Thread: Christianity

Thanks for your response, phrogget. I'm not comfortable with some person passing you off as some close-minded religious nutter, when its obviously not the case. I think that this post illustrates perfectly your true open-mindedness.
Some people are so eager to shut down an idea that contradicts with their own that they can't see the bigger picture.

Originally Posted by cerel

I liked that story phrogget, I'll have to find the source later. I also want to point out that the portion that was quoted has nothing to do with religion. The way I see it, it's more of a divine monologue. The souls are all part of God, the light, for the soul to find it's individuality, apart from God, it must go into darkness where it can see itself in contrast to the light. Without anything to compare to, we can't discern anything in our reality, which is what lead to the soul's initial anxiety. The soul is a part of God, the soul's will is also the will of God. All our action are part of God's will. Therefore it follows that if our will is the will of God, we are following God's plan.

With respect to scripture quoting and the ask and you shall receive bit, remember also that, you're supposed to be asking for salvation, not money or success. All that matters is salvation, not your comforts in life.

For those who get frustrated with religious debate, it's your own damn fault. No, you can't have logic if you wish to discuss beliefs which is what religion is. You can have logic in philosophy, history, geography, but not in beliefs, intangible things. So it's very illogical for an atheist to even entertain a religious discussion.

I also want to say that religion is a good thing. But it's by no means perfect. The most well intentioned plans can still cause great harm. I think most people hate religion because at some point they came across someone who's belief's they didn't agree with and it was like an impossible wall. Be it parents who wont let you listen to Marylin Manson, or schools that suspend you for holding hands, terrorists taking over a plane, the inquisition, no one is safe when you have strong beliefs not based in logic driving a large portion of the populous.

But whatever your problem was with the people, you can't say it was God's fault, that Jesus never existed, there is no soul, that EVERYTHING in the bible is a lie, just because of the people are illogical and have a herd mentality in their persecution of what they feel to be threats to their beliefs. My main concern in religious debate is that people, mostly atheists, are against the belief in God because of how people who believe in God act. That is not a logical way of thinking. That's like saying I'm not going to watch this tv show because people who do always quote lines from it and I find it really annoying.

word.

Also, might be worth pointing out that people seem to forget God is not a religion but a common bond between all people.
I think you pretty much alluded to that...

Also i dislike very much the way that the belief in God has now become synonymous with being religious...

I dont consider myself religious. I have spiitual beliefs..but i dont pray, i dont follow any special dietry codes and im not a card carrying member of any religous institution.

Touché

My beef is with religion, not personal spiritual beliefs, however much I disagree with them. Since this thread is about Christianity, I incorrectly assumed most of the posters in it were christian. And no, I don't disbelieve in God because of religion.

Originally Posted by cerel

For those who get frustrated with religious debate, it's your own damn fault. No, you can't have logic if you wish to discuss beliefs which is what religion is. You can have logic in philosophy, history, geography, but not in beliefs, intangible things. So it's very illogical for an atheist to even entertain a religious discussion.

Sorry but that's retarded. Why don't we all just sit down, hold hands, and never discuss anything so we all get along? This is the mindframe that allows people to never progress beyond their comfort zone. I've had countless religious debates with people who can hold their ground and they've been some of the best discussions, and greatest learning experiences. I just have never been offended during a religious debate and I assume if other people are so set in their beliefs they will have thick enough skin to handle it and also defend it where it's needed.

Originally Posted by phrogget

Apologies, to me deciding there is no God, end of, doesn't involve any more thinking than deciding there is one. It involves accepting only what you can see. Which is fair enough, but your comment implies that believing anything other than what you believe means you have no brain, or at least, refuse to use it.

Yes because the vast majority of people can't tell me why they believe in God, other than it's what they've been conditioned to do. Most people don't think about it, they just accept it and never go beyond that thought process. I think it's crippling to your intellectuality.

As for accepting there is no God because you can't see it as being your reasoning for not believing, well of course that doesn't take very much thought. But I've only come across a few atheists who are like this. And they piss me off just as much, but the difference between them and the former is that they are in the minority whereas it's the majority who don't use their brains and still claim God.

Originally Posted by Ghetto Onion

Yes because the vast majority of people can't tell me why they believe in God, other than it's what they've been conditioned to do. Most people don't think about it, they just accept it and never go beyond that thought process. I think it's crippling to your intellectuality.

I think my only problem with this is that most people that want to hear why someone believes in God and most people that say that people don't think about it generally refuse to accept any answer they're given as to why a person believes in God.

Look, if you get into a discussion and it boils down to, "I think you're dumb cuz you believe in something you can't see" and they go "You're a sinner, you're going to hell" you're not getting anything done. Don't try to discuss things like this with people who can't handle it. That would be most of them. So, really, yea, lets hold hands. It's a lot less aggrivating.

If you don't believe in God, can you have a definition of what God is? Is your definition of God, when you say, 'Why do you believe in God', the same as what they believe it is? It's obviously not. And it never will be, because you don't belive. You can only discuss something logically when you have common ground. Specifically, the definition of what you're discussing, so in fact, what you might want to start off with is 'Describe God to me'.

Originally Posted by Ghetto Onion

Please re-read your argument, it makes zero sense. Zero. That's like... what stoners pull out as some revolutionary thought because it's both paradoxical yet still is supposed to make sense because it somehow "explains" something unexplainable without ever actually explaining shit.

Actually, it's more like what theoretical physicists pull out as revolutionary thought.

Time doesn't exist? Um what? Maybe I don't have any tact in religious arguments but wtf, I seriously cannot stand it when people state their perspective on their particular space dad as fact. Stating time doesn't exist so nonchalantly as though this is just some commonly accepted viewpoint among the religious, makes me see red.

And your proof that time exists as a seperate entity in the universe? Absolutely none other than your own experience. And does your own experience reptresent the universe's ultimate truth? Of course not. If you are to follow Einstein's beautiful theories and accept that time and space are one and the same and that time can be altered by changes in gravitational forces then no, time as you define and believe it does not exist. It is just a method humans use for interpreting their experiences. In a totally non-patronising way, I suggest you get into philosophy a bit.[/quote]

Originally Posted by Fruity

Thanks for your response, phrogget. I'm not comfortable with some person passing you off as some close-minded religious nutter, when its obviously not the case. I think that this post illustrates perfectly your true open-mindedness.
Some people are so eager to shut down an idea that contradicts with their own that they can't see the bigger picture.

Yeah, totally. When many people claim to be open-minded, what they really mean is that they're positivists. They'll be open-minded to something if you can prove it.

yeesh. i go for like three days and its fine now? xD

I love that you thing being agnostic means you are open-minded.

Thats probably the most contradicting thing i have ever said, in definition, but in reality its true.

An agnostic is someone who believes there is no god but we can never know for sure. My specific thoughts are we can never really know, but if ANY relegion can prove they are right, i will absolutely worship.

My beef is with religion, not personal spiritual beliefs, however much I disagree with them.

I guess i am in the same boat. My beef is the people who are the your-a-nonbeliever-your-going-to-hell-end-of-discussion type and the people who never really put any time to conjure a personal opinion, and just go with the flow of what their family teaches them.

Yeah, totally. When many people claim to be open-minded, what they really mean is that they're positivists. They'll be open-minded to something if you can prove it.

That's almost me. xD
I am almost certain i will not be persuaded, but i give anyone the chance to try, and if you prove it, I'll be sitting in the church right next to them. Open-minded in my definition is hearing someone out and forming an opinion off of it, not just immediately shutting it down because its against your opinion.

Thanks for like...never considering that an atheist might start out as a Christian.

That's not at all what i meant.
I meant that from the text i read I saw that for the most part you guys we're shutting each others' statements out immediately. I never meant that someones a religious nutter. I was a full-fledged Protestant once. Until i was exposed to form my own opinion.

Originally Posted by thatsstupid95

yeesh. i go for like three days and its fine now? xD



Thats probably the most contradicting thing i have ever said, in definition, but in reality its true.

An agnostic is someone who believes there is no god but we can never know for sure. My specific thoughts are we can never really know, but if ANY relegion can prove they are right, i will absolutely worship.

I disagree. An atheist believes there is no God. An Agnostic believes there might be, there might not, who knows? They have no set belief either way.
Anyone with half a brain, atheist or religious must admit we do not know for sure.

If any religion ever proves they are right, most most certainly will not worship because most of them don't have a God I would worship, respect, like or love.
That's an interesting question though, I wonder how many people would follow a religion if there was proof it was 'truth' vs. those who wouldn't.

I once saw a comedian who did a think about Agnostics. He said "You aren't an agnostic, you are an idiot. You can't be bothered finding something to believe in".

I think that being a Christian means i'm open minded, because i'm already believing in things that are difficult to believe. Miracles and ressurections and transubstantiations. My mind is already equipped to dealing with strange ideas.