About done here...(please read in entirety)

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Feb 9, 2011
171
3
0
#21
Okay, I've literally tried to post this about 7 times now, so now I'll put in my answers without direct quotation. I address the OP's post in order, so based on what I've stated, you'll probably know what I'm referring to.


No one said we couldn't enjoy our lives. There are certain things that we’re told not to do for specific reasons; for the consequences. Christians may have doctrinal differences but that doesn't mean that the "wrong ones" will go to Hell.
John 3:16

Catholics pray to Saints. And Mother Mary. This is a sin. It says in the Bible only to pray to God and no one but God.

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

I think that whole premise is messed up. Why would death ever be the answer? Is it not better to live? I have the same problem with Martrydom. I think it's silly. When I grew up in Catholic school, I remember being taught repeatedly that if I were to be in some situation where a gun was held to my head and the only way to live was to reject God to not do it and die for the faith. It seems like very little can get done this way. I should state that very little, other than of course people who live later on that think that "oh, it MUST be true if they actually died for it". No, I think it's better to do what you have to do to live and then just continue teaching Christianity or whatever it is that you live for. If you believe in it that strongly, live to continue helping others!
____
(On whether Christianity is the "true religion") Good question. Some would state that since they grew up in Christian homes, they’re more inclined to be Christians but what about those who didn’t grow up in Christian homes or, perhaps, were atheists?

Every religion has convertee's. Be it Muslim to Christian, Christian to Jew, Jew to Wicca....You will find people everywhere that have switched faith for who knows what reason. Are you trying to attest that those of which grew up in atheist homes that became Christian prove Christianity so? If that's not what you meant, I don't understand the purpose of that statement

And again, this is a Christian site.
____
Okay, let’s get one thing straight. Christianity is more than a religion with rules, books and conferences. It’s about having a personal relationship with God/Christ. I’ve noticed that people who truly don’t “get” Christianity don’t understand this point.

Perhaps I don't get it. But it most certainly is about rules to some degree. And it's a pretty serious problem if you don't obey said rules. Hell is not a happy place. It should be taken seriously.

And yes, “religion” makes people do crazy things because we obviously have no control over what we do. If people actually read the Bible, they’d see that such things are directly advised against.

The Bible is loaded with crazy things. Contradictions. Among only a few there are:
Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

Kill Witches
You should not let a sorceress live. (Exodus 22:17 NAB)

Kill Homosexuals
"If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)


Kill Fortunetellers
A man or a woman who acts as a medium or fortuneteller shall be put to death by stoning; they have no one but themselves to blame for their death. (Leviticus 20:27 NAB)

Death for Hitting Dad
Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death. (Exodus 21:15 NAB)

Death for Cursing Parents
1) If one curses his father or mother, his lamp will go out at the coming of darkness. (Proverbs 20:20 NAB)
2) All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. They are guilty of a capital offense. (Leviticus 20:9 NLT)

Death for Adultery
If a man commits adultery with another man's wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)

____
I find it weird that when trying to disprove God, some people always bring science into the equation.

It's not like anyone could use english to disprove God. People use what they know. The world is largely defined by Science. Medicines were made, we know more about the human body. We know about dinosaur fossils. But let's forget that form of science and just talk about psychology. And let's forget the notion of disproving God too. It won't happen. No one will ever prove or disprove it. How can you disprove something that gives no signs of existance anyway? You can't disprove Santa either. You could send archeologists over to dig and look and search and come up with nothing, but the arguement would still remain "oh, you just didnt look in the right places, or since you don't believe, you can't see anyway." But if belief is the only way to see, that's another thing that psychology could deem insanity.

I don’t know about you but I don’t view God as my invisible friend. This thing called Christianity is largely based on faith. I can say that I’ve felt God on many occasions.

I really don't mean any disrespect, but in this case, how am I to fully make my point with out making you sound crazy? Even if it's not intentional, how am I to discuss this rationally without doing so? People feel a "presence" a lot. This presence is interchangable with whatever they might believe in. Random feelings that we all have at different points in our lives is not based on fact. The human brain is complex. Have you heard of the Chaos Theory? Slight changes in the sub-conscious can alter reality in ways we don't understand. You don't need drugs to hallucinate. People have mild psychotic break downs. (I've actually had one I'd be happy to share....I to this day don't know what it was. Some have told me it was demons, others said I was schizophrenic...I've never had something like this happened since, but it was crazy!)

Romans 10:17
So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
____
Again, it’s about faith.

(On the sun) No, actually Christianity didn’t state that. People did.
____
Okay, Christianity is representative of Christ. So my question to you is, was it really “Christianity” or those that stated that they followed it? Since you stated that your family life was hard, I can’t say your suffering was because of Christ. It sucks that we tend to base concepts on those that have seemly falsified it by how they live.
____

I completely agree and I know exactly what you mean. The notion that, people are people and people make mistakes and peoples actions should not judge a religion. The person should be dealt with individually, and not taint the reputation of an entire religion. I have mixed feelings on this. On one hand, if people of a certain religion is the cause of much harm and problems in the world, even if it is not in direct correlation with the fundamentals of the religion itself, should it not be blamed on the religion, and perhaps the religion is too dangerous for us simple minded humans? On the other hand, people are stupid, and I wouldnt want the actions of one idiot to corrupt what I believe or how I feel. So...this is hard to answer.

So you’re a Satanist? Or do you simply agree with this?

I can't say I'm a Satanist. I only recently found some of it's literature, but there is a lot that I definately agree with thus far. But they would never accept me anyway. They are a very elitist group. And I think they are against drug use and I am for it. So they woudlnt like that. I think drugs should be legal. And prostitution. Not sure how they would feel about that.

Actually the Bible never states these things as the seven deadly sins. The Bible states that the seven abominations are as follows:

Proverbs 6:16-19
These six things the LORD hates, Yes, seven are an abomination to Him: A proud look, A lying tongue, Hands that shed innocent blood, A heart that devises wicked plans, Feet that are swift in running to evil, A false witness who speaks lies, And one who sows discord among brethren.
____

Where did the 7 deadly sins come from? Thank you for telling me this. I hate false information.

You know, there are people in the Middle East that are killed because they follow Christ. I doubt they’d truly commit if it weren’t real, especially knowing that they’d be killed for what they believe.

Again, you can't say something is real just because people died for it. Maybe those people were lost. I'm sure THEY really believed what they died for, but that doest make it true. Again, think about Jim Jones or The Heavens Gate cult.

The Bible isn’t to deceive, it’s to encourage, inspire, and inform.

I don't have a problem with The Bible. I love a lot of it's teachings. It's people that really corrupt it. Or they take it too literally. They believe these stories as fact instead of allegorical literature to inspire. I think a lot of the Bible may have been inspired by drugs, actually. I have a theory about it-- It has been proven that the "witches" put to death during The Salem Witch Trials were infact not witches at all. In those days, Men were given the best food. Women were second. Children were last. They would get the scraps and the leftovers and the food with mold on it. There is a hallucinogenic property in moldy rye bread not unlike that of LSD. This was one of their most common crops of the day. These poor kids who were seen dancing naked around fires in a ritualistic way were just tripping! What is one of the most common foods in the Bible? Bread. They didnt have the knowledge on refridgeration just 400 years ago, what about 2000 years and beyond? Their knowledge was even more limited. So their eating this stuff and what is the main beverage? Wine. Their drunk too. And they are in the desert. What happens in the desert? You see mirages. How do you rehydrate yourself? It's popularly thought to look in cactuses for water. What grows in the desert? Peyote. So you got this drunk dehydrated guys wandering around with moldy bread and peyote. That will get you some talking bushes!

____
Young children, if you’re referring to those on this site, then they’re at the age where they can understand things for themselves.

No one can understand anything. There are 15 year olds that are more mature than 30 year olds. And there are some people who never learn anything. I hate atheists. I hate ANYONE who does not KNOW why they believe something. All too often are they just rehearsed (like we were in Catholic school). Rehearsed in prayers at a young age they cant begin to understand the meaning of. It's brainwash from an early age. I'm attacking ALL religion, and also the absence of religion. There's plenty of idiot atheists out there. I don't know anyone you guys know, but from where I come from, everyone is soooo confused. They have no idea why they believe what they believe. It's sad. I am the only one who actually bothers to try and look into things as best as I can. I respect people who care enough to do so. Most do not. And I just see a lot of people here who seem like they really don't know why they believe this. They ask questions on whether something is wrong or not without just deciding for themselves. They need someone to TELL them. They can't think for themselves or figure things out logically. This is probably sounding like an attack and I really am not trying to be mean (especially to the people who bothered to comment here! I thank you for your responses!!)

Dionysus? So he’s the son of a higher “god.” And they were both accused of stating their divinity? Dionysus is a myth. If you’ve actually read the Bible, you'd understand that they don't have much in common.

They have a lot in common, actually. A lot of gods in the past share plenty of traits and characteristics of Jesus. Do your homework!
____
You know, not all people have had bad experiences with “religion” nor were their lives ruined by it. It depends on how you see it and whether you base it on those around you or on the actual text that the religion is based on.

Your right. It is all about perspective. I'd like to change a few peoples perspectives though because some might not realize if they're being had.
____
Christians don’t fear Hell because Christ paid the price for our sins; we won’t be going there.

What a great fear tactic to get more people in church. Terrorism is defined as:
the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.


What’s your definition of “a good, happy life”? Being a good natured person? Or living however you see fit as long as you don’t harm anyone?

I suppose both. Someone who does not harm anyone who does not wish to be harmed. Someone who is kind. They don't have to go out of there way to help a stranger or anything, but just I guess a generally good natured person. Morals have nothing to do with it. I don't have very many morals. But I can be very nice and obey the Law. But I also don't agree with some of the laws either. But I don't want to get into politics.

I seriously doubt Hell takes music and film requests. You may think Heaven is “a boring place” but I think that based on your post, you haven’t fully comprehended all the bases of Christianity, God, Christ, and the Bible.

No, I know! lol. I was just sort of being metaphorical. I really hate the idea of Heaven and Hell. Nothing I enjoy would be allowed in Heaven. I get much more peace in thinking that there is nothing after death. I know thats scary to a lot of people. Most people would like to believe there is something. I hope there is nothing. I don't like the idea of being trapped as a ghost or in Heaven or anything of the sort. I just want to go gracefully with no worries. I recently lost my grandparents and I don't want them to suffer or be floating around or anything. Just eternal sleep is fine with me.
____
1 John 4:1-6
Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world.
You are of God, little children, and have overcome them, because He who is in you is greater than he who is in the world. They are of the world. Therefore they speak as of the world, and the world hears them. We are of God. He who knows God hears us; he who is not of God does not hear us. By this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error.
 

A lot of people are trying to say that I'm just being blasphemous or disrespectful. Really, in a case like this, dealing with a subject matter that is very dear to some people, how is one to truely analyze it and give their opinions in a respectful way? I really don't mean to offend anyone. Perhaps this message doesnt pertain to any of you. I just felt the need to make some information available. Give people a chance to hear a different thought. I wanted a healthy conversation/debate. I mean no harm. Even if that sounds fake. I really enjoy talking with people that disagree. It helps me mature and learn more. It's good to hear all sides of things. Nothing harmful can come from knowledge. I hate people who burn Bibles. And those christians in Florida who burned the Quran. That's just as bad. Destroying information is what someone would do as a last resort to get rid of it. They can't handle the words within the text, they just want to set it ablaze rather than deal with it in a mature way. It's a very immature statement. Theres nothing to fear from mere words. Should we burn every copy of Mein Kaumpf? No. Having it as a historical reference is good. Thats how we learn from our mistakes.
 
Feb 9, 2011
171
3
0
#22
Sorry for the weird typing, again. The bold is my new responses. Thanks everyone!
 
S

STRUGGLING

Guest
#23
Think of all the LOVE you have been shown here is LOVE not anything touch,taste,smell its the way of and IS God Who comprises all else-Life choose LOVE as LIFE ETERNAL friiend outside of that there is only death but this LOVE/LIFE is a free gift IF like achild you will belive:Guaranteed and cannot be stolen! I too Love you
 
Jun 20, 2010
401
1
0
37
#24
I'm keeping a metaphorical ear listening, hope the conversational goes well :), most of us have reason for our actions even if we don't understand from others what they are :)
have a nice day
 
Feb 9, 2011
171
3
0
#25
It's not clear that your "true saddening" is not at the same time disrespectful. For example, I could say to an atheist "Man you people are so incredibly dumb and I feel so sorry for you. Not disrespectfully, but truly."

I'll clarify (I may have said something like this in my last post, but here it is anyway) Atheists are stupid. And maybe "stupid" is the wrong word. Maybe I'm trying to say that they are of limited knowledge of what they believe (atheists too). They are very ignorant, yet for some reason do not wish to seek out further truths. That is what is sad! Again, I respect a christian or anyone for that matter that truely understands what they believe and why. I just feel like a lot of people sadly dont bother or dont care and they just believe what they are told. That's how lies get passed. Not on purpose, but people that just dont care to check.

That looks like double speak to me. And your own statement looks like double speak when you say:

We live our daily lives by a fantasy, most of us are Christian only because we were raised that way and accepted it uncritically, our conversations make you nauseous and our struggles are "stupid little problems," our beliefs are designed to control simple minded people (which implies we are simple minded people being controlled), our beliefs are crazier than beliefs that would get us locked in an insane asylum, lots of us are just superstitious and primitive, we are naive and gullible, and our religion is a scam.

Amazingly, you go on this long harangue and yet you don't present a single rational argument for any of your claims. You give no reason for us to disbelieve in God, you give no reason for us to believe that our problems are "stupid" and "little", you give no reason to believe we are simple minded, gullible, or being controlled, and you give us no reason to think any of our beliefs are a fantasy.

I sort of thought I made it clear. But first of all, please don't take offense to it anyway. I can already tell this doesnt even concern. You seem like someone that DOES have an understanding and I admire that.

I may have called some problems "stupid" and "little" only because they are not universal problems that affect everyone. They dont affect me and they could be avoided. For example, probably everyone has money problems, love life problems, etc... Very human things that will always be a problem no matter what. I'm citing things like masturbation or fears of irrational fears based on whatever religion it is that has placed these fears on them. I think thats sad. But it's just my opinion. And no one is forced to agree with me. I'm just throwing it out there that I believe some of their lives could be easier.

So what are you trying to accomplish with the harangue? You end it by telling us to question everything, but apparently you don't think it will occur to us that "Gee, she didn't give us any *reason* to believe her harangue. All she did was emote and insult." Surely you don't think anyone will read this stuff and go "She asserted our beliefs are a fairy-tail without giving any reasons whatsoever... She must be right so I'm going to give up Christianity!"

What reasons are you looking for? Again, I feel as though I made myself clear. The reasons are problems that you have that I don't have. I didnt want to insult, I wanted to enlighten. Are you asking me for proof that there is no God? I can't do that. No one can prove or disprove that. That's why it's one of those great, timeless philosophical questions. I think that question will always be. So I don't have that answer. What I DO have is rational arguements, nothing even to do with God, per say. But rather common sense arguements. And I just want people to be aware of whats out there. And maybe you think they already are aware but it doesnt seem like it. People seem to just take everything for face value. People are too trusting. I do want to help people. This goes beyond Christianity.

You ask us to question everything. So here are some questions I have for you:

What's the basis for your moral grandstanding? In your worldview, what determines right and wrong in a objective way that allows you to criticize our moral beliefs about things like pornography, masturbation, and re-marriage?

My moral grandstanding? Let's see... I'm not sure. I don't have very many morals. I think we are all here and are trying to survive as a society so there are some basic principals we should follow to get along with one another. Like, don't kill anyone. Don't steal. Pornography on the other hand IN MY OPINION is a victimless crime so to speak. Nothing bad can come from it. If you feel you need it, your not hurting anyone. There was some controversy over freak shows in carnivals that they are exploited for "normal people" entertainment. Well, if these people are competant adults, and they are being paid and it's their own decision, what's wrong with it? I think the "normal people" are the freaks for enjoying it. It's pretty subjective. If pornography leads to some sort of weird obsession or whatever, then yeah thats a problem. But simply using it for ones enjoyment...you don't get pregnant or STDS or anything. And the actors are paid people that CHOOSE to do it. So it's not like they care. They want you to watch it. So it's a stupid arguement that they are being exploited. They could have just as easily avoided the whole business to begin with. But again, thats just assuming that these people are not forced or raped into these videos or whatever. If it's their choice, YOUR not exploiting them. How is it wrong? What bad thing could possibly come from viewing it? I think your taking my words too close to heart. I really only am talking in a very general way. Like for re-marriage. Obviously it's not wrong. Marriage SHOULD be sacred and be life long. But people make mistakes. If your partner becomes abusive or does something terrible, religion should NOT make people stay in the marriage. And everyone deserves to be happy. So, I have no problem with remarriage. And I don't think most Christians do either. But if anyone did have a problem with it, I think it's a stupid problem, personally. To have to contemplate if your being "sinful" by falling in love again? Crazy to me.

How do you know that we have received no signs of God's existence?

Sure, you could say that the whole world itself is His creation. How else did it get there? I agree with you. There are some BIG mysteries in the universe. And maybe it is or was a God's creation. That doesnt mean it was the Christian God. Well let me ask you then, what signs have you received of God's existance? Let me rephrase. What signs have you received that could NOT be mistaken from perception?

You say:


What exactly does this mean?

Now let me address two of your statements directly:



You need to distinguish what Christians claim from what Christianity, as such, teaches. There is nothing essential to Christianity that requires us to believe the earth is 7,000 years old or that the sun revolves around the earth. So if the sun doesn't revolve around the earth or the earth isn't 7,000 years old that doesn't disprove Christianity.



So I could turn the tables on you and psychologize your atheism: you believe there is no heaven or hell because you are weak minded and you need to comfort yourself. The idea that you will be held accountable for your sins or that you need to live up to a moral standard is just to hard for you to accept. So you make up your own fairy tale: all this came from nothing, morality came from a non-moral universe, personhood came from impersonal substances, order came from disorder, and so on...

I agree with you. It definately does comfort me more. But I believe what I see. And I don't think a good arguement is just flipping it around and rationalize the existance of an invisible being just because of a thought that "I can't accept that I might be accountable". So that's what makes me delusionary? I'm so afraid that I have to make up an alternate reality? That's a long stretch. Religion on the other hand asks A LOT from people, without really providing much more than emotional stability and relief. And my arguement is that these people do not need the emotional gratification that religion provides. I think they could feel great on their own, with a better understanding.

You don't disbelieve in God because you have any evidence, but because in believing a lie you get to have more fun and be comfortable. So you've chosen the easy route.

Definately. It is easier and more fun and comfortable. And I have yet to see evidence of the Christian God. Why fall into a set of morals/rules that are difficult with no real reason to other than other people saying it's true?

But the jokes on you in the end. You've given up Christianity for an atheist worldview where there is no meaning to life, there is no morality, there is no significance to our consciousness and, as the atheist philosopher of science Alex Rosenberg admits, all of life is "just the foresightless play of fermions and bosons producing, in us conspiracy-theorists, the illusion of purpose."

I have to admit, there are a lot of high moral atheists out there. I am not a very moral person, but I make no attempt to stand for the entire atheist community

He goes on to say "One source of meaning on which many have relied is the intrinsic value, in particular the moral value, of human life. People have also sought moral rules, codes, principles which are supposed to distinguish us from merely biological critters whose lives lack (as much) meaning or value (as ours). Besides morality as a source of meaning, value, or purpose, people have looked to consciousness, introspection, self-knowledge as a source of insight into what makes us more than the merely physical facts about us. Scientism must reject all of these straws that people have grasped, and it’s not hard to show why. Science has to be nihilistic about ethics and morality" (This is all from his article "The Disenchanted Naturalist's Guide to Reality.")

So from where I'm standing, it looks a bit odd for you to tell us that you feel sorry for us when believe that humans are a special creation of God who loves us and who has endowed us with intrinsic value and purpose in the universe that we can fulfill and has established objective categories of right and wrong and, therefore, good and bad and beautiful and ugly. This looks a bit odd when your standing on a foundation that says you have no more value than a cock roach, morality and purpose is an illusion, and all that we see and all that we are is product of blind chance and the laws of physics.

Right and wrong, good and bad...these ideas ARE created by humans though. And they change with the times. Certain ancient cities practice necrophilia and cannibalism. Their religion dictated it. And it's not hard to see why really. For example, what really is wrong with cannibalism? Now a days, people will think your crazy if you think it's just fine. They said Dahmer was crazy (he definately was, killing people is wrong) but why is cannibalism wrong? Whether your athiest or christian does not matter. Christians believe that your soul will go on to the after life making your body useless. Atheists believe your body will rot and there is no consiousness making your body useless. I could forsee a day when it is a normal practice. Some strange belief of taking your recently deceased loved one into your body forever and ever. That's a poetic statement. And even Jesus gave his body and blood. So why is cannibalism wrong? This is one example of morality and rules that humans created for no reason. I don't see a problem with it.

Now, perhaps you don't think atheism entails any of this, but this would put you at odds with some of the smartest minds who share your atheism (I could quote a lot more atheists who agree with Rosenberg here, in fact one of the atheists you recommend we read, Nietzsche, agreed that morality was a convention of society). So if you want to say that you can have something like intrinsic value or objective morality with your atheism, you'll need to give a pretty good argument.
Humans set morals up to live and function together in society. Tribes have a set standard by which to live. Just like gangs. And if you wear the wrong colors or do the wrong thing, you would be killed or abandoned by your family. I think we set morals so that we can live peacefully together. No one wants to fight. Not really. We want to live in peace and harmony. If anything, religion makes more differences for us to disagree upon.

Another example is the "legal age" moral/law. Completely meaningless and useless. At 18 I can smoke and vote and join the military and go to war and die, but at 17 I can't? How about 21? In certain parts of America you have to be 17 to see a rated R movie, and in other parts the age is 18. This is a man made stupid statistic. Some people are never capable of handling certain things. Others, arrive prematurely to a grand level of superiority.

In the not too distant past, farmers in their 30s would marry 15 year olds and they would start a family. Now you will go to jail for this? The law is constantly changing. Marijuanna will probably be legal (hopefully) sometime soon. It originally was legal. Then it wasnt because of PROPAGANDA. That and cocaine too. Back when Africans were slaves, the corrupt legal system changed the law citing that it made you go crazy and rape women (not true).

My arguement has always just been about people, not christians as a whole or alone. But people. People know so little about their history. And you wont find the answers in history books either. The winners wrote those.
 
Feb 9, 2011
171
3
0
#26
I love you all too. It means a lot to me to have this outlet to share some of my ideas that I have had to keep pent up inside me prior. Thanks again to all who have responded. I hope I've cleared some things up. I don't want you thinking that I'm against Christianity. I really just want to teach people. Or atleast enlighten them. I don't have all the answers. No one does. But even though my thoughts may be different from your own, I appreciate the feedback (thanks to those who PMed me too!) I will stick around here. I really enjoy this place. No hard feelings! Don't misunderstand me! lol I'm just trying to get some things off my chest. Thanks again, like I said, for the outlet to do so!
 
C

Chalice

Guest
#27
I appreciate your post Michelle94 you have questions and needed to express it. I may not agree with your choices but that does'nt make them any less important . Of faith I can only say it's a personal choice we as believers have come to it and accept it as apart of our relationship with Jesus reading the Word and walking with him gives us a purpose. Prayer is an important part of it worshiping with our fellow christians can also strengthen us as a whole. I hope you continue to question because believe it or not it'll help you to grow and mature to be a better person. I look on the Bible as a guide and when I study God's Word Old or New Testament I look on it as divinely inspired. The translations and there are many to speak of are all valid according to each persons interpretation it all matters. It's like when the Law in the Old Testament is fulfilled in the New Testament Jesus is our Savior he is with us always. He knows us all and intercedes on our behalf. Try to imagine living in that time in the past when he is right there you can talk to him touch and Hug him. Some of his disciples in Matt.28:16-20 doubted and Jesus answered them and comforted them. Remember we can't measure up he saved us all as we are all perfected in Christ Jesus. He wants a relationship with us just like we do with him.
 
Feb 9, 2011
171
3
0
#28
I appreciate your post Michelle94 you have questions and needed to express it. I may not agree with your choices but that does'nt make them any less important . Of faith I can only say it's a personal choice we as believers have come to it and accept it as apart of our relationship with Jesus reading the Word and walking with him gives us a purpose. Prayer is an important part of it worshiping with our fellow christians can also strengthen us as a whole. I hope you continue to question because believe it or not it'll help you to grow and mature to be a better person. I look on the Bible as a guide and when I study God's Word Old or New Testament I look on it as divinely inspired. The translations and there are many to speak of are all valid according to each persons interpretation it all matters. It's like when the Law in the Old Testament is fulfilled in the New Testament Jesus is our Savior he is with us always. He knows us all and intercedes on our behalf. Try to imagine living in that time in the past when he is right there you can talk to him touch and Hug him. Some of his disciples in Matt.28:16-20 doubted and Jesus answered them and comforted them. Remember we can't measure up he saved us all as we are all perfected in Christ Jesus. He wants a relationship with us just like we do with him.


Hey Chalice, you brought up something interesting I'd like to bring up. You mentioned about imagining if we were there in Jesus's time. Would we accept Him? Most of us probably wouldnt. He was considered a criminal. A radical law breaker and cult leader in a sense. Now, I don't mean for this to sound bad, but when you think about it, how is this so different than someone like Charles Manson? Let me ask you this, if Jesus were to come today, would you really believe it's Him? Or would you think it's a hoax. A terrible deceiver. Would you mistake Him for the Antichrist? There are a lot of powerful speakers out there with ideas different from your own. Jesus was a rebel. I respect Him for what he did! Would you not see him today as some lunatic? In some ways, time hasnt changed much at all. We, as humans, still respect the wealthy. The famous. The heroic. Most of us do not like the rebellous radical who suggests ideas that seem different from our own. That's what Jesus was. And he was poor. Would you not see him as some psychotic hobo wandering around with delusional followers, had he been here today? It's interesting to think about. I know some of you would just automatically say, Of course I would know it's Him! But why? Arent you a sinner too? Wouldnt you have eaten the forbidden fruit? I used to argue that I wouldnt have eaten it. I resented God for not giving everyone an equal chance. I thought that, "why should the entire human species be defined by these two idiots that screwed it up for the rest of us (Adam and Eve)" I wanted a fair shot. I thought everyone should be given a chance to prove themself. Then I realized we all would have failed. It's in our human nature. Temptation is powerful. I finally just came to the conclusion that giving in to temptation doesnt have to always be a bad thing. And that you should respect your body and give your self what you need. You dont need to deprive yourself of things. It led to terrible thoughts about God...A never ended cycle of...a) God knows all b) he gave us free will and WE screwed up c) He already knew we would screw up his test, so why bother in the first place. None of it makes sense and seemed like a cruel joke on an incompetent species (humans). I couldnt accept the Christian God. It's too scary. If there is a God, I'd hope for a loving one. Again, this God seems to toy with peoples emotions. Teasing them. Blame it on Satan? Why? God could kill Satan and chooses not too. Seems like He doesnt care very much. Look at the story of Jobe. That story is so sadistic. Two supreme entities (God and Satan) just toying with our pathetic minds. For what purpose?

Yeah, sorry to get off topic. But yeah, I wonder how many of us would truely accept God, if he were alive today.
 
C

Chalice

Guest
#29
Ok the reason I asked you to imagine living in that time was to show you that God truely understands are weaknesses and Jesus is the incarnate word made flesh that is fulfilled to save us. He understands our faults and does'nt hold it againist us. We are all God's creation if you read the first part of Genesis very slowly it's very powerful stuff. It can explain why God would go to such lengths to have a relationship with his creation. Love is a powerful force. As for whether I would recognize Jesus right now I pray I would. You see I chose to see him in people everyday so for me he is right here now . Everytime two or more are gathered in his name he is there. You should try to read the book of Acts it details the work of the early church after Jesus ascended into heaven. The transformation of Saul into Paul. Keep searching Michelle94 your getting there. :)
 
C

Credo_ut_Intelligam

Guest
#30
I think that whole premise is messed up. Why would death ever be the answer?
In a sense, death is the answer because death is the problem. Imagine you get a speeding ticket and subsequently you owe the local government $95. What is the answer to this debt? Money. Specifically, money equating to $95. Now Scripture tells us that the wages of sin is death. Therefore, in order for God to be just and the justifier of the ungodly, he must pay that debt (death) on our behalf.

Is it not better to live?
It is, which is why God paid the penalty for us so that we might have life.

I have the same problem with Martrydom. I think it's silly.
From an atheist standpoint, you're absolutely right. The most valuable thing an atheist has is her life on this earth. Once she dies, that's it. Nothing matters to the dead person. But if physical death is not the end of our existence, it could make perfect sense to give up your earthly life for a greater good in the long run.

It seems like very little can get done this way... No, I think it's better to do what you have to do to live and then just continue teaching Christianity or whatever it is that you live for. If you believe in it that strongly, live to continue helping others!
In the scenario you describe, one would have to reject God to live. But to do this is to not trust God that obedience to him is more profitable than obedience to man. As Peter and the apostles said: "We must obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29). Furthermore, "...we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose" (Romans 8:28). So the Christian doesn't have to worry that by being unfaithful to God they might actually be more useful to God! Such a scenario is absurd in Christian theology.

The Christian has a responsibility to be faithful to God, knowing that he is sovereign and can bring forth good things out of bad things. So the person who says "why not do evil that good may come?" has a just condemnation: "Their condemnation is just" (Romans 3:8).


Every religion has convertee's. Be it Muslim to Christian, Christian to Jew, Jew to Wicca....You will find people everywhere that have switched faith for who knows what reason. Are you trying to attest that those of which grew up in atheist homes that became Christian prove Christianity so? If that's not what you meant, I don't understand the purpose of that statement
I can't speak on behalf of Lightbliss, but I would think that the point is that you were claiming:

"My Christian family made my life hell and very unpleasant for most my life until a couple years ago and I reached the age of reason... Most of you have just been Christian all of your lives and think that you HAVE to. Just because you were taught this your whole life does NOT make it true."​

So Lightbliss was giving a counter-example to your claim. And I think she makes a valid point. You can't just act like religious people only have their beliefs because, unlike you, they didn't start thinking for themselves when they "reached the age of reason"... That explanation doesn't account for all the data.

Perhaps I don't get it. But it most certainly is about rules to some degree. And it's a pretty serious problem if you don't obey said rules. Hell is not a happy place. It should be taken seriously.
Getting out of Hell is *not* about obeying the rules. It's about faith in the gospel. We do obey "rules," but we do so out of love. If you love someone you will want to do what is best for them and you will also want to give the person what they want. In our relationship with God, conforming to his holiness (by following his "rules") is the best possible thing for us and if we love God we will want to obey him.

The Bible is loaded with crazy things. Contradictions. Among only a few there are:
Again, you are just critiquing the Bible from an assumed moral standpoint. But I asked you a long time ago (perhaps you just haven't gotten to it yet) what your moral standard was. In your worldview, what is it that makes something right or wrong? How do you even account for morality?

Of course if you assume that God does not exist then many of God's precepts will look false to you. For instance, why should believing in God be a moral issue if God does not exist? Crazy, right? Not if God does exist... So you shouldn't expect your examples of "crazy things" to strike Christians as crazy if the Christian is operating in a different worldview than you that differently informs their ethical system.

The world is largely defined by Science. Medicines were made, we know more about the human body. We know about dinosaur fossils.
In fact, the findings of science are largely (even vastly) irrelevant to most people's daily lives where they find meaning, purpose and pursue their goals. For instance, you could erase our knowledge about dinosaur fossils and our lives would hardly be impoverished. I don't think anyone but a (sad and lonely) paleontologist would have his life defined by that.

Medicine is one area where science has greatly improved the quality of our lives, but still people have lived without modern medicine for most of human history and they still found meaning, purpose, etc. Even today I doubt hardly anyone would say that medicine defines their life. And even today many people in 3rd world countries don't have access to modern medicine. It doesn't define their life, but I bet they would be insulted by the idea that this means they must live without things that *really* matter to them (things like love).

But maybe you didn't mean "define" in this sense of the term. Maybe you meant it in a more literal way: science reveals the way things actually are, it discovers reality. Not all scientists would agree with that statement (instrumentalists), but even so, there are many types of truths that science can't discover (for instance ethical truths, with apologies to Harris ;) ).

Those atheist who do believe science defines our lives (in every/any sense of the term) are actually very nihilistic! I already gave you an example of this with the Alex Rosenberg quote.

No one will ever prove or disprove it.
Honestly, I don't think you know what you're talking about in this area. For one thing, philosophers (and scientists) use the word "proof" in different ways. In some ways that the term is used, a Christian can say that they can prove God's existence and, in fact, they have done so many times. Likewise, an atheist could say he has disproved God's existence. In other ways that the term is used, you can't prove God's existence, but then you also can't prove that other people have minds (that solipsism is false) and other mundane beliefs that we take for granted. So in this other sense, that we can't prove God is really irrelevant since we can't really "prove" anything.

Let me give you an example. The philosopher A. P. Martinich in his book "Philosophical Writing" defines a proof as a cogent argument. A cogent argument is a sound argument that the person to whom the argument is presented understands and accepts.

Now in this sense, it could be very easy to prove God's existence. Or, it could be very hard. But notice that whether it is hard or easy need not have anything to do with the soundness of the argument! In other words, a Christian may have a perfectly good argument for the existence of God, but it may not constitute a "proof" in Martinich's sense because (for instance) I could be presenting the argument to a 1 month old baby who cannot understand a word I'm saying. Does this mean that my argument or my belief in God is somehow on shaky epistemic grounds now? Hardly!

How can you disprove something that gives no signs of existance anyway?
Christians won't accept your claim that God gives no signs of his existence. According to Scripture all of creation points to the existence and glory of God. Whether or not they can take this data put it into an argument form that you would find persuasive is a different issue. And as I pointed out above, if no one could formulate and argument that you found persuasive this wouldn't necessarily reflect any deficiency in the data or even the argument.

You could send archeologists over to dig and look and search and come up with nothing, but the arguement would still remain "oh, you just didnt look in the right places, or since you don't believe, you can't see anyway."
Actually, science sometimes (often?) operates in this same way resisting falsification. I pointed this out to you last time. Any belief that a person has some interest in maintaining will resist falsification. This isn't necessarily a bad thing. Newton's theory didn't align with certain observable evidence for a while. Yet scientists didn't say that Newton's theory was thereby disproven. Rather, their belief in the truth of Newton's theory resisted falsification in the same way you could mock: "Oh, you just didn't look in the right places..." Were they being irrational or crazy? I don't think so. There is more to be said here, but I don't want to make this response longer than it has to be.

But if belief is the only way to see, that's another thing that psychology could deem insanity.
Any psychologist who paid attention in college would understand the role of paradigms and contextual beliefs to determine our ability to recognize certain things. In fact, my avatar ("seeing black and white") is an example of this psychological phenomena that I first saw in one of my psychology textbooks (psychology was one of my majors in college). The text that reads "White" in the shaded area is actually the same color as the text that reads "Black" in the light area. The context determines how your brain interprets the color. In the same way, the network of beliefs we have can and will effect your interpretation of data. So everyone (including the psychologists) better lock themselves in the insane asylum.

People feel a "presence" a lot. This presence is interchangable with whatever they might believe in. Random feelings that we all have at different points in our lives is not based on fact.
The fact that various people feel a "presence" and interpret it different doesn't prove that the feeling is "not based on fact." You assume, unjustifiably, that the problem is in the belief that there is some objective cause of the feeling rather than in the person's interpretation of the feeling.

On one hand, if people of a certain religion is the cause of much harm and problems in the world, even if it is not in direct correlation with the fundamentals of the religion itself, should it not be blamed on the religion, and perhaps the religion is too dangerous for us simple minded humans?
No. For one thing, even showing correlation would be insufficient to demonstrate causation. In experimental psychology we learned this as the post-hoc-ergo-propter-hoc fallacy. If the person's actions are not caused by the religion as such, then blaming or eradicating the religion as such will not fix the problem! Think about it for a moment and I think you'll see the point.

Suppose it happens to be the case that an above average number of kids in school who are violent also happen to have red hair. So we have some correlation between violent behavior and having red hair. No suppose that we know that it may not be the case that the red hair is causing the violent behavior. Would it make any sense at all to say "Look, shouldn't we blame red hair anyway? I mean maybe the red hair is just to ornery for kids to have?" and then we institute a policy where all red-heads must die their hair brown. Make sense?

Again, you can't say something is real just because people died for it. Maybe those people were lost. I'm sure THEY really believed what they died for, but that doest make it true. Again, think about Jim Jones or The Heavens Gate cult.
This is true. Being willing to die for your beliefs only demonstrates that you genuinely hold to the belief.

I think a lot of the Bible may have been inspired by drugs, actually.
A pretty wild conjecture with no evidence.

I have a theory about it-- It has been proven that the "witches" put to death during The Salem Witch Trials were infact not witches at all. In those days, Men were given the best food. Women were second. Children were last. They would get the scraps and the leftovers and the food with mold on it. There is a hallucinogenic property in moldy rye bread not unlike that of LSD. This was one of their most common crops of the day. These poor kids who were seen dancing naked around fires in a ritualistic way were just tripping!
The Salem Witch Trials are more legend than fact. According to Dinesh D'Souza, "fewer than twenty-five [were killed in the Salem Witch Trials]. Nineteen were sentenced to death, and a few others died in captivity" (What's So Great About Christianity? 207).

Your story about mold looks ludicrous. Apparently only about 20 people had a mold induced hallucination in a population where probably more than 50% of the people were eating the same stuff. And is there a shred of evidence to support the fanciful story?

What is one of the most common foods in the Bible? Bread. They didnt have the knowledge on refridgeration just 400 years ago, what about 2000 years and beyond? Their knowledge was even more limited. So their eating this stuff and what is the main beverage? Wine. Their drunk too. And they are in the desert. What happens in the desert? You see mirages. How do you rehydrate yourself? It's popularly thought to look in cactuses for water. What grows in the desert? Peyote. So you got this drunk dehydrated guys wandering around with moldy bread and peyote. That will get you some talking bushes!
You've got to be kidding... Again, any evidence for the fanciful story? People back then didn't know about refrigerators, but they did know about drugs and alcohol and its effects. They also knew about the desert.

What do you eat today? bread. Bread that can still go moldy and sometimes does (my bread got moldy not too long ago and I had to throw it away). And what do most kids your age drink when they are having a good time on the weekend? Alcohol. And what do a lot of kids your age supplement their good times and alcohol with? Drugs, especially weed. One of the effects of weed is it makes you hungry. Real hungry. It also gives you poor judgment. So you would eat moldy bread.

So we've got this drunk, drugged up, mold induced hallucinating teen age girl on here called Michelle spouting off crazy theories in her drug induced trip.

How's that for a theory?

No one can understand anything.
Which means you can't understand anything, including what you are trying to say here.

All too often are they just rehearsed (like we were in Catholic school). Rehearsed in prayers at a young age they cant begin to understand the meaning of. It's brainwash from an early age.
I already responded to the rehearsal = brainwashing thing last time.

They ask questions on whether something is wrong or not without just deciding for themselves.
Probably because they don't think *they* get to determine right and wrong by merely making a decision.

They have a lot in common, actually. A lot of gods in the past share plenty of traits and characteristics of Jesus. Do your homework!
Probably because most people recognize that for a god to be a god it needs to have certain properties in order to qualify as a god. For instance, no one would recognize a finite bumbling clown as a god. Pretty much everyone agrees that a god will have above average intelligence, wisdom, power, an affections. So we shouldn't be surprised to find some similarities in concept of deity. This doesn't mean all of them or any of them are made up. For instance, it could be that there is one true God and at one point man rebelled against God, but God created man with a need and longing for him. But man, in his rebellion wouldn't want to return to the true God. So they make up for their needs by creating a God roughly modeled on the true God, minus those things they don't like about the real God.

What a great fear tactic to get more people in church. Terrorism is defined as:
the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
What a bad definition of terrorism. By that definition, all governments are terrorist organizations since all governments operate by coercion (judicial system and police to enforce laws) for political purposes. In fact, it looks like any authority that utilizes punishment would qualify as terrorist (your parents).

But if it is true that a person will go to Hell when they die if they do not repent and believe in Jesus, then there really is no problem. Just because people are afraid of it doesn't make it false and it doesn't mean it's not a good motive for repenting or believing either.

Suppose you are speed down the road at 130 mph in a 55 zone and I tell you "If you don't slow down you're going to get a ticket." Would you scream at me "Nice try you terrorist! I'm not falling for your fear tactics!!!" ... You'd be the nut in that case, not me!

I suppose both. Someone who does not harm anyone who does not wish to be harmed. Someone who is kind. They don't have to go out of there way to help a stranger or anything, but just I guess a generally good natured person. Morals have nothing to do with it. I don't have very many morals. But I can be very nice and obey the Law. But I also don't agree with some of the laws either. But I don't want to get into politics.
So do you think we *should* not harm anyone who doesn't wish to be harmed? Do you think we *should* be kind? Do you think we *should* be good natured persons? If so, then morals have everything to do with it whether you realize it or not.

Continued in following post...
 
C

Credo_ut_Intelligam

Guest
#31
Continued from previous post....

I really hate the idea of Heaven and Hell. Nothing I enjoy would be allowed in Heaven. I get much more peace in thinking that there is nothing after death. I know thats scary to a lot of people. Most people would like to believe there is something. I hope there is nothing. I don't like the idea of being trapped as a ghost or in Heaven or anything of the sort. I just want to go gracefully with no worries. I recently lost my grandparents and I don't want them to suffer or be floating around or anything. Just eternal sleep is fine with me.
That's pious sounding, but every single person would extend their life another year if you gave them the opportunity on their death bead (unless of course they believe there is some form of existence after death or their rational faculties weren't functioning properly). Or let me put it this way: if I were to offer every single person the option of continuing to exist or me ceasing their existence this very moment who wouldn't choose to exist rather than to not exist?

Honestly, I think the "I'm at peace with my non-existence" is a facade, though I recognize many want to pretend and can even make themselves believe it when they aren't faced with death or properly reflecting on the implications. It's like the drug addict who, during a moment of strength says, "Why would I even want heroin? I don't care a thing about or have the slightest desire for it." He misjudges his wants and desires and strength in a moment of peace.

Really, in a case like this, dealing with a subject matter that is very dear to some people, how is one to truely analyze it and give their opinions in a respectful way?
And yet most atheists have managed to do just that prior to the rise of the New Atheists... now atheists just can't imagine how they could possibly not be a jerk when talking about those stupid religious people. But that's the problem you see. They think religious people, particularly Christians, are idiots and even harmful idiots. Naturally, one can't politely tell someone that they are a harmful idiot that should be eradicated from society. It's like a Nazi trying to respectfully tell a Jew how worthless and inhuman he is. The Nazi might ponder gently "How can I truly analyze your inhumanity and that your a disease upon society? I want to do this in a respectful way." But it's just a joke really. Until someone respects the person they won't respect the person's beliefs.
 
C

Credo_ut_Intelligam

Guest
#32
I'm citing things like masturbation or fears of irrational fears based on whatever religion it is that has placed these fears on them. I think thats sad.
As I've pointed out a few times I think already, to call these irrational fears assumes the falsity of the religion which issues the prescriptions. It's pretty much a waste of time to tell someone who adheres to the religion that their fear is irrational without first addressing the cause of their belief.

What reasons are you looking for?
Well you don't want us to believe in God, right? So we would be looking for reasons for disbelieving in God.

Again, I feel as though I made myself clear. The reasons are problems that you have that I don't have.
It looks like you are saying here that the reason we should be skeptical of our religion is because you don't have to worry about the stuff we have to worry about because you don't believe our religion. But that's not a very good reason for us to disbelieve our religion.

For instance, if I didn't believe the police existed I could not worry about getting a speeding ticket while driving over the speed limit. So is that a good reason to believe the police don't exist? A thing being worrying or fear-inducing doesn't have any relationship to it's truth. You can't overturn a truth claim by showing that it would cause you to fear or worry or by showing that you could reduce fear or worry by disbelieving it.

Are you asking me for proof that there is no God? I can't do that. No one can prove or disprove that.
I've dealt with this in the post above. But surely you still think you have good reasons for not believing in God.

My moral grandstanding? Let's see... I'm not sure. I don't have very many morals.
So your condemnations against Christianity and things like brainwashing and the teachings in the OT about killing witches etc. are all baseless?

I think we are all here and are trying to survive as a society so there are some basic principals we should follow to get along with one another. Like, don't kill anyone. Don't steal.
In other words, whether we should follow these principals is entirely dependent upon whether we happen to share your goal as well as your means of achieving the goal. But whether we adopt that goal or the means of achieving it is entirely optional. So, for instance, if you want to win at the game of chess, you should adhere to certain rules if you want to play it in an orthodox fashion. But then, you don't have to play chess and you don't have to play it in an orthodox fashion. There is no moral constraint.



Pornography on the other hand IN MY OPINION is a victimless crime so to speak. Nothing bad can come from it.
Actually I think that's debateable. It's easy to think of contexts in which pornography can do harm (e.g. emotional harm to the wife of the husband addicted to porn). And I could find studies about the psychological harm it does to men (and I've done that before on this website), but that might branch this thread out to even bigger proportions.

But simply using it for ones enjoyment...you don't get pregnant or STDS or anything. And the actors are paid people that CHOOSE to do it. So it's not like they care.
Most people agree that moral boundaries go beyond physical harm (STDs) or personal choice. Water boarding, for instance, doesn't cause physical harm (as I understand it anyway), but it's psychological and most would consider it torture. And I can think of some instances where persons harmed themselves or were harmed by others by personal choice, yet most agreed (and they were even convicted by law) that what they did was wrong and punishable. The particular example I have in mind I won't share because it's too explicit. But it involved two German people (if I recall) eating something.

Like for re-marriage. Obviously it's not wrong.
The only thing that's obvious is that we would disagree about it being obvious.

Marriage SHOULD be sacred and be life long. But people make mistakes. If your partner becomes abusive or does something terrible, religion should NOT make people stay in the marriage. And everyone deserves to be happy. So, I have no problem with remarriage. And I don't think most Christians do either. But if anyone did have a problem with it, I think it's a stupid problem, personally. To have to contemplate if your being "sinful" by falling in love again? Crazy to me.
The question turns on whether there are legitimate reasons for divorce. You say that marriage should be lifelong (apparently this is one of your "few" moral beliefs). But are there legitimate grounds for divorce? I'm sure you think so. Are there illegitimate grounds for divorce? Again, I think you would agree that there are. So if someone gets divorced for illegitimate reasons, then they should not have and they should be reconciled to person they made a vow to and uphold that vow. This is all Christians are saying (at least as far as I've seen) about divorce and re-marriage. In cases of legitimate divorce a person can remarry. In cases of illegitimate divorce a person should be reconciled and faithful to the vow.

And maybe it is or was a God's creation. That doesnt mean it was the Christian God. Well let me ask you then, what signs have you received of God's existance? Let me rephrase. What signs have you received that could NOT be mistaken from perception?
You appear to be latching onto something like the Kalam Cosmological Argument. But (1) I never put forth that argument and (2) the argument doesn't claim to be able to demonstrate that *the Christian God* is the creator (or first cause) of the universe. So in light of (2), it's no fault in the argument that it can't demonstrate something it doesn't claim to be capable of demonstrating in the first place.

As for my "signs," I've experienced God's love and forgiveness in my life. A love that is as evident to me as my mother's love for me. Now you say "that could NOT be mistaken from perception." But that strikes me as naive. None of your perceptually acquired beliefs are infallible. If that fact undercuts my god-belief, then it undercuts all perceptually acquired beliefs. So I could just ask you "What signs have you received of your mom's existence? Let me rephrase. What signs have you received that could NOT be mistaken from perception?"

The fact that our beliefs can be mistaken doesn't undercut any of our beliefs.

But I believe what I see.
Really? Well you might need to reassess your epistemology somewhere along the line because all that you see (via perception) could be mistaken.

And I don't think a good arguement is just flipping it around and rationalize the existance of an invisible being just because of a thought that "I can't accept that I might be accountable".
I wasn't using it as a good argument, I was using it as a demonstration of how your own psychologizing can be used against you. So whatever you think your psychologizing undercuts, it can be used to undercut your own system.

So that's what makes me delusionary? I'm so afraid that I have to make up an alternate reality? That's a long stretch.
Which is what is going through every Christian's mind when they read your harangue about them being delusional.

Religion on the other hand asks A LOT from people, without really providing much more than emotional stability and relief.
That statement assumes the falsity of Christianity. Otherwise, you'd have to say that Christianity provides us with salvation too... and in fact it asks nothing of us accept to rest in the finished work of Christ.

And my arguement is that these people do not need the emotional gratification that religion provides. I think they could feel great on their own, with a better understanding.
Even if they could feel better abandoning their beliefs, I've already pointed out that the fact that believing or disbelieving something because you find it consoling has no relationship to the truth value of that thing.

Personally, I think everyone would feel great if we tied them up and gave them drugs and then made them believe that they were living in the Carebear world with Share Bear and Cheer Bear (minus Grumpy Bear of course)... but so what?

And I have yet to see evidence of the Christian God. Why fall into a set of morals/rules that are difficult with no real reason to other than other people saying it's true?
I think there is plenty of evidence for God. The evidence is easy enough to find by yourself. Books like The Reason for God or Reasonable Faith try to make use of such evidence.

Right and wrong, good and bad...these ideas ARE created by humans though.
So your disgust at the OT laws that you listed in your last post is baseless.

And I have yet to see evidence of the Christian God. Why fall into a set of morals/rules that are difficult with no real reason to other than other people saying it's true?
And they change with the times.
While moral practice often changes (due to new facts or a different interpretation of the facts), the principles are largely the same and fairly universal. As James Rachels illustrates:

"Consider a culture in which believe it is wrong to eat cows...Such a society would appear to have values very different from our own. But does it? … Suppose [the reason] is because they believe that after death the souls of humans inhabit the bodies of animals, especially cows, so that a cow may be someone's grandmother. Now do we want to say that their values are different from ours? No; the difference lies elsewhere. The difference is in our belief systems, not in our values. We agree that we shouldn't eat Grandma; we simply disagree about whether the cow is (or could be) Grandma" (qtd. in Beyond Bumper Sticker Ethics).​


For example, what really is wrong with cannibalism?
Since you believe morality is a human construct, nothing is *really* wrong with *anything*.

They said Dahmer was crazy (he definately was, killing people is wrong)
If the idea of wrong is created by people, then nothing is *really* wrong with killing. People just happen to think it's wrong. But apparently that belief doesn't correspond to any moral fact.

Humans set morals up to live and function together in society. Tribes have a set standard by which to live. Just like gangs. And if you wear the wrong colors or do the wrong thing, you would be killed or abandoned by your family. I think we set morals so that we can live peacefully together.
I've already responded to this same idea in the previous post.

If anything, religion makes more differences for us to disagree upon.
Which is irrelevant to whether or not religion is true or false.

Another example is the "legal age" moral/law. Completely meaningless and useless. At 18 I can smoke and vote and join the military and go to war and die, but at 17 I can't? How about 21?
Moral realists (people who believe that morality is objective) don't require that all things considered right/wrong be absolute. Some are prescriptions/prohibitions (like the speed limit) are practical and to some degree arbitrary. But that doesn't overturn moral realism.

And you wont find the answers in history books either. The winners wrote those.
That's a non-sequitur. Sometimes the winners have a vested interest in preserving the truth.
 
C

Chalice

Guest
#33
Good evening Michelle94 any other questions for me? I think we need to stop picking apart each others answers and look at the bigger picture. Your young and have a big life ahead of you and I questioned everything when I was younger so that's ok to do. Just don't forget one thing for the most part There is hope for all of us so don't buy into the world. If you want to know God just ask him and he will surprise you all it takes is faith.
 

eugenius

Senior Member
Jul 17, 2009
491
9
18
#34
I started dabbling in philosophy and human psychology. And sociology. Most of you have just been Christian all of your lives and think that you HAVE to. Just because you were taught this your whole life does NOT make it true. Look into Nietzsche, LaVey, Darwin, Marquis De Sade, Hunter S. Thompson, George Carlin, and other brilliant minds. You may learn something.

[SIZE=+3]
[/SIZE]
If you want to hear a brilliant mind, listen to Ravi Zacharias. He discusses what is wrong with the philosophy of some of the people you mentioned. He is very good at explaining the logical reasons for God. He goes head to head with people like Richard Dawkins all the time. If you are interested in a more intelligent defense of the Christian faith, I strongly urge you try Ravi Zacharias.

http://www.rzim.org/resources/listen/justthinking.aspx?archive=1&pid=1838 (Good audio lecture by Ravi, right on topic)

Look at me, I was not born in a Christian family, in fact nobody believes in my family except me. I don't go to church. I read the bible myself and listen to intelligent discussions about Christianity. I research it myself. I believe it because it makes sense to me. I as an engineer and student of science see too much complexity and order in the laws of nature to believe that we are here as a result of chance.

As Ravi once said, if you take the philosophy of Nietzsche and Darwin seriously, you believe that certain races are superior to others, only the strong survive, you must destroy everyone who is weaker than you. The philosophy of Nietzsche lead to the Holocaust. I come from the former USSR, I know a little about the godless philosophy of communism. About the philosophy of Carl Marx. Its good to research these people, but you must consider what their philosophy actually means.
 
Last edited:

eugenius

Senior Member
Jul 17, 2009
491
9
18
#35
By the way Michelle94, I am impressed that at 16 you are so intelligent. We can disagree but I still feel that way.

Anyway, you were saying, if Jesus was here today would I believe him? Yes. Yes I would. Why? Well have you read the new testament entirely? I have and many times, and continuing to do so again and again.

When you hear Jesus and read what he did, you see that everything he did was for us hopeless sinners. He was a true sacrifice. He had absolutely no personal gain from any of it. To be ridiculed, spat upon, tortured, half the time people didn't listen to him, and then finally he was killed in a very brutal way. He didn't do any of it for himself. Everything he did was for us. He suffered for us.

The question is, what person would go through all of that for people like Hitler, Stalin, Genghis Khan, etc? Yes, remember Jesus did it even for them. They were never excluded. He literally went to hell and back for every bastard that was ever born.

If Jesus was an impostor, he would gain something from what he did. Fame, fortune, love, respect. The only thing he gained is torture, pain, and death.

God so loved the world he sent a part of himself to save us from ourselves!!! That is why Jesus he is who he said he is.

For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.
For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die. But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.


Romans 6-8

All who came before and after Jesus have ALWAYS seeked personal gain. That disproves them.
 

tjogs

Senior Member
Jun 28, 2009
323
18
18
#36
He who don't have God don't have his law either, no right no wrong, just distance, (the sin). And when he dies he just disapear like God forgives the sins we commit. It's sad so sad.
 
M

m0rganm03

Guest
#37
I think it's sad how you are saying your doing this for the children. When really it's for you. Christianity doesn't "Destroy or Control" lives it brightens them. That is if you choose to let it.
 
B

Brandon777

Guest
#38
I think it's sad how you are saying your doing this for the children. When really it's for you. Christianity doesn't "Destroy or Control" lives it brightens them. That is if you choose to let it.
Christianity does destroy and control lives. It destroys the life that was bound by immorality and sets a person free with a light, happy, love filled heart through the wholesome discipline of self-control.
 
T

Trax

Guest
#39
I just...I don't know. I was curious about this site but I don't think I can take much more of it. I don't believe in God and a lot of you are very sad to me. Not in a disrespectful way. A true saddening way. I can't believe you've allowed yourselves to be so corrupted by Christianity. [SIZE=+3][/SIZE]
A person, seeking answers to life, purpose for his life, walks out of his house and picks up
the first rock, in the yard, that captures his attention. He exclaims, "Wow, this is what I've
been seeking. This will give me good health, a positive mind, cause life to be smooth for
me and will make a great piece of jewel. To another person, that rock is just a small piece of granite that tumbled over into the yard, when they pour the guys driveway. But to the guy
who noticed the rock, put his faith in the rock, and that rock is now his guide. You have picked
your rock as has everyone else. Two issues people wont address to their rock:
1. Will this rock free me from my sinful nature?
2. Does this rock have the words of eternal life?

Sinful nature? I'm not a sinner, I'm a good person, exclaims the guy. So, why do you need
the rock? Why do you need the opinion of an author, of the latest self-help book?
Even though their opinion of themselves is that of, "I'm a good person", they know that
something is lacking. It is that sinful nature that drives you. That rock, or self-help book,
or philosophy can't get it out of you and they don't have the words of eternal life.

Only Jesus has the power to remove that sinful nature that has everyone in bondage.
He just wont remove it, He'll make you a new creation in Him. And only He has the words
of eternal life. He doesn't tell you a way to live life, He says He IS the way and He IS the life.

Rev 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.
 
T

Trax

Guest
#40
Hey Chalice, you brought up something interesting I'd like to bring up. You mentioned about imagining if we were there in Jesus's time. Would we accept Him? Most of us probably wouldnt. He was considered a criminal. A radical law breaker and cult leader in a sense.
That isn't true. They had nothing to accuse Him of. If they had any ounce to charge Him, they
would. They went out of their way to trick Him into a charge. He did nothing wrong and they
sought to kill Him.