can somebody help me understand this?!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stella

ok then ;how are we imposing our opinions on others?

---

The charge of imposition ought to have been directed specifically at the religious right and their effort, e.g. to have marriage defined in the consitution. Otherwise it's not so much the effort to impose politically so much as the dogmatic assertions of what Christian and other folk "know" about God and what He expects or requires of us, the evidence for which, as they seem to see it, runs like this: It says in the Bible that God exists. Since the Bible is God’s word, and God never speaks falsely, then everything in the Bible must be true. So, God must exist because it says in the Bible that God exists. Since the Bible is God’s word, and God never speaks falsely, then everything in the Bible must be true. So, God must exist because it says in the Bible that God exists. Since the Bible is God’s word, and God never speaks falsely, then everything in the Bible must be true. So, God must exist because it says in the Bible that God exists. Since the Bible is God’s word, and God never speaks falsely, then everything in the Bible must be true. So, God must exist because it says in the Bible that God exists. Since the Bible is God’s word, and God never speaks falsely, then everything in the Bible must be true. So, God must exist because it says in the Bible that God exists. Since the Bible is God’s word, and God never speaks falsely, then everything in the Bible must be true. So, God must exist because it says in the Bible that God exists. Since the Bible is God’s word, and God never speaks falsely, then everything in the Bible must be true. So, God must exist because it says in the Bible that God exists. Since the Bible is God’s word, and God never speaks falsely, then everything in the Bible must be true. So, God must exist because it says in the Bible that God exists. Since the Bible is God’s word, and God never speaks falsely, then everything in the Bible must be true. So, God must exist because it says in the Bible that God exists. Since the Bible is God’s word, and God never speaks falsely, then everything in the Bible must be true. So, God must exist.... ad infinitum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PrinceMyshkin

The charge of imposition ought to have been directed specifically at the religious right and their effort, e.g. to have marriage defined in the consitution. Otherwise it's not so much the effort to impose politically so much as the dogmatic assertions of what Christian and other folk "know" about God and what He expects or requires of us, the evidence for which, as they seem to see it, runs like this: It says in the Bible that God exists. Since the Bible is God’s word, and God never speaks falsely, then everything in the Bible must be true. So, God must exist because it says in the Bible that God exists.... ad infinitum.

---

let me get this straight, are you saying that Christians should not accept the bible's judgment, because that would be really funny.....
BTW you didn't prove that we are judging people.....maybe you want to focus on that more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stella

let me get this straight, are you saying that Christians should not accept the bible's judgment, because that would be really funny.....
BTW you didn't prove that we are judging people.....maybe you want to focus on that more.

---

Well, if they DO accept it should they accept it in toto or just the parts they happen to like? Because, for instance, the Bible advocates animal sacrifice, and it authorized the Israelites to smite the original occupants of Canaan.

As to whether the Bible IS God's word, the only proof you have of that is that it says it is, and a whole lot of people after that who had a vested interest in it have said so as well, interpreting it this way and that.

But I'm done with arguing about that. You are convinced there is a God and that the Bible is His word. I'm not. Neither of us is open to having his or her mind changed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Derringer

If this is true, then why do Christians care about things such as homosexuality, converting aboriginals, stem cell research?

---

There are two kinds of judgment: 1.) objectively stating that a particular sentiment/action/belief is wrong; and 2.) deciding that a person who does/believes/feels a certain thing is therefore in some way below you.

We are called to do the first (everyone does this anyway) but we are called to avoid the second (which is the natural tendency of everyone).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PrinceMyshkin

Well, if they DO accept it should they accept it in toto or just the parts they happen to like? Because, for instance, the Bible advocates animal sacrifice, and it authorized the Israelites to smite the original occupants of Canaan.

As to whether the Bible IS God's word, the only proof you have of that is that it says it is, and a whole lot of people after that who had a vested interest in it have said so as well, interpreting it this way and that.

But I'm done with arguing about that. You are convinced there is a God and that the Bible is His word. I'm not. Neither of us is open to having his or her mind changed.

---

OK, you miss the fact that there is EXTREME disconnect between the Mosaic Covenant (that which is outlined in the OT) and the New Covenant under Christ. We no longer sacrifice animals because Christ is our sacrifice-- and He is sufficient for all things, no more is needed. God commanded the Israelites to destroy Canaan because He was after something very different in the OT than in the NT: the Old Testament is God's creation of a political state that was to be His representation on earth. The New Testament is about creating a spiritual people of God, not dependent on an earthly government.

I've heard this before, Christians will rail about how sinful homosexuality is (for example), but when it comes to other "abominations to God" they claim this complete "disconnect" between the OT, and the NT, despite what Jesus allegedly said:

Matthew 5:18 "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Unbeliever

I've heard this before, Christians will rail about how sinful homosexuality is (for example), but when it comes to other "abominations to God" they claim this complete "disconnect" between the OT, and the NT, despite what Jesus allegedly said:

Matthew 5:18 "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."

---

You have conveniently used equivocation (or a lack of understanding) to make this point. The 600 odd prescriptions in the OT are not "the law" per se. Homosexuality was included under the umbrella term "sexual immorality" (as was prostitution, adultery, fornication, beastiality, incest, et al). When Jesus and Paul caution against "sexual immorality," it was understood that that term covered ALL types of sexual misbehavior.

We "rail" about sin because we know that it ultimately leads to self-destruction. Non-believers see "sin" as little more than some sort of mistake, or crime - they don't see it with the same eyes we do - namely, that it has eternal consequences. You'd not have a problem with Christians "railing" about smoking, or heroin use, or prostitution because (I assume) you'd see those as self-destructive; well, sin is WORSE. It leads (ultimately) to death. The Bible lists homosexuality as a sin - so we think its self-destructive. What we "rail" about is not that homosexuality exists but that society seems hell-bent on pushing it as a valid alternative to heterosexual behavior - that's why we're "railing" - just like you might "rail" is you saw TV shows advocating prostitution or drugs as viable alternatives to traditional jobs or medications.

I notice that Christians don't have a problem with anyone eating shrimp, or calamari, etc., despite the fact that the Bible says it, too, is an abomination:

Lev 11:10 "And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which [is] in the waters, they [shall be] an abomination unto you:"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Unbeliever

I notice that Christians don't have a problem with anyone eating shrimp, or calamari, etc., despite the fact that the Bible says it, too, is an abomination:

Lev 11:10 "And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which [is] in the waters, they [shall be] an abomination unto you:"

---

Leviticus is an old testament book. Hence the food laws fall under the old covenant. The new covenant under Christ essentially repealed these food restrictions as is seen in Acts 10:10:

"10He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. 11He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. 12It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles of the earth and birds of the air. "

It's commonly believed that the reason for such food restrictions in the old testament were not merely arbitrary things, but in fact the reason behind forbidding them was because they were likely to be diseased and the medical advancements had not yet been made at that time to deal with such issues. However, during the time of Christ with the advancements of Roman medicine, it became possible for them to be eaten safely.

So, does the word "abomination" simply mean that something is unhealthy?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Unbeliever

So, does the word "abomination" simply mean that something is unhealthy?

---

I wouldn't presume to tell you what the English translation actually means (since it is just a translation) and I don't know Hebrew or Greek yet so I couldn't tell you my take on the original text, but I can tell you in both languages there are words that have multiple shades of meaning so to speak and this could very well be one of those instances. That's of course not to say that the God looks favorably on any of these things (within the context of the respective covenants of course), but it may very well be the case that one of these shades of meaning is unhealthy. I'm just saying that's a possibility.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Redzeppelin

You have conveniently used equivocation (or a lack of understanding) to make this point. The 600 odd prescriptions in the OT are not "the law" per se. Homosexuality was included under the umbrella term "sexual immorality" (as was prostitution, adultery, fornication, beastiality, incest, et al). When Jesus and Paul caution against "sexual immorality," it was understood that that term covered ALL types of sexual misbehavior.

---

Sexual misbehavior as defined by whom, exactly? Would that include any sexual act other than sex between a married man and woman only for procreation using only the missionary position?

Quote:

---

We "rail" about sin because we know that it ultimately leads to self-destruction. Non-believers see "sin" as little more than some sort of mistake, or crime - they don't see it with the same eyes we do - namely, that it has eternal consequences.

---

You're right, the only thing I, at least, consider as "sin" (though I don't call it that) is causing harm to others, and I don't see sex between consenting adults to be a harm to anyone.

Quote:

---

You'd not have a problem with Christians "railing" about smoking, or heroin use, or prostitution because (I assume) you'd see those as self-destructive; well, sin is WORSE.

---

Actually, I would have a problem with that, because if those things aren't abused they don't harm anyone at all. If Christians don't like those things, they're free to not do those things, but banning them just because their particular diety is considered to not like them is merely oppression.

Quote:

---

It leads (ultimately) to death.

---

Life is what leads to death; we are all under a sentence of death for the crime of having been born. Aside from that, things like driving cars or burning candles can "ultimately lead to death", would you therefore ban those things?

Quote:

---

The Bible lists homosexuality as a sin - so we think its self-destructive. What we "rail" about is not that homosexuality exists but that society seems hell-bent on pushing it as a valid alternative to heterosexual behavior - that's why we're "railing" - just like you might "rail" is you saw TV shows advocating prostitution or drugs as viable alternatives to traditional jobs or medications.

---

So, if it's not a valid alternative to heterosexuality, then simply don't engage in it - but Christians are the ones pushing their "morality" on everyone else.

Everyone pushes their morality on everyone else. At this point in society it's a moot point. Permissiveness is a push against moderation and moderation is perceived as a chain on permissiveness. The sad thing about modern society is rather than having an open exchange of ideas, we try to shut certain ideas out as if by not speaking about them we can all live in happiness. The fact is, by not speaking about them we all become MORE intolerant and unable to cope with the differences in others.

The OP of the thread:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stella

hey all, the other day i came across this quote by Voltaire:
"If God didn't exist it would be necessary for us to invent Him"

looking at ancient civilizations such as the Greeks and the Romans and even before that , they all didn't have an idea about "God"and so they created their own...
my question is how can someone not believe in anything how can you be an atheist?
i do believe that humans have this urge to believe in something bigger than they are no matter what this thing is....

---

I guess that's a friendly reminder to cease this digression. *sigh* - it was getting good, too. Perhaps another thread will open up on this topic because it is an important one to talk about...

Perhaps we've strayed a bit off topic, sorry, I'll try to get back to it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stella

looking at ancient civilizations such as the Greeks and the Romans and even before that , they all didn't have an idea about "God"and so they created their own...

---

I think the ancient Jews (Canaanites) created their own God just as much as did the Greeks and Romans. I see no evidence that they didn't do so.

I don't quite understand what you mean, stella, whan you say the ancient Greeks and Romans had no idea about God. How could they create their own if they had no such idea?

As a Christian, I believe God is the creator of humanity; as such, it makes sense to me that creations bear the stamp of their creator; so - I believe God designed us with a "God consciousness" - an awareness that He exists, but that this consciousness will generally manifest itself in a less specific way by instilling within us some sense that there is something far more transcendant than ourselves - something greater than us that exists. It is this, I believe, that has inspired the greatest art - humans trying to "touch" or possess that transcendant "thing" that they know exists but can't quite put their finger on it. Christians know that this "thing" is our designer Himself. But, we as humans are capable of putting any number of things into that "God-shaped hole" inside our hearts: we can manufacture "gods" of our own making (pagan religions) or we can make things into gods - drugs, sex, money, fame, power - you name it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Unbeliever

Perhaps we've strayed a bit off topic, sorry, I'll try to get back to it.



I think the ancient Jews (Canaanites) created their own God just as much as did the Greeks and Romans. I see no evidence that they didn't do so.

I don't quite understand what you mean, stella, whan you say the ancient Greeks and Romans had no idea about God. How could they create their own if they had no such idea?

---

What's your evidence for believing the Hebrews made up their own God and what then do you make of the old testament prophecies of Jesus?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gorilla King

What's your evidence for believing the Hebrews made up their own God and what then do you make of the old testament prophecies of Jesus?

---

Well, first of all, I didn't say I have evidence that they made up their own God, I said I don't see any evidence that they didn't. But, since you ask, I'll see if I can provide some evidence.

The best evidence I can site, on short notice (I'm almost out of time for today, I'll try to satisfy your request better tomorrow), is the Bible itself. I've read it cover to cover 3 times, and studied it somewhat besides. It strikes me as having been man-made, I see no evidence in it of divine authorship.

As far as the OT prophecies concerning Jesus, I think they were not, in fact, prophecies of Jesus at all, but were instead an attempt to retrofit certain OT verses to seem like prophecies, and then were included in the Jesus story as being fulfilled by Jesus after the fact. In other words, the authors of the NT wanted to impress their readers with these claims of fulfilled prophecy, and so wrote the story so it would seem like prophecy was being fulfilled. I can go into more detail on this tomorrow if you'd like, I'm out of time now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Unbeliever

Well, first of all, I didn't say I have evidence that they made up their own God, I said I don't see any evidence that they didn't. But, since you ask, I'll see if I can provide some evidence.

The best evidence I can site, on short notice (I'm almost out of time for today, I'll try to satisfy your request better tomorrow), is the Bible itself. I've read it cover to cover 3 times, and studied it somewhat besides. It strikes me as having been man-made, I see no evidence in it of divine authorship.

As far as the OT prophecies concerning Jesus, I think they were not, in fact, prophecies of Jesus at all, but were instead an attempt to retrofit certain OT verses to seem like prophecies, and then were included in the Jesus story as being fulfilled by Jesus after the fact. In other words, the authors of the NT wanted to impress their readers with these claims of fulfilled prophecy, and so wrote the story so it would seem like prophecy was being fulfilled. I can go into more detail on this tomorrow if you'd like, I'm out of time now.

---

Well let's start with the big one...Isaiah 53

1 Who has believed our message
and to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?

2 He grew up before him like a tender shoot,
and like a root out of dry ground.
He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him,
nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.

3 He was despised and rejected by men,
a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering.
Like one from whom men hide their faces
he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

4 Surely he took up our infirmities
and carried our sorrows,
yet we considered him stricken by God,
smitten by him, and afflicted.

5 But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon him,
and by his wounds we are healed.

6 We all, like sheep, have gone astray,
each of us has turned to his own way;
and the LORD has laid on him
the iniquity of us all.

7 He was oppressed and afflicted,
yet he did not open his mouth;
he was led like a lamb to the slaughter,
and as a sheep before her shearers is silent,
so he did not open his mouth.

8 By oppression [a] and judgment he was taken away.
And who can speak of his descendants?
For he was cut off from the land of the living;
for the transgression of my people he was stricken. [b]

9 He was assigned a grave with the wicked,
and with the rich in his death,
though he had done no violence,
nor was any deceit in his mouth.

10 Yet it was the LORD's will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and though the LORD makes [c] his life a guilt offering,
he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand.

11 After the suffering of his soul,
he will see the light of life [d] and be satisfied [e] ;
by his knowledge [f] my righteous servant will justify many,
and he will bear their iniquities.

12 Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, [g]
and he will divide the spoils with the strong, [h]
because he poured out his life unto death,
and was numbered with the transgressors.
For he bore the sin of many,
and made intercession for the transgressors.

I'd be interested to hear your interpretation of that apart from Jesus. Mind you it was written about 600 years before him.

Second, while it's interesting to say that the gospel stories were retrofit to suit all of this, it just doesn't work. For one thing, the Pharisees had every reason to put down this Christian movement. Even Paul (before he became Paul) had the job of hunting down Christians and bringing them to trial for blasphemy. If they didn't crucify a man named Jesus (or Yeshua more accurately) then why didn't they simply prevent the evidence to the people and put down this little insurrection? And if Jesus didn't claim to be God and do the things the apostles reported Him to have done, then why did all of them with the exception of John who was sent into exile, allow themselves to be killed through violent methods for a lie? And if there were so many witnesses to these events, secular and otherwise, where are ANY contrary reports concerning Jesus? I don't know of a single one in existence. And how is it that they could make a claim such as the post crucification appearance of Jesus to so many when not a single person ever stepped forward and said "that didn't happen." Rather, the rapid spread of the early church seems to indicate that it did indeed happen.

And let's talk about the crucification. If the claim being made was that Jesus had resurrected and this was THE hinge point of all Christian belief (because remember that even the disciples and apostles scattered in fear when he died) then all the Pharisees had to do was present the body. Some say that the apostles stole the body. That's kind of difficult however considering that the tombs were guarded by 8 fully armed Roman guards with four in front and four in back with penalty of death on them should they fall asleep. Then there's the whole issue of moving the stone. It weighed about 2000 pounds. So that means the apostles would have to sneak past 8 Roman guards, move a 2,000 pound stone without their noticing and then steal away with the body and convince everyone else that Jesus had risen. And add on to that the fact that they were all willing to die for this thing which they knew was a lie. How do you rationalize that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Redzeppelin

It is this, I believe, that has inspired the greatest art - humans trying to "touch" or possess that transcendant "thing" that they know exists but can't quite put their finger on it.

---

Wow, we believe in almost the exact same thing. Except you would have to replace 'Christianity' with 'arts & literature'. Are you familiar with Ralph Waldo Emerson?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Unbeliever

Well, first of all, I didn't say I have evidence that they made up their own God, I said I don't see any evidence that they didn't. But, since you ask, I'll see if I can provide some evidence.

The best evidence I can site, on short notice (I'm almost out of time for today, I'll try to satisfy your request better tomorrow), is the Bible itself. I've read it cover to cover 3 times, and studied it somewhat besides. It strikes me as having been man-made, I see no evidence in it of divine authorship.

As far as the OT prophecies concerning Jesus, I think they were not, in fact, prophecies of Jesus at all, but were instead an attempt to retrofit certain OT verses to seem like prophecies, and then were included in the Jesus story as being fulfilled by Jesus after the fact. In other words, the authors of the NT wanted to impress their readers with these claims of fulfilled prophecy, and so wrote the story so it would seem like prophecy was being fulfilled. I can go into more detail on this tomorrow if you'd like, I'm out of time now.

---

Just as unsubstantiated as anything can be. You don't believe in Christ's divinity, therefore you find it more plausible to believe specifics were manufactured to fit the prophecies, I DO believe in Christ's divinity, and so I take them at face value. Make of that what you will.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weepingforloman

Just as unsubstantiated as anything can be. You don't believe in Christ's divinity, therefore you find it more plausible to believe specifics were manufactured to fit the prophecies, I DO believe in Christ's divinity, and so I take them at face value. Make of that what you will.

---

It does seem to be a matter of opinion, doesn't it? E.g., eight hundred million Muslims disagree with you on this, and I disagree with their beliefs, but the Bahais disagree with you, me and the Muslims, and then the Hindus think we are all wrong-headed, etc., etc., etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JGL57

It does seem to be a matter of opinion, doesn't it? E.g., eight hundred million Muslims disagree with you on this, and I disagree with their beliefs, but the Bahais disagree with you, me and the Muslims, and then the Hindus think we are all wrong-headed, etc., etc., etc.

---

I really don't think it is a matter of opinion per se. I think there are facts out there which people either are ignorant of or come to different conclusions about. I mean how many of those muslims or hindu's do you suppose have delved into Christian apologetics? On one hand you have Allah who is largely impersonal and with whom even Mohamed didn't know if he would go to heaven, and then with Hinduism you have 300 million gods and a caste system which is brutal towards the lower classes. Christianity is the only belief system where God IS personal and salvation isn't a matter of works, but grace. That's one of the major reasons why amidst the sea of different religions between the time of Christ and 300 AD that Christianity overthrew 800 years of pagan worship in Rome to become the dominant religion. It said that in Christ we are all brothers and sisters regardless of our Earthly social status. That was quite a revolutionary idea.

Well, that's certainly one way of looking at it all - but I disagree with nearly every point you make. Mainly, I think you are being rather selective in your analysis - disregarding the bad of christianity and over-emphasizing the good, disregarding the good of non-christian philosophies and over-emphasizing the bad.

Personally, I think that a disinterested study of all the facts leads one to ecumenism, not sectarianism.

Thus, we are at eternal loggerheads.

But have a nice day.

And what in your opinion is the bad of Christianity? I'm not talking about what people do...people are entirely fallible. I'm talking the teachings of Jesus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gorilla King

What's your evidence for believing the Hebrews made up their own God and what then do you make of the old testament prophecies of Jesus?

---

As to Bible prophecy, there's too much for me to type it all, so I'll have to provide some links on the subject:

PRECISELY WHAT IS A SUCCESSFULLY-FULFILLED, SUPERNATURALLY-INSPIRED PROPHECY?

Prophecies Claimed as Fulfilled

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gorilla King

And what in your opinion is the bad of Christianity? I'm not talking about what people do...people are entirely fallible. I'm talking the teachings of Jesus.

---

I'm talking about 'what people do' because I do not live in some 'alternate world', or in the midst of some 'cosmological' battle between 'good' and 'evil', nor do I have any plans of being 'eternal'. Sounds too damn long anyways. I happen to live on Earth with over 6.5 billion other people. The only thing I have is personal relationships with others and the land. My life is very happy, although I wish the world was free from war, suffering disease, and discrimination. I hate war. I want to have a positive relationship with everyone I met; I want to see man's great idea's and creations and stare aimlessly at flowers. The 'bad' in Christianity is that anyone who disagrees with me is a 'sinner', must be labeled as 'wrong', and I must do everything i can to 'save their souls', so I would never bother to call myself a 'Christian'. The only heaven I belief of is on Earth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Derringer

I'm talking about 'what people do' because I do not live in some 'alternate world', or in the midst of some 'cosmological' battle between 'good' and 'evil', nor do I have any plans of being 'eternal'. Sounds too damn long anyways. I happen to live on Earth with over 6.5 billion other people. The only thing I have is personal relationships with others and the land. My life is very happy, although I wish the world was free from war, suffering disease, and discrimination. I hate war. I want to have a positive relationship with everyone I met; I want to see man's great idea's and creations and stare aimlessly at flowers. The 'bad' in Christianity is that anyone who disagrees with me is a 'sinner', must be labeled as 'wrong', and I must do everything i can to 'save their souls', so I would never bother to call myself a 'Christian'. The only heaven I belief of is on Earth.

---

I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what sin is. Everyone is a sinner...even Christians. The wars you hate are the products of sin. I won't try to convince you of the reality of it, I'm just telling you the Christian view of it. I'd be happy to elaborate further if you're interested, bu if not then I'm just as content to leave it be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Unbeliever

As to Bible prophecy, there's too much for me to type it all, so I'll have to provide some links on the subject:

PRECISELY WHAT IS A SUCCESSFULLY-FULFILLED, SUPERNATURALLY-INSPIRED PROPHECY?

Prophecies Claimed as Fulfilled

---

I have no desire to write a book here in response to to this, but I could certainly point you in the direction of some that would refute everything there if you're interested. You could probably find them very reasonably priced on amazon too. Let me know.

This may help

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7iQRFP_e90

There's no such thing as Christianity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NikolaiI

There's no such thing as Christianity.

---

There's no such thing as atheism. To claim there's no God you have to either have to possess all possible knowledge or claim to be god. Since you don't have the first and certainly aren't the latter, I find your claim lacking.

One does have to wonder though, what is it about Christianity specifically which repulses you like it does? Some would say that we resist the most what we know to be true. After all, if you hold it in such low regard, why would you waste your time with it?

Just so you know, the quote for my signature isn't supposed to be about that statement. :D :D

Ha, no, atheism doesn't exist. Neither does America, England, or France. And I am not repulsed by any of those things.

Anyway, you missed my point, and I hope you're not too embarrased, Gorilla King. There was clearly no attack on God, or Christians in that statement. I wasn't trying to make fun.

“God is merely the answer that you get if you do not ask enough questions.” “Why do they hate Him?” by Anthony Gottlieb, The New Yorker, May 21, 2007, paraphrasing David Hume.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PrinceMyshkin

“God is merely the answer that you get if you do not ask enough questions.” “Why do they hate Him?” by Anthony Gottlieb, The New Yorker, May 21, 2007, paraphrasing David Hume.

---

What a bunch of rubbish.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gorilla King

What a bunch of rubbish.

---

Which is what I usually get when I ask those who believe in the existence of God to provide for the basis of their beliefs.

"I can live with doubt and uncertainty and not knowing. I think it's much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers which might be wrong... I don't have to know an answer. I don't feel frightened by not knowing things, by being lost in a mysterious universe without any purpose, which is the way it really is as far as I can tell. It doesn't frighten me." Feynman, Richard, quoted in Gleick, Genius: The life & Science of Richard Feynman, p. 438

“God is merely the answer that you get if you do not ask enough questions.”

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PrinceMyshkin

Which is what I usually get when I ask those who believe in the existence of God to provide for the basis of their beliefs.

"I can live with doubt and uncertainty and not knowing. I think it's much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers which might be wrong... I don't have to know an answer. I don't feel frightened by not knowing things, by being lost in a mysterious universe without any purpose, which is the way it really is as far as I can tell. It doesn't frighten me." Feynman, Richard, quoted in Gleick, Genius: The life & Science of Richard Feynman, p. 438

“God is merely the answer that you get if you do not ask enough questions.”

---

Well get specific! If I ask you to teach me about biology, is it much use if I dismiss you because you can't condense thousands of pages of reading into a handful of paragraphs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gorilla King

Well get specific! If I ask you to teach me about biology, is it much use if I dismiss you because you can't condense thousands of pages of reading into a handful of paragraphs?

---

If you were to ask me about the basis for my belief in the findings of biology I would tell you that those findings have been tested.

You get defensive when asked about the basis of your beliefs, as if 'God' were incompetent to defend himself against attack and it was up to you to do so. The existence of God is not within my competence either to affirm or disprove; it is the authority and the touchiness of those who profess to 'know' Him that I am curious about.

It's true though, that when you're on one side you really do believe it's true. As Donnie Darko said from the movie Donnie Darko, "I want to believe I'm not alone, but I don't know. I've just never seen any proof, you know? I don't debate it anymore. I used to, but I don't anymore. You could debate it all your life and not be anywhere further. It's absurd! So I just don't debate it anymore."

I agree with Feynman. Living and not knowing, or living and being alone is nothing terrible. I don't fear death, etc., either. Some theologians think it's inherent that all people are terrified by death, etc., like Camus, and it just doesn't make sense.

And about God and not knowing, the only reason we consider it at all, and are debating it, is because of the precise way we were raised. We were raised, taught the issue, etc., talked with people about it ever since our childhood and schooldays. If, for example, you never knew anything about it, you wouldn't think anything about it. Consider a child raised in a small community, seperate from the modern world. She was taught nothing about religion or God, she just lived with nature, knew plants and animals and the seasons in all their freshness and beauty, the warmth of the sun in the summer, the grass on her bare feet and the streams, and winter in all its vigor and freshness, and lived with her family and community and people who loved her, but she never knew God - then she would think of the world as a safe place, she would be happy and think of the world as a good place, and and she wouldn't be sad because she was alone in the universe or unhappy because she didn't know...theology.

The Christian mythic narrative, as so-and-so calls it, has many adherents. Some of them were, really did fit the negative stereotype some atheists have of Christians. I mean the ones who were the opposite of what the ideal was - what Christ was - the ones you just want see- you say you follow Christ!?? The type of person Nietzsche thought a Christian was. But obviously the way it should be is a good religion, one that preaches compassion and enlightenment, etc., i.e., if one follows Jesus. I think one problem is that people take the bible too literally. It's a mythic narrative. There are lots of others. It doesn't have a monopoly on truth, rationality, logic, and everything good, goodness. It isn't the one and only truth. Going through Buddha is the same as going through Christ. Proof: the actions are the same, and the thoughts are the same.

That's my opinion. Hope that helps, stella. I find it strange when people take strange things for granted; things that are strange to me. Like, we should all be depressed, or things should be this way or that, pretty much almost anything. Like, if someone bases everything on the bible. Then you're in an argument with them, and they use a verse from the bible as evidence, or proof. It's not evidence, it's only the point you made. And you're giving me another source for it. That doesn't convince me. Or when people argue about who's right. It's very strange. I don't have anything to prove to anyone. But, I understand you when you say it's hard to grasp how someone could, not believe anything, because we all feel that way about people who believe different things.

Nikolai, what a wonderful, temperate post your last is! Thank you. I once made up this mantra for myself:

"Nothing to prove - everything to discover."