|
On April 24 2013 11:19 Feartheguru wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 11:14 LuckyFool wrote:
Sorry I was just going off this;
"Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities."
So a deity is still possible? I'm confused. Rejection of belief means you don't believe. That's a lot different than saying god is impossible. If the Christian god came down tomorrow and said hi, I would be a Christian instantly. There are a million thing I reject that I would believe in if I saw a valid reason to.
Ah I see. Thanks for making that distinction.
|
The thing for me is that even if there was undeniable evidence that the Christian God was real, I wouldn't follow him. Certainly I'd accept that he exists, but I cannot find it acceptable to follow a deity that is supposedly all powerful but does nothing to relieve suffering. By my definition that's evil. If you have the power to stop suffering and you see it every day, it's evil to not do anything about it. There are plenty of humans I'd rather follow before following God, since there's actual evidence that they are compassionate and selfless beings, even without limitless power and knowledge.
In fact, if God exists, if even a fraction of the things written in the Bible are true, and if the vast majority of Christians truly do go to heaven, I'd rather burn in hell for all eternity than join his followers (and leave many of my loved ones who are also destined for hell) in a heaven full of people that historically have had little more empathy for their fellow man as they have for the average animal.
|
On April 24 2013 16:16 wherebugsgo wrote:
The thing for me is that even if there was undeniable evidence that the Christian God was real, I wouldn't follow him. Certainly I'd accept that he exists, but I cannot find it acceptable to follow a deity that is supposedly all powerful but does nothing to relieve suffering. By my definition that's evil. If you have the power to stop suffering and you see it every day, it's evil to not do anything about it. There are plenty of humans I'd rather follow before following God, since there's actual evidence that they are compassionate and selfless beings, even without limitless power and knowledge.
In fact, if God exists, if even a fraction of the things written in the Bible are true, and if the vast majority of Christians truly do go to heaven, I'd rather burn in hell for all eternity than join his followers (and leave many of my loved ones who are also destined for hell) in a heaven full of people that historically have had little more empathy for their fellow man as they have for the average animal.
What your saying here is that even if a God exists who created you, created your mind and your understanding, then by that understanding you would judge that creator to be morally inferior to you.
So you do believe in absolute truth: anything that you happen to feel strongly about.
You do believe in absolute morality: whatever you think is right or wrong.
You do believe in God: your own mind.
The genesis allegory of creation describes sin as "eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" which is to say that humanity wanted to know good and evil the way Did knows it.. Not to understand morality, but to be the one who defines it. You couldn't fit that description better if you tried.
|
On April 24 2013 16:35 kerpal wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 16:16 wherebugsgo wrote:
The thing for me is that even if there was undeniable evidence that the Christian God was real, I wouldn't follow him. Certainly I'd accept that he exists, but I cannot find it acceptable to follow a deity that is supposedly all powerful but does nothing to relieve suffering. By my definition that's evil. If you have the power to stop suffering and you see it every day, it's evil to not do anything about it. There are plenty of humans I'd rather follow before following God, since there's actual evidence that they are compassionate and selfless beings, even without limitless power and knowledge.
In fact, if God exists, if even a fraction of the things written in the Bible are true, and if the vast majority of Christians truly do go to heaven, I'd rather burn in hell for all eternity than join his followers (and leave many of my loved ones who are also destined for hell) in a heaven full of people that historically have had little more empathy for their fellow man as they have for the average animal. What your saying here is that even if a God exists who created you, created your mind and your understanding, then by that understanding you would judge that creator to be morally inferior to you. So you do believe in absolute truth: anything that you happen to feel strongly about. You do believe in absolute morality: whatever you think is right or wrong. You do believe in God: your own mind. The genesis allegory of creation describes sin as "eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" which is to say that humanity wanted to know good and evil the way Did knows it.. Not to understand morality, but to be the one who defines it. You couldn't fit that description better if you tried.
Lol did u just try to justify that a non-believer biblically sinned?
Also did i misread it, or you were saying: Whatever (your) God deems right, is right; and whatever he deems wrong is wrong. Whatever our current ethics and moral codes dictate is irrelevant because we are inferior, whereas He is the superior being that created us all?
|
I wasn't raised to be religious, so there wasn't much of a transition-period.
I'm not impressed by fanaticism, be it religious or scientific, though although I had a good time reading Dawkins / Hitchens, their literature didn't move me one inch in any direction. Nor did the Old Testament, obviously.
|
Hm luckily for me my family was never religious so I grew up thinking of it in my own terms.
I believe there is a god, but I don't believe a lot (or all I have never read it) the bible says or the stories. I believe there is a god, but I don't care if someone is athiest or believes in it as I could care less, I don't' go to church and never will, I don't pray and never will, etc.
I do say religious fanatics though drive me nuts rofl :D
|
On April 24 2013 16:45 kafkaesque wrote:
I wasn't raised to be religious, so there wasn't much of a transition-period.
I'm not impressed by fanaticism, be it religious or scientific, though although I had a good time reading Dawkins / Hitchens, their literature didn't move me one inch in any direction. Nor did the Old Testament, obviously.
Dawkins' writings on religion is complete garbage but his books on evolution aimed at popular consumption are actually quite good. He's a surprisingly good writer when he's working on his real specialty.
|
On April 24 2013 07:20 Fumanchu wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 06:23 Feartheguru wrote:
This debate is truly pointless. Anyone that does not believe in the great magenta honeybadger is going to hell. It says so right on this piece of paper I just wrote on. I'll be laughing at all you atheists and christians burning while I enjoy my 40 virgins beside the great one. If you don't believe me prove me wrong. His son the ferret skinned himself to keep you guys warm and yet you refuse to believe in him? I feel bad for you guys I really do. But... the choice was yours and you chose willfully chose to ignore what's right beside your eyes, I wish it could be some other way but, sad life for you guys. If you believe it's pointless, then stop cluttering the thread with useless comments so that those of us who don't find it useless can discuss. I'm not atheist yet, but I feel I'm on the cusp of becoming one. I've been a Christian since I was 5, but I didn't really challenge the ideas of my religion or question the scripture I was being taught until about two years ago. I just followed what I followed blindly. I KNEW God existed and there wasn't anyone that could tell me different. I grew up in a bubble. But then I started travelling abroad and I ran into a vast array of people who all believed different things. People who were really nice and respectful and believed in their religions just as adamantly as I believed in mine. And like me, they weren't trying to convince anyone else of what they believed, but they also weren't up for any discussion of the possibility that they might be following the "wrong" religion. So I returned to the leaders of my church, and several other churches, and I began questioning them on the principles and practices that they had brought me up on. And every one of them directed me towards the scripture. But what if the scriptures were false I said? And no one that I talked to would deviate away from that. The scriptures were true because God wrote them through the people he chose. No one would even entertain the idea that maybe God doesn't exist. It seemed that when I had questions of God's plan for me, or his divinity, then I got tremendous support and outreach. However, when I started questioning my beliefs, I was pushed into a corner and left there. Which has forced me to sort of figure things out on my own. There's three things with which keep me back from becoming an atheist. 1) Logically it makes the most sense to be a Christian. I think about these four scenarios: A) I'm Christian, I die, God exists, I go to heaven B) I'm Christian, I die, God doesn't exist, I return to nothingness C) I'm an atheist, I die, God exists, I go to hell. D) I'm an atheist, I die, God doesn't exist, I return to nothingness When I look at these options, really it makes the most sense to be Christian. If I'm wrong I get the same reward as you when I die, but if I'm right, I get an eternity of happiness rather than an eternity of suffering. 2) I cannot as of yet wrap my head around returning to nothingness. Just in the same way that it hurts my brain to think that once there was nothing, and then all of a sudden there was something. I don't want my accumulation of experiences to end upon death. I just can't get past it. 3) Finally, and this ties in with number 1, is that being a Christian is not a suffering experience. At least not in North America. The only thing that I would struggle with is premarital sex. Every other commandment or teaching within in the bible is already followed by most people trying to live their lives. There's really no down side to being a Christian. Every person that has gotten to know me hasn't been affected by my Christian status. It's never hindered me in relationships of any kind, in any way. A lot of people liken a belief in God to a belief in santa, or the tooth fairy. I personally see no harm in a grown man who believes in santa or the tooth fairy. If you simply believe what you believe what you believe without trying to force others to believe it, most people respect you for it. Even if they don't agree with you. Anyway I'm really enjoying the different discussions in this thread so far, just thought I'd throw down where I'm at.
I had this dilema once, but I did not just get safe with it. I resulted to "pimp my God" Started customizing him saying hmm my God would probably happy if I am happy. But I am not happy kneeling or going to church so my "God" would understand if I don't go to church and do "christian" stuff. But then I realized.. hey I just made an imaginary friend.. then I said screw this.
I just don't believe in it to be safe, don't you have any problems with going christian? Don't you feel the guild everytime you commit "sin" or not follow the christian things? Doesn't it hinder you life? Also the point that what if christianity is not the "right" religion? What if the real god is Odin? What if the xelnaga made us?
I have a suggestion, try to soft launch it, try to not believe in a month. You will notice you would feel lighter, free. No more guilts of nonsense, no hindrance, no stupid rules to follow.
|
Heaven and Hell are just created by man because we're too scared to think we didn't go somewhere when we die. Plus you can put some money into this basket so I don't have to work or pay taxes on anything and browse the internet all day for cats.
|
On April 24 2013 16:35 kerpal wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 16:16 wherebugsgo wrote:
The thing for me is that even if there was undeniable evidence that the Christian God was real, I wouldn't follow him. Certainly I'd accept that he exists, but I cannot find it acceptable to follow a deity that is supposedly all powerful but does nothing to relieve suffering. By my definition that's evil. If you have the power to stop suffering and you see it every day, it's evil to not do anything about it. There are plenty of humans I'd rather follow before following God, since there's actual evidence that they are compassionate and selfless beings, even without limitless power and knowledge.
In fact, if God exists, if even a fraction of the things written in the Bible are true, and if the vast majority of Christians truly do go to heaven, I'd rather burn in hell for all eternity than join his followers (and leave many of my loved ones who are also destined for hell) in a heaven full of people that historically have had little more empathy for their fellow man as they have for the average animal. What your saying here is that even if a God exists who created you, created your mind and your understanding, then by that understanding you would judge that creator to be morally inferior to you. So you do believe in absolute truth: anything that you happen to feel strongly about. You do believe in absolute morality: whatever you think is right or wrong. You do believe in God: your own mind. The genesis allegory of creation describes sin as "eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" which is to say that humanity wanted to know good and evil the way Did knows it.. Not to understand morality, but to be the one who defines it. You couldn't fit that description better if you tried.
No, I don't believe in God nor absolute morality.
I wouldn't give a flying fuck if God truly created me if he's anything like the way he's described in the Bible.
If you would find a human despicable for carrying out some of the acts that God carried out in the Bible, then it's easy to see why I think the same about a so-called perfect being.
What's even funnier about this whole situation is that this supposedly all powerful God created a being such as me, who is capable of pointing out his own absurdities and follies.
|
On April 24 2013 22:13 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 16:35 kerpal wrote:On April 24 2013 16:16 wherebugsgo wrote:
The thing for me is that even if there was undeniable evidence that the Christian God was real, I wouldn't follow him. Certainly I'd accept that he exists, but I cannot find it acceptable to follow a deity that is supposedly all powerful but does nothing to relieve suffering. By my definition that's evil. If you have the power to stop suffering and you see it every day, it's evil to not do anything about it. There are plenty of humans I'd rather follow before following God, since there's actual evidence that they are compassionate and selfless beings, even without limitless power and knowledge.
In fact, if God exists, if even a fraction of the things written in the Bible are true, and if the vast majority of Christians truly do go to heaven, I'd rather burn in hell for all eternity than join his followers (and leave many of my loved ones who are also destined for hell) in a heaven full of people that historically have had little more empathy for their fellow man as they have for the average animal. What your saying here is that even if a God exists who created you, created your mind and your understanding, then by that understanding you would judge that creator to be morally inferior to you. So you do believe in absolute truth: anything that you happen to feel strongly about. You do believe in absolute morality: whatever you think is right or wrong. You do believe in God: your own mind. The genesis allegory of creation describes sin as "eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" which is to say that humanity wanted to know good and evil the way Did knows it.. Not to understand morality, but to be the one who defines it. You couldn't fit that description better if you tried. No, I don't believe in God nor absolute morality. I wouldn't give a flying fuck if God truly created me if he's anything like the way he's described in the Bible. If you would find a human despicable for carrying out some of the acts that God carried out in the Bible, then it's easy to see why I think the same about a so-called perfect being. What's even funnier about this whole situation is that this supposedly all powerful God created a being such as me, who is capable of pointing out his own absurdities and follies.
You're just restating yourself, which is fine, whatever.
Since your such a fan of inconsistencies, here's a fun one:
Science seeks to understand the universe. It does a pretty fantastic job. Science, given enough time and enough resources will understand everything completely, right?
I agree.
Here's the problem: Why and how is that the case? Evolutionary theory suggests that we are the latest in a chain (and it would seem the last in a chain, it's not as if natural selection is at work in human society, because we take pains to help the weak survive at the expense of the fittest, rather than vice versa) our intellect is the product of time and chance, we've reached the critical point at which we are able to modify our environment rather than adapt to it.
Now chimps are pretty clever. Dogs less so, humans more so. Chimps can use tools to get termites out of their mounds, dogs can learn tricks. I bet chimps think they have it really worked out. I bet they think they totally understand how termites and sticks work, but they cannot understand termite biology and genetics, and they will never understand the molecular forces behind fluid cohesion/adhesion (I don't really remember how chimps catch termites.. but i saw them licking the sticks they push into termite mounds on a documentary once  )
Obviously just as a dog will not be able to understand using a stick to catch termites, a chimp will never understand quantum mechanics and humanity will never really understand anything of importance. Ultimately we're chimps poking the standard model with a supercollider and hoping we find termites. Or CP violation, I'm not fussed.
Obviously religion explains this because God makes the world, and humanity (whatever their origins) are chosen and special to him, and it is this belief which motivated people like Isaac Newton to seek to understand the world. If you believe there is no God, it is illogical to believe that science will ever come to any definite answer about anything. (Which is not to say that science can't provide us with a better standard of living, but again, that's just chimps and termites.)
|
On April 24 2013 16:35 kerpal wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 16:16 wherebugsgo wrote:
The thing for me is that even if there was undeniable evidence that the Christian God was real, I wouldn't follow him. Certainly I'd accept that he exists, but I cannot find it acceptable to follow a deity that is supposedly all powerful but does nothing to relieve suffering. By my definition that's evil. If you have the power to stop suffering and you see it every day, it's evil to not do anything about it. There are plenty of humans I'd rather follow before following God, since there's actual evidence that they are compassionate and selfless beings, even without limitless power and knowledge.
In fact, if God exists, if even a fraction of the things written in the Bible are true, and if the vast majority of Christians truly do go to heaven, I'd rather burn in hell for all eternity than join his followers (and leave many of my loved ones who are also destined for hell) in a heaven full of people that historically have had little more empathy for their fellow man as they have for the average animal. What your saying here is that even if a God exists who created you, created your mind and your understanding, then by that understanding you would judge that creator to be morally inferior to you. So you do believe in absolute truth: anything that you happen to feel strongly about. You do believe in absolute morality: whatever you think is right or wrong. You do believe in God: your own mind. The genesis allegory of creation describes sin as "eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" which is to say that humanity wanted to know good and evil the way Did knows it.. Not to understand morality, but to be the one who defines it. You couldn't fit that description better if you tried.
Are you saying that if ever Christian god is really true and he made you, made your mind thus your mind is your god? and you should agree with god, his morals and understanding?
Okay let me put it this way, say the generic hollywood robot story of robots rebelling to humans.
Humans made the robots, gave them freewill and the power to think for themselves.
Then robot found out that Humans are the greatest threat for even themselves.
For that, did robot agree with human his creator? they killed humans.
|
On April 25 2013 00:27 kerpal wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 22:13 wherebugsgo wrote:On April 24 2013 16:35 kerpal wrote:On April 24 2013 16:16 wherebugsgo wrote:
The thing for me is that even if there was undeniable evidence that the Christian God was real, I wouldn't follow him. Certainly I'd accept that he exists, but I cannot find it acceptable to follow a deity that is supposedly all powerful but does nothing to relieve suffering. By my definition that's evil. If you have the power to stop suffering and you see it every day, it's evil to not do anything about it. There are plenty of humans I'd rather follow before following God, since there's actual evidence that they are compassionate and selfless beings, even without limitless power and knowledge.
In fact, if God exists, if even a fraction of the things written in the Bible are true, and if the vast majority of Christians truly do go to heaven, I'd rather burn in hell for all eternity than join his followers (and leave many of my loved ones who are also destined for hell) in a heaven full of people that historically have had little more empathy for their fellow man as they have for the average animal. What your saying here is that even if a God exists who created you, created your mind and your understanding, then by that understanding you would judge that creator to be morally inferior to you. So you do believe in absolute truth: anything that you happen to feel strongly about. You do believe in absolute morality: whatever you think is right or wrong. You do believe in God: your own mind. The genesis allegory of creation describes sin as "eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" which is to say that humanity wanted to know good and evil the way Did knows it.. Not to understand morality, but to be the one who defines it. You couldn't fit that description better if you tried. No, I don't believe in God nor absolute morality. I wouldn't give a flying fuck if God truly created me if he's anything like the way he's described in the Bible. If you would find a human despicable for carrying out some of the acts that God carried out in the Bible, then it's easy to see why I think the same about a so-called perfect being. What's even funnier about this whole situation is that this supposedly all powerful God created a being such as me, who is capable of pointing out his own absurdities and follies. You're just restating yourself, which is fine, whatever. Since your such a fan of inconsistencies, here's a fun one: Science seeks to understand the universe. It does a pretty fantastic job. Science, given enough time and enough resources will understand everything completely, right? I agree. Here's the problem: Why and how is that the case? Evolutionary theory suggests that we are the latest in a chain (and it would seem the last in a chain, it's not as if natural selection is at work in human society, because we take pains to help the weak survive at the expense of the fittest, rather than vice versa) our intellect is the product of time and chance, we've reached the critical point at which we are able to modify our environment rather than adapt to it.
No it doesn't.
There is no evidence to suggest that natural selection is not working on humans. In fact, there is evidence of evolutionary change in the human species as young as a few hundred years.
On April 25 2013 00:27 kerpal wrote:Now chimps are pretty clever. Dogs less so, humans more so. Chimps can use tools to get termites out of their mounds, dogs can learn tricks. I bet chimps think they have it really worked out. I bet they think they totally understand how termites and sticks work, but they cannot understand termite biology and genetics, and they will never understand the molecular forces behind fluid cohesion/adhesion (I don't really remember how chimps catch termites.. but i saw them licking the sticks they push into termite mounds on a documentary once )
So?
On April 25 2013 00:27 kerpal wrote:
Obviously just as a dog will not be able to understand using a stick to catch termites, a chimp will never understand quantum mechanics and humanity will never really understand anything of importance.
Really? What is "anything of importance" here?
If there is nothing beyond the physical realm then there is nothing "out there." Science does not deal with the supernatural, because there is no evidence that the supernatural even exists in the first place. Otherwise, it probably would not be called the supernatural.
On April 25 2013 00:27 kerpal wrote:
Ultimately we're chimps poking the standard model with a supercollider and hoping we find termites. Or CP violation, I'm not fussed.
So in other words, God did it, and we should be satisfied with that.
Great attitude. Let's give up on understanding things, since clearly we are not intellectually capable of understanding anything at all.
Really wonderful attitude you have here.
On April 25 2013 00:27 kerpal wrote:
Obviously religion explains this because God makes the world, and humanity (whatever their origins) are chosen and special to him, and it is this belief which motivated people like Isaac Newton to seek to understand the world. If you believe there is no God, it is illogical to believe that science will ever come to any definite answer about anything. (Which is not to say that science can't provide us with a better standard of living, but again, that's just chimps and termites.)
Religion doesn't explain shit.
Religion was not able to explain why the world was apparently flat, or the center of the universe, or 6000 years old. Religion has been consistently wrong about almost literally everything for millenia.
You could not pick a worse model of thought to idolize.
Also, it's patently false that religion motivated Isaac Newton or any other scientist to study the world. Given that you can simply explain things with "God did it" there's no reason to look any further. The scientific method and innate individual curiosity motivated those people, regardless of what they actually believed about God or the universe.
That's shown evidently, since the thing that links all of science together is not God but the methodology itself. There are plenty of atheist scientists, Muslim scientists, polytheistic scientists, spiritual scientists, Catholic scientists, and so on. Yet, their work is unified not under religion but under the scientific method.
It doesn't take a genius to see why that is. Religion is literally worthless when it comes to answering real and pertinent questions about the workings of our surroundings.
|
you have ENTIRELY misunderstood me.
the point is not "science bad, God good" I actually have a degree in physics, and think physics is pretty great.
The point is that the humanist viewpoint of understanding the universe is self contradictory, because a humanist worldview tells us that our minds are not equal to the task.
"anything of importance" did not refer to God, or the supernatural, it refers to a more complete understanding of the NATURAL than a chimp has.
Try re-reading my post looking at what I actually say, rather than what you expect me to say.
|
On April 25 2013 02:45 kerpal wrote:
you have ENTIRELY misunderstood me.
the point is not "science bad, God good" I actually have a degree in physics, and think physics is pretty great.
The point is that the humanist viewpoint of understanding the universe is self contradictory, because a humanist worldview tells us that our minds are not equal to the task.
"anything of importance" did not refer to God, or the supernatural, it refers to a more complete understanding of the NATURAL than a chimp has.
Try re-reading my post looking at what I actually say, rather than what you expect me to say.
there was no contradiction even in what you said, because most of what you said was false to begin with.
for having a degree in physics your knowledge of evolution is piss poor
|
I'd go even further wherebugsgo. For a scientist, you have a piss poor understanding of science in general, Kerpal. It is painful how wrong every single thing you said in your dogs and chimps post is. It actually makes me sad that someone who made it through university, doing a degree in one of the most important fields of study no less, can't get excited about the insane leaps in knowledge we are making every year. Every day science constricts God into a smaller and smaller box, and you reply with some obscure definition of knowledge by saying 'Humanity will never really understand anything of REAL importance in God's work.'
On April 24 2013 07:20 Fumanchu wrote:
If you believe it's pointless, then stop cluttering the thread with useless comments so that those of us who don't find it useless can discuss.
I'm not atheist yet, but I feel I'm on the cusp of becoming one. I've been a Christian since I was 5, but I didn't really challenge the ideas of my religion or question the scripture I was being taught until about two years ago. I just followed what I followed blindly. I KNEW God existed and there wasn't anyone that could tell me different. I grew up in a bubble.
But then I started travelling abroad and I ran into a vast array of people who all believed different things. People who were really nice and respectful and believed in their religions just as adamantly as I believed in mine. And like me, they weren't trying to convince anyone else of what they believed, but they also weren't up for any discussion of the possibility that they might be following the "wrong" religion.
So I returned to the leaders of my church, and several other churches, and I began questioning them on the principles and practices that they had brought me up on. And every one of them directed me towards the scripture. But what if the scriptures were false I said? And no one that I talked to would deviate away from that. The scriptures were true because God wrote them through the people he chose. No one would even entertain the idea that maybe God doesn't exist. It seemed that when I had questions of God's plan for me, or his divinity, then I got tremendous support and outreach. However, when I started questioning my beliefs, I was pushed into a corner and left there. Which has forced me to sort of figure things out on my own.
There's three things with which keep me back from becoming an atheist.
1) Logically it makes the most sense to be a Christian. I think about these four scenarios:
A) I'm Christian, I die, God exists, I go to heaven
B) I'm Christian, I die, God doesn't exist, I return to nothingness
C) I'm an atheist, I die, God exists, I go to hell.
D) I'm an atheist, I die, God doesn't exist, I return to nothingness
When I look at these options, really it makes the most sense to be Christian. If I'm wrong I get the same reward as you when I die, but if I'm right, I get an eternity of happiness rather than an eternity of suffering.
2) I cannot as of yet wrap my head around returning to nothingness. Just in the same way that it hurts my brain to think that once there was nothing, and then all of a sudden there was something. I don't want my accumulation of experiences to end upon death. I just can't get past it.
3) Finally, and this ties in with number 1, is that being a Christian is not a suffering experience. At least not in North America. The only thing that I would struggle with is premarital sex. Every other commandment or teaching within in the bible is already followed by most people trying to live their lives. There's really no down side to being a Christian. Every person that has gotten to know me hasn't been affected by my Christian status. It's never hindered me in relationships of any kind, in any way. A lot of people liken a belief in God to a belief in santa, or the tooth fairy. I personally see no harm in a grown man who believes in santa or the tooth fairy. If you simply believe what you believe what you believe without trying to force others to believe it, most people respect you for it. Even if they don't agree with you.
Anyway I'm really enjoying the different discussions in this thread so far, just thought I'd throw down where I'm at.
If #1 is your biggest reason for hanging onto Christianity, let me be the first to welcome you to atheism. As others have already pointed out, even Christian apologists think that Pascal's wager is one of the worst reasons to believe. I'll just leave this link, since others have already covered it. http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Pascal's_Wager
For #2, were you bothered 2000 year that you didn't exist? Were you bothered in 1950 when you didn't exist? In 500 years, long after you are dead, I doubt it will bother you at all that you don't exist.
And I would argue that it is harmful for adults to believe in supernatural beings like the tooth fairy. Our beliefs inform our actions, and the more out of line those beliefs are with reality, the larger the potential for harm.
|
Indeed, you do go further, by once again demonstrating that you have missed the point.
Your response is essentially to tell me I'm just plain wrong. Enlightened.
Do you think I'm not excited? Of course I'm excited by scientific progress. The question is why are YOU excited by scientific progress?
I'll have one more go at this:
In my worldview science is humanity coming to better understand God's creation.
In a humanist worldview, everything we know should suggest to us that we are unable to grasp the amazing intricacies of the universe.
Why would we be able to understand the physical universe? Why should we have the arrogance to believe that we can truly understand physics? What about humanity suggests that we have it in us to correctly analyse our world, when every other animal is so clearly limited?
|
for having a degree in physics your knowledge of evolution is piss poor
...
Evolution is primarily covered by the study of biology, not physics.
|
I am willing to convert to any religion, if someone gives me $1000.
|
On April 25 2013 08:23 Kalingingsong wrote:
I am willing to convert to any religion, if someone gives me $1000.
Sadly, it works they other way. They are the ones that end up taking your money. Cuz, ya know, an all powerful god still needs dollars.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
