> Why do you believe there aren't leprechauns? Is it because you weren't taught how to see them?
> ...


Those who claim they have no faith have a major problem. How do you explain the beginning of the universe? Even the most fanitical believer in the religion of science has to admit that at some point something had to be created out of nothing. If you only can accept what you can see or prove then how can you accept the universe actually exist because you can't prove it was created.


----------



## Taylor R. (Apr 3, 2013)

Uh...big bang. There are many theories about the creation of the universe that have nothing to do with religion. And something can't be created from nothing (that's a law, not a theory).


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

willow_girl said:


> I am agnostic. I don't see any compelling evidence for a Sky Being. Looking objectively at the natural world, one does not come away with the impression that there is an omnipotent being who is concerned about us, or with suffering in general. So be it. :shrug:


The problem is the natural world doesn't follow the natural rules. Example, like charges repel one another. If that's true why do the positrons in the nucleus of an atom stay together and why don't the electrons go flying off into space?


----------



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

Well there was this tiny ball of very condensed matter and one day for some unknown reason it exploded setting off a very long chain reaction of events and so .... here we are

... but really do you think innate matter could spontaneously form life? And just forming life is not enough .... needs to be life complete with mechanisms which allow it to reproduce itself ????

Science is no way near being able to prove this could happen. Science has been (since the 1950's) endeavoring to produce life from scratch in the laboratory. I doubt they will be able to accomplish this .... but if they could or would they would not have proven much. The reason I say this is because they would only have reverse engineered life .... Dissecting a cell and making copies of the parts to use for assembly of a new cell is not proving much. If you would take a college freshman and turn him loose in a laboratory full of stock chemicals and equipment and watch him mix shake and bake to accidentally create life then I would be impressed.


----------



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

As for the Holy Bible .... there are three choices

The Old Testament forecasts a coming messiah.

either he came
or did not get here yet
or he won't be coming


----------



## gryndlgoat (May 27, 2005)

watcher said:


> Those who claim they have no faith have a major problem. How do you explain the beginning of the universe? Even the most fanitical believer in the religion of science has to admit that at some point something had to be created out of nothing. If you only can accept what you can see or prove then how can you accept the universe actually exist because you can't prove it was created.


How do you explain the beginning of God then? If the universe can't just have "been", then neither can God. He had to be created out of nothing too. 

It's just as easy to accept that the universe always existed as it is to accept that God always existed.


----------



## tarbe (Apr 7, 2007)

I became a believer at 40, despite spending essentially all of those 40 years doing everything I could to deny God.

I cannot explain it any way other than to say, like the scriptures do, that God replaced my heart of stone with a heart of flesh, or to say, the Spirit made me alive to the things of God.

15 years and much study later, some of my doctrines may have evolved, but the essential truths of the faith remain. Christ's life, death and resurrection make possible the reconciliation of sinners to a holy God.

I fully accept that this is folly to those who are not inclined, for whatever reason, to believe. I have friends and family who do not believe. I do not love them any less because they do not believe. Unless God had done a work in my life, I would still not believe!

That's my story, and I'm sticking to it! :grin:


----------



## deaconjim (Oct 31, 2005)

gryndlgoat said:


> How do you explain the beginning of God then? If the universe can't just have "been", then neither can God. He had to be created out of nothing too.
> 
> It's just as easy to accept that the universe always existed as it is to accept that God always existed.


Mind if I offer my take on this? Time was created by God like everything else. It's a useful tool for us, but God is not bound by his creation.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

willow_girl said:


> I don't see any compelling evidence for a Sky Being. Looking objectively at the natural world, one does not come away with the impression that there is an omnipotent being who is concerned about us, or with suffering in general. So be it. :shrug:


I'm comfortable with scientific explanations, and I'm comfortable with the idea that there are some things we simply can't explain. For example, there's not enough known about where the universe begins & ends, and there is not enough known about when time began. But I think it's plausible that there will someday be a scientific explanation for both.

To suggest that the explanation for everything we don't understand is that God did it defies logic. It also has the nasty side effect of needing to reverse that explanation when we're eventually able to explain things scientifically.

Whatever people want to believe is fine with me. If what they believe makes them happy, then even better. But I expect the same courtesy from them.


----------



## Wolfy-hound (May 5, 2013)

I'd like to point out it's page 3 and no one has dissolved into a screaming match.

I am fairly certain that's a internet record. Kudos to all involved.

I still haven't really gotten a good answer(that explains to me, not that anyone's answers are not valid, which of course, they are!) to my question, but I don't really expect to, since it seems most simply accept the practice.


----------



## Karen (Apr 17, 2002)

I get that God isn't a logical conclusion to some. But why would God have to be a logical conclusion in order for Him to exist? If there is a God, then that's not logical, but it doesn't mean one can't exist. An awful lot of illogical things go on in our world.

Plus, why is that one's belief in science can't co-exist with God? Why would it be such a stretch for God to be the creator of science and the explanation for how science works. For instance, couldn't God have cause or created the Big Bang?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

gryndlgoat said:


> How do you explain the beginning of God then? If the universe can't just have "been", then neither can God. He had to be created out of nothing too.
> 
> It's just as easy to accept that the universe always existed as it is to accept that God always existed.


Not if your religion is science. Everything in it points back to a starting point. People came from chimps which came from the primordial ooze which came from the elements when the earth was formed which came from the big bang which came from, well that's where the faith in the religion comes in.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

wolfy-hound said:


> i'd like to point out it's page 3 and no one has dissolved into a screaming match.
> 
> I am fairly certain that's a internet record. Kudos to all involved.
> 
> I still haven't really gotten a good answer(that explains to me, not that anyone's answers are not valid, which of course, they are!) to my question, but i don't really expect to, since it seems most simply accept the practice.


Ok I'll scream if you are missing it. I'LL EVEN USE A LOT OF EXCLAMATION POINTS TO SHOW I'M YELLING REALLY LOUD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

Maybe we need to define science here. Science is knowledge and includes approved methods for deriving knowledge. Science limits itself to knowledge about the material world. Science is biased by the presupposition that the material world is comprehensible and can be explained in terms of the causes and effects of natural laws. Science does not acknowledge supernatural explanations. (My definition of science)

I am ok with science as long as it is understood that science will not be able to determine truth about the physical world in a scenario where a god did supernaturally create !!!!!

For me .... this world was created and made to be mostly (but not completely) rational and comprehensible. I see this as part of God's plan.


----------



## unregistered41671 (Dec 29, 2009)

Here is a good site that deals with science and faith. I may not agree with all but it sure is interesting. 

http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com/hugh-ross-origin-of-the-universe/


----------



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

When the Big Bang was first theorized science did not like it because it appeared too much like a creation event


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

Science causes me no problem as I see God as a master of it. I see "acts of God" not as magic, but of God using that science, and I don't see God acting outside the laws of it.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

More Richard Feynman. 
http://io9.com/watch-a-series-of-seven-brilliant-lectures-by-richard-f-5894600
Our knowledge is minuscule! We know only enough to see how ignorant we are. We are not so far raised above the Stone Age folk we were just a few thousand years ago.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Karen said:


> I get that God isn't a logical conclusion to some. But why would God have to be a logical conclusion in order for Him to exist? If there is a God, then that's not logical, but it doesn't mean one can't exist. An awful lot of illogical things go on in our world.
> 
> Plus, why is that one's belief in science can't co-exist with God? Why would it be such a stretch for God to be the creator of science and the explanation for how science works. For instance, couldn't God have cause or created the Big Bang?


The real issue with religion is not what people believe, it's understanding why people are leaving the church. And it's an interesting issue, since it's for similar reason that people have stopped supporting the republican party.

The fact is that churches have become political. I get that, since government decides who gets tax-exempt status, and government decides the rules under which schools (even religious-based private schools) must operate. Jerry Falwell had good reason to have interest in the political process.

But churches have also become exclusive, aren't concerned with social justice, and are hostile to the LGBT community. In short, they are old-fashioned, intolerant, and out of step with society.

The answer is not for churches to have more casual services with rock bands, any more than having rock bands at republican political rallies is the answer to garnering public support for republicans. The answer for both churches and republicans is to become more in step with what people are looking for.


----------



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

vicker said:


> Science causes me no problem as I see God as a master of it. I see "acts of God" not as magic, but of God using that science, and I don't see God acting outside the laws of it.


What appears supernatural to us is just natural for God.

God is not material He is spirit ..... and how does spirit interact with the material world which he created ???


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Johnny Dolittle said:


> When the Big Bang was first theorized science did not like it because it appeared too much like a creation event


No, the scientific community questions all new ideas, which is not a bad thing. It needed more investigation. With time they got used to the idea.


----------



## SLFarmMI (Feb 21, 2013)

Re: the OP's question -- Faith is the reason I believe the way I do. God works within the heart of those whom He calls which is the beginning of faith. It is developed through study of His word, prayer, spiritual habits. Can I prove God exists? Nope, but I don't need to because my faith tells me that He does. I can't explain it any better than that.

Regarding the praying for "Bob" question. We, as Christians, pray because it is our way to talk to God. Reading Scripture is His way to talk to us. None of us knows what God's plan is for Bob (or anyone else for that matter) because we see things from an Earthly perspective whereas He sees things from a Heavenly perspective. God always answers prayer with either a yes, no or not yet. Praying for Bob is our way to express our desire that God heal him if it is within His plan. The problem comes in when we get an answer that we don't want. We get upset when God's plan for Bob doesn't jive with our plan for Bob.

The comment was made earlier that someone had difficulty believing in God because it just wasn't logical. I'd agree with that statement. When we view some of the things that God does with our human logic, sure, some of those things don't make sense at all. Really, does it make sense that Christ would select rough, uneducated, poor fishermen to be his Apostles instead of the important people of the day? Does it make sense that God would use the biggest persecutor of Christians around (Saul) to be one of the most prolific deliverers of His message to the Gentile world? When viewed from the perspective of human logic, I've got to go with no, those things don't make any sort of logical sense. But, He did and as it turns out, His plan worked out beautifully.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

Harry Chickpea said:


> InBonus question:
> Can eating too much soul food make your soul fat?
> 
> .


I would have to answer "yes" to that. I just moved to the south, and 1 mile down the road from a fabulous southern soul food joint. I think I gained 5 lbs in 1 week.

I think this will be the only clearly true answer on this thread


----------



## Wolfy-hound (May 5, 2013)

SLFarmMI said:


> Regarding the praying for "Bob" question. We, as Christians, pray because it is our way to talk to God. Reading Scripture is His way to talk to us. None of us knows what God's plan is for Bob (or anyone else for that matter) because we see things from an Earthly perspective whereas He sees things from a Heavenly perspective. God always answers prayer with either a yes, no or not yet. Praying for Bob is our way to express our desire that God heal him if it is within His plan. The problem comes in when we get an answer that we don't want. We get upset when God's plan for Bob doesn't jive with our plan for Bob.


But... shouldn't you be trusting that God is already doing what He planned on doing with Bob? The part I don't understand is why you "tell" God that you'd like Him to heal Bob. 

Of course, if you're praying and in praying saying "I hope that if it's your will, you heal him" as part of the "conversation" you have, then you're not really asking God to heal Bob. I guess, I kind of wonder why you bring it up in the prayer if you're trusting in His plans. 

Even as a kid, I started feeling like I would be bugging God to pray in anything other than asking for my own guidance or saying praise type thanks to God. I might ask for patience and less worry over Bob, because I know Bob is already in God's hands, etc. 

Now I think I'm mostly agnostic, leaning towards atheist. I go with my own morals and don't attribute it to doing good deeds just for the reward, or fear of punishment, or because the preacher/Bible told me to. I just try to be a decent person. It's kind of hard to screw up when you just try to be a good person. With or without God.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> Those who claim they have no faith have a major problem. How do you explain the beginning of the universe?


This isn't the first time a believer has asked me this question. 

The short answer is, "We don't know for sure at this point in time."

That's no reason to jump to the conclusion that some sort of supernatural being is responsible.


----------



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

stanb999 said:


> Because you asked.
> Actually I believe he never existed. He was the culmination of the wild dreams of Paul the crazy but well to do son of a merchant. Paul talked about him being a spirit(not real flesh and blood) except in the letters penned after his death.  He isn't found in contemporary texts or documents except those obvious fakes from the 14th century. Heck Bethlehem the city he was "born" didn't exist in year 0. It became a small settlement in 125AD. See the issue?
> 
> I believe lots of things were added in the first 1000 years of the existence of the bible to the point of changing the original meaning. I believe the bible stories were made to suit the rulers of Rome when it was adopted by Constantine. I believe the bible was changed again to make it more misogynistic and give the impression of divine rights to kings in the 1200-1500's. Finally the bible/meanings are being changed again to bring things to match the modern era and science. Hard to "open windows in the sky and let rain in".
> ...


"Heck Bethlehem the city he was "born" didn't exist in year 0. It became a small settlement in 125AD. See the issue?"

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Example of one of many Old Testament references to Bethlehem

*Micah 5:1-2*

King James Version (KJV)

5 Now gather thyself in troops, O daughter of troops: he hath laid siege against us: they shall smite the judge of Israel with a rod upon the cheek.
2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.




Here is archaeological evidence Bethlehem existed 800 BC

http://www.ntd.tv/en/news/world/mid...-seal-confirms-citys-old-testament-roots.html

Bethlehem referred to in the Old Testament

http://globalchristiancenter.com/ex...s-old-testament-listing-and-significance.html


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

It is folly to argue science and religion, as one has nothing to do with the other. I love both, and they never tangle in my head, and one never takes from the other. After just finishing several semesters of human anatomy and physiology I am more in love with both. I am fearfully and wonderfully made. (Ps. 149:14 I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well. kjv) Every moment of my life is a miracle of thousands, upon thousands of things happening, in just the right way to keep me going. It is all simple chemistry and physics, but it is not simple. I can extend that wonder to the edges of the universe, and I, and my fellow humans are the only ones who have the ability and the desire to try, with our feeble brains, to understand it, to draw it out on paper and see how it works, to appreciate it for what it is and hunger for more, to understand that I, little ole me, am felt by the whole thing. We are barely 400 yrs into beginning to really find answers, and we have far, far to go. Our accumulated knowledge is a thimble of the ocean. I could never have the audacity to say there is no God. I'm just not that smart.


----------



## deaconjim (Oct 31, 2005)

stanb999 said:


> Really Jim? I do indeed have faith, You can do better than that.
> 
> That is just "petitio principii"


Not at all. A foundational belief of Christianity is that, God has always existed and always will exist; He has no beginning and no end. We also believe that God is the creator of everything, time included. Just as God is not limited by the laws of physics, He is also not limited by constraints of time.


----------



## deaconjim (Oct 31, 2005)

Nevada said:


> The answer for both churches and republicans is to become more in step with what people are looking for.


Wouldn't it be more important for the churches to become more in step with what God is looking for?


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> Wouldn't it be more important for the churches to become more in step with what God is looking for?


But who's to say what God is looking for (assuming He or She actually exists)?

All we have to go on is _what someone else said God is looking for_. That's all the Bible is -- the beliefs or opinions of others regarding the nature of God. 

Why are their opinions more valid than yours or mine?


----------



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

vicker said:


> It is folly to argue science and religion, as one has nothing to do with the other. I love both, and they never tangle in my head, and one never takes from the other. After just finishing several semesters of human anatomy and physiology I am more in love with both. I am fearfully and wonderfully made. (Ps. 149:14 I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well. kjv) Every moment of my life is a miracle of thousands, upon thousands of things happening, in just the right way to keep me going. It is all simple chemistry and physics, but it is not simple. I can extend that wonder to the edges of the universe, and I, and my fellow humans are the only ones who have the ability and the desire to try, with our feeble brains, to understand it, to draw it out on paper and see how it works, to appreciate it for what it is and hunger for more, to understand that I, little ole me, am felt by the whole thing. We are barely 400 yrs into beginning to really find answers, and we have far, far to go. Our accumulated knowledge is a thimble of the ocean. I could never have the audacity to say there is no God. I'm just not that smart.


I mentioned in the OP that I participate in the Intelligent Design discussion. Intelligent Design arguments have been around forever but this modern discussion is concerned with molecular biology and genetics where a huge amount of knowledge has been accumulating over the past 30 or so years.

Something that just blows me away concerns what is known as DNA repair mechanisms. The DNA in a cell contains all the information needed to make all of the proteins in a cell. Proteins are the building blocks of life and over 99% of a cell is composed of proteins .... the remainder is DNA and a few other things.

The DNA in all cells is mutating at a very fast rate all of the time and if it were not being continuously monitored and repaired all life would soon fail to function (die). A few mutations will be missed by the cells DNA monitors and these mutations determine the actual mutation rate for cells.

I would like to further illustrate by making an analogy.......

Assume you have a computer and the hard drive storage contains all of the information needed to make and operate this computer(including anti virus software). This computer is online and prone to virus attacks. You have anti virus hardware which monitors and detects attacks. This computer operates 24/7. As the computer functions it is attacked often and sometimes a virus escapes through the monitoring and damages the computer. The damage may not cause a crash but may decrease the operating efficiency of the computer. But then the day comes when a significant virus passes into the system and the system crashes (analogous to the cell dying)

In the cell the DNA is monitored for damage .... when damage is detected it is evaluated and there are numerous kinds of repair mechanisms .... some appropriate for minor repairs and some for major repairs where the DNA is more critically damaged. The DNA monitor assesses the damage and calls in the appropriate repair mechanism.

(for video animations search for DNA repair mechanisms)

.................. in a godless world could this kind of stuff invent itself ?????????


----------



## Taylor R. (Apr 3, 2013)

Well sure...that's kind of what evolution is all about.


----------



## Karen (Apr 17, 2002)

stanb999 said:


> Sure. So could have Aliens and we are in an exceedingly small universe in the multiverse.





willow_girl said:


> This isn't the first time a believer has asked me this question.
> 
> The short answer is, "We don't know for sure at this point in time."
> 
> That's no reason to jump to the conclusion that some sort of supernatural being is responsible.


Your both absolutely right; however, since we don't know for sure, why would that totally rule out a God? Couldn't God be one of the possibilities?


----------



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

There are two default positions here...

(1) I will not believe in God unless it is proven that one exists

(2) I will believe in God until someone proves otherwise


----------



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

The concept a multiverse is just a theory .... theoretical physics is very much theoretical .... no holding back on speculative wonderings


----------



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

stanb999 said:


> :shrug:
> 
> There is a third...
> 
> ...


I'm ok with belief in many Gods .... I just hope they can all get along....

My 3 in 1 God operates in perfect harmony


----------



## Truckinguy (Mar 8, 2008)

I think people invent religions and gods as a survival mechanism. It's far more comforting to most people to think that when we die we go to some beautiful place where it's all happy for eternity, . Nobody wants to stop existing when we die which is what would happen if this little ball of life that we all float around on in this universe is all that there is.

I was raised strict Christian and Christianity, in my experience, turned out to be very... well, to put it bluntly, corrupt, judgmental and controlling. I don't know what label applies to me but I follow Nature in it's cycles, I treat everyone with respect and do what I can to help others as much as possible. I believe that this Earth is all there is and when I die I will return to the Earth, my "life force" will dissipate into the general energy of Earth and my body will be recycled into new life. 

To answer the OP's question of why I believe what I believe, I found the concept of Christianity absurd, making people aspire to some anattainable level of perfection only to be told that you could never reach it without help because we were not worthy anyway. The idea that we were to love/worship God or spend eternity burning in a lake of fire was abusive at best. I can't tell you the relief that I felt when I let go of my Christian teachings and just focused on living my life simply, treating others as I want to be treated and doing my best to be a good person.

I find Islam abhorrent, I find the teachings of Buddhism interesting and I find the ideals and concepts of Wicca and Paganism comforting. I believe in the Earth and Nature, the changing of the seasons and the circle of life. Hope that makes sense.


----------



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

Johnny Dolittle said:


> There are two default positions here...
> 
> (1) I will not believe in God unless it is proven that one exists
> 
> (2) I will believe in God until someone proves otherwise


OK I will fix it .... the third option....

(3) Those who don't have a clue .... they believe you can't know


----------



## vicki in NW OH (May 10, 2002)

Karen said:


> I get that God isn't a logical conclusion to some. But why would God have to be a logical conclusion in order for Him to exist? If there is a God, then that's not logical, but it doesn't mean one can't exist. An awful lot of illogical things go on in our world.
> 
> Plus, why is that one's belief in science can't co-exist with God? Why would it be such a stretch for God to be the creator of science and the explanation for how science works. For instance, couldn't God have cause or created the Big Bang?


I agree. The "Big Bang" came from a religious mind. A Catholic priest was the one who proposed the Big Bang theory. Religion and science are compatible.


----------



## Karen (Apr 17, 2002)

stanb999 said:


> Karen, It is impossible to prove a negative. How can I "prove" god doesn't exist? That is the nature of the ongoing questions. This is a classic logical Fallacy known as "argumentum ad ignorantiam" Or because there is no proof that god doesn't exist he surely must! In a debate the fellow that makes a claim or assertion that isn't readily evident is tasked with providing proof.


I'm not suggesting that it proves or disproves anything. I'm only asking why it is something that would automatically be ruled out, if it is a possibility. Since we don't know diffinetively how the universe all came together, then any and all possibilites can't be ruled out. I'm simply saying one possibility can't be ruled out without ruling all the others out. All possibilities should remain as possible.



stanb999 said:


> There is good reason to suppose the god of the bible doesn't exist. Carbon dating Dinosaur bones and noting the date conflicts with the purported age of the planet is just one tiny piece in a mountain of evidence.


But there is evidence. It's called the Gap Theory and there is a real basis for it. The Bible highly suggests that there was a very long period of time in which the earth existed prior to as we know it today. Some Christian scientist believe that is period of time does go back millions of years and that there were living plants, animals and creatures who walked the earth during that time during that time period. Perhaps even great apes who evolved into man-like creatures. It's not such a huge stretch to consolidate earth's beginnings and history with that of the Bible.


----------



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

stanb999 said:


> Or is science still being corrupted by religion? Remember Galileo?
> 
> The big bang is made up conjecture. No actual proof is involved.


..... and is science infallible 

Science once believed life arises spontaneously ... the proof was dead meat would produce maggots !!!


----------



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

stanb999 said:


> Yep, I confused Bethlehem and Nazareth. It's Nazareth that wasn't around in the time frame. Maybe that's why they were in need of a carpenter.


There have been numerous cities mentioned in OT which history has no account of .... and then some archaeologist comes along one day and discovers and identifies a city


----------



## Oggie (May 29, 2003)

Johnny Dolittle said:


> ..... and is science infallible
> 
> Science once believed life arises spontaneously ... the proof was dead meat would produce maggots !!!


Science evolves.

(So do most religions, although some don't much like to admit it.)


----------



## MDKatie (Dec 13, 2010)

I'm an athiest. I don't believe there is a god controlling things or creating things. I believe we're responsible for our own actions and our own fate. If I am successful, it's because of the work _I_ put in, not because of an imaginary being made it happen. I believe we should treat others how we would like to be treated, simply because that's the right thing to do. 

I don't get it when I hear people say "God saved me from that accident" or things like that, because if there was a god, why would he let the accident happen in the first place? Why do bad people live and good people die? Why does this god get credit for all the good things but not the bad? Why would this god allow such suffering in the world? Does he do it to spite people? To make them fearful of him? I don't want any part of a god who uses fear to dictate if people believe in him or not. 

Just my $.02. Not looking for anyone to answer any of those questions, I'm just voicing my thoughts and opinions.


----------



## vicki in NW OH (May 10, 2002)

stanb999 said:


> Or is science still being corrupted by religion? Remember Galileo?
> 
> The big bang is made up conjecture. No actual proof is involved.


Galileo was tried for being disobedient. The Church had accepted heliocentrism since the Copernican publication. Galileo was tried because he was disobedient in insisting heliocentrism was incompatible with scripture, and the Church did not agree. He persisted in this heresy. 

Remember Antoine Lavosier, the Father of Chemistry (Catholic)? He was put to death by secular humanists in France. It is true he was put to death for political reasons, not scientific ones. They did close the Academy of Science, though. Not very scientific of them. Imagine that. The Church promoted the sciences, the seculars did not.


----------



## deaconjim (Oct 31, 2005)

willow_girl said:


> But who's to say what God is looking for (assuming He or She actually exists)?
> 
> All we have to go on is _what someone else said God is looking for_. That's all the Bible is -- the beliefs or opinions of others regarding the nature of God.
> 
> Why are their opinions more valid than yours or mine?


The only thing that would make one opinion more valid than another would be the truth of the issue. Having read the Bible, I have reached the conclusion that it is the truth, and that it is the Word of God. Anyone else is free to make their own decisions. I'll be happy to share my views with those who genuinely want to understand, but I have no ability or inclination to force anyone else to believe the same as I, nor will I undertake to challenge the beliefs of others.


----------



## Karen (Apr 17, 2002)

I think, willow_girl's question is a good one. The problem is that it won't be able to be answered to everyone satisfaction because it just depends on whether one views the Bible as just a history book, or do they view it as God's Word. 

Someone who doesn't believe in God certainly isn't able to accept it as the God's Word; therefore, it has no authority and the answer would be that it doesn't hold any more validity than your opinions or mine. 

For someone who does believe in God, then there is no higher validity because it's the same as God saying it.

Personally, even as a Christian, I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. I don't believe the Bible to be 100% accurate and every word being God's words. The Bible is 'inspired' by God. It doesn't mean that God was moving the hands of the writers and that they had no ability to think for themselves nor had absolutely no bias. I believe the _message_ the Bible to be the truth, but to say every word is God's Word, I have a hard time with. Then we have the translation issue, the denominational issues, etc. IMHO, we have to open to the fact that, even as Christians, there may be a whole lot of things we don't have right or correct.


----------



## Oggie (May 29, 2003)

God speaks in many ways.


----------



## Tiempo (May 22, 2008)

Truckinguy said:


> I think people invent religions and gods as a survival mechanism. It's far more comforting to most people to think that when we die we go to some beautiful place where it's all happy for eternity, . Nobody wants to stop existing when we die which is what would happen if this little ball of life that we all float around on in this universe is all that there is.
> 
> I was raised strict Christian and Christianity, in my experience, turned out to be very... well, to put it bluntly, corrupt, judgmental and controlling. I don't know what label applies to me but I follow Nature in it's cycles, I treat everyone with respect and do what I can to help others as much as possible. I believe that this Earth is all there is and when I die I will return to the Earth, my "life force" will dissipate into the general energy of Earth and my body will be recycled into new life.
> 
> ...


This. Very well put sir.


----------



## deaconjim (Oct 31, 2005)

I think many people fail to understand that there is a BIG difference between the teachings of Christ and the behavior of His followers. We are at best imperfect humans attempting to live up to the standard set by a perfect God in human form. Judging Chrisrtianity by the failures of Christians rather than by the teachings of Christ will almost always lead one to the wrong conclusion.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Nevada said:


> The real issue with religion is not what people believe, it's understanding why people are leaving the church. And it's an interesting issue, since it's for similar reason that people have stopped supporting the republican party.


You have that right. They both have left their beliefs in the dirt. 

When a "church" preaches the same thing the world is why go? Well that's not strictly true. If you look at most "mega" churches you will find they preach 'name it and claim it' and 'if you follow my preaching you well be rewarded here on earth'.





Nevada said:


> The answer is not for churches to have more casual services with rock bands, any more than having rock bands at republican political rallies is the answer to garnering public support for republicans. The answer for both churches and republicans is to become more in step with what people are looking for.


That's like saying the way to cut your shoplifting losses is to start giving your product away.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Nevada said:


> No, the scientific community questions all new ideas, which is not a bad thing. It needed more investigation. With time they got used to the idea.


Like macro-evolution. Because we see micro-evolution, AKA survival of the fittest, science jumps to the conclusion bacteria evolved into humans. After all this time its still the *"theory"* of evolution because there is no evidence. Yet because they are used to it any one who questions the theory is treated like a dunce.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

watcher said:


> When a "church" preaches the same thing the world is why go? Well that's not strictly true. If you look at most "mega" churches you will find they preach 'name it and claim it' and 'if you follow my preaching you well be rewarded here on earth'.


I don't believe that being exclusionary and judgmental is the way of the Bible. After all, you don't exclude modern money changers for their sins. Instead, you accept them for who they are and let them worry about their own sins. Maybe doing the same for gays wouldn't be giving up the church's values.

My point is that you exclude people selectively. Some sinners are ok, while you don't want others around you. The millennial generation sees that and doesn't want any part of it. Unless you let people worry about their own sins and stop judging them on a church level, you'll see churches fail for lack of membership. The same will be true of the republican party.

This idea isn't so new and radical. Ronald Reagan proposed the same thing with his "big tent" approach. It worked pretty well. The ranks of republicans swelled.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Wolfy-hound said:


> But... shouldn't you be trusting that God is already doing what He planned on doing with Bob? The part I don't understand is why you "tell" God that you'd like Him to heal Bob.
> 
> Of course, if you're praying and in praying saying "I hope that if it's your will, you heal him" as part of the "conversation" you have, then you're not really asking God to heal Bob. I guess, I kind of wonder why you bring it up in the prayer if you're trusting in His plans.


I'm horrible at analogies but to try to be very, very simple. . . As a kid don't you think your dad knew you'd like to have a candy bar? So why would you bother to ask him to buy you one?




Wolfy-hound said:


> Now I think I'm mostly agnostic, leaning towards atheist. I go with my own morals and don't attribute it to doing good deeds just for the reward, or fear of punishment, or because the preacher/Bible told me to. I just try to be a decent person. It's kind of hard to screw up when you just try to be a good person. With or without God.


You need to take a few classes in psychology and history. People can justify a lot of things as 'good' when it is what they want. Ever read about Heaven's Gate, the Peoples Temple Agricultural Project, the Manson Family, the Final Solution? Those are just a couple of examples.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

willow_girl said:


> This isn't the first time a believer has asked me this question.
> 
> The short answer is, "We don't know for sure at this point in time."
> 
> That's no reason to jump to the conclusion that some sort of supernatural being is responsible.


So you have "faith" that it was created by something, right?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

vicker said:


> It is folly to argue science and religion, as one has nothing to do with the other. I love both, and they never tangle in my head, and one never takes from the other.


I disagree. The more you learn about them the more you see they support one another. Every year places which were once called places of Biblical legend are being found. I just read a story about how they are fairly sure they have found the remains of David's palace.

Will science ever 'prove' religion? Of course not but the more you look at science with a religious eye the more you see how they are interconnected.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

watcher said:


> Every year places which were once called places of Biblical legend are being found. I just read a story about how they are fairly sure they have found the remains of David's palace.


Oh, I never doubted the historical value of the Bible. But the fact that much of the Bible might include historically correct information isn't evidence that a deity exists.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Nevada said:


> I don't believe that being exclusionary and judgmental is the way of the Bible. After all, you don't exclude modern money changers for their sins. Instead, you accept them for who they are and let them worry about their own sins. Maybe doing the same for gays wouldn't be giving up the church's values.


You might want to read the Bible a bit closer. It is VERY exclusionary and judgmental. You are told you JUDGE a tree by its fruit and we are given the fruit which you will find on a Christian 'tree'. You can call that tree in your yard an apple tree as much and as loudly as you want but you'll never make it stop producing cherries and start making apples.

In the same way you can call yourself a Christian as much and as loudly as you want but as long as you want but if you aren't producing Christian 'fruit' you might want to question where you stand with God.

Gays, adulterers, fornicators, murderers and all sinners are welcome. And are even accepted; as long as they have repented and are working to stop sinning.




Nevada said:


> My point is that you exclude people selectively. Some sinners are ok, while you don't want others around you. The millennial generation sees that and doesn't want any part of it. Unless you let people worry about their own sins and stop judging them on a church level, you'll see churches fail for lack of membership. The same will be true of the republican party.


The failure of churches isn't measured by a drop of people in the seats. Churches fail when they stop teaching God's Word. Five people meeting in someone's home to worship and study the Word is a much more successful church than one with 5,000 people which is teaching the world.




Nevada said:


> This idea isn't so new and radical. Ronald Reagan proposed the same thing with his "big tent" approach. It worked pretty well. The ranks of republicans swelled.


I have no problem with a big tent as long as everyone in it is there for the same reason. Do you think Reagan would have wanted his big tent half filled with people who supported democrat ideas?


----------



## Wolfy-hound (May 5, 2013)

watcher said:


> I'm horrible at analogies but to try to be very, very simple. . . As a kid don't you think your dad knew you'd like to have a candy bar? So why would you bother to ask him to buy you one?
> 
> You need to take a few classes in psychology and history. People can justify a lot of things as 'good' when it is what they want. Ever read about Heaven's Gate, the Peoples Temple Agricultural Project, the Manson Family, the Final Solution? Those are just a couple of examples.


Actually, I never really asked my dad for anything, but that's another issue entirely...

One of the constant things I'm told by a lot of Christians is that "God has a plan" and I'm supposed to go along with that plan. When something bad happens it's always "God has a reason for this happening" because it's all part of a plan He has in place. I don't think the asking MY dad for something for ME is the same as asking for my dad to give something to a stranger who doesn't know either of us.

And I've studied a lot of human interaction. I do know SOME people will decide things would be Good and go with it, even if it's destructive. [I would disagree with Manson family, as I'm completely convinced they all knew what they were doing was evil and they just smugly tried using the whole story and wackiness afterwards to appear really cool.] 

And I've also seen plenty of Christian churchs and groups bashing groups of people because they feel it's Good to exclude people, judge them, abuse them because something in their personal opinions makes it 'okay'. But truly, that's just people ignoring their own teachings, which at the base is "Don't be a jerk". Jesus said "Love your neighbor". I'm fairly certain if he was the Son of God, if he had meant "Love your neighbor but only if they are the right color/race/sex/denomination/gender identity/region" he would have stated it that way.

Cults that have a leader that does destructive behavior towards other people and sometimes towards his own group are not really a good example of thinking something is Good, because it's really a case of them believing that a single person knows what is Good, and therefor misplacing their trust. Most of the leaders know they are doing wrong, they simply don't care, because they are being selfish and doing what they want to do.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Nevada said:


> Oh, I never doubted the historical value of the Bible. But the fact that much of the Bible might include historically correct information isn't evidence that a deity exists.


Never said it was. My point was the more science goes looking for evidence to show the Bible is nothing but a fairytale the more they find more evidence showing its factual.


----------



## Wolfy-hound (May 5, 2013)

And why is it that people get hung up on the gay thing in the bible, while ignoring that the Bible also supports polygamy, slavery, no mixed fiber fabrics, etc? I mean, if folks are going to claim that everyone has to follow the Bible rules, then they have to make multiple wives plus concubines okay too, right?

I do think you can believe in God without the Bible too. Or you can believe in God and think the Bible is just some loose guidelines that might be fallible(don't stone your neighbor for mowing his lawn on sunday, for instance... unless it's before 6am and the mower is loud...).


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Wolfy-hound said:


> And why is it that people get hung up on the gay thing in the bible, while ignoring that the Bible also supports polygamy, slavery, no mixed fiber fabrics, etc? I mean, if folks are going to claim that everyone has to follow the Bible rules, then they have to make multiple wives plus concubines okay too, right?


As I said, churches are selective about which sinners to leave alone and which ones to judge.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

watcher said:


> The failure of churches isn't measured by a drop of people in the seats. Churches fail when they stop teaching God's Word.


The church across the street from me failed last year. Membership dropped to the point where they couldn't make ends meet. The church building was eventually sold to become a church of a different persuasion. Financial success of a church is really not a lot different than running any other service business.


----------



## Oggie (May 29, 2003)

One of the biggest shortcomings by churches in general, is their silence for the most part on the subject of cats.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Wolfy-hound said:


> Actually, I never really asked my dad for anything, but that's another issue entirely...
> 
> One of the constant things I'm told by a lot of Christians is that "God has a plan" and I'm supposed to go along with that plan. When something bad happens it's always "God has a reason for this happening" because it's all part of a plan He has in place.


Continuing my analogy your dad had a plan when he took you to the store with him and that plan might or might not have included buying you a candy bar or his plan might have been to see if you would ask for a candy bar.




Wolfy-hound said:


> I don't think the asking MY dad for something for ME is the same as asking for my dad to give something to a stranger who doesn't know either of us.


Ok change it. You see what you think is a poor kid at the store. You dad knows that kid would like a candy bar so why ask him to buy the kid one? 




Wolfy-hound said:


> And I've studied a lot of human interaction. I do know SOME people will decide things would be Good and go with it, even if it's destructive. [I would disagree with Manson family, as I'm completely convinced they all knew what they were doing was evil and they just smugly tried using the whole story and wackiness afterwards to appear really cool.]


The family was just the same the people at the People's Temple and Heaven's gate. They were following what their leader convinced them was 'good'. 




Wolfy-hound said:


> And I've also seen plenty of Christian churchs and groups bashing groups of people because they feel it's Good to exclude people, judge them, abuse them because something in their personal opinions makes it 'okay'. But truly, that's just people ignoring their own teachings, which at the base is "Don't be a jerk". Jesus said "Love your neighbor". I'm fairly certain if he was the Son of God, if he had meant "Love your neighbor but only if they are the right color/race/sex/denomination/gender identity/region" he would have stated it that way.


So if you loved someone and you know they are doing or about to do something which would harm them would it be loving to just sit back and allow them to do it.





Wolfy-hound said:


> Cults that have a leader that does destructive behavior towards other people and sometimes towards his own group are not really a good example of thinking something is Good, because it's really a case of them believing that a single person knows what is Good, and therefor misplacing their trust. Most of the leaders know they are doing wrong, they simply don't care, because they are being selfish and doing what they want to do.


But the people are doing what they THINK is good because their leader says it is. What their leader thinks has nothing to do with it. If I hate cats and I convince you it would be a good to kill every house cat in the world and you start killing your neighbor's cats you are doing what YOU THINK is good, correct?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Nevada said:


> The church across the street from me failed last year. Membership dropped to the point where they couldn't make ends meet. The church building was eventually sold to become a church of a different persuasion. Financial success of a church is really not a lot different than running any other service business.


There's your problem. You see the church as a building or business. As I pointed out you can have a weekly attendance of 5,000 and a net yearly income of 500 million dollars and not be a successful church if all you are doing is telling people what they want to hear. That is entertaining them, putting on a good show that people are willing to pay for, no different than a Vegas show.

There are very few large churches which teach the strong truth of the Word. People don't want to be told they are bad for screwing around on their spouse or for lying to get ahead in business or for stealing from the company they work for. They want to hear they can do what ever makes them feel good or makes life better for them.

Its the same reason the dem party is growing. People don't want to vote for someone who is telling them they need to take responsibility for themselves, that they need to work hard, to get a good education, etc. They want the guy who is going to tell them their problems aren't their fault, they deserve something for nothing, others should provide for them, etc.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

So, if my fruit is Christian fruit, that identifies me as Christian?, even though I am outwardly an agnostic, Buddhist, nudist?


----------



## Tabitha (Apr 10, 2006)

stanb999 said:


> I'm Atheist.
> 
> Because religions questions challenged with logic end up being matters of Faith.
> Faith isn't logical tho very real for some.
> ...



So what proof do you have that there is no God? 

I think the evidence points more in the direction that there is a higher intelligence. To believe that everything, including myself, came, by itself, from nothing, requires more faith than I can muster. No offence meant, just trying to get the ball rolling. 
Nothing comes from nothing.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

watcher said:


> I disagree. The more you learn about them the more you see they support one another. Every year places which were once called places of Biblical legend are being found. I just read a story about how they are fairly sure they have found the remains of David's palace.
> 
> Will science ever 'prove' religion? Of course not but the more you look at science with a religious eye the more you see how they are interconnected.


I disagree with your disagreement. While they may occasionally overlap, and science can at times support your religion, religious views cannot support scientific views. The scientific view, by definition, has to stand on its own, while religion stands on its own when contradicted by science, but still uses science when they agree. At some future date, God may be scientifically provable, would that be the end of religion, and, or science? No.


----------



## Tiempo (May 22, 2008)

deaconjim said:


> I think many people fail to understand that there is a BIG difference between the teachings of Christ and the behavior of His followers. We are at best imperfect humans attempting to live up to the standard set by a perfect God in human form. Judging Chrisrtianity by the failures of Christians rather than by the teachings of Christ will almost always lead one to the wrong conclusion.


See, I've never met anyone who claims Christianity who thinks they are not such a great Christian, most seem pretty certain they are, while the actions of some of them (certainly not all, but a LOT) would suggest otherwise.

I mean this in a general sense, not you personally, but how do you know you are one of the good ones when so many seem to be getting it wrong yet are not aware of it?


----------



## Tabitha (Apr 10, 2006)

Nevada said:


> As I said, churches are selective about which sinners to leave alone and which ones to judge.


Which churches, and which particular sins are left alone (or ignored)?


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

Nice to meet you. I'm a terrible Christian, and have only known a handful of those who produce those sweet fruits. I might drop one now and then, but most of what I drop is best wiped from your shoe. Yet, I am a Christian who feels the hand of God heavily upon me, and know that I am His.


----------



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

vicker said:


> Nice to meet you. I'm a terrible Christian, and have only known a handful of those who produce those sweet fruits. I might drop one now and then, but most of what I drop is best wiped from your shoe. Yet, I am a Christian who feels the hand of God heavily upon me, and know that I am His.


Some people produce artificial fruit..... it looks real until you pick it up with intentions to taste.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

Ain't it! Nothing worse than a lying fruit.


----------



## deaconjim (Oct 31, 2005)

Tiempo said:


> See, I've never met anyone who claims Christianity who thinks they are not such a great Christian, most seem pretty certain they are, while the actions of some of them (certainly not all, but a LOT) would suggest otherwise.
> 
> I mean this in a general sense, not you personally, but how do you know you are one of the good ones when so many seem to be getting it wrong yet are not aware of it?


Glad to make your aquaitance. I assure you, I am not one of the "good ones", but Christ, who died on the cross to pay the price for my sins, was the only good one. His sacrifice was all that was required of me, except that I accept it as a free gift. If my 'goodness' was required I would be forever lost and hopeless.


----------



## Truckinguy (Mar 8, 2008)

I reached the point of religious fatigue a long time ago, all these deep debates and scripture quoting until I was ready to stick a fork in my eye. Yet, after all the debates, neither side was the least bit tolerant of the others point of view. I think organized religion has strayed so far from it's roots that it's no longer about spiritual growth but about men controlling others for their own financial and political gain. I think it's reached the point that they can't see the forest for the trees. Stop trying to find some sort of deeper meaning between the lines and go out and spread the love and compassion that the Bible is supposed to be about. A little less thinking, a little more doing.



> Glad to make your aquaitance. I assure you, I am not one of the "good ones", but Christ, who died on the cross to pay the price for my sins, was the only good one. His sacrifice was all that was required of me, except that I accept it as a free gift. If my 'goodness' was required I would be forever lost and hopeless.


I just shake my head when I read stuff like this, Christians constantly putting themselves down and saying they are nothing without the "gift" of someone giving their life for them. I couldn't possibly be part of a group that constantly exudes so much negativity and guilt.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

Wow! It must be wonderful to be so far removed from guilt and negativity. I don't feel guilt because I learned it from my religion, but because I am guilty. I have done terrible things in my life that hurt myself and others. I have made huge mistakes that can never be corrected. My religion tells me not that I am guilty, I already knew that, but that I have hope of redemption. I know others who share that hope, and I'm proud to be a part of that group. I'm no Jesus.  I was probably like you at some point in my life, but I fell here and there until all I did was fall. I didn't want to be the person I was, but could not not be. While Jesus may purchase my sins and offer me forgiveness, he can't remove them, or take the effects of them away. They remain, rippling outward forever. You have my best wishes for the continuance of your cleanliness.


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

What is God's redemption? I know what redemption means - being saved from sin, error, or evil - but why is it important? If you (that's a general 'you', not any one particular person) recognize you're guilty of sins and feel remorse and have done the best you could to make up and atone for them then what more can you do and why would you expect more? In what way does God's redemption make up for or improve upon that and how does God's redemption save you from further sin, error or evil? If you are redeemed by God for your sins does that mean you can go out and commit further sins and that will be okay because you believe that you will be redeemed for those sins too?


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

Just for clarification - I'm not a religious person, nor an atheist, nor an agnostic. I guess the closest I could come to describing my beliefs is as a spiritual universalist gaiaist but even that is not an adequate description.


----------



## deaconjim (Oct 31, 2005)

Truckinguy said:


> I just shake my head when I read stuff like this, Christians constantly putting themselves down and saying they are nothing without the "gift" of someone giving their life for them. I couldn't possibly be part of a group that constantly exudes so much negativity and guilt.


Then by all means find whatever makes you happy.


----------



## Old John (May 27, 2004)

*Quote:*

"There is a third...

I don't know one way or the other. That would be the agnostic.










P.S. I believe the assertion was made for many gods as well.







I'm ok with belief in many Gods .... I just hope they can all get along...."


My 3 in 1 God operates in perfect harmony 

Like
 


Johnny Dolittle said:


> I'm ok with belief in many Gods .... I just hope they can all get along....
> 
> My 3 in 1 God operates in perfect harmony


 
Well, I myself do believe in Many Gods. And I believe that each Pantheon or Family of Gods and Goddesses sprang forth from a Specific People, Folk, and a Specific Culture. The Greeks had their Gods. The Romans had their Gods. And the Jews and Muslims had their Gods.

I've mentioned before that I Believe in the Aesir and Vanir. These are the Ancestral Gods of the Germanic and Scandinavian People. These Gods sprang forth from those People and that Culture, out of Northern Europe. I still Honor Them.

In the same way, Jehovah or Yahweh came out of the Semitic Culture of the Israelites and later was adopted by the Muslims and Christians. The Scriptures of the Jews, Muslims and Christians bear that out.
Mohamed is the Prophet of Islam and Jesus is the Prophet and Deity of Christianity. 

I've been studying Religion since I was a young man. I even spent 3 years at high school level in the Catholic Seminar, thinking I might want to become a priest. But, I changed my mind. I am no longer a Catholic.
I have explored several other Belief systems.

Religion is still an interesting, fascinating subject, for me. But I will not argue about Religion.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

Paumon said:


> What is God's redemption? I know what redemption means - being saved from sin, error, or evil - but why is it important? If you (that's a general 'you', not any one particular person) recognize you're guilty of sins and feel remorse and have done the best you could to make up and atone for them then what more can you do and why would you expect more? In what way does God's redemption make up for or improve upon that and how does God's redemption save you from further sin, error or evil? If you are redeemed by God for your sins does that mean you can go out and commit further sins and that will be okay because you believe that you will be redeemed for those sins too?


Joseph was his father's pride and joy, and the child of his old age. Joseph's brothers were jealous in their hearts and wanted to murder him, but instead sold him into slavery and convinced their father that he was dead, breaking his heart. God took their sin and used it to save the entire nation of Israel. Perhaps God can do something like that with my own sins.  Also, in the end, Joseph's father Israel's joy was far greater than his pain and sadness. Perhaps, God can do something like that for me as well


----------



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

vicker said:


> Joseph was his father's pride and joy, and the child of his old age. Joseph's brothers were jealous in their hearts and wanted to murder him, but instead sold him into slavery and convinced their father that he was dead, breaking his heart. God took their sin and used it to save the entire nation of Israel. Perhaps God can do something like that with my own sins.  Also, in the end, Joseph's father Israel's joy was far greater than his pain and sadness. Perhaps, God can do something like that for me as well


Its looking like your position in heaven might be something like shoe shine boy :bouncy:


----------



## Karen (Apr 17, 2002)

I also fail miserably in my Christian walk. I want so much to be a good example, but either my mouth or my foot seem to keep getting in the way. Forget getting the mansion in heaven, I'll be lucky if I make it and get a pup tent!


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Karen said:


> I also fail miserably in my Christian walk. I want so much to be a good example, but either my mouth or my foot seem to keep getting in the way. Forget getting the mansion in heaven, I'll be lucky if I make it and get a pup tent!


Luck has nothing to do with it. You make it if you believe, repent and follow Christ's teachings. I know I have more to look forward to than a tent because I've been told there is a place already prepared for me in my Father's house.


----------



## deaconjim (Oct 31, 2005)

Johnny Dolittle said:


> Its looking like your position in heaven might be something like shoe shine boy :bouncy:


 What an awesome place to shine shoes!


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> Your both absolutely right; however, since we don't know for sure, why would that totally rule out a God? Couldn't God be one of the possibilities?


Certainly. I'm agnostic, not an atheist. 



> The only thing that would make one opinion more valid than another would be the truth of the issue. Having read the Bible, I have reached the conclusion that it is the truth, and that it is the Word of God.


But there is no objective way to determine whether it is true or not. In your opinion, the things written about God by other people are true, and you're willing to follow them. That's certainly your prerogative ... but please don't confuse it with objective truth.


> So you have "faith" that it was created by something, right?


No, I'm saying I really don't know, just like I really don't know what will happen to me after I die. (Nor does anyone, if they're honest about it.) I'm able to tolerate some ambiguity, though. I'd rather say, "I don't know," than jump to a conclusion that might be incorrect.

But I'll stroll down this path a little ... assuming some supernatural being _did_ create the universe, how can you be certain you've picked the correct one to worship? After all, humankind has generated hundreds or thousands of creation stories, and many involve some supernatural being. How can you be sure the Israelites got it right, and everyone else is wrong?


----------



## deaconjim (Oct 31, 2005)

willow_girl said:


> But there is no objective way to determine whether it is true or not. In your opinion, the things written about God by other people are true, and you're willing to follow them. That's certainly your prerogative ... but please don't confuse it with objective truth.


You are right, at least in this case, that there is no objective way to determine the truth, but the truth is what it is regardless of our ability to discern it. Everyone must determine for themselves what they believe truth is and make their decisions accordingly.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

This just in. 
http://arstechnica.com/science/2013...ve-may-have-walked-on-earth-at-the-same-time/
Interesting research on the Y chromosome. 
We learn more every day. One day we will have answers in objective form. For now we can mostly just make assumptions.


----------



## Taylor R. (Apr 3, 2013)

I was taught that to assume...well..you know how it goes.

vicker, you're one Christian dude I could get along with. This thread has been, for the most part, quite enlightening (don't confuse that with it changing my view in any way). High five to everyone here for keeping it civil and being (mostly) tolerant.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> Everyone must determine for themselves what they believe truth is and make their decisions accordingly.


Or, perhaps, if it's not possible to determine the truth with the methodology we have at present, it's best to just leave the question on the table.

I don't lay awake at night wondering whether there is a god or what will happen to me after I die, I just proceed as best I can with the information at hand. It may be impossible to know whether a god has decreed that we should love our neighbor, but I know we all bleed red -- that ought be reason enough, eh? :shrug:


----------



## deaconjim (Oct 31, 2005)

willow_girl said:


> Or, perhaps, if it's not possible to determine the truth with the methodology we have at present, it's best to just leave the question on the table.
> 
> I don't lay awake at night wondering whether there is a god or what will happen to me after I die, I just proceed as best I can with the information at hand. It may be impossible to know whether a god has decreed that we should love our neighbor, but I know we all bleed red -- that ought be reason enough, eh? :shrug:


You have reached the best conclusion that you can at this point, and I have as well. I am happy to respect your decision as long as you will offer the same consideration (or even if you don't). This, by the way, was the example set by Christ in the 19th chapter of Matthew.


----------



## Karen (Apr 17, 2002)

watcher said:


> Luck has nothing to do with it. You make it if you believe, repent and follow Christ's teachings. I know I have more to look forward to than a tent because I've been told there is a place already prepared for me in my Father's house.


I was just being factious.


----------



## Karen (Apr 17, 2002)

I know this might sound self-serving, but what actually forced me into examining whether God exists or not was when 2 questions popped into my mind one day. 

The first was, "What would I be out if I went out on a limb and had some faith in God; what would I be out"? My conclusion was nothing other than just kidding myself. If God didn't exist and all there was is nothingness after we die, then there will still be nothingness when I die. In the meantime, having faith that I'm not alone and someone else has my back, surely would help to get me through life. Whether there is or isn't, if it helps during the bad times, then again, what would I be out. Absolutely nothing; it cost me nothing.

The second questions was, "What if God *does* exist and I was so bent on being so certain He didn't exist; and what if He did have requirements He expects me to follow"? Well, shoot; that would then mean I sure would be out a whole lot! Whether I think He is right and just; whether I think He shouldn't let little kids die or disaster to occur, is irrelevant. He has His reasons and it isn't my business what they are, apparently, because God can do whatever He wants whether right or wrong. My not liking it won't change anything for me, my future or my eternity.

So for me, I figured I don't need to know all things. I don't need to understand all things. I just need to have a tiny amount of faith and let it grow from there to wherever it goes from there. For me, I'd rather take the chance I'm wrong in having God in my life and be out nothing, than to not have Him and find out I really messed up 'life' from what it could have been -- and then, also find out I _really big time_ messed up my eternity!


----------



## deaconjim (Oct 31, 2005)

Karen said:


> I know this might sound self-serving, but what actually forced me into examining whether God exists or not was when 2 questions popped into my mind one day.
> 
> The first was, "What would I be out if I went out on a limb and had some faith in God; what would I be out"? My conclusion was nothing other than just kidding myself. If God didn't exist and all there was is nothingness after we die, then there will still be nothingness when I die. In the meantime, having faith that I'm not alone and someone else has my back, surely would help to get me through life. Whether there is or isn't, if it helps during the bad times, then again, what would I be out. Absolutely nothing; it cost me nothing.
> 
> ...


Karen, we all have our own reasons for beliieving as we do. I became a Christian at the age of 6, and at that young age I obviously hadn't delved very deeply into theological studies. Over the next 12 years I believed and did my best to be what I thought a good Christian should be. When I left home for boot camp, I attended the church services on Sunday, and the very first sermon I heard was about the prodigal son. It was then that I realized that the Bible stories I had learned as a child had real world implications for me, and I began to take my Christianity much more seriously. 

Thirteen years ago, my wife (Teresa) was in failing health, and eventually entered the hospital. During the next six weeks, to occupy my time as we sat in the hospital room, I began to read a lot of books, many of which were on the subject of Christian apologetics. These topics made me question my belief in God and my faith in Christ, and after spending a lot of time mulling these questions over in my mind, I reached the conclusion that God must exist, and that Christ was indeed His Son. I read the Bible front to back, which helped me understand who God is and what His plan is. 

At the end of this six weeks of study, my wife's condition had deteriorated to the point that she was in a coma. The doctors were able to bring her out of it, but about the same time they finally diagnosed her condition and, to quote the medical texts on the subject, her prognosis was "bleak". I was faced with a choice of struggling to keep her alive in excruciating pain with no hope of recovery, or doing the best I could to keep her comfortable until she passed. 

At this point there were certain things I was sure of. I was certain that the God of the Bible was real, and that Christ had died to save those who had accepted His gift of grace. I knew that Teresa would never recover from her illness, and that every day she lingered would be filled with unimaginable pain. Teresa was a strong Christian, so I was certain that she was going to a much better place where she could live without pain or suffering. As much as I wanted to continue to fight to keep her alive, I was at peace with my decision to let her go. I cannot imagine making that decision without the firm knowledge of the saving grace of Christ, and I thank God for leading me to the place that I could find that peace.


----------



## MDKatie (Dec 13, 2010)

Karen said:


> I know this might sound self-serving, but what actually forced me into examining whether God exists or not was when 2 questions popped into my mind one day.
> 
> The first was, "What would I be out if I went out on a limb and had some faith in God; what would I be out"? My conclusion was nothing other than just kidding myself. If God didn't exist and all there was is nothingness after we die, then there will still be nothingness when I die. In the meantime, having faith that I'm not alone and someone else has my back, surely would help to get me through life. Whether there is or isn't, if it helps during the bad times, then again, what would I be out. Absolutely nothing; it cost me nothing.
> 
> ...


You bring up some good points. I hope you don't mind if I answer your questions...mainly using my thought process to answer those same questions to myself. I am not arguing with you or your opinions, but just using your questions to explain how I would think of the answers. 

As an atheist, I don't know for sure if there is or isn't a god, but my belief is there is not. Nobody can say exactly though. To answer the first of your questions, if there was no god, then there will still be nothingness when we die, like you said. I guess I see my friends and family as the people who have my back in this life. 

For the second part, if there IS actually a god, and I find that out when I die, I would feel comfortable knowing I lived a good life and was a good and nice person. Would god not let me in heaven just because I didn't believe in him, even if I've lived a good and honorable life? If so, great. If not, I don't want to be a part of a religion (or belief system) that would honor a god like that.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

deaconjim said:


> These topics made me question my belief in God and my faith in Christ, and after spending a lot of time mulling these questions over in my mind, I reached the conclusion that God must exist, and that Christ was indeed His Son.


You didn't provide any detail on how you arrived at that conclusion, other than to state what your conclusion was.

You might not believe this, but how people adopted a belief in religion interests me a great deal.


----------



## Truckinguy (Mar 8, 2008)

vicker said:


> Wow! It must be wonderful to be so far removed from guilt and negativity. I don't feel guilt because I learned it from my religion, but because I am guilty. I have done terrible things in my life that hurt myself and others. I have made huge mistakes that can never be corrected. My religion tells me not that I am guilty, I already knew that, but that I have hope of redemption. I know others who share that hope, and I'm proud to be a part of that group. I'm no Jesus.  I was probably like you at some point in my life, but I fell here and there until all I did was fall. I didn't want to be the person I was, but could not not be. While Jesus may purchase my sins and offer me forgiveness, he can't remove them, or take the effects of them away. They remain, rippling outward forever. You have my best wishes for the continuance of your cleanliness.


I"m sorry that you have done terrible things in your life and I hope you find the peace you are looking for. Yes, it is wonderful to not be focused on guilt and negativity. I consider myself a good person but I have made mistakes in my life and I have done things that I'm not proud of, however, nothing that would require someone else's death to make up for them. I will never be perfect and I"m not even attempting to be. We are human and we will make mistakes. Learning from our mistakes and rectifying the situation is how we grow to be better people. Having someone else pay the price for our mistakes is kind of passing the buck, don't you think? Seems like an easy way out and a way to avoid personal responsibility.


----------



## Truckinguy (Mar 8, 2008)

deaconjim said:


> Then by all means find whatever makes you happy.


Thank you, Jim, I have. The question of the OP was about why we believe what we believe and I choose to take a positive path rather than a path that starts out by telling me I'm a "sinner" just by being born and will amount to nothing unless I'm "saved". My path starts off by telling me I'm a good person but flawed and that's ok. I"m a work in progress and always will be and that's ok too.


----------



## Truckinguy (Mar 8, 2008)

Karen said:


> I know this might sound self-serving, but what actually forced me into examining whether God exists or not was when 2 questions popped into my mind one day.
> 
> The first was, "What would I be out if I went out on a limb and had some faith in God; what would I be out"? My conclusion was nothing other than just kidding myself. If God didn't exist and all there was is nothingness after we die, then there will still be nothingness when I die. In the meantime, having faith that I'm not alone and someone else has my back, surely would help to get me through life. Whether there is or isn't, if it helps during the bad times, then again, what would I be out. Absolutely nothing; it cost me nothing.
> 
> ...


I worked with a guy many years ago who was Mormon and one day he told me basically this. My question was "would God be satisfied if you believed in him "just in case he exists"?


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Truckinguy said:


> I worked with a guy many years ago who was Mormon and one day he told me basically this. My question was "would God be satisfied if you believed in him "just in case he exists"?


A lot of people become active in church after retirement. While it might be reasonable to believe that some of them are there to enjoy social contact, it not hard to imagine that a lot of them are there just in case there's a God & heaven. What do they have to lose?


----------



## deaconjim (Oct 31, 2005)

Truckinguy said:


> Thank you, Jim, I have. The question of the OP was about why we believe what we believe and I choose to take a positive path rather than a path that starts out by telling me I'm a "sinner" just by being born and will amount to nothing unless I'm "saved". My path starts off by telling me I'm a good person but flawed and that's ok. I"m a work in progress and always will be and that's ok too.


In that case, we started at the same point. I want to be a good person, but I recognize my flaws. Nothing negative about that.


----------



## deaconjim (Oct 31, 2005)

Nevada said:


> You didn't provide any detail on how you arrived at that conclusion, other than to state what your conclusion was.
> 
> You might not believe this, but how people adopted a belief in religion interests me a great deal.


There are limits to what I can post on a forum. The things that drove me to the conclusions I reached took up one Bible and a number of other books written by some very intelligent people, as well as a few decades of living. To even attempt to summarize it in a post here would be out of the question. If you are genuinely interested, read the books written by Ravi Zacharias, and perhaps some by Lee Strobel.


----------



## Lazaryss (Jul 28, 2012)

deaconjim said:


> There are limits to what I can post on a forum. The things that drove me to the conclusions I reached took up one Bible and a number of other books written by some very intelligent people, as well as a few decades of living. To even attempt to summarize it in a post here would be out of the question. If you are genuinely interested, read the books written by Ravi Zacharias, and perhaps some by Lee Strobel.


Ravi Zacharias and Lee Strobel are amazing. Are you familiar with Hank Hanegraaff?


----------



## deaconjim (Oct 31, 2005)

Lazaryss said:


> Ravi Zacharias and Lee Strobel are amazing. Are you familiar with Hank Hanegraaff?


No I'm not, but I know how to correct that. Thank you!


----------



## paradox (Nov 19, 2012)

MDKatie said:


> For the second part, if there IS actually a god, and I find that out when I die, I would feel comfortable knowing I lived a good life and was a good and nice person. Would god not let me in heaven just because I didn't believe in him, even if I've lived a good and honorable life? If so, great. If not, I don't want to be a part of a religion (or belief system) that would honor a god like that.


This is me just answering that question from a Christian viewpoint. I am not attacking you or trying to convince you of anything, just trying to answer the question and explain how we can not only honor but love a God like that. This is fairly mainstream Christianity stuff, but I know some denominations and certainly other religions have different ideals. I truly hope that some of my fellow Christians won't find this to sound irreverant because I am going to paraphrase and summarize a bit. 

God is perfect and His standards for someone being "good" are pretty high. So high that it is not actually possible for a human to to meet those standards. (Romans 3:23) They used to try (Old Testament) and were failing pretty miserably, and doing all kinds of offerings to try and atone for the things they did wrong. Also the religious leaders of the time had gotten a bit big headed with all their power and started making a bunch of their own rules that were pretty silly and impossible to follow (like how many steps you could walk in a day - what is up with that???). Basically they were just being typical humans and really messing up what could have been a good sytem and it was kind of a neverending cycle so God sent Christ (New Testament) who offered his own life as a sacrifice to pay for everyone's mistakes all in one fell swoop (John 3:16). And then He actually said "It is finished." right before He died in case anyone didn't get the point (John 19:30). So now we don't have to do all those offerings, we only have to understand that Christ's offering covered us. See He doesn't expect you to live a "good enough" life because He knows we really can't be pure of heart and mind and motive every second of every day. All He asks is for you to accept the fact that Christ paid for whatever mistakes you have made or will make and then do the best you can to do better next time. So in our belief the only actual unpardonable sin is simply not believing in God and Christ, because then your mistakes are not covered, you are back to fending for yourself. 

It's kind of like if you were convicted of a murder and sentenced to death row but then this guy stands up and says he will go in your place and you can go home. The judge agrees that will be fine, but you have to decide, do you want to answer for the crime yourself or let this other guy do it for you? Accepting his sacrifice on your behalf is all that is required to go free. Does that make any sense? I don't mean that like "do you believe it now?" - I just mean have I made an analogy that clears up the way we think and why it is necessary to believe in God and have that other guy (Christ) pay for your mess before you actually die?


----------



## Karen (Apr 17, 2002)

Even though I've been a Christian now for 50 years, for some reason I still can't wrap my mind around the 'sacrifice' stuff. I know all the theological discussions and explanations, but I've never been able understand why God required them in the first place and how that makes up for sin. Why doesn't God just forgive since He knows our hearts, that we are truly sorry, and have repented? Why did He require murder (first of helpless animals and then ultimately His own son) in order to forgive in us? 

It just has always seemed so odd coming from a God of so much love. It's on my list of "1 million Things To Ask God" if I ever do get there.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

It is not God, it is a natural law. Once an act is done it cannot be undone. It is done. The sacrifices were an attempt at making us see a cost for our sins. That didn't really work very well. God did not just make up random laws. They are laws because they are true, not true because they are laws. We can have forgiveness of a sin, but the act is never taken away from having happened, and rarely can we make it right in any shape or form.


----------



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

Karen said:


> Even though I've been a Christian now for 50 years, for some reason I still can't wrap my mind around the 'sacrifice' stuff. I know all the theological discussions and explanations, but I've never been able understand why God required them in the first place and how that makes up for sin. Why doesn't God just forgive since He knows our hearts, that we are truly sorry, and have repented? Why did He require murder (first of helpless animals and then ultimately His own son) in order to forgive in us?
> 
> It just has always seemed so odd coming from a God of so much love. It's on my list of "1 million Things To Ask God" if I ever do get there.


One man Adam the father of the human race was made in the image of God. Being in the beginning sinless he willingly chose to sin .... and his sin would result in death of the body .... a condition passed on by inheritance to all of his offspring..... they would be born sinners and because of sin their bodies would die.

One sinless man Christ who is God incarnate .... paid the penalty for sin which was death

One sinless man caused the sin and another sinless man paid the price for the worlds sin .... which was the result of one man sinning.

God in the beginning before he created man .... knew this would happen.... and he chose to save those who would believe

It's just the way He set things up.

*1 Corinthians 1:18-31 (New International Version)*

*Christ Crucified Is Godâs Power and Wisdom*

18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written:
âI will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.â[a]

20 Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22 Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.
26 Brothers and sisters, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. 27 But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. 28 God chose the lowly things of this world and the despised thingsâand the things that are notâto nullify the things that are, 29 so that no one may boast before him. 30 It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from Godâthat is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption. 31 Therefore, as it is written: âLet the one who boasts boast in the Lord.â[b]


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> So for me, I figured I don't need to know all things. I don't need to understand all things. I just need to have a tiny amount of faith and let it grow from there to wherever it goes from there. For me, I'd rather take the chance I'm wrong in having God in my life and be out nothing,


If you really are "out nothing" by believing, it's quite possible you've made a good bargain.

But sometimes faith costs people a lot, the obvious example being the martyrs. Of course there are numerous lesser examples as well -- for instance, people who stay in miserable marriages because they feel compelled by the Biblical laws regarding divorce. That's sad, and so unnecessary, IMO, but ... to each his own, I guess!



> You have reached the best conclusion that you can at this point, and I have as well. I am happy to respect your decision as long as you will offer the same consideration (or even if you don't).


Does this mean you won't be voting to make gay marriage illegal if it comes up on the ballot in your state?


----------



## deaconjim (Oct 31, 2005)

willow_girl said:


> If you really are "out nothing" by believing, it's quite possible you've made a good bargain.
> 
> But sometimes faith costs people a lot, the obvious example being the martyrs. Of course there are numerous lesser examples as well -- for instance, people who stay in miserable marriages because they feel compelled by the Biblical laws regarding divorce. That's sad, and so unnecessary, IMO, but ... to each his own, I guess!
> 
> ...


Too late, that's already been done.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

I think it is Haven who has a few times commented ( in the past) that sometimes she hates the way some Christians seem to act like their beliefs or something puts them in an inclusive (exclusive?) club or something, I'm paraphrasing. I Hope I don't sound like that, as I don't feel that way and don't think that. I think we are all different and unique to God and God would never want us to all be the same, and I certainly don't think others should be like me or that I have some more special than normal thing with God. I think our paths are different, but eventually lead to the same place. I do think I have a special relationship, but no more special than anyone else's. it is mine. I've always been a very curious person, and want to know things. Early in my teens I was saved at a Billy Graham revival. After that I lived my life as most people, but had a huge thirst for knowledge. I read lots of science, philosophy, psychology and other books that expanded my views of the world and people in it. I studied many religions. I have been or studied deeply; Buddhist, Methodist, Southern Baptist, 1'st Baptist, fundament baptist, Church of God, church of Christ, Pentacostal, Jehova's witness, 7th Day Adventist, Christian missionary alliance and many more I can't think if right now.  I also drank a lot, chased women, did drugs and lived a heck of a life. I swung all over the place and learned much. 
In my early 20's I read a book, King of the Earth, The nobility of Man According to The Bible and Science (yeah, I got hooked by the title ) by Erich Sauer. That book was heavy reading, but really got me fired up on Physics , and on a deeper inquiry of "why am I am I here?". By then I was married, had a couple of kids and was settled down. For the first time in my life I felt connected, whole. I went to a normal church and lived a normal life. In 1989 it all started to come unraveled, and came apart at the seems. My whole world fell apart. I could not imagine why God had let this happen to me, had DONE this to me! At the time I was in a unique position and able to read almost all of most days. I read the bible for two years, front to back, back to front and sideways. I also fasted and prayed for days on end. I wanted understanding, but mostly I wanted to defeat my enemies. Instead, God gave me complete defeat  I lost everything. But somehow, through screaming, cursing and arguing with God, I got faith lol! Not exactly what I asked for. I think I also got understanding, but its been a long time coming. Somehow, I came through the last 25 years not believing in God, but knowing God. It is the one thing I would give anyone, if I could give anyone anything, but I can't.  
I don't think less of anyone for not believing. I do sometimes get angry at people who, I think, show a shallow and superficial understanding of God, especially when they are vociferous, but I try to hold my tongue.
I could tell you about the dream that prepared me for the whole end of my world as I knew it, and about the many years of arguing with God that followed. I pray my best alone in the wilderness, because it often involves yelling and sometimes bad language  My relationship with God is very real, and hasn't come cheap.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> Too late, that's already been done.


And thus you can dodge the question!


----------



## Karen (Apr 17, 2002)

vicker said:


> It is not God, it is a natural law. Once an act is done it cannot be undone. It is done. The sacrifices were an attempt at making us see a cost for our sins. That didn't really work very well. God did not just make up random laws. They are laws because they are true, not true because they are laws. We can have forgiveness of a sin, but the act is never taken away from having happened, and rarely can we make it right in any shape or form.





Johnny Dolittle said:


> One man Adam the father of the human race was made in the image of God. Being in the beginning sinless he willingly chose to sin .... and his sin would result in death of the body .... a condition passed on by inheritance to all of his offspring..... they would be born sinners and because of sin their bodies would die.
> 
> One sinless man Christ who is God incarnate .... paid the penalty for sin which was death
> 
> ...


I get that and, I even get that a price must be paid, but murder just seems so 'out there' and makes absolutely no sense to me. Especially when you consider that "do not murder" is one of God's laws. Yet when it applies to Him, it then becomes (not only a requirement) but a _necessity_ in order for us to be absolved of our sin.

I mean, He's God and, therefore can do anything -- including forgiving and forgetting if He wants to without requiring a murder. I don't get why He didn't choose another forum that was more appropriate and within all His other examples and character.

And getting back to Adam and Eve. None us even knew the guy and yet all of mankind has to suffer and pay for his mistake for all eternity. Adam and Eve probably didn't even know serpents weren't suppose to talk. It was a good argument the serpent presented and it wasn't like they had been around the block to know bad things to make an informed decision; nor did they know or understand what 'consequences' was. 

It seem a pretty harsh judgment from a loving God. If He didn't want them to eat from it, then why even put it there in the first place. Instead, one of God's first missions in the life of mankind was to 'test' them. Since He knows all things, then He already knew they would fail the test, so why even continue on with humanity? It seems almost like God's desire is to punish man for being who He created Him to be. 

I know, I'm probably the only Christian on earth that doesn't get this. I accept it, but I don't understand it and I do have issues with it. :ashamed:


----------



## Karen (Apr 17, 2002)

willow_girl said:


> Does this mean you won't be voting to make gay marriage illegal if it comes up on the ballot in your state?


What Jim was saying is that it has already come up and voted down. So it's a moot point here in Virginia. But, when it does come up again (and it will at some point), there are more and more Christians who would vote for it. I'm one. But there will always be those who feel it would be against God to vote for it and we need to respect that they have that right as well, even if we think they are being unfair and not in touch.


----------



## Elffriend (Mar 2, 2003)

Karen said:


> I know, I'm probably the only Christian on earth that doesn't get this. I accept it, but I don't understand it and I do have issues with it. :ashamed:


Don't worry about it too much. I'm a Jew and the whole Adam and Eve story bugs me to no end. First, it doesn't show God in a very good light. He's like a parent who leaves a plate of cookies on the coffee table, tells his 2 yr old not to touch them, then leaves the room to see what will happen. Then there's Adam, father of all humanity, who when God asks him if he ate the fruit, instead of saying "Yes, Lord, I'm sorry" starts pointing fingers. He says "The WOMAN (blaming Eve), who YOU (blaming God) gave me bid me to eat" It makes God sound like a bad parent and Adam like a whiny little boy.


----------



## Tabitha (Apr 10, 2006)

Karen said:


> Even though I've been a Christian now for 50 years, for some reason I still can't wrap my mind around the 'sacrifice' stuff. I know all the theological discussions and explanations, but I've never been able understand why God required them in the first place and how that makes up for sin. Why doesn't God just forgive since He knows our hearts, that we are truly sorry, and have repented? Why did He require murder (first of helpless animals and then ultimately His own son) in order to forgive in us?
> 
> It just has always seemed so odd coming from a God of so much love. It's on my list of "1 million Things To Ask God" if I ever do get there.


I know just how you feel, been there and struggled with it for years. I do not wish to come across as a know it all, just what I came up with after much search, prayer, agonizing and etc. 

Can you imagine the temple, it must have been a slaughterhouse without running water and refrigeration. Must have smelled stenchy. Okay, so in the bible there are directions for sacrifice, and there are statements totally to the contrary, totally opposite. Oodles of them, God abhors sacrifice. Okay, then I came across an article by scientists that claim according to their studies, the old Israelites did not sacrifice. It came into use after Babylon. The Persian king financed the building of the new temple, for the purpose of offering sacrifice and donated money to buy bulls, etc. Check it out in Ezra. He who pays calls the shots. 
God says, lets reason together, though our sins are red as scarlett he will make us white as snow. that is in the old testament. 
The sacrifice of Jesus was a baffling point. Me being catholic, and here they say to God during Mass for God to accept this sacrifice.? Are they sacrificing the son to his own father? So if my neighbor does something bad to me, I can not forgive him until my own kid has died a terrible death as a sacrifice to me. If he does not claim this sacrifice, he will go to a horrible hell for ever. I sure would love to see an explanation by a conventional Christian as to that. 
In a nut shell, all heathen offered sacrifices, some going so far as to throw their little children into the fire. Their gods demanded sacrifice. God says, don't do like the heathen. 
Who was Jesus sacrificed to if his death was a sacrifice? Who had a claim to us since we all sinned and the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is life? The Bible claims we were bought with a price ( His blood and dying), we were ransomed, who was paid for us? God is willing to forgive us, he needs no blood, but there is a dark side who says, not fair, we have to pay. No life for us. So God GAVE his son (John 3:16).
According to the Bible, Satan is the ruler of this Earth, ( look at the shape it is in) and he has power here, insomuch that he could tempt Jesus and tried to draw him to his side. 

okay, my 0.2 cents worth.
PS there are scriptures to back up everything I said.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

The incident in the garden involved more than the simple ingestion of a piece of fruit. The question raised by Satan, through man, in the Garden was and is a legitimate question. If God through his strength and power overruled, and prevented the whole thing from playing out, he would be a powerful god, but he would not be a perfect and just God, as the question would remain. A big part of why we are here is to answer that question once and for all.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

vicker said:


> So, if my fruit is Christian fruit, that identifies me as Christian?, even though I am outwardly an agnostic, Buddhist, nudist?


No. Does having feathers identify a bird as a chicken?

Stating it IDs you as a Christian, but your fruit is the proof. As I have said again and again, you can't tell if someone *is* a Christian but you can almost always tell when they are *NOT *based on their actions.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

As Dietrich Bonhoeffer said, "When Jesus calls a man, he bids him come and die.", and he was not speaking metaphorically. I don't know many who answer that call. The modern church, conveniently, forgets those hard parts. I sure hope you are wrong, Watcher. He also said," Even on the cross Jesus did not try to convert the two thieves, but waited until one turned to him".


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

vicker said:


> The incident in the garden involved more than the simple ingestion of a piece of fruit. *The question raised by Satan, through man, in the Garden was and is a legitimate question*. If God through his strength and power overruled, and prevented the whole thing from playing out, he would be a powerful god, but he would not be a perfect and just God, as the question would remain. *A big part of why we are here is to answer that question once and for all*.


Please save me from having to try to track it down. What was the question???


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

In short, can we be as gods? Do we need God, or can we do just fine by ourselves, apart from God?


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> Don't worry about it too much. I'm a Jew and the whole Adam and Eve story bugs me to no end.


I've always read the story as a sort of allegory of human existence. We are born into paradise in the sense that our parents (like Father God) provide for our every need, but we're not content to stay there. Eventually we want to eat from the tree of knowledge ourselves; we want to become adults. We then are cast out of the garden of childhood innocence. In exchange for gaining the pleasures and privileges of adulthood -- for instance, sexual knowledge -- we must endure a lifetime of adult toil and become parents ourselves. There's no turning back!


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

vicker said:


> In short, can we be as gods? Do we need God, or can we do just fine by ourselves, apart from God?


I believe there is a 3rd option then. Needing god and at the same time being as gods. That is to say, being a part of god and god being everything ..... I am god and god is me because god is all, in all, and all is in god.

Only I guess for many that would not be an acceptable option and could cause severe cognitive dissonance for a lot of people. It would make Satan a paradox and everyone would have to accept responsibility for themselves for being god.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

These are not new ideas or questions. It is interesting to note that they seem to predate the creation of man, and perhaps the earth itself. That is old


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

It's definitely not a new idea but it's the one that works for me and it fits with my ideologies and background. I learned that about 58 years ago or so..... anyway, when old enough to talk articulately and to really start becoming consciously aware of "other consciousnesses" of all things around me and was prompted to start asking my elders serious questions about god and all that is.

I am god and you are god and we are god and we are all god together and god is everything. Kukukuchookuchoo. :happy2:


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

As a member of the LDS church, I am definitely a believer. I believe in "God". Exactly what, however, God is, has not been revealed to me, yet. "God" is a title, not a name. Now, I know I was made in this God's image, so I know he is the celestial equivalent of a supreme "human" ( the word "human" being entirely a mortal descriptor). He is a deified "being". I do not believe that God is some big blue "supernatural" genie that sits, cross legged, above the Earth and metes out punishment and reward. Not for a minute! I believe that my essence is the same as His essence, because He made me and He is my Father, therefore I carry his essence within me. What exactly does that make him? Or what exactly does that make me, or this thing we call a "spirit"? What exactly is it? I don't know, but it fascinates me. 
Yes, I have this stuff called "faith", which is the substance of things hoped for, but not seen. I see the action of faith or the lack thereof, as being akin to a blind man who has never seen the sky, who cannot touch it, see it, taste it, or smell it, but rather must rely on other men's word that the sky exists, even though he is unable to imagine the color blue or the "puffiness" of cumulus clouds, or the breath taking glitter of a star studded sky. Never the less, despite his lack of understanding, the sky does exist. For some, those scales of blindness fall away, while for others, they do not. Now, this isn't to disparage anyone, but rather to try to explain my own view on the subject. I also believe that God loves us all, believers and unbelievers alike and he doesn't give up on any of us.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

stanb999 said:


> I would counter this with all the terrible things that happen to other people. Now one could say that "they were in need of testing" or other trials to make them better people.
> 
> A most extreme examples of course...
> But what say you of child burn victims. Were they in need of the pain and anguish? How about child cancer patients, they suffer so others can learn lessons.


People think like that when they believe God is active in everything that happens to people. As for me -- I think God is the God of the big picture, He set things up to work, but leaves us our agency to do what we will. Bad things happen because people choose to do wrong OR because accidents just happen.

I just don't believe that the "Supreme Ruler of the Universe" helps people locate their missing car keys like some people claim, or tells them who to marry, or what property to buy, or causes little children to get burnt or get cancer to teach people lessons. ymmv


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

wyld thang said:


> Seems to me cush and the sweet untroubled thank you Jesus life should be suspect.


Who thinks the followers of Jesus have, or even Jesus Himself had, a "cush and the sweet untroubled thank you Jesus life" ????


----------



## Oggie (May 29, 2003)

I'm still trying to decide if ascribing various human characteristics to an all-powerful, all-knowing entity would be considered "anthropomorphism" or "personification".


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Harry Chickpea said:


> For myself, I find Christ to be immensely edifying, but am NOT a fan of Saul/Paul who was way too worldly and rule-based for my taste. He organized and promoted and created a structure that grew to oppressiveness, had to break apart, and reform, ad inifnitum. The Christ of the Bible was far beyond and above that.


I tend to agree with you, many Christians today are actually Paulites rather than Christians. (followers of Paul more than followers of Christ)


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

watcher said:


> Those who claim they have no faith have a major problem. How do you explain the beginning of the universe? Even the most fanitical believer in the religion of science has to admit that at some point something had to be created out of nothing. If you only can accept what you can see or prove then how can you accept the universe actually exist because you can't prove it was created.


There is always the flip side of that: who created God or how did he come into existence -- hint: 'He always was' is not an acceptable answer


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

> There is good reason to suppose the god of the bible doesn't exist. Carbon dating Dinosaur bones and noting the date conflicts with the purported age of the planet is just one tiny piece in a mountain of evidence.


 Not all Christian denominations believe in the 'Young Earth' theory (personally I don't know how anyone can). My Christian denomination believes that the Earth has existed for billions of years, and that yes, dinosaurs existed at one time long before mankind existed.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Tiempo said:


> See, I've never met anyone who claims Christianity who thinks they are not such a great Christian, most seem pretty certain they are, while the actions of some of them (certainly not all, but a LOT) would suggest otherwise.
> 
> I mean this in a general sense, not you personally, but how do you know you are one of the good ones when so many seem to be getting it wrong yet are not aware of it?


That's funny, I think I'm a lousy Christian, but I keep trying to get better at it. 

Churches (Good ones at least) are not resting places for saints, they are hospitals for sinners where we can get help and encouragement from other sinners that are also trying to be better.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Elffriend said:


> Don't worry about it too much. I'm a Jew and the whole Adam and Eve story bugs me to no end. First, it doesn't show God in a very good light. He's like a parent who leaves a plate of cookies on the coffee table, tells his 2 yr old not to touch them, then leaves the room to see what will happen. Then there's Adam, father of all humanity, who when God asks him if he ate the fruit, instead of saying "Yes, Lord, I'm sorry" starts pointing fingers. He says "The WOMAN (blaming Eve), who YOU (blaming God) gave me bid me to eat" It makes God sound like a bad parent and Adam like a whiny little boy.


Lets look at it differently: Eve was told that to know good from evil was the ultimate prize: its what God knew, and that the only way to do that was to eat the fruit of that tree. Adam knowing Eve would be cast out of the garden choose to follow her. 

This way of thinking Eve made a wise choice, as did Adam. Most Christians see it as a terrible thing they did, I don't: it was their crowning achievement, now we have the freedom of knowing good and evil and choosing for ourselves which we will follow.


----------



## Work horse (Apr 7, 2012)

MDKatie said:


> As an atheist, I don't know for sure if there is or isn't a god, but my belief is there is not. Nobody can say exactly though. To answer the first of your questions, if there was no god, then there will still be nothingness when we die, like you said. I guess I see my friends and family as the people who have my back in this life.
> 
> For the second part, if there IS actually a god, and I find that out when I die, I would feel comfortable knowing I lived a good life and was a good and nice person. Would god not let me in heaven just because I didn't believe in him, even if I've lived a good and honorable life? If so, great. If not, I don't want to be a part of a religion (or belief system) that would honor a god like that.


You and I share the same beliefs. 

I have nothing to lose in life by not worshiping a god; one might say I actually have more time to love everything and everyone in my real. actual. life. because I am not attending church or those types of things. Life is amazing! The sun comes up and goes down, stuff grows, stuff dies, life goes on... I am fascinated by it all and I have a very deep appreciation for it's beauty. I work hard, I'm a good neighbour, a good friend, a good wife... I'm an honest person who wants to just live a good life. 

If it turns out I'm wrong, and I find out there is a god when I die, then I would simply ask god why he did not make himself known to me. I would not feel that I owed an apology for not believing... I need to hear it from the horse's mouth, so to speak. 

It's a risk I'm willing to take.


----------



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

mnn2501 said:


> I tend to agree with you, many Christians today are actually Paulites rather than Christians. (followers of Paul more than followers of Christ)


Paul once said follow me as I have followed Christ.


----------



## Cabin Fever (May 10, 2002)

I REALLY try to stay away from religious debates. Seems like people are constantly arguing over what is fact and what is fiction. They point to this book, or that author, or some prophet when trying to find answers. They argue incessantly over the interpretation of something that is written in ancient scrolls and scriptures. I say stop searching and just open your eyes.

My belief, my faith, is simple. I&#8217;m a scientist and a scientist looks for proof. I see more proof of a Creator by using my own eyes than I am going to find by studying and interpreting ancient canons or dogma. I see this proof in the awesome beauty that surrounds me, the living soil, the vast oceans, the majestic mountains, the star-spangled sky, the miracle of birth, the feeling of love, the complexity of the human body or of any living creature or plant for that matter, the intricate web of earth&#8217;s ecosystems, the solar system, the Universe, the unexplanable smile on my Dad's face when he took his last breath on Earth. All of these things and so much more are proof to me of an awesome Supreme Being. And, I thank that Creator with every chance I get.

And, I also see what horrible evil man can do to other men like the holocaust, or the cruelty that man can impart to torture helpless animals, and the greed and lust of some men, my eyes also tell me that there is hideous, horrible evil that lurks on this earth. I see a constant struggle between good and evil. 

Yeah, I know that my faith is simple, but I know that the good and evil I see and experience is not by evolutionary chance or the result of some &#8220;Big Bang&#8221;....no way, no one will ever convince of that. No one will ever convince me that there is not a supernatural Creator and supernatural Evil....the proof is right before my eyes.


----------



## Tiempo (May 22, 2008)

mnn2501 said:


> That's funny, I think I'm a lousy Christian, but I keep trying to get better at it.
> 
> Churches (Good ones at least) are not resting places for saints, they are hospitals for sinners where we can get help and encouragement from other sinners that are also trying to be better.


I worded my post poorly. 

I was thinking more about the Christians here, who when the subject of Christians behaving badly comes up, often seem to say that it's because those people are not 'real Christians' or something similar because of their actions... however, 'those people' consider themselves Christians.

I guess rather than using the term "good Christian", I'm wondering how anyone can be sure they are not one of "those Christians" if "those Christians" don't know that they are one of "those Christians"


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Tiempo said:


> I was thinking more about the Christians here, who when the subject of Christians behaving badly comes up, often seem to say that it's because those people are not 'real Christians' or something similar because of their actions... however, 'those people' consider themselves Christians.
> 
> I guess rather than using the term "good Christian", I'm wondering how anyone can be sure they are not one of "those Christians" if "those Christians" don't know that they are one of "those Christians"


All I can say is 'if someone has to tell me they are Christian, In my mind they probably are mistaken' and by this standard that I use many atheists and agnostics are much more Christian than some people claiming that title.

Now that's not to say there are not a lot of people doing the best they can with what they know and I give them credit for that, but think they could be much much more.


----------



## tarbe (Apr 7, 2007)

mnn2501 said:


> I tend to agree with you, many Christians today are actually Paulites rather than Christians. (followers of Paul more than followers of Christ)


Did Paul teach in opposition to Christ's teachings?


----------



## Truckinguy (Mar 8, 2008)

I think I really have a big problem with the whole concept of sin. We are told we are born in sin and I've heard it argued that we are actually sinners since conception. I find it hard to wrap my head around the concept that I'm somehow a bad person just because I exist. If I steal something, I should suffer the consequences of my actions, if I commit fraud or murder, I should be punished to the full extent of the law. However, I refuse to believe that if I am a good person, treat people nicely and help others when I can, that I still need "saving" because I"m somehow a "sinner".

I see all the things that Cabin Fever sees and I see proof of Nature. I believe Nature is completely capable of being wonderful and creative and has had millions of years to get to where we are. Mother Nature can be cruel and unforgiving but she can also be beautiful and complex and comforting. I don't see the beauty of conception, gestation and birth and say "There must be a God". I understand the biology of it and it reinforces in me the beauty and wonder of this planet that we live on. I believe that there is still much we don't know and I wish I could live forever to see the natural, scientific and technological discoveries in the future and see where mankind goes as we travel the galaxy and hopefully meet other civilizations. 

I wake up every morning content in my beliefs and without the pressure to attain some impossible level of perfection that I'm told I have to achieve but, by the way, I'm not capable of achieving. I'm a good person, not a "sinner" and I"m capable of walking on my own two feet and learning from my own mistakes.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

mnn2501 said:


> There is always the flip side of that: who created God or how did he come into existence -- hint: 'He always was' is not an acceptable answer


It is to those who put their faith in God and not the religion of science. In science you can not have something which was created from nothing.


----------



## Elffriend (Mar 2, 2003)

mnn2501 said:


> Lets look at it differently: Eve was told that to know good from evil was the ultimate prize: its what God knew, and that the only way to do that was to eat the fruit of that tree. Adam knowing Eve would be cast out of the garden choose to follow her.


In Genesis 2:17 the Lord tells Adam that the punishment for eating from the tree is death, not expulsion from Eden. Eve wasn't even created yet when this commandment was handed down. 

It still begs the question as to why God would do this. If He is all-knowing then He had to have known exactly what was going to happen. Why would He set such a temptation in their midst?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

I seem to have missed a post where carbon dating was brought up. I just have to say anyone putting their money on that horse might want to research it first. Specifically the flaws in it.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

mnn2501 said:


> Churches (Good ones at least) are not resting places for saints, they are hospitals for sinners where we can get help and encouragement from other sinners that are also trying to be better.


I disagree. Churches, as in the places where believers meet, are places where those believers are uplifted, supported and taught God's Word so they can grow and take that Word out to the world. If you want a worldly analogy I'd say a church is more like a gym or physical rehab center.

You, the believer, are the real Church. You should be the one leading people to Christ daily. By your life and your actions.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Truckinguy said:


> I think I really have a big problem with the whole concept of sin. We are told we are born in sin and I've heard it argued that we are actually sinners since conception. I find it hard to wrap my head around the concept that I'm somehow a bad person just because I exist. If I steal something, I should suffer the consequences of my actions, if I commit fraud or murder, I should be punished to the full extent of the law. However, I refuse to believe that if I am a good person, treat people nicely and help others when I can, that I still need "saving" because I"m somehow a "sinner".


The fact people are born sinners is easily proven. Every known anyone who had to teach a child to lie? Teach a child to be selfish? To hit another when they get angry?


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

Before the creation of man, the earth was created and dominion over it was given to Satan. Afterward, Satan raised the question, caused a revolution in heaven, and he and his minions were banished to his (Satan's) earth. If God would have destroyed Satan and taken back the earth, again, he would be powerful, but he would not be just, as the question would remain. When man was created the temptation was already there. Man did not have to fall to the temptation. God knew what would happen either way. Man was created to have and to make that choice, so why would God not allow man to make it? We were made to play this out.


----------



## Karen (Apr 17, 2002)

vicker said:


> Before the creation of man, the earth was created and dominion over it was given to Satan. Afterward, Satan raised the question, caused a revolution in heaven, and he and his minions were banished to his (Satan's) earth. If God would have destroyed Satan and taken back the earth, again, he would be powerful, but he would not be just, as the question would remain. When man was created the temptation was already there. Man did not have to fall to the temptation. God knew what would happen either way. Man was created to have and to make that choice, so why would God not allow man to make it? We were made to play this out.


But why? What is the reason we were set up for failure? God knew we would fail, so it really wasn't a choice. If it was, then why isn't every person given the same test instead of being cursed of sin before they even know what sin is or capable of making a choice just because Adam and Eve made the choice they did? I'm not convinced every person on the face of the earth since time began would have made the same choice. 

Another thing, if Adam and Eve had passed the test, would God have just left that tree there to continue the temptation, provided more tests, allowed Satan to keep pursuing them, etc., etc. Or would it have ended the whole temptation thing once and for all? I'm guessing not since He put Satan here and that would mean life long temptations. 

Which brings up another question. Why put Satan and his cronies in the midst of perfection? Why not send them to some other planet like Venus or something where man doesn't exist. Why put him in the mix on earth and then get all mad and annoyed and demanding sacrifices and give out punishments because man fails in the midst of temptation? God knew all this would happen, especially considering that Satan and his followers were angels. If an angel couldn't cut it, then man had no chance!


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

Oh boy, that's a lot of questions  I'm not going to try to answer all of them, but: God did not put the tree there, and the earth was not perfection. Satan owned and had had dominion over the earth for some time (thousands of years), and the tree was already there. Man was created and placed in the garden, nurtured by God, to husband the garden, expand it till it covered the earth, and reclaim it. Adam's choice removed that level of protection for all of us, and it couldn't be undone. There were some crazy things going on on the earth in those days, for instance the Nepilim who found the humans attractive, and mated with some of them (Gen. 6). Of course we had a chance, and we still do, we just took a many thousands of years side track to go to school. We have always had a choice. We just consistently say at the last minute, "OK, hold on a second, I'm not completely sure about this". We have always had the chance to turn to God, but we won't, not until we have finally become sure that there is no other way, because we think the cost is too high. And yes, God made us this way for a reason (I don't know, ask him ). It's kind of like The Wizard of Oz and Dorothy's ruby slippers.
We have always owned the power to go home. We have again and again, from the highest levels, corrupted the word of God to our comfort level, and now we've done it again. We now believe that the highest level of following God is to go to church on Sundays, knock on our neighbor's doors and tell them our beliefs, or stand on a street corner, and yell to everyone that they are going to hell. God does not need me to save people, He calls who he calls, my job is to follow Him. 
These are just my beliefs, answers I have come up with to the questions I ask. I am un-endorsed.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

On the cost being too high: Jesus commands us to give up every earthly thing and follow him; all things of monetary value, husbands, wives, children, parents and friends, and promises that we will be hated for it, and promises this, " Come unto me, all ye who are heavy laden, and I will give you rest, Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly of heart: and you shall find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light."  It just goes against our way of thinking in every way, and we eschew it. We put it as far away from us as earthly possible. We look for another way. Surely I can serve God and keep my Honda Rancher.


----------



## Truckinguy (Mar 8, 2008)

watcher said:


> The fact people are born sinners is easily proven. Every known anyone who had to teach a child to lie? Teach a child to be selfish? To hit another when they get angry?


This does not mean the child is inherently evil, these are easily correctable and the reason why we grow up in families. We learn as we grow and become better people. Through the guidance of loving parents and others in their social circles the child can be taught why these things are not acceptable, specially when they experience the negative effects of these themselves. There is evil in this world, of course, but I believe there is more good in this world than evil and the struggle between good and evil is what makes better human beings out of all of us. If we were born without any flaws there wouldn't be much personal growth as we learned from our mistakes.

I'm not trying to pick on Christianity in particular but that's where I came from, it's what I know, It's what's affected my family in traumatic ways and what I have serious issues with. I"m not impressed in the least with Islam but I admit I don't know much about it other than what I see on the news and what is discussed on this forum. I have done a little reading on Buddhism and find it interesting. I have done a fair bit of research on Wicca and Paganism and find they make the most sense although I don't follow them exclusively.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

vicker said:


> Oh boy, that's a lot of questions  I'm not going to try to answer all of them, but: God did not put the tree there, and the earth was not perfection. Satan owned and had had dominion over the earth for some time (thousands of years), and the tree was already there. Man was created and placed in the garden, nurtured by God, to husband the garden, expand it till it covered the earth, and reclaim it. Adam's choice removed that level of protection for all of us, and it couldn't be undone. There were some crazy things going on on the earth in those days, for instance the Nepilim who found the humans attractive, and mated with some of them (Gen. 6). Of course we had a chance, and we still do, we just took a many thousands of years side track to go to school. We have always had a choice. We just consistently say at the last minute, "OK, hold on a second, I'm not completely sure about this". We have always had the chance to turn to God, but we won't, not until we have finally become sure that there is no other way, because we think the cost is too high. And yes, God made us this way for a reason (I don't know, ask him ). It's kind of like The Wizard of Oz and Dorothy's ruby slippers.
> We have always owned the power to go home. We have again and again, from the highest levels, corrupted the word of God to our comfort level, and now we've done it again. We now believe that the highest level of following God is to go to church on Sundays, knock on our neighbor's doors and tell them our beliefs, or stand on a street corner, and yell to everyone that they are going to hell. God does not need me to save people, He calls who he calls, my job is to follow Him.
> These are just my beliefs, answers I have come up with to the questions I ask. I am un-endorsed.


You lost me here. God did not put the tree there, it was already there? But God created this world, did he not? Therefore, did he not create the tree? He created ("planted")the garden of Eden, therefore, he put the tree there.
But for the most part, I don't share this view with you, but I appreciate you sharing it. 
I believe that God DID plant the garden and place the tree in it. I also believe that God gave Adam and Eve (man and woman) 2 conflicting commandments. At first blush this may seem like a terrible quirk to ascribe to a merciful and loving God, but in truth, it is merciful and loving. Yes, he placed the tree there, and not merely to needlessly tempt mankind to disobedience. Adam and Eve could have remained in the garden, in total innocence, by obeying the commandment not to partake of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Yet they were also commanded to populate and replenish the Earth and to have "dominion" over all the Earth. Dominion is something that requires a knowledge of good and evil. Remember, along with the lack of knowledge of evil came the lack of knowledge of good. A choice had to be made and Eve, through the temptings of the serpent, who merely wanted Eve to disobey God without understanding himself the concepts of agency and obedience. Eve used, for the first time, her God given agency, in choosing to partake of the fruit, so as to better obey a higher commandment, that to populate the Earth and to have dominion over all the Earth. Why would God have given Adam and Eve agency and then tempt them to use it if he didn't intend for them to continue to use it. Why bother putting the tree there in the first place? Why put the serpent in the garden or allow him access if Eve wasn't supposed to be tempted to make this choice? Life would not have been any sort of testing ground if we were sent to Earth to live in an ignorant/naive/innocent state never learning anything but continuing to exist in that monotonous state whereby there was no hate, no love, no pain, no pleasure. You can't have the good without the evil. (Good and evil always existed though, as is evident by the presence of the serpent. It was only the knowledge of them, the awareness, and the ability to choose between the two that Adam and Eve obtained through eating the fruit) So I guess I should say you cannot appreciate the good without the knowledge of the evil. So Eve disobeyed one commandment in favor of a greater commandment, which exercised her agency for the first time, and showed some spark of understanding of 
God's laws, those lesser laws, and those greater laws, which became a recurring theme throughout the scriptures.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

In our faith, we don't believe babies are born sinners. As with Adam and Eve, sinning takes a certain amount of accountability. All babies are mortal therefore all babies are born with that potential to become sinners if they live long enough.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

tarbe said:


> Did Paul teach in opposition to Christ's teachings?


Actually I personally believe he did. I believe he added things to what Christ taught. Just to confirm, that is my personal belief and not that of the denomination I belong to.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Karen said:


> But why? What is the reason we were set up for failure?


I certainly do not see it as a failure. It was necessary.

Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy.


----------



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

My interpretation...

(1)The angels were made perfect but 1/3 rebelled . They were given a chance to repent but they would not.

(2)God made Adam knowing that he would sin and cause the entire human race to sin.
God has given a chance to repent.... some repent and some do not.

.... really is there that much difference between (1) and (2) ????????

.... in either case is God being fair ???


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

watcher said:


> If you want a worldly analogy I'd say a church is more like a gym or physical rehab center.


 Semantics


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

mnn2501 said:


> Semantics


Much more than that. You don't drag a dieing person to a gym and you don't go to the ER to train for a marathon. You go to church to train. Maybe a better analogy would be church is more like medical school or an EMT class.


----------



## Karen (Apr 17, 2002)

Dona, so what you're saying is that we weren't set up for failure, we were set up to experience life more fully? That does makes a whole lot of sense! 

Since some of what Satan said was true, it also shows how tricky and manipulative Satan is in how he can take just enough 'truth' to ultimately twist it enough to work it against us.

Do you happen to have any explanations of the whole sacrifice thing? I don't know why that one has always been my downfall. Several years ago, it had me reeling so much that I almost gave up my faith over it at one point until I agreed to just accept it, right or wrong simply because He's God and can do or demand whatever He wants. 

I just seem to have this mental block and conflict between God's love and righteousness and His demanding murder. I appreciate and love Christ, and truly honor and remember what He did as our final sacrifice, but at the same time, has been a weak point of almost being mad at God for such a horrible demanding act from Him; because I do love and appreciate Christ's sacrifice. I know, that probably doesn't make any sense. :lookout: 

Another question, if your faith teaches that baby's aren't born with original sin, when does sin come into their lives? I'm assuming upon their first acts of rebellion? But how can a child sin when their brain isn't even developed enough to understand the concept of sin? Just wanting what you want as a little child isn't sinning, IMHO; it's just being human and learning.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Karen said:


> Do you happen to have any explanations of the whole sacrifice thing? I don't know why that one has always been my downfall.


Because it shows that there is a cost for sinning, loosing a dove or a sheep in OT times was better than losing your soul. Why doesn't God just forgive? perhaps its the same reason giving the poor something for nothing doesn't work. There's no sorrow, there's nothing learned and its not of value to them
Sin has consequences.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

I completely agree with mnn2501 here (not surprisingly  ) I also think there is another layer (probably several more, but this one should be mentioned) and this is obedience. Its easy to be obedient when the law you are to obey is something easy, or mundane. Its not so easy when it is something we hold dear, and what do we hold more dear than life itself? God gave the life, and he can request it, or require it back, at our hand. He doesn't demand child sacrifice or the sacrifice of the vanquished. It was animal sacrifice, such as the lambs, doves, and kid goats that mankind was supposed to have dominion over. This theme of obedience in the face of living sacrifice is what the story of Abraham's willingness to sacrifice his son Isaac is all about. As hard and horrific as it was, Abraham was willing to obey, however, God mercifully stayed Abraham's hand because human sacrifice is not required and is even discouraged (strongly!). I think rituals and rites that are ethnically specific create a form of cohesion within the group, and adhering to the obedience required to maintain the cohesion is vitally important for the group. The early Jews had to learn that cohesion through obedience, and being a warlike and primitive culture, that obedience came in controlled manner that they could relate to. Animals meant wealth. The sacrifice was not much different than sacrificing our cash today, and many people think that's cruel!


----------



## Tabitha (Apr 10, 2006)

Karen said:


> But why? What is the reason we were set up for failure? God knew we would fail, so it really wasn't a choice. If it was, then why isn't every person given the same test instead of being cursed of sin before they even know what sin is or capable of making a choice just because Adam and Eve made the choice they did? I'm not convinced every person on the face of the earth since time began would have made the same choice.


I guess because God wants us to become tough and have good character. We have to contend with evil on this planet and the purpose is, to recognize it, overcome it and reject it. It says so in the Bible. I guess God is not interested in a bunch of automatons. We have to choose. Planet earth is a suicide mission. Nobody would make it if it was not for the saving grace of God. So unless things are as they are, we would not have a chance to overcome evil.


----------



## Work horse (Apr 7, 2012)

If all people are born sinners, then infants/children who die before accepting Christ go to hell, right? What about people without mental capacity?


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Work horse said:


> If all people are born sinners, then infants/children who die before accepting Christ go to hell, right? What about people without mental capacity?


Some people believe that, not me.
Until children know right from wrong its impossible for them to sin. Same with people with diminished mental capacity.

They may transgress Gods law, but they can not sin if they don't know and understand right and wrong.


----------



## Work horse (Apr 7, 2012)

mnn2501 said:


> Some people believe that, not me.
> Until children know right from wrong its impossible for them to sin. Same with people with diminished mental capacity.
> 
> They may transgress Gods law, but they can not sin if they don't know and understand right and wrong.


So wouldn't that also apply to people who don't believe in god?


----------



## tarbe (Apr 7, 2007)

mnn2501 said:


> Actually I personally believe he did. I believe he added things to what Christ taught. Just to confirm, that is my personal belief and not that of the denomination I belong to.


Can you share your examples, so I can try to learn something?

thanks,


Tim


----------



## Truckinguy (Mar 8, 2008)

Work horse said:


> So wouldn't that also apply to people who don't believe in god?


Sin is a concept invented by Christianity. To those who don't believe in God there is good and bad. We live our lives as well as we can. If we make a mistake, we correct it, learn from it and move on. If we commit a crime, we should be brought to justice for it and pay the appropriate price as society deems fit. If that price is death, so be it. We don't "sin" because the concept isn't part of our lives. Any price we pay for making mistakes or committing crimes is paid for by us, there is no need for someone else to sacrifice themselves to pay for us.


----------



## Work horse (Apr 7, 2012)

Truckinguy said:


> Sin is a concept invented by Christianity. To those who don't believe in God there is good and bad. We live our lives as well as we can. If we make a mistake, we correct it, learn from it and move on. If we commit a crime, we should be brought to justice for it and pay the appropriate price as society deems fit. If that price is death, so be it. We don't "sin" because the concept isn't part of our lives. Any price we pay for making mistakes or committing crimes is paid for by us, there is no need for someone else to sacrifice themselves to pay for us.


I know  

My comment was just food for thought -- if someone does not believe in god, they are _incapable_ of sinning. So if said person ends up being wrong about the god existing, wouldn't they still be innocent in god's eyes? 

To sin, you need to believe in god and knowingly reject him, or fail to love him. 

Atheism =/= rejecting god.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Work horse said:


> So wouldn't that also apply to people who don't believe in god?


To an extents yes. Meaning: Since they know right and wrong, even though they may not know Gods laws, they would be judged by what they know. In my belief system almost everyone makes it to Heaven.(In my Fathers house are many mansions - meaning to me at least that there are places for pretty much everyone.) 

God is not going to punish people who didn't know Him, in many cases through no fault of their own:


> Matthew 16:Verse 27 (KJV) For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.





> Romans 2: Verse 6 (NLT) He will judge everyone according to what they have done.


Every man and Everyone, not just some, and not just those that believed in him, everyone.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

I don't believe the non-believer is incapable of sinning any more than that blind man in my previous example is incapable of flying through the sky in an airplane. He may not believe the sky is there, and he feels the airplane beneath his body, but cannot recognize nor understand that he is truly flying through this thing called the sky, something no man can possibly explain to him so that he can see it/touch it/taste it/hear it/smell it. By all of his abilities and senses, it doesn't exist, even if he is flying through it. So the sinning unbeliever believes he cannot sin.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Work horse said:


> If all people are born sinners, then infants/children who die before accepting Christ go to hell, right? What about people without mental capacity?


Everyone is given the chance to choose. How? I don't know. But then again I don't know how the atom stays together yet it does.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Truckinguy said:


> Sin is a concept invented by Christianity. To those who don't believe in God there is good and bad. We live our lives as well as we can. If we make a mistake, we correct it, learn from it and move on. If we commit a crime, we should be brought to justice for it and pay the appropriate price as society deems fit. If that price is death, so be it. We don't "sin" because the concept isn't part of our lives. Any price we pay for making mistakes or committing crimes is paid for by us, there is no need for someone else to sacrifice themselves to pay for us.


So say society decides its ok to kill every person over 18 who is shorter than 5' 8". If you go out and shoot someone who is 5' 6" you haven't done anything "bad" because its socially acceptable?


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

watcher said:


> So say society decides its ok to kill every person over 18 who is shorter than 5' 8". If you go out and shoot someone who is 5' 6" you haven't done anything "bad" because its socially acceptable?


Yes. For the reason you stated in your first sentence. It is in accordance with that society's law so it's not bad for that society and has nothing to do with whether or not it's "socially acceptable". 

Actually, living in a society that had a law like that then there probably wouldn't be many adults under 5'8" anyway because everyone would be practising selective breeding for height.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

Oh what tangled webs we weave, when we practice to perceive.


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

> Oh what tangled webs we weave, when we practice to perceive.


That's the truth.

Different societies and belief systems have different perceptions and standards of what is good or bad. What might be considered to be wrong or a sin according to one society's religious laws, morals and standards may be considered to be perfectly correct by a different society's standards. 

I think people of any religion/society need to be careful to not set themselves up as judge and jury of other religions/societies' sins or virtues based on what their own sins and virtues are. 

It would be really nice if everyone in the world could just try to get along without trying to interfere or dominate others with their beliefs about religion. Somehow I have a feeling that's too much to ask for though.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Paumon said:


> Yes. For the reason you stated in your first sentence. It is in accordance with that society's law so it's not bad for that society and has nothing to do with whether or not it's "socially acceptable".
> 
> Actually, living in a society that had a law like that then there probably wouldn't be many adults under 5'8" anyway because everyone would be practising selective breeding for height.


There were more than a few Jews in Germany when similar laws were put into effect. So by using your logic loading people into cattle cars, putting them into mass gas chambers and pulling their gold teeth before cremating them wasn't "bad" because it was legal and supported by the society where it happened?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Paumon said:


> That's the truth.
> 
> Different societies and belief systems have different perceptions and standards of what is good or bad. What might be considered to be wrong or a sin according to one society's religious laws, morals and standards may be considered to be perfectly correct by a different society's standards.
> 
> ...


It may sometimes not seem it but I've very tolerant. I believe you are free to believe, practice and 'preach' what ever you want as long as you are not forcing others to believe, practice and/or preach it nor preventing others from believing, practicing and/or preaching their views.


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

watcher said:


> There were more than a few Jews in Germany when similar laws were put into effect. So by using your logic loading people into cattle cars, putting them into mass gas chambers and pulling their gold teeth before cremating them wasn't "bad" because it was legal and supported by the society where it happened?


I think you're getting sidetracked off topic and also you're not really understanding what a whole society is. Don't confuse a whole society with a military regime ruled by monsters.

What happened to those Jews at that time wasn't a good thing, it was unconscionable, but you are incorrect that it was legal under German society's laws and justice system or that it was supported by the society. It was not the society that did or supported the atrocities. 

Most of the society there were a good Christian society who didn't know it was happening and wouldn't have condoned it if they had known about it. Most of the society there was also held to ransom under the authority of Hitler and his elite military regime which imposed barbaric atrocities upon the Jews as well as other people who were not Jews. Hitler, a dabbler in the occult and sorcery, and his hand-picked unconscionable elite military cronies were accountable for what happened, not the society, and he and his cronies were responsible for the atrocities they forced their military to do.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

Whoa!! It is astounding how few of the "good Christians" in Germany and Europe as a whole did anything , while knowing what was going on, to prevent what happened to the victims of Hitler's machine. Most good citizens helped. They ratted out their neighbors, they held them down, they spit on them, they yelled goodbye, they gladly took their possession when they could no longer keep them, and they went home and cooked their supper. A pitiful few risked life and family to protect the victims. And, it is a well established fact that they knew what was happening, and they participated. The main pillars of the Christian church in Germany stood behind Hitler.


----------



## gryndlgoat (May 27, 2005)

vicker said:


> Whoa!! It is astounding how few of the "good Christians" in Germany and Europe as a whole did anything , while knowing what was going on, to prevent what happened to the victims of Hitler's machine. Most good citizens helped. They ratted out their neighbors, they held them down, they spit on them, they yelled goodbye, they gladly took their possession when they could no longer keep them, and they went home and cooked their supper. A pitiful few risked life and family to protect the victims. And, it is a well established fact that they knew what was happening, and they participated. The main pillars of the Christian church in Germany stood behind Hitler.


I think you have introduced something that hasn't been discussed yet--namely, the abandonment of religious/societal principles in times of war or oppression. It always seems that atrocities are "permitted" when they are being done to the "other side" and usually with the full blessing of the populace. "For security reasons" replaces "for the good of my fellow neighbor" especially when that neighbor doesn't share my particular belief/has something I want/is weaker. Black lynchings in the early 1900s were another example--murder was just fine by many and often reason for a public party. We still see the same complete disregard for human life in many war-torn parts of the world today. True evil is excused as collateral damage.

This has been a great thread.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Paumon said:


> I think you're getting sidetracked off topic and also you're not really understanding what a whole society is. Don't confuse a whole society with a military regime ruled by monsters.
> 
> What happened to those Jews at that time wasn't a good thing, it was unconscionable, but you are incorrect that it was legal under German society's laws and justice system or that it was supported by the society. It was not the society that did or supported the atrocities.


You might want to check your history. There was nothing illegal done in the build up to nor in the actual 'Final Solution'. German society allowed and supported the Nazi movement which included antisemitism from the very start.

But that's only one example. Slavery in nations around the world, the laws allowing for the indiscriminate killing of indigenous people of colonized lands, laws which allow for the jailing or killing of people for doing nothing more than practicing a different religion, segregation by class or religion or skin color or religion etc. Are you saying all of those things are just fine because the society has deemed them to be?


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> The fact people are born sinners is easily proven. Every known anyone who had to teach a child to lie? Teach a child to be selfish? To hit another when they get angry?


I would say that's not evidence of sin, but of self-interest. Most people will do what they perceive to be in their best interest. The socialization of children ideally serves to develop their conscience and cultivate a sense of altruism. I say "ideally," because sometimes it merely teaches children to be sneaky hypocrites, hiding their bad behavior under a veneer of social graces! ound:



> You might want to check your history. There was nothing illegal done in the build up to nor in the actual 'Final Solution'. German society allowed and supported the Nazi movement which included antisemitism from the very start.
> 
> But that's only one example. Slavery in nations around the world, the laws allowing for the indiscriminate killing of indigenous people of colonized lands, laws which allow for the jailing or killing of people for doing nothing more than practicing a different religion, segregation by class or religion or skin color or religion etc. Are you saying all of those things are just fine because the society has deemed them to be?


We each have an individual notion of "right" and "wrong." When enough people share the same values, they tend to be expressed collectively in the society's laws and mores. "Right" and "wrong" changes over time, and from society to society. 

From our perspective, we would say the Holocaust was a very bad thing indeed. Probably Americans 100 years from now, or people in other cultures looking at us today, would say some of the things we're doing are horrific. And so it goes ... :shrug:


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

watcher said:


> ....... Slavery in nations around the world, the laws allowing for the indiscriminate killing of indigenous people of colonized lands, laws which allow for the jailing or killing of people for doing nothing more than practicing a different religion, segregation by class or religion or skin color or religion etc. Are you saying all of those things are just fine because the society has deemed them to be?


I don't think any of those things are fine. I think they're all wrong because my conscience tells me so and I don't need any religious sin-seekers egging me on telling me they're right or wrong for me to recognize that they're wrong by my own standards. 

Are you saying none of those things would happen if they were not being promoted by religions and being done because of or for the sake of religions? Are you saying all of those things happen because of religion? Do you think those things would not happen if there was no such thing as religions and beliefs in gods?


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

vicker said:


> Whoa!! It is astounding how few of the "good Christians" in Germany and Europe as a whole did anything , while knowing what was going on, to prevent what happened to the victims of *Hitler's machine*. Most good citizens helped. They ratted out their neighbors, they held them down, they spit on them, they yelled goodbye, they gladly took their possession when they could no longer keep them, and they went home and cooked their supper. A pitiful few risked life and family to protect the victims. And, it is a well established fact that they knew what was happening, and they participated. The main pillars of the Christian church in Germany *stood behind Hitler*.


I think the key word there is Hitler. Was the society of Germany already doing all of those things before Hitler came on the scene?


----------



## IowaLez (Mar 6, 2006)

I just want to clarify that we Buddhists do not consider Buddha a supernatural being or god. He was simply a human being who attained perfect enlightenment. Siddhartha Gautama was not the first Buddha, the Sutras teach there were primordial Buddhas before him.

I converted to Nichiren Buddhism 30 years ago.

In the West, people have a completely inaccurate notion of what Karma is. I don't feel like going into a long post about it, tho. If anyone wants to know more, PM me. I am happy to share info.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

Paumon said:


> I think the key word there is Hitler. Was the society of Germany already doing all of those things before Hitler came on the scene?


I don't think they were to the same extent, the German Jews, for example, had a very healthy middle class when things went south in Germany. There was a lot of antisemitism in white societies around the world. Are you saying it was Hitler's fault that white Germans hated their neighbors? I think Hitler only told the people what they wanted to hear, and there in lay his power. He gave them the hope (belief) that they could rise up out of the severe poverty that was crushing them, and have a better life. The common man quickly hopped on the wagon. Only the few uncommon did not. Even if a person was silent and did not participate in the atrocities, he would still be guilty by his own inaction. And Germany is not even the best example. I think Americans' attitudes about chattel slavery in the 19 century may be a much better example. Though early 20th century Europe is certainly a more extreme and dark example. Let's not forget what happened in the rest of Europe as well, as they fell under German influence.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

And a vegetarian society of 2313, which has extended civil rights to sentient nonhumans, may look back on our CAFOs and feedlots and slaughterhouses, and regard them with the same horror that we do Auschwitz.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

On second thought, the slavery issue is a very poor example. White Americans at that time viewed blacks as barely human, if human at all (this was preached from the pulpits in many instances), while even "enlighten" whites did not think blacks and whites could live together in free society. Hitler and his group had to first dehumanized their victims. They portrayed them as vermin, leeches, parasites and such, suckling at the tit of society . That seemed to do the trick right well.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

gryndlgoat said:


> I think you have introduced something that hasn't been discussed yet--namely, the abandonment of religious/societal principles in times of war or oppression. It always seems that atrocities are "permitted" when they are being done to the "other side" and usually with the full blessing of the populace. "For security reasons" replaces "for the good of my fellow neighbor" especially when that neighbor doesn't share my particular belief/has something I want/is weaker. Black lynchings in the early 1900s were another example--murder was just fine by many and often reason for a public party. We still see the same complete disregard for human life in many war-torn parts of the world today. True evil is excused as collateral damage.
> 
> This has been a great thread.


I don't think it is the abandoning of those principles when they are not convenient, but in making those criminal actions acceptable to, or even included in those principles. That is when it gets scary.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

And we should be wary of thinking our generation has it all figured out ...


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

willow_girl said:


> I would say that's not evidence of sin, but of self-interest. Most people will do what they perceive to be in their best interest. The socialization of children ideally serves to develop their conscience and cultivate a sense of altruism. I say "ideally," because sometimes it merely teaches children to be sneaky hypocrites, hiding their bad behavior under a veneer of social graces!


I would remove the word "sometimes". Socialization teaches them that what they really want is 'bad' and they will be punished if they do it. Look at true sociopaths, they feel no need to conform to societal norms and are considered 'bad' people.

But I think your attempt show we are not born into sin really has added support. 





willow_girl said:


> We each have an individual notion of "right" and "wrong." When enough people share the same values, they tend to be expressed collectively in the society's laws and mores. "Right" and "wrong" changes over time, and from society to society.


So you are saying there are not true rights and wrongs? IOW, it was not wrong to treat a specific group of people as subhuman because at that time it was considered right by enough people? Using that logic should we have not convicted any Japanese military people for war crimes. After all in their society it was right to treat someone who surrendered as subhuman.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Paumon said:


> I don't think any of those things are fine. I think they're all wrong because my conscience tells me so and I don't need any religious sin-seekers egging me on telling me they're right or wrong for me to recognize that they're wrong by my own standards.


But the people who did those things DID think it was fine. 




Paumon said:


> Are you saying none of those things would happen if they were not being promoted by religions and being done because of or for the sake of religions? Are you saying all of those things happen because of religion? Do you think those things would not happen if there was no such thing as religions and beliefs in gods?


I'm saying God provides a definite set of values. Its man who changes values to fit what he wants to do.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Paumon said:


> I think the key word there is Hitler. Was the society of Germany already doing all of those things before Hitler came on the scene?


Yes they just didn't have the courage.

Look at riots. The people involved were not forced to throw a rock through a window and grab what they want. They always wanted to get something for free but were just too afraid to take it due to fact they might be punished. But during the riot they think their chances of getting away is high enough to do it.


----------



## Oggie (May 29, 2003)

One of my lingering questions is: Do most people adapt their lives according to "The Truth," or do most people adapt "The Truth" according to how they want to live their lives.


----------



## thestartupman (Jul 25, 2010)

Quote:
Originally Posted by *stanb999*  
_
I would counter this with all the terrible things that happen to other people. Now one could say that "they were in need of testing" or other trials to make them better people.

A most extreme examples of course...
But what say you of child burn victims. Were they in need of the pain and anguish? How about child cancer patients, they suffer so others can learn lessons._

People think like that when they believe God is active in everything that happens to people. As for me -- I think God is the God of the big picture, He set things up to work, but leaves us our agency to do what we will. Bad things happen because people choose to do wrong OR because accidents just happen.

I just don't believe that the "Supreme Ruler of the Universe" helps people locate their missing car keys like some people claim, or tells them who to marry, or what property to buy, or causes little children to get burnt or get cancer to teach people lessons. 

I personally think that most people that are believers in God, do not truly understand Him. I believe that just as the Bible says, God cares more about our souls, than He does this short life on this planet. We all get so wrapped up in the daily struggles of this life. If the bible compares our lives here on this planet as a vapor that appears for a little time, don't you think that shows us where our priorities ought to be? If I live a life that is 20, 40 80, or 120 years long does it really matter when you realize that if we have excepted Him as our savior then our lives are eternal. It reminds me of some of the pains and fears I have had in my youth, and how many times I never thought I would live to see another day because of them. Yet here I am now, and they are all just distant memories that very little details of the pain or fear can be remembered. I think that is how God looks upon the pains and struggles of this life. Yes it seems so unfair to see children go through so much pain, but then again, it is only for a very brief moment when compared to eternity. Even in all this though, my God cares for me enough to know how many hairs I have on my head, and yes, I do believe He cares enough to help me find my keys.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

watcher said:


> Look at true sociopaths, they feel no need to conform to societal norms and are considered 'bad' people.
> 
> .


 
Um. Any other sociopaths here want to raise their hands?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

thestartupman said:


> I just don't believe that the "Supreme Ruler of the Universe" helps people locate their missing car keys like some people claim, or tells them who to marry, or what property to buy, or causes little children to get burnt or get cancer to teach people lessons.


<edited for space>



thestartupman said:


> Even in all this though, my God cares for me enough to know how many hairs I have on my head, and yes, I do believe He cares enough to help me find my keys.


Funny that finding stuff was mentioned. Let me tell you two stories.

Many years ago the house we lived in had DARK brown carpet (don't get me started on that carpet but the color is important for the story) in the living room. One day I had to go into town to buy something. I can't remember what it was but I do remember it was quite urgent I buy it that day. Anyway I could not find my debit card. I searched and I searched. I looked all over the house in each of the cars and even walked the path from the cars to the house. No luck card was gone. I stopped and prayed about it. As I walked through the house laying in living room on that dark brown floor was my WHITE debit card. There was NO way that I could have missed that card laying there during the many times I searched for it and there was no one else home who could have put it there.

Second story. We had just acquired a pig (another of _those_ stories) and I was setting up a waterer for it. I had laid the pipe to the pen, set a 4X4 post and had firmly attached the pipe to the post. I came in to get the nipple from out of the desk drawer where I had put it and, yep, no nipple. I searched every drawer in that desk, I searched the storage bins where I keep all my extra goodies I even searched the tool box on my tractor. No nipple. Then I prayed to find it. After that I opened the desk drawer and in the pencil tray in the very front of the draw there laid the nipple. Again there's NO WAY I could have missed a 3" long silver nipple laying right in the front of the drawer.

I have another example of something which can't be explained. When my son was small I was working on a truck while it was on ramps and he was out there "helping" me. It started to lightly rain so he got just under the truck out of the rain. While working I hit the gear linkage and knocked the truck out of park. The truck started rolling down the ramp and he was right in line with the tires. I saw him move straight back out of the way. He didn't jump, he didn't scoot, he didn't push himself away. He move straight back out the path. The truck then rolled over me. He wasn't hurt in any way and all I got of it were some bruises and the loss of part of a toe.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

wyld thang said:


> Um. Any other sociopaths here want to raise their hands?


You'll find very few true sociopaths outside mental institutions because of their inability to adapt to social norms. If a sociopath wants a piece of candy he has no problem hitting another kid with a bat to get it.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

Sociopaths aren't mentally ill. It could be argued that they are the most sane of all. I doubt you'll find many in a mental institutions, prisons more likely. Maybe you mean psychopath. 
"Deep in my dungeon, I welcome you here.
Deep in my dungeon, I worship your fear.
Deep in my dungeon I dwell.
I do not know if I wish you well."
Now that is a sociopath  I love that poem. It was the opening to The Executioner's Song by Norman Mailer, the scariest book I have ever read.


----------



## Harry Chickpea (Dec 19, 2008)

Taylor R. said:


> Uh...big bang. There are many theories about the creation of the universe that have nothing to do with religion. And something can't be created from nothing (that's a law, not a theory).


Skimming the thread, I came across your post. Oddly, there is now a theory that the universe _was_ created from nothing.
http://discovermagazine.com/2013/september/13-starting-point

The essence of the theory is that equal amounts of negative and positive energy were created, giving a sum total of nothing. I pointed out to a Buddhist friend that the theory sounded like a nod to Tibetan Buddhism. The laws of conservation of matter and energy do not necessarily hold beyond the boundaries of the universe.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> So you are saying there are not true rights and wrongs?


Yes, I'm afraid that's the awful truth, although most of us have been socialized so well that it's hard for us to recognize it. 

As much as some would like to think there is some authority On High handing down rules, really it's just us, humans, making it up as we go along. 

The good news is that most human societies seem to have evolved a core set of beliefs or values which allows them to function in an orderly fashion. Stealing and murdering, at least within the group, generally are taboo. (Probably societies that didn't forbid these things didn't function very well, and fell prey to better-organized ones that did.)

From the time we are born, we're socialized by our parents to understand and follow the rules of our society (or the subgroup to which our parental figures belong). Good parents cultivate a child's conscience by encouraging him to take others' feelings into consideration and teaching him that what seems to be in his immediate self-interest may not be so over the long term. ("If you bash Johnny over the head and take his toy, he may refuse to play with you again.") We learn to take turns, wait in lines, and say "Please" and "Thank you." Et cetera.

Most of us internalize these lessons so well and at such a young age that we're not even conscious of having been taught them. Of course, a handful of individuals seem to be born without the mental apparatus to internalize society's rules (sociopaths and psychopaths), and a minority also are the product of antisocial subcultures -- for instance, children of parents who teach them to steal. But they're the exception, not the rule.

A free society is a marketplace of ideas in which varying opinions constantly are jockeying for position. There are winners and losers over time. If enough people adopt a particular viewpoint, it is likely to be transformed into law or at least custom.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

That is silly, Willow. You are saying we are good out of the goodness of our own hearts (brains) but, if there is no good or bad, what benefits me is good. There is no group. I should enjoy my life as well as I can, no matter others' desires, or opinions, or what my wants cost them. This is My life. If I want it, I should have it. How ridiculous is it for me to give to others, to let someone else have what I desire? Should only the fear of the law stop me from taking my neighbor's ass, his house or his children? A sociopath is only "crazy" because he sees how insane that is. If there is no God, then I am God, and what I want is mine, what I desire is good, what I despise is bad. If I am wrong, so what? When I'm dead all is done and debts are erased. Life's only meaning is what do I want, how do I get it and is there a way to get it quicker. 
Have you ever read Flannery O'Conner's A Good Man is Hard to Find?
http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~surette/goodman.html
"Jesus was the only One that ever raised the dead," The Misfit continued, "and He shouldn't have done it. He shown everything off balance. If He did what He said, then it's nothing for you to do but thow away everything and follow Him, and if He didn't, then it's nothing for you to do but enjoy the few minutes you got left the best way you can by killing somebody or burning down his house or doing some other meanness to him. No pleasure but meanness," he said and his voice had become almost a snarl.

If what you say is true, then being "good" is just being a victim and denying myself what is just as much my right as anyone else's. 
Maybe, being religious keeps us real sociopaths from destroying the civilized world.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

Vicker, I see your "A Good Man is Hard to Find" and raise you one "Parker's Back" (my favorite Flannery O'Connor short story). ("Good Country People" would be my runner-up.) 



> You are saying we are good out of the goodness of our own hearts (brains) but, if there is no good or bad, what benefits me is good. There is no group. I should enjoy my life as well as I can, no matter others' desires, or opinions, or what my wants cost them. This is My life. If I want it, I should have it. How ridiculous is it for me to give to others, to let someone else have what I desire? Should only the fear of the law stop me from taking my neighbor's ass, his house or his children?





> If what you say is true, then being "good" is just being a victim and denying myself what is just as much my right as anyone else's.


That's all true, but ... wise men throughout the ages have figured out that life generally is better when people practice a bit of altruism, not to mention delayed gratification! The idea of the Golden Rule is endemic to many cultures (and is, IMO, the only morality necessary). 

Or to put it another way, a society in which all players act strictly out of perceived self-interest is likely to be less pleasant than one in which there is a degree of cooperation and sharing ... making it ultimately in one's best interest to cooperate and share, at least to some degree! 



> Maybe, being religious keeps us real sociopaths from destroying the civilized world.


I do think religion is one of the tools the people who can "see the big picture" have used to try to keep the rest in line down through the ages. (Was it Ben Franklin who said something to the effect that "_f your religion is the only thing preventing you from breaking my leg or picking my pocket, I'd be a fool to disabuse you of it"?) :grin:

I think there is probably an evolutionary advantage to religion ... i.e., if you have to resort to brute force to maintain order in your society, it's going to require a tremendous amount of resources. But if people can be kept in line by believing an invisible Sky Being is watching their every move, and will punish them in the afterlife if they disobey ... well, that requires a lot less policing, doesn't it? :shrug:_


----------



## Truckinguy (Mar 8, 2008)

watcher said:


> You might want to check your history. There was nothing illegal done in the build up to nor in the actual 'Final Solution'. German society allowed and supported the Nazi movement which included antisemitism from the very start.
> 
> But that's only one example. Slavery in nations around the world, the laws allowing for the indiscriminate killing of indigenous people of colonized lands, laws which allow for the jailing or killing of people for doing nothing more than practicing a different religion, segregation by class or religion or skin color or religion etc. Are you saying all of those things are just fine because the society has deemed them to be?


If you look at it from a global scale, the world recognized Hitler's evil for what it was and took steps to stop it. Some would say that it was God's hand guiding the forces of good to eradicate evil but I think that humanity itself is quite capable of deciding evil is wrong and making morally acceptable decisions.

It's interesting that you bring up the killing of indigenous people considering that God commanded the Israelites to kill everyone in the Promised Land and take it for themselves. Would slaughtering an entire society including children be acceptable just because God commanded it? The Bible also allows for slavery and discrimination based on practicing a different religion, sexual preference and gender. Followers of Christ don't get to decide for themselves what is right and wrong, they get told what to think. "Thou shalt do this, Thou shall not do that" is not giving someone two choices and allowing them to make a moral decision of what is right and wrong.


----------



## Tiempo (May 22, 2008)

Several times a well placed and emphatic, "Now where the &**%$ did I leave that *&^%# thing?!" has garnered similar outcomes for me.




watcher said:


> <edited for space>
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------

