God botherers, I want your opinions.

[djet]

Obviously you aint it then....

[Maxintosh]

How do you know if God even has the ability to care?

Yeah I know, that's a good point that I was going to bring up too. Religious people tend to think so two dimensional, thinking only in 'human' terms. Whatever God is I'm sure no living human being has ever had it cross their mind. I like to use the 'teach algebra to ants' analogy

[killbot1000]

Yeah I know, that's a good point that I was going to bring up too. Religious people tend to think so two dimensional, thinking only in 'human' terms. Whatever God is I'm sure no living human being has ever had it cross their mind. I like to use the 'teach algebra to ants' analogy

 

I don't really believe in god until I see evidence to indicate it's existence, but I agree with everything you just said in this post!

 

Another point I'd like to throw out:

 

Many Christians have told me that the universe is so unlikely, flows so well together, is so vast, and perfect that only God could have created it. This always made me laugh because in order for this unlikely, well oiled, universe machine to exist, an even MORE unlikely, vast, well oiled, perfect thing needs to exist so that "He" can make an even less perfect, well oiled, unlikely thing. If this is the case, and god really does exist, one can likely derive that God is a child, messing with building blocks.

 

Honestly, human beings don't matter, except to ourselves. We don't hold a special place in "God's" heart. The only reason why a god would create something like us is for entertainment, and if god really is perfect (which I would be hard pressed to believe) then why did god mess up so badly on human beings, he smashed his hand right into the clay while he was drunk or something.

 

I am willing to believe in an entity that has extreme power, much like Q (from star trek) or something of that nature, but just because one is incredibly powerful, doesn't make one a GOD.

 

To use a time travel analogy, if we went back in time 4000 years with today's technology, computers, guns, electricity, cars, WE would look like gods, and this is only a short 4000 years, what if human beings have encountered aliens that are 5 million years ahead of our current development, would we be hard pressed to call them gods? I think so...

 

I have no doubt if human beings survive and continue to evolve, one day we will resemble gods, I just hope that if we encounter any kind of less developed species that we don't pretend to be gods.

[QuietOC]

...and if god really is perfect (which I would be hard pressed to believe) then why did god mess up so badly on human beings, he smashed his hand right into the clay while he was drunk or something.

So, there is a problem with humans?

 

Christians believe God himself has solved the problem: Jesus. And Christians are those purposely evolving to be like Jesus. Biblically we are still in the sixth day of creation. God has yet to say, "it is very good."

[killbot1000]

So, there is a problem with humans?

 

Christians believe God himself has solved the problem: Jesus. And Christians are those purposely evolving to be like Jesus. Biblically we are still in the sixth day of creation. God has yet to say, "it is very good."

 

I don't think there is a problem with humans, I think much of our behavior (murder, stealing, etc.) is derived around the need to survive, however in our modern society we have evolved past "just surviving" but we still have all these instincts, etc.

 

However I think that if there was a perfect being (in every way), then this perfect being would have been able to do a better job.

 

If something created us however, that doesn't automatically make it a god. Our parents created us, and while we are grateful to them, we can't really call them god, maybe god is no different than this analogy.

[Maxintosh]

Sure we don't know anything but a smidgen about God, but what we do know we have derived from the Bible.

I think you meant to say "but what we do know - that is incorrect - we have derived from the Bible." The bible is a book, written by people that were less educated than most people are today. It is a collection of stories. They had many of these stories to choose from, but they chose to include only those that portrayed what "they" wanted it to portray. They weren't interested in being factual. The bible was assembled to teach a certain viewpoint. If you do a case by case history of each section of the bible you will find that it's roots came from myths and popular fables of the day. God had nothing to do with the bible. Why on Earth would God with his perpetually creative omnipotentness choose to portray himself on something as common as a piece of decaying parchment? Remember Gods time and our time are completely different. A thousand years to us can go by in a blink of an eye for God, so, why would God choose to reveal himself on something like a piece of parchment that will only last, from his point of view, for a few seconds? It makes no sense. The people that made up those stories chose to write it on parchment, not God. They used their imaginations to describe what THEY felt at the time was what God was like, but they had nothing to verify any of their theories. People of the day just assumed that these stories were true because these stories were approved by someone in religious authority, but that doesn't make them true, in fact, far from it.

 

If this is the case, and god really does exist, one can likely derive that God is a child, messing with building blocks.

I think that even though you don't want to believe in God that you have absorbed part of the religious dogma about him. God does not have to be anything physical. God could just as well be some sort of a universal energy that we have yet to discover. Mankind likes to think of themselves as being modern and all knowing but the simple fact of the matter is that our knowledge is that of an infant comparatively. There are approximately 100 billion planets in our Universe alone, and there are approximately 100 billion universes, and we somehow trick ourselves into thinking that we know everything that is obtainable, but we don't know what Gods 'purpose' is. We're good at speaking for him, but the truth is we don't have a clue about God, and that's OK. We just need to show him respect, and to stop putting words in his mouth would be a good place to start

 

God has yet to say, "it is very good."

God has yet to say ANYTHING.

 

Christians have yet to say, that God has yet to say "it is very good.".

 

Big difference

[QuietOC]

Christians have yet to say, that God has yet to say "it is very good.".

Christians can't take credit for the opening passage of Genesis.

[Maxintosh]

Christians can't take credit for the opening passage of Genesis.

Taking 'credit' has nothing to do with it

 

Humans, be they christian or not, created it and wrote it down. God had NOTHING to do with it. There are many things that are jokingly funny about the version of 'God' in the bible. For example; the God of the bible allegedly ate solid food, participated in a wrestling match, was seen face to face, spoke with Moses, etc.. Some biblicists contend that biblical chronology puts the date of Earths creation at 4004 B.C. thereby making the earth around 6000 years old. This, of course, is all in spite of overwhelming evidence that the earth is actually billions of years old. Weird

[QuietOC]

There are many things that are jokingly funny about the version of 'God' in the bible. For example; the God of the bible allegedly ate solid food, participated in a wrestling match, was seen face to face, spoke with Moses, etc..

The Bible is quite complex. Some think there are many versions of God in it. Those poor unadvanced people who made it all up should have stuck to something simpler like George Lucas' Force.

[danerd100]

First off, I love this quote I may start saying it

 

Christians believe God himself has solved the problem: Jesus. And Christians are those purposely evolving to be like Jesus. Biblically we are still in the sixth day of creation. God has yet to say, "it is very good."

 

We think we're special because it's us judging ourselves...we are animals, plain and simple.

 

We have opposable thumbs, we have slightly bigger brains that most primates, but make no mistake about it, we are descended from primates. The DNA evidence indicates it, Evolutionary theory indicates it, almost all the evidence available to us indicates it.

 

UHH... What about the whole intelligence and communication thing? Are you telling me that primates are building computers, and telling jokes to eachother?

 

Gee... you mean documentation in books mean nothing these days Don't tell me you're one of those borg who think that all of mankind's knowledge is on the net. LOL

 

Actually, we already had this conversation. You say this is true. Did you read it in one book, multiple, or just make it up? If it is only in one book, okay it might not be on the net, but it also might not be true. If it is in multiple, well, it would most likely be on the web.

 

So far, I have come across two things that you have said, but have not backed up with evidence. You are becoming unreliable in what you tell us.

 

Give me a good reason to go through the trouble of doing your work and researching it for you and I will.

 

This wouldn't be my research, it would be yours. When you write a report, you give a bibliography. That tells the people where you got the information so they don't have to go find it on their own.

 

That would be your loss and nobody elses. Apparently you're not much of a history (or research) buff wink_anim.gif Give me a good reason to go through the trouble of doing your work and researching it for you and I will. There are many books written about this, plus even CNN did a special report on the topic just before Christmas of last year. This fact about Mary Magdolin it is actually common knowledge amongst most religious scholars.

 

Okay, this clears things up. The Bible doesn't say it. You didn't specify which woman that was considered a prostitute. There is another woman who is brought to Jesus who is a prostitute, I thought that was who you were talking about

 

Now you know why God doesn't need redeemed people, and we haven't even included any other life forms that may be in other Universes

 

Uh... THis is the only Universe, I believe you mean galaxies

 

EDIT: I read on, and saw your post from the book, thank you for that. I repeat there was a misunderstanding on which woman you were talking about

[killbot1000]

I think that even though you don't want to believe in God that you have absorbed part of the religious dogma about him. God does not have to be anything physical. God could just as well be some sort of a universal energy that we have yet to discover. Mankind likes to think of themselves as being modern and all knowing but the simple fact of the matter is that our knowledge is that of an infant comparatively. There are approximately 100 billion planets in our Universe alone, and there are approximately 100 billion universes, and we somehow trick ourselves into thinking that we know everything that is obtainable, but we don't know what Gods 'purpose' is. We're good at speaking for him, but the truth is we don't have a clue about God, and that's OK. We just need to show him respect, and to stop putting words in his mouth would be a good place to start :)God has yet to say ANYTHING.

I understand this, but if this "universal energy" were to be discovered, I wouldn't call it god, I would call it "universal energy". It seems also as if you have picked up some religious dogma by talking about showing HIM respect. There are many more than 100 billion planets in our universe, there are even more than 100 billion planets in just our galaxy alone. you also make the assumption that god has a purpose.When I say "god" I am not referring to energy, or anything of the sort, I am referring to what most people understand as god when one says god. If I take the definition most people accept ( a physical being in the sky, with a beard, etc.) then no, I absolutely do not believe in god.As for the universal energy thing, i wouldn't call it god, so even if I believed in that, I would still have to say "I don't believe in god". Please, if you are going to try to tell me what my assumptions about god are, please don't make assumptions about god as well. Calling god a "him" or "he" is the biggest assumption anybody can make about god in the first place.Also as a last point, if god has said nothing, does nothing, etc. then even if god does exist, why should we care? We should act as if god doesn't exist because no evidence has been brought forward to support the contrary.

UHH... What about the whole intelligence and communication thing? Are you telling me that primates are building computers, and telling jokes to eachother?

...cant you see it!? I am sick of people being so human-centric. We're not as great as you think we are...Other animals communicate, when a cat's hair all stands up and they growl at other cats, they are telling them to get out of their way, or to leave them alone. When rattlesnakes rattle their tail they are afraid, and they are warning you not to get any closer or they may strike. As for the tools thing, Chimpanzee's have tools, they take thin sticks and gather ants with them, they will use rocks to bash open nuts, etc. A computer is the same thing, its a tool, but it is a tool that is thousands of times more complex than a rock or a stick. What we know is merely the progression of all of this knowledge through time, theres nothing different about it, it is simply more complex.We communicate in the same way as many other animals, our communication is simply MORE complex.I don't know how most people CANT see this, it seems blatantly obvious.

[Maxintosh]

The Bible is quite complex.

There's nothing complex about it at all. It's a collections of man made stories.

[killbot1000]

The Bible is quite complex.

 

It's not complex at all, its a copy, a plagiarism. The story has been told a thousand times before the bible was written, the reason for this is because of the stars, the bible again is based off of astrology, I am disappointed that few Christians on this board have tried to argue against the astrology argument, maybe thats because its right.

 

-Jesus dies on the cross: on/around December 22, the sun is at its lowest point in the sky, it is the dead of winter, the sun is located on the constellation Crux (cross). It "appears" to stay in the same spot for three days after this date, hence the 3 day death and resurrection .

 

-3 day death and then resurrection - the sun on December 25th begins to rise again (in the sky), the resurrection begins.

 

There is so much more its not even funny, if you want to see this in an easy to digest fashion, watch the first third of the movie Zeitgeist, it talks all about this.

 

If you want to argue the themes alone, these themes have been used before (good/evil, heaven/hell), with the religion from the middle east called "Zoroastrianism".

 

I will never be able to prove my belief that god doesn't exist, and thats ok, I don't really care about that, its not even really on my mind.

 

But I simply do not understand how one can be a Christian, when there is so much obvious evidence that the religion itself is just false...not to mention blatantly repulsive (every punishment is death), degrading to women, patriarchal, etc.

 

By believing in something like Christianity, one is volunteering to be a slave, the sad part is, these people don't even realize they're a slave, and as their lives go on, they begin to like being a slave. Please guys, open your eyes.

[Maxintosh]

Did you read it in one book, multiple

We already answered this question. Seems your comprehension skills are a bit off so to REPEAT ourself, it is in many books as it is part of documented history.

If it is in multiple, well, it would most likely be on the web.

Knock your socks off

I have come across two things that you have said, but have not backed up with evidence.

Just because you are blind doesn't mean that someone hasn't backed something up. Maybe read a little slower. One thing is for sure, it's really annoying for us to have to keep repating ourselves for you each time you gloss over what you're supposedly looking for

I believe you mean galaxies

No, we said exactly what we meant, which is multiple universes. Time for you to bone up on your astrophysics

I understand this, but if this "universal energy" were to be discovered, I wouldn't call it god, I would call it "universal energy".

That's because you are logical. If you were a religious organization trying to pawn off money from millions of naive devotees, you'd call it "God"

When I say "god" I am not referring to energy, or anything of the sort, I am referring to what most people understand as god when one says god.

Yes, it's difficult to talk about this topic when everyone has a different definition I only call "it" God because it's easier to talk about, but you are certainly right.

If I take the definition most people accept ( a physical being in the sky, with a beard, etc.)

This version I like to call the 'cosmic santa claus'. You know, you want something, so you 'pray' for it - and the cosmic santa claus is supposed to bring it to you, but if you're naughty he won't. I guess this version of God has a list that he checks twice too

Calling god a "him" or "he" is the biggest assumption anybody can make about god in the first place.

I couldn't agree more, but until I find another term that fits well in spoken English that's the term, that I'll use Even calling God an 'it' assumes that God is an object and has a physical embodiment, which is incorrect. It's just easier to use the term 'him' in a sentence, that's all.

[3nigma]

I am disappointed that few Christians on this board have tried to argue against the astrology argument, maybe thats because its right.

if you want to see this in an easy to digest fashion, watch the first third of the movie Zeitgeist, it talks all about this.

Actually, I already did address this issue on the end of page 11. And I brought up the movie "Zeitgeist" before anyone yet on this thread.

 

My post is addressed to every single person in the conversation, with quotes and responses to each conversant. Everyone would benefit to review it all.

[Maxintosh]

if you want to see this in an easy to digest fashion, watch the first third of the movie Zeitgeist, it talks all about this.

Zeitgeist won some big movie award. It's a great movie. Breaks everything down in small bite-sized pieces I plan on ordering the DVD next week. I especially enjoyed George Carlins interpretation of religion A link to the movie can be found here

But I simply do not understand how one can be a Christian, when there is so much obvious evidence that the religion itself is just false

This is actually quite easy to answer There are three ways that this can happen. 1.) Something tragic happened to them in their life and the religion acts as a psychological buffer so that they can handle the event(s). 2.) Some of these people have a defect in a certain gene that makes them literally addicted to the feeling that a religion gives them. It's identical to drug addiction only the 'drug' is praying'. 3.) They are taught from the day they're born that the religion (belonging to the parents of course) is the ONLY religion to follow, and that they MUST learn it hook, line and sinker or they will be punished! To me this is a form of child abuse. In other words they are not allowed to grow up and think for themselves. Both of these scenarios have one common factor, FEAR! Fear of facing the tragic event, or fear of facing the parents wrath if the child doesn't go along with "the program". You know to a 4 or 5 year old - a parent is 3 or 4 times taller/bigger. Think about if someone was 3 or 4 times taller/bigger then you, wouldn’t you be fearful of what they might do to you? Scary stuff to an innocent child that’s only been on this planet a few short years, and certainly a good incentive for the child not to want to make the parents angry. As a child some of them would ask their parents questions about the religion. The parents would tell them not to question them, but to just do as they say. Even as a child they realized that "going along with the program" made their parents happy, so they started to do it on their own. The more you praised this "Jesus" the happier their parents would be. And so a habit was started. Children believe in whatever their parents tell them to believe. That's how religion stays alive. They do this because that is what they were taught by their parents, who were taught it from their parents, who were taught it from their parents... so is it any wonder that they defend it as they do? When you tell them that they are wrong you are, in effect, telling them that their parents were wrong. Most people misunderstand this as saying that their parents were bad people (which they weren't) and that is why they get so huffy over this subject. History has shown us that people who are intelligent enough to analyze and think for themselves, are not usually a part of “the herd”. Cookie cutters don’t honor God, truth does.

We should act as if god doesn't exist because no evidence has been brought forward to support the contrary

Since you seem to be very logical I will answer that with a quote from NASA. They have a saying; "The mere absence of evidence, is not evidence of no existence"

[QuietOC]

It's not complex at all, its a copy, a plagiarism. The story has been told a thousand times before the bible was written, the reason for this is because of the stars, the bible again is based off of astrology,...

Astrology, what biblical scholar has claimed that?

 

It is not complex? Well, having actually pursued graduate studies of it, you are very wrong. As for it being plagiarism, that is false. It even repeatedly credits pre-existing works. People have argued that it makes up sources to lend itself credability. Which is it?!!!

 

Such a simple book, and yet Maxintosh's understanding of certain sentences from it are opposed by the vast majority of biblical scholars since at least as early as Augustine. Now your sunday school sourced knowledge of it is likely simple, yet for some reason there are few religious idiots earning PhDs in Old and New Testament studies.

[djet]

I'm agreeing with the above statement although maybe to not the extent though. Sure a PHd would be great but another simple thing I have to ask is have you read the Bible?

[danerd100]

2.) Some of these people have a defect in a certain gene that makes them literally addicted to the feeling that a religion gives them. It's identical to drug addiction only the 'drug' is praying'.

 

Okay, I know you brought this up before, but I don't want to read over it again, so here goes, you may have already adressed this comment

 

If it is a "Defect" then why are only 16% of people not in a religion? I believe that it would be a "Defect" if you didn't have it because "Defects are less common than non-defected people

[Maxintosh]

Astrology, what biblical scholar has claimed that?

One of the most credible scholars in our lifetime, Joseph Campbell. He even had an audience with the pope. The 'Power of Myth' and 'Thou Art That: Transforming Religious Metaphor' are both excellent books

 

In one breath you're claiming that the bible is complex, and in another you're saying the bible is a simple book. Make up your mind and stick to it, please. You're sounding like a politician

 

Oh and just to be clear, killbot1000 wasn't referring to astrology as in the kind that you find in newspapers that predict how your day is going to go. It was more along the lines of the roots of astrology. You keep ignoring the fact that people didn't just wake up one day and suddenly decide to start a religion. These things all formed out of myths and popular stories of that day and age. Everything in the christian religion can be traced back to basic astrology, myths and pagan beliefs, and if they didn't teach you that in your school then you should demand a refund

 

As for it being plagiarism, that is false.

LOL

 

Glad to see you've got a sense of humor

 

I believe that it would be a "Defect" if you didn't have it because "Defects are less common than non-defected people

Well first I believe your 16% figure is way off, but that's another thread A defect is not what you seem to think it is.

 

defect:

noun: a failing or deficiency

noun: an imperfection in a bodily system

[danerd100]

Well first I believe your 16% figure is way off, but that's another thread A defect is not what you seem to think it is.

 

http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html

http://www.gallup-international.com/Conten...illennium15.asp

http://www.religioustolerance.org/worldrel.htm

http://www.gc.cuny.edu/faculty/research_br...ages/aris14.jpg

 

I'd add wikipedia, but you would get mad saying it is not a credible source as you did earlier in the topic

 

16% is the largest number I found.

 

I do my research and provide sources

 

I did a bit of research on what your were saying about the God Gene and here is my belief on it

 

God put it there so we can have a connection with him. It helps us realize he is there so we don't have to give some people 100% proof that he is there

[Maxintosh]

16% is the largest number I found.

I'll dig around. I believe CNN had a report about it a few months ago and the figure was higher. At any rate the figure is growing.

 

God put it there so we can have a connection with him.

That is certainly one possibility. The only reason why I don't agree with that is because they can induce a religious experience in a person artificially with a compound called Dimethyltryptamine. God appears to be stored in the emotional part of the brain, and not the logical. The gene that's effected is a gene that just happens to also code for production of the neurotransmitters that regulate our moods. It is also interesting that ecstasy, LSD, peyote and other mind-altering drugs that effect this part of the brain have long been used in religious rituals. If God would have put this gene in humans for the purpose that you stated then God would have done it the other way around, in other words most people would have it, and only those with a defective gene wouldn't.

[danerd100]

I was going to say that, but u defined defective for me, so I decided not to. You read my mind

[Maxintosh]

This may be what I was thinking of. The date seems to be right. I'll keep looking though. I remember it said that the number of christians has been consistently dropping year after year.

Other animals communicate

This is true but other animals don't perceive time the same way that humans do. For an entity to be considered a 'god' it would have to be able to control time as we know it. There are also more than 3 dimensions so it would have to have control over that too, as well as have control over all chemical properties in the universe.

[djet]

These things all formed out of myths and popular stories of that day and age. Everything in the christian religion can be traced back to basic astrology, myths and pagan beliefs

 

Can you give us some examples?