The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

Last week the pope a former youth nazi himself, lifted the 20 year excommunication of a   bishop best know for his denying the holocaust. 

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=6722245

This week he promoted to bishop the cleric who said he was convinced that the death and destruction of Hurricane Katrina earlier that year was "divine retribution" for New Orleans' tolerance of homosexuals and laid-back sexual attitudes.

http://www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/2009/01/pope_promotes_cleric_who_calle.html

I don't know if there is a god or not.  (I am agnostic.)  But I am absolutely certain these evil idiots are not his messengers if he exists!   
 

Not a good reason to "hate religion" in my humble opinion.

If you care to "hate" individuals who base extreme judgements and attempt to use religion for those judgements that is one thing.

That is a broad stroke you are painting with, cowboy.

  The Pope would be in jail, if he were not the Pope.

How much hush money had been paid out by the Catholic church from all the abuse over the years.

It's perfectly OK to do that when it comes to God's people.  If one makes a mistake, you pin it on God and everyone who even thought about following Him. 

Obviously I jest but hating or mocking God's people is more accepted than any other group.  Pick on any other group and then people outside of that group will stand up for them.

That would certainly help balance out the fact that EVERY TIME something good happens in the world, it's God's will or God's miracle.  If this fictional character can take all the credit for all the good things he didn't do, he should have to take some of the blame for the bad things that he didn't do as well.

PS... Not jesting

I don't see the correlation about bashing Christians but I can only assume it's based on the joke about no one giving God credit when they fail. 

Many people are  going through very tough times and trusting God will bring them through it.  They give God credit in good times and in bad knowing that He will bring them through it and usually better off. That's called faith. It takes zero faith to praise God in the good times.  While God doesn't directly make bad things happen he does allow us to go through them ... especially if they are self inflicted or consequences to not listening to him.   

As a Christian I know the Bible says that while I will still have sickness, disease and hard times until Jesus comes back, that by trusting God that He will make them easier to deal with and will even turn a negative situation into a positive.

Do you see the correlation...and more importantly, the inequity, of giving God credit every time something good happens in the world, but not blaming God when something bad happens?

That was my point...

I think people would argue that good in this world comes from God or his agents, whereas evil is done by El Diablo Satanas and his group.  At least, I think that's the argument.

People would definitely argue that.  I would at least.

Good doesn't come from God.  God is made up.

I don't like what some people do in the name of religion, but it is not exclusive to Christians,

God, Devil...two sides of the same fictional character.

Man is responsible for the good in the world, and man is responsible for the bad. Period.

^^You caught Breakfast Club on HBO2 this weekend, didn't you??

Regardless of your own personal beliefs I think it's important to:

1:  Not paint all religion, and those who subscribe to such beliefs in the same way.

2:  Not to dismiss people that do believe in God / Bible / religion as someone that has a lower intellect and / or a brainwashed blind following fool.

Every person that follows religion does not use the Bible as their own personal scape goat (1) and not every person that believes in religion does so blindly (2). 

I understand why you would think this is important.  I want religious and non-religious people to co-exist and share the same right to believe whatever they want.

I do however, think that people who believe in God are suffering from a delusion.  It's not intellect-based, but rather more of a mental-illness or brainwashing.  I know I should respect that belief, but I respect it just like I'd respect the idea that a schizophrenic thinks people are always following him.  I respect the person, but still think that they are ultimately unhealthy on some level.

I actually changed that signature about a week ago...but I long ago committed the script of Breakfast Club to memory. Most of it, anyway... ;)


Who needs burning bushes when you have Dave around?

I understand what you're saying - you either accept people for who they are or you don't.  What they believe in shouldn't alter that for you at all, really.  

I think it's important to accept someone for who, and what, they are - beliefs and all.  Judging anyone for any reason - that is unhealthy and unbalanced especially for someone that fancies themselves a "free thinker."  I swear I don't mean that as a jab, I mean it in an open dialog way.  

People have faith for all kinds of reasons.  Some people have faith based on nothing more than that is the way they were raised, that's the way it's always been and they haven't taken the time to look into anything on their own.

And some people, like me, are completely different.  I was raised in a home with zero faith and zero religion.  Raised by a father who is actually very anti-religious.  Anti-Bible.  And I formulated my own beliefs and thoughts about everything as I grew and experienced life without any outside interference.  My beliefs are very unorthodox.  I know the Bible too well and I also know how fallible the men were that wrote it.  I believe a lot of the Bible what used to govern the masses with fear.  I also believe there is a lot of truth in the Bible.

A lot of people need faith for one simple reason - it helps them get through every day.  How could you possibly begrudge someone that?  Whatever it takes for someone to get from day to day is okay with me.

Because I view faith as a net negative.  "Faith" is simply believing in something without evidence.  We see it as a good thing, but I think that it is not.

I am ultimately on the side of (what I consider to be) truth.  That's what I am looking for.  Even if faith gets people through the day, I want no part of it.  I don't want to believe in lies just because it makes me feel better.  Faith is a drug.

I honestly believe that if you think that Jesus is the son of God, that you have something wrong with your brain.  It doesn't mean I don't like you or can't be your friend or see you an as equal, but I think that you have a serious deep-seeded mental problem.  The only reason that it doesn't negatively effect you more than it does is because it's a mass-psychosis. 

I suffered from this same psychosis myself, through brainwashing as a child.  Only through years of "self-therapy" could I let go of it.  I wasn't dumb when I was a child.  But I had let my environment convince me of something completely absurd and irrational through repetition.  Even in my teens, when I knew deep-down the belief system I was raised with was totally asinine, I still had trouble letting go of that safety net.

LOL!  What a moron. Everyone knows it was President Bush that created katrina becuase he hates Black people............. ::)Idiots.............. 8)

So what you are saying is that you're Jewish?  Sorry...couldn't resist...


I'm not understanding how this is a bad thing, Dave.  I'm really not.  "Stephanie" sends her husband, her life love, off to war and he comes back in a body bag.  The one thing that keeps her from falling apart in front of her kids is her faith that they'll be together again in another life.  That "drug" is allowing her to get through a day, whether it's just a strong mask of denial or not isn't the point.  

"Steve and Mary" are sitting at the doctor's with their three year old and they find out that child has Leukemia.  Perhaps their faith is the only thing allowing them to stay strong and see this situation through.

How is that a "net negative?"  Not everyone has the inner strength to deal with something that traumatic head on.  If your faith gives you the strength to deal with that situation, so be it.  Give 'em all that "faith drug" that they need.  

If you tell me that "Steve and Mary" have so much faith in their God that they won't allow the doctors to treat that three year old based upon their faith that "God will provide" - I'm right there in the car riding along with you.  But what is so God awful about that couple drawing general faith that things will work out?  And, if they don't, that the three year old that they loved more than life itself is in a better place?

Isn't life painful enough without coping tactics?  I view faith as a source of strength.  I think that your view point borders a little on arrogance, to be honest, as I'm sure you believe that mine borders on lunacy.  So I guess we have a common ground there!  :)  Either way, it's a good discussion.

Do you have faith in others?  Trust? Love?  You can't see or prove any of those either. 

Hebrews 11:1 (NIV)

Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.

To have faith is to have confidence in something or someone.  Miracles do not produce faith but strong faith is developed by obedience to Jesus ...  although miracles often confirm one’s faith. Faith is a principle of action and not just wishful thinking.

Amen CF!!!!!!  Well done!!!!  Preach on!!!!!!

I believe that faith is a homograph.  (A word that means two different things.)  I don't believe that faith in God is the same word when applied to faith in another person.

But even it if were, I don't think that it applies.  Love is an emotion, so that's not really relevant.  Trust is something that is gained through positive repetition.  It's not the same context.  There actually is evidence to support the decision to have faith in your friends or family.  They've given you positive repetition prior to that point.


As for Maine's stuff --

I'm sure that I sound arrogant.  But I'm just telling you what I believe.  I'm not saying that I'm better than you because of it.

And whether or not faith is helpful is debatable....totally.  But it's still lying to yourself.  Should you lie to yourself to make yourself feel better?  I guess it depends on the person.  For me, I've chosen no.  But, in the past, I've chosen other things.  I've chosen to pretend I was loved when I was not, because it was easier than facing the truth.  I'm not infallible with stuff like that.

I also question whether faith actually gets anyone through anything.  I think that it may be Dumbo's magic feather.  Ultimately, someone who copes is doing it through their own inner power -- not some mythical force.

And I will concede in some cases, that faith does help things.  That's why I say NET negative.  I think that faith also causes much, much damage to our society and our world, moreso than it helps.

Could not disagree anymore..

Things started falling apart when they started taking God out of everything & started patting themselves on their back for their own work..

Ever wonder how 2 million people could get out of DC in one day in freezing weather, but 200K could not get out of NO in 85 degree heat with 4 day warning?   ;D

The greatest thing anyone can do for another is pray for them.  I'll pray that one day you will come around.

It doesn't matter if you believe in God or not because God still believes in you and loves you.

This is why faith sucks.

If you really want to help them -- help them.  Sitting there with your hands clasped talking to your imaginary friend about them isn't going to amount to a hill of beans.

I understand Hoodie's reasons completely, and at one time, would've probably accepte dthier conclusion.

I do not anymore, for a number of reasons. Benedict has done nothing to show he does not believe the tenets of Mit Brennedner Sorge (German for: "With Burning Sorrow"), a 1939 writtten by Eugenio Cardinale Pacelli (Later Pius XII) encyclical which repudiated Nazi doctrine completely and threatened excommunication to any German Catholic who didn't.  Furthermore, the bishop who was brought back into the churhc last wee was a member of the Society of St. Pius XII (or maybe XI, I forget), a sedecantevist group which had previously been in schism with the church. Benedict's worked for greater ecumenism with dissident Catholic groups, and this is one of the fruits of his labor. A great number of Bishops (and faithful) were brought back into communion with the Church, not merely one imprudent Bishop (who later and formally apologized for his denials).

As far as the other bishop Hoodie mentions, I don't have a problem with a theology which states that God punishes for sin. Nowhere do I see logical or scriptural evidence that he doesn't do so. It is hard to swallow if you don't believe in a God, but otherwise, what can I say. God may very well have done exactly what that Bishop said. As for myself, I dissent from what that Bishop believes, but I am sure I could be wrong.

And as a side note: to anyone arguing with Dave, give it a rest. He doesn't have the slightest clue what he's talking about when it comes to the ontology of morality. To date there is no way to explain the existence of objective morals without positing a Deity. It is simply impossible to do. Yet Dave tells us morality comes from man. How so? How are men in any way objectively good without a God? There is no answer to this question: all you will receive are merely subjective opinions from an individual who is no more objective than the incompetent in the mental asylum.

If anything's a contradiction in terms, it's an atheist trying to explain how good exists without a God. But it is fun to watch them try...   

i'd rather have cash personally

and being infinitely loving he even loves osama bin laden, hitler and charles manson .. and should any of them ask or have asked for forgiveness from god .. they will be forgiven for any and all sins they've committed. and are right now in heaven playing badminton with jesus

Yes, but only if they are truly sorry for their transgressions.

^^

Yet I end up in hell.  What a gyp.

There is no hell.

I used to think God was a concept used to keep the masses in line... He was for those dummies not me.

Then miracles, outside the power of humankind, happened and I was forced to the conclusion a power greater than myself was at work.

I'd have guessed lawn bowling, but I bet the J-man whacks a mean shuttlecock as well.


"Smarmy" is how my mother would describe your tone in that last sentence...and it isn't a flattering term.

I can physically demonstrate a human being doing good. Hell (oops), I actually physically demonstrated that exact thing myself today. You cannot physically demonstrate ANYTHING about god. Zero, zip, zilch, nada.  You can show me shrines built to his honor, and you can show me zealots who will pound their chest and say "he exists, I know it!" ...but in the end, he exists only in the imaginations of man, like zombies and wanting to win the lotto. You can point to fluke things and say "that's good, so hallelujiah, it must be god," But you cannot prove anything. Bottom line...when you can hug your faith tightly to your chest...you can call it faith, or god's touch, or nuclear tapioca, but it's really just your own arms that you're feeling.

There, for the grace of myself, go I...

Let's look at some of the 10 commandments, and how these have been incorporated into our lives (for the world's betterment)

You shall not make for yourself an idol:  Humility is a good thing, no?
Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy: Weekends rock.  I'm just sayin'.
Honor your father and mother: Respect for your elders is something I fully endorse.
You shall not kill Pretty much a universal law of man, right? 
You shall not commit adultery Encouraging family is good for society; I don't think anyone can argue against that with any authority.
You shall not steal  Another good law...
You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor  Laws against that, too...
You shall not covet your neighbor's wife
You shall not covet anything that belongs to your neighbor  Don't rack up a massive credit card bill trying to keep up with the Joneses.  Fiscal responsibility preached in the bible!

Many of our laws are based on religious tomes, meaning that our society's laws are based in faith.  I can't say that faith is a "net negative" as law and order, and the stability inherent to these, are the reason we've evolved and progressed so much in the last 1200 - 1500 years.

I don't attribute any of these rules to faith, though.  (And I think your interpretation of some of those commandments is a bit off.)

You should be the last person on this board to lecture me on getting a more charitable attitude in my writings. But then again, you're old enough to where you probably have forgotten how utterly nasty and absurd your comments often are (towards anything I write).

Nowhere in this thread did I point to any "fluke thing" and call it a miracle. Nowhere did I hug my faith tightly to my chest without giving my reason for belief in God (which is the moral argument, which is as old as Socrates). Nowhere did I merely pound my chest and exclaim my belief. That's Dave's (and your) job. I kid you not. Let's look at some of y'all's replies in this thread:




Beautiful statements of faith all, but about as well-reasoned as my flatulence. No explanation of these propositions is given, just the bald statements themselves. Give me a break, if you're gonna make a statement this brazen... give me reason to believe it! (at least Dave tries, and fails, sometimes, but you commit this intellectual sin all day without ever explaining yourself.)

The fact of the matter is that none of you have ever explained why you believe in goodness without your belief in God. SpiderDan tries, but the best he can come up with is calling God arbitrary. The rest of you don't even get that far. That is probably the best strategy, because the argument and evidence is totally against you there.

If you view faith as a net negative, then I would suggest the cure for what ails you is to convert to Christianity. There's less faith required there than in any form of atheism on the market today.

Give me a break. You don't want forgiveness.

^^

I'm saving it for a deathbed confession.

(Seriously though, don't be a prick about it.  We're having a normal discussion.  Don't turn it nasty.)

To not attribute the law of man to the laws passed down from heaven (as the story goes) is to completely ignore history.  Our laws, codes, and ethics are all heavily influenced, if not dominated, by religious faith.  As for your second comment, I was trying to keep it light.

I believe that many of those laws are inherent to mankind.  Non-theists follow them as well.  I just think that religion is stealing the credit.

You're right. I'll tone down a little.

Seriously though, have you ever wanted forgiveness for disbelief? If you have, why haven't you repented of it and turned from it?


This is what I'm talking about Dave. Why do you believe religion is stealing the credit? Can you muster any scientific evidence to show that this is so?

I would love to hear your evidence. The last time you tried wasn't very successful as far as we are concerned either.

Ok: simply put,

1. Objective morality cannot exist without God, because no human is capable of promulgating an ad hoc objective morality. (Objective morality is not the same as universal morality, where everyone on earth agrees on something being wrong or right. Instead, objective morality means those morals which if they were transgressed, would result in a real, actual wrong or sin, rather than just being merely wrong in the opinion of a group of men.)

2. But objective morality exists. For example, it is wrong to rape a child, even if the society or culture you're in disagrees.

3. Therefore, God exists.

I look forward to your response, Phish. I bet ya can't beat me.

I don't believe in God.  What's to repent for?  And who to repent to?

I'm glad I don't believe in God.  I have no intention of ever believing in God.

Who knows?  Maybe I'll go through something traumatic and turn to God.  But if I do that, I think it would be in reaction to that trauma, and still ultimately false.

Also, to those of you that do believe in hell -- will I go to hell based on your definition?

My assessment was based on a lot more than this one thread, but you are getting much better at flipping things without actually addressing them. I'd applaud ya, but one hand is busy seeking spiritual enlightenment from my johnson at the moment.



All I hear here is the same broken scratchy vinyl... "We believe that good comes from god, therefore since good exists, god exists." You're selling the Holy Sizzle, but you're not putting any steak on the plate. Mixing a little legalese in there is a nice touch though.

What wrongs? The acts which society has decided are wrong? The acts which a book that has been put together of hand picked scriptures by a select group of MEN with an agenda?
Are the societies that have converted from polytheism to monotheism more chaste and moral since their conversions? Who makes that distinction? Are the modern Greeks more moral and ethical since they kicked ol Zeus to the curb with his pantheon and his son concieved of a human mother?
Here is the kicker, I have yet to have an aethiest or agnostic get all fired up about converting me and how I was headed for damnation for my beliefs, yet I have had multiple good christians to include CF( I loved when he compared me to satan's minions, to the point spider ripped him an new ass over it) because my beliefs did not match theirs.

  Where you are wrong Daniel son.   

If you are lucky enough to get one.
  Which I hope so.

^^

If I die tomorrow, does that mean I'm going to hell?

I'm just curious.  I ask this a lot, but I can't seem to get an answer out anyone.

No way anyone would truly know, but from what I do, there is a very good chance of it.  If you do die & go, then its to late & eternity is a long time to be wrong.

You religious folks sure seem to be able to speak for God on a lot of subjects...why not this one?

Does not believing in God get me a ticket to hell or not?  It's a yes or no question.


...or is it like a point system?

Not believing in God     -10
Genocide                      -20
Skipping church            -1

Then, you have to get to -25 to get a ticket in.

I'm just asking.

The mockery is not lost & I lost a ton of respect for you with this last post. I'm not overly religious.  I still have my doubt in turning control over to God.

To answer your question. Its suppose to, but I'm not the one making the ultimate decision on this & that is why I replied the way I did.  God is the only one sitting in judgment of you, not I or anyone else on this board.

I'm making light of it, sure -- but there's a real question.

Are there certain things that get you in to hell, even if you're a good person in other ways.

I follow the rules of Christianity, other than the ones specifically tied to the religion -- belief, keeping the sabbath day holy, tithing, etc.

Does breaking the one of not believing in God get me a direct flight, regardless of the rest?  Yes or no?

  From my understanding there is only one sure way to go directly to hell & not pass go..  You have to make the decision that Jesus is your personal savior.  Everything else you posted is nothing either way.

Maybe this will help.  I'm not the best person to be answering this question.

I disagree.

You claim that this is a fact, not an opinion; please prove it.

that's the protestant interpretation. the vast majority of christians aren't protestant.

Yes.  You have two choices ... both free will. Either accept God or be your own god.  Hell is the eternal separation from God and is a choice one makes. It's not God's choice nor his fault.  He says if you look for Him you will find Him but unfortunately most will not look for fear of finding Him. I don't see how He can be any more fair than that with freedom of choice.

Fair enough!

Sounds like a theology lesson to me. I don't have to beat you because I don't think you were even on topic. You are now talking morality which was not what we were discussing (bet you didn't think anyone would catch on). We were discussing the existence of good which is different than morality.

Yes. Jesus said He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father excpet through Him.  So this means either you are a Christian or your not.  BTW ...  Jesus also points out no one is good except in their own mind but I don't have time to dicuss that now.

I have to chime in her on something that really ticks me off and it has to do with SCFan stating that his words are proof God exists and dismissing God's physical absence as proof that he doesn't.

I accused Dave of arrogance in a previous post and need to do the same thing here.

SCFan - no matter how you spin it, and YES -- it is SPIN -- nothing on this planet PROVES that God exists.  Nothing.  Not morality, nothing.  Zip, zlich, zero, nada. 

This statement is complete bullshit:

1. Objective morality cannot exist without God, because no human is capable of promulgating an ad hoc objective morality. (Objective morality is not the same as universal morality, where everyone on earth agrees on something being wrong or right. Instead, objective morality means those morals which if they were transgressed, would result in a real, actual wrong or sin, rather than just being merely wrong in the opinion of a group of men.)

2. But objective morality exists. For example, it is wrong to rape a child, even if the society or culture you're in disagrees.

3. Therefore, God exists.

First of all - there are many societies past and present that permit children to be placed into a marriage situation against their will.  Those children are then forced to consumate the marriage - again, against their will, which by definition is RAPE.  So let's toss #2 out the window, shall we?

"Right and wrong" has been passed down from society to society and has been learned and taught like a math lesson.  Studies of early man show that even the most primal of our species understood one simple logic:  work together and succeed, work alone and die.  This was the first stepping stone or building block to a society that contains "objective morality."  It had nothing to do with love for a fellow man.  At the end of the day the laws of society are kept in place out of fear and not a glowing interest of being a good person. 

It is certainly not "proof" that any God exists, that is a fairly laughable and ridiculous statement.

Furthemore - "objective morality" is defined by each society as something completely and utterly different.  Take a stroll into the Congo and tell me that those men are living under those same codes as the people walking down Main Street in your home town? 

There is not one shred of physical proof that God exists, it is either a faith that you believe in or you don't.  As CF said, and as stated in the Bible, free will allows you to either search for God or not.  If you have found him on your personal journey that's great.  But please don't try to spin your way into someone else's mind with your hyperbole.  Faith, in the religious context, is much like love.  You either feel it in your being or you don't.  Stating that your words are "proof" that God exists, and therefore trying to suppress the opinions or others, is mere rhetoric and can be taken as fairly insulting.

Your statement of "Therefore, God exists" is nothing more than pure opinion.  Coupling that with "betcha can't beat me" is not needed.

I think everyone needs to reads Dave's posts very closely.  He isn't judging you, do not judge him.  He is not forcing his beliefs in you, do not force your own on him.

I can't believe we're still having this conversation. Nothing written on this board will convince anyone of the merits of religion or atheism. Like Maine said, either you feel it or you don't.

Basically.

I need to learn how to be less long winded.

I still think President Bush was racist and we need to find his weather machine to prove it!!

  You may be correct.   I feel though you might plant the seed in someone that if they get the time on this earth will grow within them.  So anytime someone is asking questions, then you should take the time to try & answer them the best you can or at least lead them to someone who can.   Leading someone to God is the greatest thing you can do for them.

^^And doing it in the wrong way can easily be one of the most counterproductive things that could possibly be done.

This thread would do nothing in regards to encouraging someone to think outside the box in regards to their religious beliefs, in my honest opinion.

This thread won't change anyone's mind nor will any other thread. Unless God is working in someone's life ... His word falls void.  Nothing we do has an effect on that without the Hand of God. But in saying that ....

1 Peter 3:15-16 (NIV)
But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,16 keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander

Sorry...I swear I couldn't help myself.

Oh.My.God.


You've got to be kidding me with this shit, Jeff!  Would you please stop?  I have work here to do...

LMFAO...

Man, I honestly laughed for 5 minutes straight when I saw it, and then immediately posted it up here.

If I have any time later, I might bastardize the YMCA lyrics to fit the subject better. ;D

It took me a while! ;D

(http://lh6.ggpht.com/Nitro2k/R59GlONSwEI/AAAAAAAAA3g/cgLhgfVCJJM/s800/holy-bible-warning.jpg)

That's nothing short of beautiful...I'm getting all verklempt here. ;D

(http://www.nelsonweedandpest.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/cricket.gif)

Do you hear them Hoodie?

I'm a cricket now?  I would have guessed rhinoceros beetle...

Okay, that photo is just plain creepy.... ick....

Figures. I offer a proof, and you don't even attempt to challenge it.

Simply and patently untrue. There are something like 4 dozen proofs for Gods existence which are logically valid. While it's possible to disbelieve despite these proofs, it is simply impossible to say that there is no proof for the existence of God without being ignorant of the last half-century of philosophy. The moral argument, which I just put forward is, I think, the strongest one.

If that's the strongest argument there is for God's existence, then you literally have nothing at all. What are you going to use for your backup argument...the lyrics to "Don't Worry, Be Happy?"  I mean, if we're being happy, then God must exist...because God made happiness.

 ::)

If that is your strongest argument it's the weakest one I think I have ever heard.  I'll say the same thing here that I said to you in PM:

Everything - EVERYTHING - that you are stating is based upon your personal opinion and is highly subjective.  It's based on your faith and personal beliefs and not objective facts.  There is not one shred of objective, can never be disputed, cold hard evidence that a higher power is watching out over us.  You can find things that YOU think prove that existence but that is exactly that.  What YOU think.

Again - what you consider evil actions are not considered evil through out the world.  There is not one action in this world that is considered the same way through out this land, one governing law that binds us all together.  Murder, rape, child molestation are all evils within our society and most free thinking parts of the world.  Those things are mere actions and things to survive in other parts of the world - parts that are living and breathing right now.  So sorry - your "strongest argument" isn't all that strong pal.

I think you need to face facts on this - you are trying to turn something subjective into something objective and it can't be done.  And you're doing it based on your personal feelings and beliefs.

The only thing that I can offer this highly amusing discussion is this:

The last time I had an imaginery friend / was talking to peeps that no one else could see or hear, I was Baker Acted. Sure it was due to drug induced psychosis from a prescription, but who's to say that all the "believers" aren't having the same thing?

^^

That's the type of stance that I take personal offense to.  It's the "I am not smart enough to think for myself therefore I must believe in a higher power to keep me in check."  I must be on drugs and mid-psychosis due to my beliefs and faiths? 

I think that same stance could be taken towards non-believers.  To actually believe we're all wondering around "just because" and things happen "just because" is a little ignorant, in my opinion.

I personally base most of my beliefs in the Tao Te Ching, which is an amazing work.  A lot of the bible "borrowed" a lot of it.  And I think that to belittle someone due to their beliefs is simply not right.

It's one thing to make your stance on why you don't believe, another to make fun of someone that doesn't hold that same belief.

But that's just me.

Borrowed is certainly not the appropriate word as Old testement documents that are similar were written much, much earlier than the Tao Te Ching. The New Testament similarities have just as many polar opposites.  Are some ideas similar? Absolutely including the coming of one who will bring peace as well things like do good to those who do wrong to you but many other areas are in direct contrast.

Sorry for derailing but I think "borrowing" paints a completely false picture. 

I'm not making fun. I'm making a point. Who's to say that the noise I was hearing in my head is any different than those that think they speak with "god"? What is the difference between mental illness and believing in God? When people say the devil made them do it, people assume they're crazy. How is that different from god making you do it?

Where is the line drawn? Do we only make the distinction that god is ok since more people believe in it? Would the voices and noises I heard in my head be acceptable if I could talk more people into following them?

I also find it laughable that while you take personal offense, you choose to call non believers ignorant.

Hello pot. Meet kettle.

At least I didn't call you crazy or of lower intelligence.

Nor did I. I haven't mentioned intelligence at anytime. Nor have I called anyone crazy. I'm just asking what the difference is.

Not nessasarrily true.  Most scholars agree that the Old Testament was compiled between the 12th and the 2nd century BC.  The Tao was written in the 6th century BC.  For every scholar that believes the OT was written before you'll find 10 that believe the Tao came first.

I personally believe that portions of both old and new were highly influenced by Lao Tzu.  And that is not a bad thing at all.

“The truth is not always beautiful, nor beautiful words the truth.”- LAO TZU      

I have been biting my tongue on this but I feel the need to interject.

I don't consider myself a religious person.  I am a man of science - I typically don't believe in things that can't be proven.  However, I think its important to keep an eye open to these things.

I find that speaking of "imaginary friends" and calling religious believers "mentally ill" as over the line.  If people want to practice their faith and believe in a higher power, so be it.  Maybe it helps to keep them centered.  Maybe it helps to give them a purpose to life.  Who are you to belittle them for doing so?

Belief is a choice, its not an illness.  You don't choose to be mentally ill, but you can choose to believe in God.  Let's be realistic, mental illness is OVER THE LINE in this context.

Of course, that's not to say that there aren't crazy mentally ill people that cite God (or Satan) as their reason for acting in some cases, but those aren't the people I'm referring to.  A guy who goes to church every Sunday, a guy who prays to a God of his choosing - what makes him any more "crazy" than you?  

I think some of the "I don't believe in God" people have taken a self-righteous stance and can't fathom that other people might have different beliefs.  I think its important to take a "to each his own" stance here, and stop trying to convince each other that there is or isn't a God.

Maybe none.  You very well could be right.  God knows that so many horrific things have been done on this planet equally because "the devil made me do it" and "because God commands it."  So either way, you're right, religion can (and is) be used as a scape goat.

I just think that it might be a little bit of an oversimplication.  Everyone has a conscience.  Everyone has that little voice in their head saying "is this a great idea" while you're doing something that might be against your own personal moral code.  Right?  Where does that voice originate from?  If one stance is that it is absurd that it's a higher power speaking to you than you have to admit it's equally absurd that the voice came out of nowhere.  Because ultimately if your core knew that action was wrong in the first place you wouldn't have put yourself into a position to hear "that voice."  Right?

Make no mistake about it. I don't care who you worship. As long as you keep it to yourself I don't care. However, what I am asking is at what point do we deem it mental illness.

If I were walking around saying that Lilith, for instance, is going to make everything all right. Started insisting that Lilith created the world, would heal me, and would take care of everything. When asked where Lilith is, I told people that they cannot see him they just have to belive I would immediately be locked up.

Please, tell me, how is the believe in god or any supereme being any different?

Maine...the little voice is me thinking. It's not put there by anyone else.

If that little voice were you thinking - you would never be in a situation that you second guessed...due to thinking it through prior to placing yourself in that situation.

Either way - that little voice is either you talking to yourself or someone else prodding you along.  Some would consider either equally crazy.  Right?

You must be careful to separate people who are actively preaching about Lilith.  If you went to the Church of Lilith on Sundays with 300 other Lilith worshipers, and worshipped Lilith in your home in private, why is it anyone's business to lock you up?

So, as long as everyone else is having the same thought/delusion or worshipping the same peculiar entity it's ok? But, if it's just you it's time to be medicated? I'm still not understanding what the difference is here.


Talking to yourself consists of talking outload. If it's within the head, you're just thinking.

No the difference is not the number of people, the difference is IN PRIVATE.

If a guy goes out on the street with a sign that says "JESUS SAVES" and starts screaming how the end is near and we must all convert to be saved, etc, I don't think there's anyone who wouldn't say "that dude's off his rocker."  But, surely I hope you can see the difference between that crazy guy, and your neighbor, husband and father, who chooses to go to church on Sunday, and is just a regular guy.

I challenged it by saying you proved nothing. Please look at the responses to your post. #1 I said you aren't even on topic and #2 Maine himself said you offered no proof because there is none. If you want to use long winded explanations that is fine with me (I know how lawyers like to write) but please quit passing off opinion as proof.

I don't know,if he does exsist he's a cruel S.O.B. if he does....

 

Depeche Mode's finest work, IMO!

But, if you truly believe shouldn't you share that with others? I'm still confused as to what the criteria is here.

You didn't offer any proof at all; you made a claim and presumed it was true.

You claim that there is objective morality.  Objective means "not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased."  But you have two problems:

a) You can't prove that (for example) murder is objectively evil
b) You cannot establish factual, objective criteria for what constitutes murder

So your claim is effectively meaningless.  As in a previous thread, you make a claim that objective morality exists, yet you cannot define it; you use this claim to then "prove" the existence of a god.

In exactly the same sense, since "objective tastiness" exists, there must be a god.  This illustrates the triviality of your argument.

EXACTLY why I said "to each his own"

Some people choose to practice tolerance and let people believe what they want without persecution.

Some people choose to enforce their beliefs onto everyone around them.

Just because I believe something doesn't mean I have to "share that with others..."

Since I offered the sagely verse of Depeche Mode on this subject, I thought another really good bit on religion came from George Carlin, who told us...

"Religion, at best - at BEST - is like a lift in your shoe. If you need it for a while, and it makes you walk straight and feel better - fine. But you don't need it forever, or you can become permanently disabled. Religion is like a lift in the shoe, and I say...just don't ask me to wear your shoes. And let's not go down and nail lifts onto the natives' feet."

From what I remember from years of going to church, you are supposed to spread the word. No?

As stated....I myself don't care who you worship. I'm just asking when does it cross over into mental illness and who's to say what the difference is.

No it's not.

If someone can believe in God and their view is protected, why can't I believe that the person is mentally ill and my view be protected?

I'm not saying it to be a dick.  It's my honest opinion about the situation.  I don't see how my honest opinion crosses any line.  That's my reasoning for people believing in things that aren't there.  I think my mom has that illness.  It's not like I'm saying they should all be locked up.

But I am saying that I think that there's a mental block that making them unable to logically look at the situation.  If you can step back and rationally look at religion, you wouldn't be religious.  You have to have this "faith" element.

Ok again I have to say you are full of it.  Comparing 1200 BC to 350 BC is literally world's apart and that's even "if" Lao Tzu actually lived.  No one is even sure if that was a real person, scholars included.  I have no idea where you got 6th century BC.  Also, I can guarantee you that you can't find 10:1 scholars that say it came first.  That's just lunacy.  In fact the oldest reliable writings and references of are from 1BC ... much later than Biblical manuscripts.

 

I would just like to be clear --

I like AND respect many, many religious people.  I think they are smart and funny and enjoyable.

I am not trying to diminish their place in society, in my life, or as people.  I do, however, think that their (what I would consider) baseless belief system is due to a mental block or mental trauma.  It's easiest to convert the weak, the poor, the uneducated, the sick, the damaged, the vulnerable, the addicted, those in prison, etc.  -- Those groups are highly religious, probably because of desperation and trauma.

Ah!  If Lao Tzu actually lived!  Jesus Christ lived, right?  Although you never shook his hand, bought him a cup of coffee or asked him over for dinner.  You just know that to be true.  

And, yet, so quick to state your doubts about Lao Tzu when there is roughly the same amount of documentation that supports the guy's existence as there is Jesus.  Weird how you can be so quick to jump to that conclusion while holding on to another.

I'm not pulling numbers out of my ass, no matter how much you want to rush in and claim the OT is the living / breathing / stand alone / nothing was taken for it but from it stance.  It's based on years of undergraduate work on my first degree and based on work by scholars that I respect a great deal.  

But hey, I'm sure Lao is just some made up figure.  You jump down people's throats like that and wonder why someone challenges you on your beliefs?  I don't believe I was jumping down your's.

You would think that my suggestion that the OT as well as the NT borrowed some ideas from the Tao is a capitol offense.  I guess I should be strung up by my eyebrows?

That is my opinion and it's based on my education.  You aren't going to change it.  I think works of that era borrowed from each other and I believe that there are strange similarities between the OT, NT and Tao.  I also believe that the Tao is older.  Draw your own conclusions from that.

You are free to have that opinion. When you voice it, it makes you a jerk because it is an insult to some people. People can have the opinion that you are ugly and that's ok but when they start telling it to you then you would become offended ... or at least most people would.  

You know if you follow it that even followers of Tao aren't sure if the story of Lao is true. It's quite possible that Sima Qian made up his biography ... not that it changes the writings.  If Jesus didn't live, die, and ressurect then Christianity is false and there is absolutely no reason to follow Him.  There is no room for error.

And even if hell is labelled as eternal separation from God, or the absence of God, God is still not entirely absent in hell.  However, he is looked at in a much different light.  In heaven, God's presence and love brings peace and joy to heaven's inhabitants.  However, in hell, God's presence and love brings unmitigated terror because hell's inhabitants have rejected God's love while on earth. 

To say that people have some sort of mental trauma because they believe in a higher power is what gets me, Dave (and Buddha).  I could almost say the same about people who believe in any sort of unproven phenomenon, like man's effect on global warming.  A religious man tells you the apocalypse is upon us because it is so prophesized in the bible, and you tell him no, it's because the scientific community (which once believed we were due for:  an ice age, a giant meteor strike, a cataclysmic earthquake that would separate California from the union, a giant volcanic eruption that would cover the Earth in ash, in essence blotting out the sun and creating a nuclear winter, etc...) tells you we're all going to be swallowed up by the sea if we don't start buying hybrids.  People then make movies pushing their specious arguments and become Nobel laureates for their troubles!

This "mass psychosis" is inherent to all humans, believers or not.  Question is, what pushes your buttons?  What unexplained fiction will you choose to believe?  Science that will be found to be faulty by future generations (duck and cover, anyone?), or a belief system that has existed for millenia and has helped shape much of the world's order?  Science can't incontrovertibly explain how the universe works, how it began, where it came from.  Only theories exist.

Faith attempts to offer an explanation, because, in our lifetimes, the answer to the important questions will NOT be known.  Where do I COME FROM?  WHAT AM I HERE TO DO?  Science can never answer these questions to any degree of satisfaction, if only because science will tell us that we're nothing more than a giant, inconsequential ant colony living in our own little glass box, and that, in the grand scheme, whatever we do is inconsequential.  I can't live with that, because that means, in the end, that my life is worthless regardless of how well I live it, and that means that holding a job, paying taxes, helping others, loving my wife (exclusively) and daughter, raising her right, etc...means nothing.  

So I CHOOSE to believe there's a higher power that gave me a soul, and the ability to distinguish right from wrong, and a compass to guide me through a righteous existence, regardless of whether there's a carrot at the end of the stick (heaven).  But I'm no religious or scientific scholar.  I just look at it objectively, and, given the choice, I'll go with the "fiction" that gives my life meaning beyond being no more than an insect.

i tell him he's ugly all the time

I find that I get a similar reaction from people that I confront about having depression or a drug problem.

They think I'm an asshole.  ...and that's cool -- whatever.

I actually understand why religious people think I'm an asshole.  I'm just giving my honest assessment.

i'll just submit one thing for thought .. over the past 30 years scientology has become a "religion" and has millions of followers  who absolutely believe those tenets

how do you know that christianity didn't start int he exact same way.

Why would your life be inconsequential if there is no God? You still helped others, loved your wife, raised your daughter right, etc. That doesn't sound inconsequential to me. It sounds like a fulfilling life. There doesn't need to be a God to make that stuff important.

Whatever floats your boat. I'm not saying that you're mentally ill. I'm just asking what the difference is.

Taking care of your daughter, respecting your wife, work, etc. Those ARE the things that makes us more than an insect.
Perhaps Marx is right. Religion truly is the opiate of the masses.

You could (and I would) say the same thing about lots of phenomenon.  If you believe in bigfoot, there's probably something wrong with you.

As far as ghosts and stuff, that's a little different.  There's at least visual evidence to support some kind of phenomenon.  I think it's mixed-up brain signals, but I wouldn't go so far as to say mental illness.

For things like meteors and global warming, I concede that we cannot know those things entirely one way or the other, but they are based on evidence, not faith.  You can choose to disagree or agree with the conclusions to that evidence.  ...but those are hypotheses, not a faith-based belief system.

I also would be the first to change my opinion on any scientific theory if a new, better theory arose due to more evidence.  As a believer in science, you follow the best data and best evidence.  Currently, I believe that lies in the camp of man-contributed warming, because I don't have the means, time, or knowledge to do my own climate experiments, so I follow the scientific consensus.

But...they belive in aliens. It's not a real religion. They're crazy. They worship something that we can't see or prove. It was just made up. . .Oh. Wait.

Scientology is the same as Christianity, but one has been around for a lot longer.  It's also harder to silence your critics these days (but Scientology still tries).

I've been reading all three works for a long time.  I am well aware of the history behind the writings.  You should also know that when people speak of Lao Tzu they speak of the author of the Tao.  The Tao does exist, therefore it was created.  

Lao Tzu isn't nessasarily a name but a title.  And thus, yes - Lao Tzu existed.  As a single man?  Maybe not.  The OT nor the NT was not written by one man, rather a group of authors.  

You should also know that a large vocal vehicle that supports Lao Tzu was not an individual man is the Religious Taoism group, one that follows the Tao but also believes in deities.  The Tao itself leans towards not believing in deities.  That same group also largely believe that Lao Tzu didn't write the Tao but found it.

I personally believe that Lao Tzu was an individual, as do millions of others.  I believe there is sufficient documention that supports that.

You know this is a good thread, because the believers are debating against other believers and non-believers are doing the same.

Dave, you are a dink.  I believe in Big Foot.  Just wanted to toss that out there.  I'm SURE I saw him while I was video taping the loch ness monster.  They both live in my area, one in the pond behind my house and the other in the woods.  Here is proof.

(http://curbed.com/uploads/2007_11_LochNessMonster.jpg)

I've seen Fau without a shirt on.  Sometimes, I wonder...

How?  Don't most mammals care for their young?  Don't some specias of animals mate for life?  Don't some monkeys grind organs for change in the mall (they work!).  If there is no reason for being, then shouldn't I just be like any other male of most other species and "spread my seed" indiscriminately?  Why should I not live down to my most basic mammal instincts?  Can science explain why I have a conscience unlike any other animal?  Or why my species strives to improve upon itself rather than subsist?  Why, why, why?  Is random chance really a satisfactory answer?

Yes, science does have a hypothesis for these things that make total sense.  If you're serious about asking, I'll gladly explain it.

I think, when you make the jump to say "If you believe in (insert unexplained phenomena here), there's something wrong with your brain" is where you cross the line, Dave.

Unless we have different definitions.

But, you'd never think maybe there's something wrong with YOUR brain since you don't have the mental capacity to understand blind faith.

There is a reason for being. It's all of the things that make us human. Not the fairy tale that you'll wind up in heaven.  
I think it's scary that for most christians, the only thing keeping them from being an animal is the believe in god. I always thought being human is what seperates us from the animals.

Do you not believe in evolution then? Because if not, then this entire conversation is pointless.

It's possible.  Maybe I'm lacking something that makes one understand God.

Right - but I don't mean God, specifically.

If I truly believe that there are aliens from other planets out there, does that mean there's something wrong with my brain?  There's no evidence to support this fact, other than scientifically-dismissed phenomena.  I think its a huge stretch to say that I'm mentally ill to believe that we are not the only life-forms in the vast expanse of the universe.

But are you willing to kill people based on this? Are you ready to start persucuting those that don't believe the same as you? Take away people's rights because the aliens don't think those people should have rights?

I don't think people that believe in aliens are mentally ill, either.  Given the vast space of the universe, and having seen evidence of evolution, and the fact that life sprung up on Earth -- I believe that there is cause to believe in the possibility (and even probability) of alien life.  There is logical cause for that belief.  The belief in aliens comes largely from observations and probability -- both scientific evaluations -- not faith.

Now, depending on how far that goes, I might say that a person has illness -- thinking that aliens come and probe people, abduct, etc...

Not true.  I was abducted one night while chasing Big Foot out of my garden.  My ass still hurts from the things that they did to me once they got me on that ship.  That's proof enough!

But seriously, this is a good point.  Dave - you believe that we are alone in the universe or there is something else out there?

I don't believe in humanoid aliens that visit Earth.

But, is the other life in the universe?  I'd say it's probable.  Given the something CAN happen, over enough time, something WILL happen.  I believe that the universe is large enough and old enough that it's likely that the phenomenon of life has happened more than once.

I'm not absolutely convinced of it, though -- either way.

Of course I believe in evolution.  I believe in and enjoy science.  (Aside to Dave - I know that science attempts to explain my issues, but I find them unsatisfactory, and yes, I'm dead serious about asking, since knowing more is always best).  I, however, don't think that science and God are mutually exclusive.  I can't leave the Universe's creation to random chance.  I find it difficult to understand how natural laws, which are so ordered, could come from chaos.  It makes no sense to me.  I think we were given the tools to make our own destinies, the intellect to make our own way.  Hence, we strive to improve and succeed.  I don't know about heaven, and I don't need its existence to be a good man.  I don't fear judgement.  I just want meaning.

Scientology = Mormonism but it in no way is even close to Chrtistianity even without archeological eveidence.

How could the lowest people (Jews) silence critics?  That would have been impressive.  Just taking Jesus stories alone ... they were baised on eyewitness accounts without rebuttal.  There is nothing of the same era contradicting Christianity while many Christian eyewtinesses did die.  Dying for hope is one thing but dying for something you "know" is a lie is unexplainable.

And the only way you can get meaning is by believing in god. I gotta say, I don't get it.

You say this as though these conditions are limited to religion.  Have economics, racial strife, hell, even beautiful faces not launched a thousand ships before?  Slaughter, slavery, despair, etc...are carried on for many, many reasons.  Religious tomes, at least, teach of peace and good will.  Mad men churn a few passages into lunacy and pervert the message, but overall, religion is supposed to preach peace.  To equate all religion to misery is to say the same about science.  After all, did science no bring us the thermo-nuclear bomb?  Wasn't Nobel the creator of dynamite, which helped revolutionize warfare?  Should we hate all things that get perverted for bad use?  Would there be anything left to love?

I'd be interested to hear how you understand it and what you find unsatisfactory.  How I understand it seem to be very sensible.

Whoa there...You're taking my statement out of context. I was replying to Brian asking about the believe in aliens and what difference there is between that and religion. That's why I said that. Anything can be used for evil.

Because you apparently believe God and science to be mutually exclusive.  If one exists, then the other cannot.  I don't believe that.  Just because God created the universe, say, and allowed for our eventual creation, does not mean that we could not have been imbued with the ability to decipher His rule book.  After all, if we were created "in His own image", then we should have the capacity to eventually understand His doings.

Again, I don't preach dogma, because much of it makes no sense to me (because I do critically analyze religion, as I do pretty much everything else, to my wife's constant chagrin).  I don't, however, exclude from consideration the possibility that some power greater than me is sailing the cosmic ship.  Do I think God's looking over me?  Only to the extent that He gave me a functional brain - and fists, if needed -  to care for myself.  Do I put my faith in God to make my decisions for me?  Again, that's why my species was given a brain that works the way it does.

Fair 'nuff.

I'll get back to you on that one.  I suddenly realized I've lost an hour and it's tax season.

That was exactly my point in that example.  What is the difference between me believing in aliens or me believing in God?  Neither one has ever been experienced by any human on earth to a scientifically acceptable level, and in both cases, any person who claims to have experience with either one is dismissed as "crazy".

So, in fact, I ask YOU - what is the difference?  Why does Dave explain away the possibility that aliens COULD exist but can not comprehend that "God" might exist?  What does killing or persecuting have to do with Joe-Schmoe-Churchgoer, who you deemed "mentally ill?"

I don't think that someone who says "God might exist" is mentally ill.  I think that someone who says "God DOES exist" has a delusion.

I've already given the differences between aliens and God.  One is faith based, and the other, I feel, is based on observable phenomenon, including the size of our universe, understanding mathematical probability, and studying the origins of our own existence.

The difference, in my opinion, is that Joe Schmoe Churchgoer wants to take away others rights because of it. He wants to not let certains groups of people do certain things and then hide behind a book. He wants to tell me what I can and cannot do with my body and tell me what is right and wrong based on his religion. Where as someone believing in aliens doesn't eally harm anyone.

And...as stated. I never said that I think being a christian makes someone mentally ill. I just asked what is the difference? Who makes that call? When I was "guided by voices", I woke up strapped to a gurney. What if those were the voices of angels telling me to break out of the hospital? Why is the person doing something (anything...good or evil) in the name of god, or because god spoke to them different?

I think you have a different definition of "Joe Schmoe Churchgoer" than I do.  I know a lot of people who are devout Christians and go to church weekly, even carry a bible in their car for spare-time reading.  None of them have EVER tried to take away my rights or tell me what to do.  I wonder if you've had a bad experience...?

And Dave, I think you're missing my point about the idea of God.  What if you envision "God" as a spiritual center point, and not as a magical invisible man in the sky?

you are neither a woman nor gay

or they would

Fair enough.  If we're talking about God in the Einsteinian sense -- meaning the forces of nature -- but giving it the name God...whatever.  That's more of a philosophy thing.

I'm talking more about a Judeo-Christian God that loves you and listens to prayers kind of thing.

No bad experiences for me. Except when they try to take away my right to an abortion and contraception, dictate whom can marry whom. Pesky little rights like that.

Maybe I'm in over my head in this debate...

I am just having a hard time tagging anyone who holds a belief in religion as "insane."  I think the tag is being used too liberally, and should be reserved for the most extreme cases.  

I don't agree with A LOT of things preached by the church, which is why I don't support a lot of it.  However, I don't take the self-righteous step of saying that "I'm normal, you're all crazy."  I think that could go either way.

Some people need faith in their life.  Some people don't.  Neither circumstance makes those people crazy, ill, insane, or any of it, as I can see.

I believe you were the first to say mentally ill.  I went along with it.  I originally said "delusion", I believe, although I didn't go back and check.  Crazy isn't a term I really use, and is more derogatory.

I would say the same thing about homosexuality.  From an evolutionary position, I think it's a genetic defect or possibly a mental illness.  I think it's acceptable, however and I fully support gay rights.  I don't think gay people are crazy, however.

For semantics purposes, Mental illness, delusion, crazy, etc, are all the same thing to me.

Scientology = Scientology not anything else. By the way, doesn't Mormonism fall under Christianity? That shoots your statement in the foot.

Word.

I stand by "mental illness".  I guess I was the one who used it first.  Depression is a mental illness.  I would say people suffering from depression are crazy, though.

...not all of them, at least.

Just what makes reliable writing? Either it is writing or it isn't. But since you have convieniently left out much older writings let me refresh your memory.

1. This one is from the new world and falls into that wide gap the old testament may have been written in.
http://research.ua.edu/archive2006/olmec.htm

2. This makes it sound as if the biblical writings were not quite as old as you claim as they came after pottery writings.
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2008/10/31/earliest-hebrew-writing.html

3. And the big one.....http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/334517.stm. Be sure to read to the end where they show the three cultures that developed writing first and the dates.

I actually feel sorry for people that choose not to believe in God.

Why? How do you know your chosen faith is the correct one? Where is the line drawn on who is a better believer? Just because you can quote scripture and go to a building more often, does this make you a better follower of god than someone who lives a good life.

You might be under the impression that "Christianity" includes "those religions that believe that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah and died for our sins."  Apparently, this is not the case.  I have personally witnessed:

- Protestants claim that Catholics are not Christians
- Catholics claim that Mormons are not Christians
- Mormons claim that Jehovah's Witnesses are not Christians
- Jehovah's Witnesses claim that only they are true Christians

So yeah, I probably wouldn't put too much stock in how one group of Christians classifies another.  If your religion believes that Jesus was a divine savior that died for the salvation of man, then you are pretty much a Christian by definition.

Why? I live a good life. I treat people fairly. I'm not out hurting people. I take good care of myself and don't abuse my body. I give to charity and work to help those that can't help themselves. Outside of me not believing in god, what am I missing out on?

"People that choose NOT TO BELIEVE in God"At no time did I single out one faith vs. another.I also similarily feel bad for those that cannot comprehend reading beyond a third grade level.lol.

It is quite your right to believe or disbelieve whatever you wish.Just as it is my right to feel sympathy for those whom I choose.Besides,I thought you were a Buddhist?

This is a perfect example of you arguing for arguments sake as people keep complaining about.  I wish I had your free time.  Nothing you said even relates.  We were speaking of two texts.  I didn't convienently leave out anything but thanks for trying to get into the conversation.

Had you been a conservative member of this board 10 other members would have attacked you for doing what you just did ... or even for less.

I lean towards Buddhism, but do not believe in a higher power.

And it is your right, but it is also my right to ask WHY you feel sympathy for those that don't believe in god.

Jesus said, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life.  No one comes to the Father but through me." 

Jesus also said, "There is none righteous, not one."  and "All our righteous acts are like filthy rags."

Bottom line is, simply being a "good person" doesn't cut it.  Even if someone has committed one sinful act, they deserve to go to hell because no sin can get into heaven.  But Jesus dying on the Cross paid that penalty for our sins.  All you have to do is confess your sins and ask for forgiveness.  Jesus wants you to give your heart to Him and serve Him faithfully.  Once you do that, then your works do matter, as that is Jesus manifesting Himself in your life.

^^In other words, Buddha...

Sin all you want as long as you have given yourself over to Christ.  Don't bother trying to be a good and honest person. 

Give yourself to Christ and act the way you want.  Lie, steal, cheat, whatever.  Be as bad as you wanna be...and just bow your head a couple times a week and say "forgive me please?"  Then you'll be part of the crew and we can hang out in heaven.

;)

More sniping from the lyrics box...courtesy of XTC


"Dear God, don't know if you noticed, but...
your name is on a lot of quotes in this book
and us crazy humans wrote it, you should take a look
All the people that you made in your image
still believing that junk is true.
Well I know it ain't, and so do you..."

Jesus sounds like he wanted to start a cult or something. Why was it ok to follow him, and not others?

Religion is for those who fear going to hell.

Spirituality is for those who've already been there.

Great quote.

And atheism is for those who neither fear hell, nor plan on visiting it...

This is BS, in my opinion.  I guess it depends on your further beliefs but being a good person should be more than enough. 

Although, I'm not sure what we're trying to qualify for...

The problem is the idea of a good person.  People assume that anyone who is "nicer" than them is a good person and thinks anyone "meaner" than whatever is a bad person.  Unfortunately God doesn't grade on a curve.

Let me explain ... Jesus said that "we think" if we have sex with another person while married then we have committed adultry but that in reality if we have thought about it we have already commited the sin.  He was showing us that we have no idea what good or not sinning is. If we are guilty by thinking it then on judgement day we will stand before God as a lying, cheating, murdering, adulterer and trying to tell Him we are good. It isn't happening.  He exposed the fact that no one is good enough by themselves and that they will need a savior, sacrifice, or whatever you want to call it, to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. He then went onto say He was that one and only way.

Compared to God/Jesus ... no one is good.  Compared to CF, Dave, Brian and Tommy, probably most people are good.  Unfotunately there is no curve. Not my rule but it is God's rule.

The funny thing is what Maine said to Buddha is not entirely untrue.  All it takes is accepting Christ to be saved. The other side to that is if you have accepted Christ, your life will show it. Not because you have to but because you want to.

When all of these guys in prison find Jesus, and then are let out of jail and commit crimes again, did they never really find Jesus in the first place?  Are they all lying about it?

do devout Christians serve in the military ? and how do they balance the sanctity of life vs. being trained and expected to kill ?

also how do christians condone the death penalty ?

both of those make big hypocrite flags pop up in my head.

I do not understand all the defensiveness of the christians here. If all that really matters is your own relationship with god and the teachings, then it should not truly matter wether other people believe in god or not. You should be safe and peaceful in the knowledge that you are on the path to salvation and eternal rewards.

It depends on what you mean by Christians.  I think the Catholic church is still anti-war and anti-death penalty.

Yes there are some huge "bible thumpers" in the military, especially overseas where it is worse because you are stuck on the FOB with them and it is hard to truly get away.
Much like prisoners, many people find jesus while sitting in a foxhole.

seems to me that jesus wouldn't want you to shoot a bullet into someone's head.. why christians aren't pacifists is beyond me..

i had a friend that was a johova's witness .. from everything i know about his faith .. i think that as far as living the way his religion preaches .. then he's by far the truest to the basic tenets of christianity

Maybe because pacifism is the eventual way to subjugation?  You keep turning that cheek, people will keep slapping... 

Killing an enemy in the act of war is an exception to that rule.  It says in Exodus that if you kill someone who attacks you, you will not be punished for murder

that doesn't matter though ..

Seems to me that a true believer in jesus would be a pacifist even to his own detriment.

what i dont' want to hear from christians is that "we're all flawed .. we all sin" .. that's a cop out .. either you believe or you don't .. and if you believe and yet CHOOSE to do things that are against your belief for expedience or convenience or practicality .. then you must not believe all that much is my view.

don't dust off old testament to justify something the new testament tells you not to do .. i can see that thought process if you were jewish .. but if you believe in jesus .. then his teachings trump the old testament whenever there's a conflict.

or so i was taught :P

This is the kind of thinking that gets you fed to lions, Fau.  Not to speak for the Christians, because, again, I have my own views that differ greatly from the bible (in that, as a book written by MAN, it's bound to be influenced by MAN'S prejudices and flaws), but I view the Bible and its teachings as guidelines by which to live, not absolute rule.  The teachings of Jesus are examples of virtue, not black and white "do as I do or burn eternally in flames".  To expect a human to live as a deity would is silly, anyway.  I'm kind of surprised you're seriously arguing this point, because to argue that true Christians would somehow have to be above humankind's flaws and fallacies is just...silly.

Also, why issue a blanket statement?  Are not, in fact, many Christians pacifists?  Are Christians somehow more or less inclined to be pacifists than the rest of the rabble?

Back during the Cold War (dear God, I've become my grandfather), there were a lot of the bible thumpers in the combat units (infantry, armor, etc...), but not a whole lot in the intell units. I guess a lot of that comes from the "I may die today, better have reservations made just in case" mentality of the battlefield.

On a side note, since it is something I do professionally now... The first slogan I ever wrote was for US Field Station Berlin, subsystem P, when I was 18. We were designing black denim jackets for the morse operators in our unit, so I took the pyramid from the dollar bill, the one with the eye of providence, and we put our unit crest in the middle of it. Then, with the first part above the pyramid and the second part below, I wrote our new slogan...



(edited for heinous brainfart typo)

What you just said was absolutely correct.  All the Old Testament stuff is what Jesus came to stop. 

Jeusus didn't come to stop anything.  Old testament law was meant to reveal sin. Nothing more. He fulfilled their intent just as he did the prophets before Him.  God spoke through Prophets that were accompanied by signs and miracles as proof of who they were.  After Jesus gave us all equal access there was no need for Prophets. Jesus is the basis for it all.  It's all in the Sermon on the Mount that I referred to previously. He pretty much laid out His whole reason for being here in that one sermon.  Jesus is the Law, the Prophet, the Word of God in the flesh. He is God.

Matthew 5:17
17"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

That rocks. I enjoy the current motto of our thinly stretched military " Semper Gumby"

That's some funny shit there...I hadn't heard that one before. Maybe we should get Lil_B to do a Gumby photoshopped in marine battle dress. ;)

And, to get this thread back on topic... God sucks, film at eleven.

Fau,

The concept of the "just war" is well established in Christian theology. Read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_war

Thats us, Always Flexible, especially with all the different types of missions we are expected to do that have nothing to do with our MOS's

I am very confused.  In your eyes you can only be without sin if you're a pacifist? 

If you live by the code of the seven deadly sins - the closest thing to this is Wrath.  I wouldn't consider someone's ability to defend themselves the same thing as a definition of wrath: inordinate and uncontrolled feelings of hatred and anger.