do non Christians, athiests and agnostics belong here?

Marriage Builders

There has been so much religous talk on this board lately. It seems like if you have a non conventional opinion about religion you are automatically attacked with scripture. Is this still a board for everyone or only born again Christians?

Just curious

It is assumed by many that this is a Christian web site. I haven't seen this specifically stated.

Here is the instructions from the Forum's intro page: <blockquote>quote:<hr />This forum is open to not only those who have questions, but also to those with comments or suggestions. We recommend that all participants of the discussion forum be familiar with Dr. Harley's Basic Concepts.<hr /></blockquote>I would hope that all can have discussions here without feeling attacked.

jilly,

I'm a very spirtual person...but I'm not christian. In spite of that...I very rarely get "attacked" by anyone. I know lots of others who are in similar circumstances...for the most part...we all get along. It's my experience that the fights that start about scripture...are most between those who believe in scripture...and in how they interpret it. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />

People of any faith or no faith are welcome here. Many of the principles of MB are Christian based, but there is no one religious faith required to participate. All are welcome and appreciated because different faiths lend more diversity and varied view points. We are all here to learn and broaden our knowledge.

Hey jilly,

This is NOT a Christian site. The Harley's are professing Christians though, so I think the site attracts like-minded people.

[ March 19, 2004, 05:42 PM: Message edited by: new_beginning ]

Yikes, guess I might as well fan the flames a bit....since you offered

nb...I think the Bible is corrupted and is not to be taken literally

sufdb....I dunno nb, kinda guts the whole program. If the Bible is corrupt, then we have no way of knowing anything about God, so Christianity becomes meaningless....like all the other "religions" which are based on nothing. However, interpretation is another issue alltogether, plenty to fight about there.

nb...I believe in allowing civil ceremonies/marriages for gays

sufdb...Not me, but not because of religion...but because it is an incredibly stupid socio/political paradigm....heterosexual marriage as the basic societal unit is like democracy...it isn't the best paradigm, but it is better than all the alternatives for accoplishing the purpose of our social paradigms....species survival.

nb...I believe in a woman's right to choose what happens to HER BODY

sufdb....I suppose if I were female I would be similarly biased. I do believe (for the most part, but not 100%) in the concept of self-determination re ones body (male or female)...however when a female chooses to become pregnant, it no longer is her body...and she does not any moral/ethical/rational/etc. right to pass judgement on the reproductive rights of males. However, IMO there is a happy middle ground, the female gets autonomy if physical health is substantially at risk....otherwise she has the baby and gives it up for adoption....or more appropriately she does not have sex (so will not be pregnant, and can have all the autonomy she wants) or she has herself sterilized....lots of choices, killing unborn babies is not one of them. I can only imagine the uproar if we decided males can choose for a woman to abort the baby...... boy would that cause chaos and mayhem.

Sorry jilly... quick thread-jack.

Well sufdb,

I'm sure this isn't what jilly expected when she wrote her thread.

I'm torn between asking you to begin another thread and just letting the whole thing go with you... I just don't think I have the energy to debate you tonight. Also, you were, in fact, one of those who said that my belief was based on 'nothing' last summer too.

No, we've never "fought" or anything, but you and I have discussed this before.

In any case, I don't think that this is thread to discuss it.

I've noticed a lot of religious wackos on the boards lately. It's sad because religionists always think they have the market cornered on morality, and I have NEVER found that to be true. In fact, whenever I hear someone's message machine end with "Have a blessed day" I know I'm in trouble. In fact, most o the accounts my company has i collections have people whose message machines end like that!

I have read some very helpful and warm and intelligent posts on this site. That being said, religion does not make someone a nice and caring person. Either someone is or isn't. A specific religion has nothing to do with in. Let's all be honest, shall we? LUCK caused us to be born within the last 100 years in the U.S.A. What is we were born 2,500 years ago? You would hav never heard of your Jesus. Would that mean you would not have been a nice person and you would be burning in hell right now?

Most of the time when I noticed people go into the whole religious phrases, quotes, etc. it's because they are so overwhelmed with sadness and they are looking for somehting, anything to blame, to help them get through this misery. But no god or demon made your spouse cheat and no god or demon or angel is going to fix things. It's up to the two people involved and that's that. An guess what? There is NOTHING wrong with thinking that. I personally feel wonderful to know I have power over my life and that there isn't some supernatural force that's moving the pieces of my life around without my permission. Life has enough fantasies in it. We don't need to create anymore.

And for anyone who wants to attack me for not believe in god let me say this --- IF there was a god then "He" or "she" betrayed us more than any loving spouse ever could.

[ March 18, 2004, 09:39 PM: Message edited by: batoutofhell ]

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by new_beginning:
 Sorry jilly... quick thread-jack.

Well sufdb,

I'm sure this isn't what jilly expected when she wrote her thread.

I'm torn between asking you to begin another thread and just letting the whole thing go with you... I just don't think I have the energy to debate you tonight. Also, you were, in fact, one of those who said that my belief was based on 'nothing' last summer too.

No, we've never "fought" or anything, but you and I have discussed this before.

In any case, I don't think that this is thread to discuss it. <hr /></blockquote>I only vaguely recall, but I hope I was more making the point of what is it based on then, and how does it apply to everyone the same way as it must, as do all the laws of the universe. However, I am not looking for a relgious debate thread either <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> . And you are correct, I was remiss in not responding to jilly's point.

No jilly, this IMO is not a Christian site, and does not purport to be, but is heavily populated by Christians, so naturally reflects the um....bias of the majority. I think all are welcomed who have an interest in MB stuff. I also personally do not believe in attacking someones religious beliefs, but I do think it is fair to comment and disagree with religious positions taken on a public board...and I think that is a good thing as it completely airs such issues and readers can take away what they want...but I do think all such discussions should be civil.

jillybean36,

--It seems like if you have a non conventional opinion about religion you are automatically attacked with scripture.

TR--I'm sorry If I have posted scripture and some one feel's attacked by it--which is why I try not to quote it--but only to give reference to something in the bible I feel may be helpful to them or for clarification, and then if someone chooses to look it up and read it for themselves--they can--and if not, that is okay too--but it's there in case they want to--

but please forgive me, if there is anything I've said or shared that has caused you or anyone else to feel attacked--as that is not my intent--

Would I like for other's to believe as I do--sure I would--only because I believe it so strongly--and so it scares me for them--but then I also understand that not everyone will or does believe
the same way--and never will, and just as I have shared with others--I believe it's okay that they don't--it's a choice--and can not nor should it be force fed to others--

So if I happen to share a bible verse--I do try and just give a reference to it--that way--the choice is still their's to look it up or not--so again, if there is anything I have said that has offended you or others by sharing my beliefs--I'm sorry--

--Is this still a board for everyone or only born again Christians?

TR--And as far as I know--this board is for any and all people--no matter what their belief systems are--

Bat,

--What is we were born 2,500 years ago? You would hav never heard of your Jesus. Would that mean you would not have been a nice person and you would be burning in hell right now?

TR--no it doesn't, the Old Testament Believers even though they did not know about Jesus--still believed in the promise of a coming Savior--so they lived in Hope of that promise being fullfilled--and we live in faith that it did happen--

[ March 18, 2004, 11:09 PM: Message edited by: ThornedRose ]

Dear Jilly...

Good Question! I would like to know that answer to that myself, after some of the beatings I've taken lately by other, so-called Christians.

My answer is this: everyone SHOULD be welcome here, but unfortunately they are not. When discussing moral and ethical situations, religion, or your interpretation of the Bible, TOO MANY here have NO TOLERANCE for diversity. The literalist, charismatics just wait in the wings, ready to "pounce for Jesus". It leaves many of us with horrible tastes in our mouths, and unwilling to attempt any rational discussion.

It is unfortunate. Many people only want to be heard, and to honestly discuss their beliefs and interpretations without being preached to, or told how wrong they are, and how they will be driving the "Hades Express" in the next life. Simply because their beliefs aren't EXACTLY in line with the more vocal minority.

So, no, I don't believe this place is open to people of other beliefs and faiths...unless they are masochistic.

Just my opinion...which I'm sure many will rush to tell me IS WRONG.

Clay <img border="0" title="" alt="[Frown]" src="images/icons/frown.gif" />

It is unfortunate that some people seem to believe that if you aren't a Christian, your morals are all wrong or you simply don't have any.

I grew up with ministers for Parents. I went to church without fail from birth into my 20's. When I decided to actually study the Bible for myself instead of just taking people's word for it, I decided that it is not what people say it is.

I decided that it is useless as a guide for morality because you could go to prison for doing many of the things that God instructed his people to do over the course of the Old Testament in particular.

I wish that Jesus and the Bible could stay out of these discussions unless someone wanted to discuss them specifically.

For every Christian there is an idea of who Jesus is. Just like too many cooks spoil the broth, I thing that too many different religious opinions just muddy everything up.

Good thought!! I believe in God myself but have very different views from the norm. I absolutely think organized religion is crap. I have my doubts about the Bible because it's organized religion that has carried it through the years and has made "changes" as seen fit to make it more understandable and up to date.

I do find religion or lack of to make for interesting conversation and it always gives me something to think about. I love debate on the subject but I cannot take people who tell you what to believe or because they believe something and you don't that you are wrong.

Everyone interprets things in thier own way and has to find the beliefs that reflect them and make sense TO THEM. It doesn't matter what faith you are. Most religions have good points. The Ten Commandments alone are a good rules to live by and pretty darn basic if you ask me.

Some of my best friends are athiests. My husband is one. We talk about religion, we don't argue!! I think it's important that we respect eachothers beliefs, views and opinions. There really is no reason to argue. I think the worst way to persuade someone to believe something you do is to tell them they are wrong (ignorant, stupid) or to ram it down thier throats. It seems people who are so adamant about thier beliefs often alienate others instead of actually showing why or how they believe the way they do. It seems more like defense, like they are really convincing themselves that they know it all.

Thanks for posting an interesting thought Jilly.
Symphony

I've never seen anyone use religion against a poster. I have seen Christians post their beliefs based on their religious point of view.

What's wrong with that?

We don't get upset if a liberal post a liberal point of view....you don't have to agree with that point of view.

Or a conservative.

Or a homosexual.

Or a feminist.

Or a non-feminist.

My point is just because someone differs on your point of view and that their position based on their value system why protest a Christian anymore than if you were a liberal and someone posted a conservative viewpoint?

I mean I haven't seen attacks on conservatives defining them as "whackos" so why do that to Christians?

Some very good replys. The reason I started this thread is because I have seen people being preached too and the bible thumped maybe a little too much lately. I believe we all have our own beliefs but we need to be respectful to others who don't believe as we do.

I am an atheist and have managed to survive this board for 5 years. I have been hit over the head with scripture on occasion, but not as often as some others - maybe because I am considered a lost cause. This board is not a board just for Christians, though some would like to think so.

Stunned dad posted: <blockquote>quote:<hr /> ..why protest a Christian anymore than if you were a liberal and someone posted a conservative viewpoint?<hr /></blockquote>I agree. This bias against Christianity is characteristic of our culture.

As far as Christians debating Christians, I think it's healthy. I learned early on in seminary that if you want to be a good theologian, you have to have a nose for argument.
I love a good debate with fellow believers. I love being challenged to go back to the Scriptures and rethink my position. Bring it on!

Well, as the beneficiary of the Come To Jesus speech that our wicca High Priestess MB-trained coach gave to my born-Jewish-but-went-to-Catholic-elementary-school wife, I can certainly give a hearty "Praise Jesus" for the results even though I am not Christian.

Hopefully people of all religious persuasions can feel comfortable and respected here.

It seems to me that some people post scripture when they don't have any rational reason for what they are saying.

"Homosexuality is wrong because it says so in the bible" is just so much easier to say than to think logically about why it is wrong for society.

On the other hand, some people seem to post scripture because they are are trying to be good christians and evangelize, I think that is part of the program and the bible says something about it. I'm sure someone could provide the quote.

I don't dislike christians. I do dislike it when some christians just slap some out-of-context quote from the bible to justify bigotry though.

[ March 19, 2004, 09:00 AM: Message edited by: Comfortably Numb ]

Anyone who wants a classic example of what a lot of people are referring to here should see the thread, "Things Bush Can do to Protect Hetero Marriage", on this same board.

It has gotten extremely ugly; and not just between non-believers and believers, but between the "Conservative" Christians and the "Intellectual" Christians.

One thing I have noted in almost nine months here...I have NEVER seen a Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, etc., slamming someone for their beliefs. It has been, in every case I can remember, Conservative Christians who have the philosophy that those who don't believe EXACTLY the same as they do, or interpret the Bible EXACTLY as they do, are not "true" Christians, and not as "worthy" as they are.

clay

I'm often involved in the religious type threads, but always in the "god is fake" type approach. As a ex-born again christian and now a scientist, I will always try to help folks see the light that they should have more faith in themselves and their fellow humans, less in some "make you feel good" theory. LOL (that is supposed to me humours, although my position as well).

So, yeah, you seem some pretty arrogant people standing in their scriptures...but you learn to skip it. Or skip certain posts. Or at least skip certain paragraphs.

You need thick skin around here at times...but I don't think we non-believrs are going to get booted.

BP22 posted: <blockquote>quote:<hr />As a ex-born again christian<hr /></blockquote>I don't believe you can lose your salvation. Because God does the regenerating work in Romans 3:21-27, how can you undo what God does.

Are you saying that one day you bowed your knee to the Lordship of Christ, and then one day you decided He wasn't worth following, or he was a liar or lunatic?

(sigh) <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />

Here we go.......

HOOTIE, I AGREE WITH YOU, I AM NEW HERE AND I DO WELCOME CHRISTIAN ADVICE, AS THOSE ARE MY BELIEFS, BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN I COUNT OUT ADVICE FROM ANYONE ELSE, IT'S GOOD TO HEAR DIFFERENT OPINIONS AND JUDGE FOR YOURSELF WHICH SUGGESTIONS MY HELP YOU.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Hootie:
 BP22 posted: <blockquote>quote:<hr />As a ex-born again christian<hr /></blockquote>I don't believe you can lose your salvation. Because God does the regenerating work in Romans 3:21-27, how can you undo what God does.

Are you saying that one day you bowed your knee to the Lordship of Christ, and then one day you decided He wasn't worth following, or he was a liar or lunatic? <hr /></blockquote>It just depends on what you believe. Some denominations hold that you can lose and regain salvation on a moment to moment basis depending on whether you're "prayed-up." I think these folks run afoul of the scripture you referenced.

Other denominations would say that bp22 was never saved in the first place, so his subsequent rejection of Christ was just an acknowledgement of where he was spiritually anyway.

Still others would hold that bp22 may have been saved at some point, but has now committed the unpardonable sin of blaspheming Christ (i.e. not accepting Christ) and is not saved.

Really, it's all moot. One is either a believer or not a believer. Period. The rest is details.

On the topic of this post, I think it's great that all beliefs and faiths are represented here. As one of the Christians, my perception is that Christianity (and the expression thereof) is less tolerated by the more vocal agnostic/atheistic folks than the nonbelievers are tolerated by the Christians. I try to keep a good perspective on things, but I'm probably helplessly biased toward feeling a little more attacked than the attacker. Aren't we all, though?

I feel like there are many posters on both sides of the spiritual fence who are inarticulate, close-minded, and intolerant. I generally try to explain where I am with things, what I believe, and what I accept as a service to those who misunderstand or misrepresent me and/or my beliefs. If that leads someone to (or back to) faith in Christ, that's great, but I'm not here specifically with that agenda or anything. It probably doesn't help that I like a good debate... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />

Dilbert posted: <blockquote>quote:<hr />Other denominations would say that bp22 was never saved in the first place, so his subsequent rejection of Christ was just an acknowledgement of where he was spiritually anyway.<hr /></blockquote>I know that I could be wrong in my position. Good scholars have given me examples of "those who have once been enlightened...and then have fallen away." (Heb. 6)

"The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting. It has been found difficult, and left untried." G. K. Chesterton

As a person of another faith who was told I was a gulliable, occultist in another thread I will say that there are a few posters on this board who are particularly strident in their Christian views and seem to be on a mission to evangelize everyone in their path. It does leave one feeling at times that the Xian contigency on this board might be happier if those of us in the "other or none" category would just bugger off or at least keep our mouths shut.

*

[ March 19, 2004, 05:41 PM: Message edited by: new_beginning ]

Stunned-dad, you wrote...

<blockquote>quote:<hr />I've never seen anyone use religion against a poster. I have seen Christians post their beliefs based on their religious point of view. <hr /></blockquote>Well, I guess I'd offer myself as an example of just that. I made the mistake of calling myself a Christian, and having some Christian content in one of posts....when BAM! I got hit over the head with the bible by a couple of our more devout colleagues.

To be fair: maybe what they said what they had to say out of sincere desire to be helpful to me, and maybe also they are completely convicted of their righteousness, as Christians say. But the message I recieved was pretty much all DJ's. And so their "helpfulness" to me was muted and filtered by me.

That being said, I'd hate for this board to become the kind of place where we couldn't any longer enjoy this kind of vigorous debate. Where we couldn't apply a helpful 2x4 to those of us who really need it.

I'd like to think that we're all just Schmoes. Regular folks who are trying to figure things out for ourselves, and to help others do the same thing for themselves. Without -- without -- impuning each others' motives no matter by what euphemism we refer to those motives: a person's "Christian Expeience," their "liberalism," "conservatism," "intellectualism," or what ever.

__J

I am not sure exactly how to put this into words now but I feel like many of the people who do not believe in God feel that ALL christians are shoving thier beliefs down other peoples throats and I sense a undertone in alot of the posts from those who aren't believers that the Christians are a little stupid for believing what they believe.....maybe I am reading wrong?

Well, you are probably right. I mean, the only thing that sounds kookier to an atheist than what christians believe is what christians think other people believe! Face it, xians think every other religion is a cult and that their followers are nuts! Actually, let's add to that --- christians think that every other denomination of christianity is filled with nuts.

MMOH said it best, "No knowledge of where we came from is going to come from reading a # of short books written by some bare-assed, half-starved, protein deficient, illiterate jews, wandering around in a desert, in a nomadic tribe, hallucninating from the oppressive heat and conditions in which they tried to eke out an existence."

Prayer does not work because no on is listning. If there was, there would a hell of a lot less choir boys being molested by priests. How arrogant is it to think that god is answering someone's prayers about getting a new job, passing a test, winning the lottery, stopping a leak in the roof, fixing a bone; but "he" does not care about little kids being molested, buses flying off cliffs, nuns being raped, etc.

You would also have to believe that "he" supported all the naked aggression and misery xianity and religion has caused mankind throughout history. Honestly, xianity's history is deeper in blood than the nazis. Do the #s if you wish.

I never met an atheist who knocked on people's doors, trying to convert them. Atheists don't burn books. Atheists don't tell people how to think or what to do or try to create laws to MAKE PEOPLE DO THINGS. Atheists don't have a history of torturing people who don't think as they do. xians on the other hand wants everyone to be like them. And if they can't kill or convince them; they'll encourage politicians to make laws that deny people's freedoms and civil rights.

Incidentally the founding fathers despised xianity and organized religion. If they didn't, THIS WOULD BE a xian country. It's not. We are free to think what we want without threat of prosecution. That's why we need to keep religion out of schools. No kid should ever feel alientated because he does not want to say "under god."

Incidentally, can someone please name for me one televangelist that Jesus would want to pal around with in heaven? How would "he" feel about people wearing GOLD crosses studded with diamonds? How would "he" feel about multi-million dollar churches? Religion has always been about two things --- $$$ and power. That's it. You give religion the $$$ and they have the power. Oh, but you get to walk away feeling like you bought some extra chips that you can cash in when you get to "heaven."

Come on! Lighten up! There is nothing wrong with being part of a highly evolved species. It could have been worse. You could have been born as a Venus fly trap.

[ March 19, 2004, 01:02 PM: Message edited by: batoutofhell ]

Since I began posting on MB last summer I have received some wonderful, heartfelt advise from Christians and non-Christians. I have made it very clear that I consider the Bible as my sole authority of direction. If the advise I receive jives with Scripture I retain it. If not, I reject it. It's a very simple process for me.

I have tried to show the difference between religion and Christianity here. I still see a great confusion here between religion and Christianity. There was a time in my life when I considered myself to be religious. When I met Jesus Christ and accepted Him as my personal Lord and Savior, I became a Christian. It was religion that nailed Jesus to that cross. It was God's power, grace, and mercy that brought Him out of that tomb. Today, the tomb is still empty. It is empty because Jesus is no longer there. Religion would place Jesus back into the tomb.

If I agree to blindly accept some's suggestions to deny the reality of a risen Lord, or to "tone down" my bringing forth of that good news, I am in effect putting Him back into that tomb. A dying, confused society claims that "any pathway will lead to God". Christianity states that the ONLY way to God is through the Son. Religion seeks to accomodate those who would seek to justify themselves through works, goodness, or "enlightened thinking". Christianity seeks to set the captive free. Religion seeks your dollar bill, Jesus wants your dollar will. Religion stifles, Christianity freshens. That is the difference between life and death.

Please don't ever ask me to deny the power and love of Christ. It won't happen. I have bet my life on it. If you produce his body, I will willingly renounce my faith. Are you willing to bet your life, your eternal existence, on your belief system? That is the question that must be answered. That is the issue that a wise person would examine. God bless you all!

John 16:33.

I tend to agree strongly with the post just before this one. I make reference to God and Christ because I believe it. God never said anywhere that people would never have trouble. I have to believe that God has a plan for everyone, and that as long as you seek out and follow that plan your life blessed more than if you choose to ignore what God is telling you. Sometimes I think it takes some trials to knock us down a peg and bring us back to where He wants us to be. God isnt that hard to figure out, obey and honor and love him and you will be blessed. I've seen it happen to many times to believe otherwise. In the case that caused me to end up here, I know my WS is not living the way God wants us too, but I havent been either. This situation has begun to bring me back and to help me realize the peace and blessing I have been missing out on. I hope that somedday my wife will get her head on straight and see it too.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Symphony of Life:
 I am not sure exactly how to put this into words now but I feel like many of the people who do not believe in God feel that ALL christians are shoving thier beliefs down other peoples throats and I sense a undertone in alot of the posts from those who aren't believers that the Christians are a little stupid for believing what they believe.....maybe I am reading wrong?

I think everyone, regardless of belief, deserves the same respect as we oursleves would want as we state our own beliefs.

For the record...while I believe in God I do not consider myself a Christian.

Symphony <hr /></blockquote>This is where I am now, the recent threads have definately convinced me I am not a Christian. I do believe in God, but I can in no way consider any longer that I am Christian, nor do I want to.

Batoutofhell,
Not sure if you directed you post at me or if you were just stating a viewpoint in general to all the posts and posters. I want you to know if you hadn't already picked it up in a previous post that I do believe in God but I do not believe in organized religion of any kind and I have my doubts about the Bible because it was the church who has brought it through to what we know it today. I do not consider myself christian.

In reading your post I see alot of stereotypes of christianity and christians. That's just as wrong as Christians using stereotypes for athiests or people who believe differently. No one can be put in a neat little box. Religion, people and beliefs are all too diverse. What you say about christians is the same thing you are complaining that they are saying about you and anyone who thinks differently. I do not disagree that some people are very stubborn and judgemental. I do believe that some are self righteous. I DO NOT believe that you can label ALL christians as such.

As for prayer not working and the evidence being that there would be no more suffering if it did. No where in the Bible does it say that life will be easy, no one will sin, no one will hurt another. Christians believe people have free will and so do I. We choose to do what we will. We do have a choice of how we will live our life and how we treat people. If people followed some of the guidlines set out in the Bible there wouldn't be the hate and tradedies we see in our world today.

Why would God "support" the "naked aggression and misery xianity and religion has caused mankind throughout history." It's man himself that has created such misery and in many cases used God's name as thier defense.

"Atheists don't have a history of torturing people who don't think as they do." Hitler is the first that comes to my mind and there are others.

As to your views on tele-evangelists, gold crosses and fancy churches I completely agree. The money they put into all the shiny pretties should be going to help the poor and needy because that is what the church is supposed to do. I could go on and on about the failing of organized religion and the church but that would take up my whole night and yours.

I have my beliefs and I don't feel I need to defend them. They are MY beliefs. I only ask for respect and I give the same. I cannot fathom believing in evolution but I certainly don't believe anyone who does is stupid or even wrong. I have no problem discussing the issues with my husband who is an athiest, my good friend who is an athiest, my friend who is agnostic, my friend who is a christian etc etc etc.

It's not about right and wrong for me. I can point at the failings of the church all I want but I am responsible for my own choices and beliefs. I can't hold God responsible for what people do and I can't make that an excuse not to believe. I believe faith in God is a choice and is personal.

I actually think Venus Flytraps are pretty cool <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />
Symphony

My best friends wife,
Like I said in my last post, I believe that faith and a relationship with God is personal. I don't feel that I need to have a label or a group to practice my faith.
Symphony

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by hurting Promise Keeper:
 Please don't ever ask me to deny the power and love of Christ. It won't happen. <hr /></blockquote>I think people are just asking you to be polite to the folks that do deny the power and love of Christ.

 <blockquote>quote:<hr />I have bet my life on it. If you produce his [sic] body, I will willingly renounce my faith. <hr /></blockquote>I'm puzzled as to how this would work. Suppose someone produced a 2000 year old corpse (or more likely, skeleton), and said that it was Jesus. What would you accept as evidence? Obviously dental records are out-there weren't any in 1st century Judea, and even if there had been, we don't have them. I don't think there are any extant DNA samples, either . I suppose one could have a forensic anthropologist reconstruct the facial features, but what would that tell us-no one really knows what Jesus looked like, and even if we did, there would be enough room for error that a skull that wound up looking like Him could be a brother or a cousin or some other look-alike. And relying on tell tale signs of crucifixion wouldn't help-I've read that the Romans crucified 250,000 Jews, so that hardly narrows it down.

It sounds to me like what you have really said is that no one can disprove your belief in Jesus to you (and I have no problem with that), but stated it in such a way as to make it sound to the uncritical as if you are open to proof. Or is there some form of identification that you will accept, if someone produces a likely corpse?

I am enjoying reading this thread.

(That is all I will add!)

<img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="images/icons/cool.gif" />

<blockquote>quote:<hr />When I met Jesus Christ and accepted Him as my personal Lord and Savior, I became a Christian <hr /></blockquote>HURTING PROMISE KEEPER --- not to be rude but; please stay in your church or wherever you go. I prefer knowing where people who think like you are at all times. Kind of like INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS.

I guess some people are just wired differently. 7 billion people on the planet and lots of different personalities. There might even me some medical or biological or psychological reason why some people are prone to get involved in cults and religions. Some of us are lucky enough to not have that propensity. I don't think it's a choice. Either your brain is organized a certain way or it isn't. No amount of freaky Jesus talk is going to convince "us" and no amount of education or ridicule is going to change you.

I don't want everyone to be the same. I don't want everyone to think the same way. That would be quite boring. That being said, I sure hope I don't ever end up in some xian heaven! Geez, that's gotta be a horrible place to be. No Elvis, No John Lennon, No one can curse, and poor ol' Jesus has to sit on a throne all freaken year, with a bunch of men in skirts singing beside him, kissing his fingers, and he can't touch any of the hot, single, groupy chicks that saved themselves for him throughout history.

By the way, since you are a xian and NOT just religious, does that give you some leeway if you ever sin and go to hell? I mean, will you get some speacial perks like operating the flame throwers on infidels like me?

I am sure you are a nice fellow. And given a choice, I prefer people like you wandering around instead of angry lunatics; but if you can just talk your church into paying taxes, revealing their sources of income, stop the priests from touching little boys, help get "In God We Trust" off of our $$$ (it's only been there since 1954 as a result of the McCarthy hysteria by the way), stop freaking out if non-xians don't want references to GOD in our schools and public buildings, and just minded your own business, you would help drive away some of the hostility xianity inspires in other people. If you are a good person and can encourage other people to be good --- keep at it.

But putting the 10 commandments in court houses is not ever going to stop a single crime! (By the way, there are NOT 10 commandments. There's actually well over 600! And they were all written by Jews over 5,000 years ago and most deal with how to eat an animal and what clothes to wear.

Someone really needs to sue xianity for plagiarism. There isn't a single original thought or idea in the whole religion.

Do you have any idea how many religions and cults throughout history have the same damn story about the "pure man who was born of a virgin and whose daddy was a god and who died for our sins?" IF xianity was real, couldn't god at least come up with an original way to put his little boy on the earth?

And why didn't Jesus get around to inventing something or writing a book while he was around to help PROVE his existence? What kind of game is your god playing? What's with the mystery? Um ... could it be because it NEVER happened?

Let's face the facts --- if there was a god, there would be no reason for religion. We would all know what Mr. & Mrs. God would want from us and what we had to do to join them after we die so we don't end up as just calcium dust.

If people gave us much $$$ to the S.P.C.A. as they did to churches the world would be a happier place. Just exactly how many gold goblets does the Pope need anyway?

By the way, I am a very happy person. But I believe in freedom. "Do what though whilst, so long as you don't hurt anyone." That's my attitude towards life.

Why in the world xians (no one else seems to be doing this) freaks out if homosexuals want to marry or have sex, or people don't want to be compelled to swear on a bible in court, or don't want to say UNDER GOD in the pledge, etc. is beyond me. Back off. Lay off.

How would you like it if non-xians marched in Washington and demanded that our new motto should be "There is no Jesus!" Would you want to use that $$$? No? Well, I cross IN GOD WE TRUST off of every bill I get. Do you think your god is sitting back, salivating in hopes that will burn in hell? I hope so, because Elvis and Errol Flynn are in hell; and I dig those guys. Oh, and I look forward to meeting Winona Ryder there too. She's single and cute --- and Jesus can't have her.

[ March 19, 2004, 08:51 PM: Message edited by: batoutofhell ]

This thread has certainly prompted a lot of heated debate, and I surely hope it has been helpful for people to get some things off their chest.

I wonder if now that we know everyone is welcome (at least in theory) from various backgrounds and with various beliefs, do we need to continue this thread?

It has rather morphed from something that is relevent to helping people build marriages into a variety of religious, social and philosophical debates among virtual strangers.

Whether you are a Christian or not shouldn't preclude you from enjoying encouragement and challenge in terms of how to improve your MARRIAGE.

Perhaps there is another website for those people who want to debate in greater depth on these other issues.

It just doesn't feel very productive to me. Interesting... stimulating for some... sure. But not productive for the intended purposes of this site.

Just my opinion, which I am sure will be completely rejected by people on all sides of the issue.

[ March 19, 2004, 09:17 PM: Message edited by: emss ]

In a perfect world, "no", but even God allowed for Sin in the world - and sent his son to save the sinners.

<img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

Jan

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by batoutofhell:

...I mean, the only thing that sounds kookier to an atheist than what christians believe is what christians think other people believe! Face it, xians think every other religion is a cult and that their followers are nuts! Actually, let's add to that --- christians think that every other denomination of christianity is filled with nuts.
<hr /></blockquote>Actually Bat, I know something that sounds even kookier: when persons who are obviously and incredibly mis-informed about Christianity rant on and on about how "Christians believe this" and "Christians do that" and "Christians are such lunatics", all because we have the audacity to express a view. What is it you find so unnerving about that?
<blockquote>quote:<hr />
MMOH said it best, "No knowledge of where we came from is going to come from reading a # of short books written by some bare-assed, half-starved, protein deficient, illiterate jews, wandering around in a desert, in a nomadic tribe, hallucninating from the oppressive heat and conditions in which they tried to eke out an existence."
<hr /></blockquote>Can I assume that you have some reason for all this slander? Apparently slamming Christians is too limiting for you, since now you're branching out to attacking Jews as well.
<blockquote>quote:<hr />

Prayer does not work because no on is listning. If there was, there would a hell of a lot less choir boys being molested by priests. How arrogant is it to think that god is answering someone's prayers about getting a new job, passing a test, winning the lottery, stopping a leak in the roof, fixing a bone; but "he" does not care about little kids being molested, buses flying off cliffs, nuns being raped, etc.
<hr /></blockquote>I'll certainly grant you that the issue of prayer and how/whether God is listening has tormented many a believer who sincerely wonders how it is that God allows such profound suffering in the world.
<blockquote>quote:<hr />
You would also have to believe that "he" supported all the naked aggression and misery xianity and religion has caused mankind throughout history. Honestly, xianity's history is deeper in blood than the nazis. Do the #s if you wish.
<hr /></blockquote>Again you make sweeping declarations of what Christianity is and what Christians believe
<blockquote>quote:<hr />

I never met an atheist who knocked on people's doors, trying to convert them. Atheists don't burn books. Atheists don't tell people how to think or what to do or try to create laws to MAKE PEOPLE DO THINGS.<hr /></blockquote>I suspect your blanket assessment of atheists may also be naive. Some atheists may have an attitude of 'live and let live', but some clearly are not satisfied with eliminating religious influence in their own lives - everyone else must be similarly deprived as well.
<blockquote>quote:<hr />

Atheists don't have a history of torturing people who don't think as they do. xians on the other hand wants everyone to be like them. And if they can't kill or convince them; they'll encourage politicians to make laws that deny people's freedoms and civil rights. <hr /></blockquote>Are you SURE it's the CHRISTIANS you're talking about? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />
Incidentally the founding fathers despised xianity and organized religion.<hr /></blockquote>Sorry, but this lie has been repeated so often that some people actually believe it. You can continue to believe it, or do a little actual historical research. It's up to you.
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />
If they didn't, THIS WOULD BE a xian country. It's not. We are free to think what we want without threat of prosecution. That's why we need to keep religion out of schools. No kid should ever feel alientated because he does not want to say "under god." <hr /></blockquote>Certainly no quarrel with that last sentence.
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />

Incidentally, can someone please name for me one televangelist that Jesus would want to pal around with in heaven? How would "he" feel about people wearing GOLD crosses studded with diamonds? How would "he" feel about multi-million dollar churches? Religion has always been about two things --- $$$ and power. That's it. You give religion the $$$ and they have the power. Oh, but you get to walk away feeling like you bought some extra chips that you can cash in when you get to "heaven."
<hr /></blockquote>PLEASE don't tell me your opinion of Christianity is based on televangelists! IMHO, most (not all) televangelists are to true Christianity what professional wrestlers are to sports.
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />

Come on! Lighten up! There is nothing wrong with being part of a highly evolved species. It could have been worse. You could have been born as a Venus fly trap. <hr /></blockquote>We ARE highly evolved! (Notice my opposable thumbs!) It's just too bad that our moral selves haven't evolved as fast as our physical selves.

And just for the record: I'd rather be born the fly trap, than the fly. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />

[ March 19, 2004, 11:03 PM: Message edited by: fireandice ]

I'm with emss on this one. This has ceased to be a useful thread. The MB concepts are human ones and would work for practioners of any faith or of none. If we all adhered more to discussion of the basics of MB rather than riding our own hobby horses we would grate on each other far less and likely progress in our marriages far more.

As I am not without sin, I am not casting stones, but maybe we should be building?

This is a marriage builder website. We are all here for that purpose. If you post on a bulletin board where people from all walks of life are reading and responding, you should expect opinions and beliefs that differ from your own. If you don't like someone's advice, ignore it. What do you gain by starting an argument or insulting someone who is anonymous and has no real influence on your life?

*jillybean-this was in response to some of the arguments that I have read in this thread.

[ March 20, 2004, 12:57 AM: Message edited by: cleopatra ]

While I am a believer and a Christian, I found the following information interesting. I didn't know so many of these people were outspoken Atheists/Agnostics. I still respect their works, though. I just find it interesting....especially the quotes by Abraham Lincoln and Mark Twain.

Quotes:

The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity.

-John Adams, U.S. President

This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it.

-John Adams, U.S. President

Every sensible man, every honorable man, must hold the Christian sect in horror.

-Francois Marie Arouet "Voltaire", French author and playwright

Christianity is the most ridiculous, the most absurd and bloody religion that has ever infected the world.

-Francois Marie Arouet "Voltaire", French author and playwright

Nothing can be more contrary to religion and the clergy than reason and common sense.

-Francois Marie Arouet "Voltaire", French author and playwright

Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd.

-Francois Marie Arouet "Voltaire", French author and playwright

I am an atheist, out and out. It took me a long time to say it. I've been an atheist for years and years, but somehow I felt it was intellectually unrespectable to say that one is an atheist, because it assumed knowledge that one didn't have. Somehow it was better to say one was a humanist or agnostic. I don't have the evidence to prove that God doesn't exist, but I so strongly suspect that he doesn't that I don't want to waste my time.

-Isaac Asimov, Russian-born American author

Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet.

-Napoleon Bonaparte, French emperor

Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich.

-Napoleon Bonaparte, French emperor

All religions have been made by men.

-Napoleon Bonaparte, French emperor

Religion is just mind control.

George Carlin, comedian

I don’t believe in God. My god is patriotism. Teach a man to be a good citizen and you have solved the problem of life.

Andrew Carnegie, Scottish-born American industrialist and philanthropist

It may be that our role on this planet is not to worship God, but to create him.

Arthur C. Clarke, author

Religion is a byproduct of fear. For much of human history, it may have been a necessary evil, but why was it more evil than necessary? Isn't killing people in the name of God a pretty good definition of insanity?

Arthur C. Clarke, author

Faith is believing something you know ain’t true.

-Samuel Clemens "Mark Twain", American author and humorist

If Christ were here now there is one thing he would not be -- a Christian.

-Samuel Clemens "Mark Twain", American author and humorist

It (the Bible) is full of interest. It has noble poetry in it; and some clever fables; and some blood-drenched history; and some good morals; and a wealth of obscenity; and upwards of a thousand lies.

-Samuel Clemens "Mark Twain", American author and humorist

A man is accepted into a church for what he believes and he is turned out for what he knows.

-Samuel Clemens "Mark Twain", American author and humorist

Our Bible reveals to us the character of our god with minute and remorseless exactness... It is perhaps the most damnatory biography that exists in print anywhere. It makes Nero an angel of light and leading by contrast.

-Samuel Clemens "Mark Twain", American author and humorist

I cannot see how a man of any large degree of humorous perception can ever be religious -- unless he purposely shut the eyes of his mind & keep them shut by force.

-Samuel Clemens "Mark Twain", American author and humorist

If there is a God, he is a malign thug.

-Samuel Clemens "Mark Twain", American author and humorist

I do not consider it an insult, but rather a compliment, to be called an agnostic. I do not pretend to know where many ignorant men are sure.

-Clarence Darrow, American lawyer

I believe that relgion is the belief in future life and in God. I don’t believe in either. I don’t believe in God as I don’t believe in Mother Goose.

-Clarence Darrow, American lawyer

For myself, I do not believe in any revelation. As for a future life, every man must judge for himself between conflicting vague probabilities.

-Charles Robert Darwin, English naturalist

The mystery of the beginning of all things is insoluble by us, and I for one must be content to remain an agnostic.

-Charles Robert Darwin, English naturalist

Religion is all bunk.

-Thomas Edison, American inventor

I cannot believe in the immortality of the soul.... No, all this talk of an existence for us, as individuals, beyond the grave is wrong. It is born of our tenacity of life -- our desire to go on living -- our dread of coming to an end.

-Thomas Edison, American inventor

I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religion than it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.

-Albert Einstein, German-born American physicist

I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotism.

-Albert Einstein, German-born American physicist

I do not believe in the immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern with no superhuman authority behind it.

-Albert Einstein, German-born American physicist

Neither in my private life nor in my writings, have I ever made a secret of being an out-and-out unbeliever.

-Sigmund Freud, German-born psychologist

Religion is comparable to a childhood neurosis.

-Sigmund Freud, German-born psychologist

I turned to speak to God, About the world's despair; But to make bad matters worse, I found God wasn't there.

-Robert Frost, American poet

Forgive, O Lord, my little joke on Thee and I'll forgive Thy great big one on me.

-Robert Frost, American poet

I hold it to be the inalienable right of anybody to go to hell in his own way.

-Robert Frost, American poet

History does not record anywhere or at any time a religion that has any rational basis. Religion is a crutch for people not strong enough to stand up to the unkonwn without help. But, like dandruff, most people do have a religion and spend time and money on it and seem to derive considerable pleasure from fiddling with it.

-Robert A. Heinlen, American science-ficiton author

Any priest or shaman must be presumed guilty until proven innocent.

-Robert A. Heinlen, American science-ficiton author

All thinking men are atheists.

-Ernest Hemingway, American author

Our nada who art in nada, nada be thy name. Thy kingdom nada, thy will be nada as it is in nada. Give us this nada our daily nada and nada us our nada as we nada our nadas and nada us into nada but deliver us from nada; pues nada. Hail nothing full of nothing, nothing is with thee.

-Ernest Hemingway, American author

That it is wrong for a man to say he is certain of the objective truth of a proposition unless he can provide evidence which logically justifies that certainty. This is what agnosticism asserts and in my opinion, is all that is essential to agnosticism.

-Thomas Henry Huxley, English biologist

With soap, baptism is a good thing.

-Robert G. Ingersoll, American politician and lecturer

For the most part we inherit our opinions. We are the heirs of habits and mental customs. Our beliefs, like the fashion of our garments, depend on where we were born. We are molded and fashioned by our surroundings.

Environment is a sculptor -- a painter.

If we had been born in Constantinople, then most of us would have said: 'There is no God but Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet.' If our parents had lived on the banks of the Ganges, we would have been worshipers of Siva, longing for the heaven of Nirvana.

As a rule, children love their parents, believe what they teach, and take great pride in saying that the religion of mother is good enough for them.

-Robert G. Ingersoll, American politician and lecturer

The clergy know that I know that they know that they do not know.

-Robert G. Ingersoll, American politician and lecturer

All who doubted or denied would be lost. To live a moral and honest life -- to keep your contracts, to take care of wife and child -- to make a happy home -- to be a good citizen, a patriot, a just and thoughtful man, was simply a respectable way of going to hell.

God did not reward men for being honest, generous and brave, but for the act of faith. Without faith, all the so-called virtues were sins. and the men who practiced these virtues, without faith, deserved to suffer eternal pain.

All of these comforting and reasonable things were taught by the ministers in their pulpits -- by teachers in Sunday schools and by parents at home. The children were victims. They were assaulted in the cradle -- in their mother's arms. Then, the schoolmaster carried on the war against their natural sense, and all the books they read were filled with the same impossible truths. The poor children were helpless. The atmosphere they breathed was filled with lies -- lies that mingled with their blood.

-Robert G. Ingersoll, American politician and lecturer

Question boldly even the existence of God; because if there be one, He must approve the homage of Reason rather than that of blindfolded Fear.

-Thomas Jefferson, U.S. President, author, scientist, architect, educator, and diplomat

I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature.

-Thomas Jefferson, U.S. President, author, scientist, architect, educator, and diplomat

Religions are all alike – founded upon fables and mythologies.

-Thomas Jefferson, U.S. President, author, scientist, architect, educator, and diplomat

It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are 20 gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.

-Thomas Jefferson, U.S. President, author, scientist, architect, educator, and diplomat

The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being of His Father, in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter.

-Thomas Jefferson, U.S. President, author, scientist, architect, educator, and diplomat

I wasn't raised Catholic, but I used to go to Mass with my friends, and I viewed the whole business as a lot of very enthralling hocus-pocus. There's a guy hanging upon the wall in the church, nailed to a cross and dripping blood, and everybody's blaming themselves for that man's torment, but I said to myself, 'Forget it. I had no hand in that evil. I have no original sin. Theres no blood of any sacred martyr an my hands. I pass on all of this.'

-Billy Joel, American musician

I believe that all important matters have to be settled here, not in the clouds somewhere after we kick off.

-Billy Joel, American musician

The Bible is not my book nor Christianity my profession. I could never give assent to the long, complicated statements of Christian dogma.

-Abraham Lincoln, U.S. President

During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution.

-James Madison, U.S. President

In no instance have . . . the churches been guardians of the liberties of the people.

-James Madison, U.S. President

Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise.

-James Madison, U.S. President

I'm glad some people have that faith. I don't have that faith. If there is a God, a caring God, then we have to figure he's done an extraordinary job of making a very cruel world.

-Dave Matthews, Australian rock musician

Who wants to go to Heaven with all those ******* angels?

-Marilyn Manson, American rock musician

The wretchedness of religion is at once an expression and a protest against real wretchedness. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the feeling of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of unspiritual conditions. It is the opium of the people.

-Karl Marx, German economist and political philosopher

The social principles of Christianity preach cowardice, self-contempt, abasement, submission, humility, in a word all the qualities of the canaille.

-Karl Marx, German economist and political philosopher

O senseless man, who cannot possibly make a worm and yet will make Gods by the dozen!

-Michel Eyqyem de Montaigne, French essayist

Faith means not wanting to know what is true.

-Freidrich Nietzsche, German philosopher

So long as the priest, that professional negator, slanderer and poisoner of life, is regarded as a superior type of human being, there cannot be any answer to the question: What is truth?

-Freidrich Nietzsche, German philosopher

The Christian faith from the beginning, is sacrifice: the sacrifice of all freedom, all pride, all self-confidence of spirit; it is at the same time subjection, a self-derision, and self-mutilation.

-Freidrich Nietzsche, German philosopher

All religions bear traces of the fact that they arose during the intellectual immaturity of the human race - before it had learned the obligations to speak the truth. Not one of them makes it the duty of its God to be truthful and understandable in his communications.

-Freidrich Nietzsche, German philosopher

The most serious parody I have ever heard was this: In the beginning was nonsense, and the nonsense was with God, and the nonsense was God.

-Freidrich Nietzsche, German philosopher

There is no devil and no hell. Thy soul will be dead even sooner than thy body: fear therefore nothing any more.

-Freidrich Nietzsche, German philosopher

Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and tortuous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we call it the word of a demon than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind.

-Thomas Paine, American revolutionary

All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.

-Thomas Paine, American revolutionary

It is fear that first brought Gods into the world.

-Gallus Petronius, 1st Century Roman courtier

I condemn false prophets, I condemn the effort to take away the power of rational decision, to drain people of their free will--and a hell of a lot of money in the bargain. Religions vary in their degree of idiocy, but I reject them all. For most people, religion is nothing more than a substitute for a malfunctioning brain.

-Gene Roddenberry, Creator of Star Trek

Religion is based . . . mainly on fear . . . fear of the mysterious, fear of defeat, fear of death. Fear is the parent of cruelty, and therefore it is no wonder if cruelty and religion have gone hand in hand. . . . My own view on religion is that of Lucretius. I regard it as a disease born of fear and as a source of untold misery to the human race.

-Bertrand Russell, British philosopher, educator, mathemetician, and social critic

Fear is the parent of cruelty, therefore it is no wonder if religion and cruelty have gone hand-in-hand.

-Bertrand Russell, British philosopher, educator, mathemetician, and social critic

The idea of God is the sole wrong for which I cannot forgive mankind.

-Marquis de Sade, French libertine

My view is that if there is no evidence for it, then forget about it. An agnostic is somebody who doesn't believe in something until there is evidence for it, so I'm agnostic.

-Carl Sagan, American astronomer and author

The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one.

-George Bernard Shaw, Irish-born English playwright

At present there is not a single credible established religion in the world.

-George Bernard Shaw, Irish-born English playwright

If God has spoken, why is the world not convinced.

-Percy Bysshe Shelley, English poet

By the year 2000, we will, I hope, raise our children to believe in human potential, not God.

-Gloria Steinam, women's rights activist

I do not believe in the divinity of Christ, and there are many other of the postulates of the orthodox creed to which I cannot subscribe.

-William Howard Taft, U.S. President

To regard Christ as God, and to pray to him, are to my mind the greatest possible sacrilege.

-Leo Tolstoy, Russian revolutionary

I can very well do without God both in my life and in my painting, but I cannot, suffering as I am, do without something which is greater than I am, which is my life, the power to create.

-Vincent Van Gogh, Dutch painter

Say what you will about the sweet miracle of unquestioning faith, I consider a capacity for it terrifying and absolutely vile.

-Kurt Vonnegut, American author

I believe in God, only I spell it Nature.

-Frank Lloyd Wright, American architect

Clay,

May I ask the source of this list?

F&I,

I was searching for some information in regards to the quote by BOOH (interesting acronym, btw) when he said:

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Atheists don't tell people how to think or what to do or try to create laws to MAKE PEOPLE DO THINGS. <hr /></blockquote>I was trying to find the name of the woman who has taken the issue of the Pledge of Allegiance (...under God...) to court every year since Eisenhower added those two words in the fifties.

I went to Yahoo.com and searched for Famous Atheists, and came up with a gazillion websites. Many had these same quotes in them, but this one had them in the most concise manner of any.

The website was:

http://www.no-god.com/article/quote.html

I don't pretend to support these views, nor do I guarantee their accuracy. If you look around, though, they are all over the place. The Presidential ones should be pretty easy to verify, I would think.

Again, I thought it was interesting, and applied to the topic.

clay

It is an interesting list. I recall hearing a radio program that addressed both the faith of Jefferson and Lincoln. I seem to recall that for much of Lincoln's life, he studied the bible, I do believe daily, but didn't understand the plan of salvation.

I do believe he did accept Christ as his savior much later.

However, my point is, we don't know where in any man's spiritual journey these quotes might be uttered. So I contend in Lincoln's quote, that it may not be his, "final answer"

Just more food for thought.

Tony

Thanks, Clay.

I was just curious. As any modern public figure learns to his/her sorrow, snippets of uttered words can be so thoroughly folded, spindled and mutilated as to bear no resemblence to what was actually said, or what was intended.

I don't mean that it applies to all these quotes - just that it's something I like to remember.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Hootie:
Are you saying that one day you bowed your knee to the Lordship of Christ,<hr /></blockquote>

I did, but I was a kid.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />...and then one day you decided He wasn't worth following, or he was a liar or lunatic? <hr /></blockquote>I realized that he was at least partially fictional.

I have one thing to say to that list Clay...

A GIANT A-MEN!!!

LMAO

And Hootie...When I was a child, i thought like a child...oh yeah, shades of 1COR13, eh?

That is when I professed to the world that I was saved...and there's no doubt that I bought it all...hook line and sinker.

But not one to ever give up on my questions and thought, after a year of physics in college, I realized it was indeed all just bunk....and will definately say today that I am an ex-born again christian.

So yeah, I have been told I was never saved, I have been told I still am, etc. Frankly, folks can say anything they like. I will say I was brainwashed, wrong, and on the road to a very "disillusioned" life. But for me, science, logic, and thought provided the light...and I have been freed from my brainwashing, indeed!

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> Can I assume that you have some reason for all this slander? Apparently slamming Christians is too limiting for you, since now you're branching out to attacking Jews as well.<hr /></blockquote>Fireandice - I really don't have anything further to add to this because it really isn't the place for it; but I would like to make one thing very clear. Yes, I dispise xian-insanity. I am a complete infidel. I am a 3rd generation atheist; but I never have been and never will be anti-semetic. My mom's side of the family are Jews. That of course qualifies me to be a "member of the club". I can't escape it and I am proud of it. It's a heritage. Kind of like being Italian or something. So let's just be clear on that, OK? The Jews have been through enough bull**** throughout history. Enough people hate them for no good reasons, and I have no desire to join the group of uneducated *******s who encourage hate on a gentle and spiritual and educated group that has always minded their own business and tried to improve their own lives.

Xians on the other hand inspire a lot of hatred in "non-xians" by trying to shove their beliefs down everyone's throats. I am sure you are a nice guy. Of course there are nice xians out there who mean well, etc. But why in the world anyone would want to call themself a xian and to openly associate themselves with a group that has caused more misery and naked aggression against mankind than the Nazis is beyond my comprehension. There was no "son of god" Jesus, but even if there was --- HE would NOT be a xian. Especially since the mythical Jesus was a Jew. Doesn't that say it all? Honestly. If you want to be close to Jesus, then understand HIS religion as best you can. It seems a lot better than buying into the nonesense written by 70 different people, all over the world, with differents plitical agendas, over the course of 1,500 years.

The BIBLE is filled with so many contradictions! Honestly, how can you believe a word in it? If you are lookng for insipration, there are plenty of inspirational books out there. if you are looking for a hero, there are plenty of REAL heroes to admire; and if you are afraid to die, then do something to immortalize your name and make a difference; but don't just believe a bunch of plagiarized fiction just in hopes of walking around on a cloud or in a garden in some fantasy called heaven with some boring, uneductaed nuns and priests and Jerry Falwell!

By the way, most of my friends are atheists, agnostics, humanists and other freethinkers and as far as I have been able to tell --- they don't drink, do drugs, gamble, beat their wives, cheat, steal, have tattoos, rape little boys, or burn witches. Amazing, huh? And they didn't even have to pray into the air when a waiter brings food to their table, wear gold crosses, spend their Sundays on their knees, shooting abortion doctors, or tring to have teachers or lawyers or judges fired if they don't get into lock-step with the demands of the xian right's agenda.

I guess god works in mysterious ways, huh? Give the good life to those who can't believe the unbelievable and want some verifiable proof before allowing themselves to be beaten into submission by those who feel they have the burden of converting everyone to the ways of Jesus.

By the way, if atheists had a history of killing and torturing millions in hopes that they can "burn their bodies to save their souls" I would be the first in line to call myself anything else. There's enough ugliness in the world, so why would I want to associate myself with ugliness? I'm sorry, my friend, but xianity has a history that is way too filled with murder and greed and torture and lies and deception and I don't see how anyone with a clear conscience and honest heart can categorize themselves there.

Oh, and I forgot who mentioned HITLER way back when, but he was NOT an atheist. He was totally into superstitions and mythology, etc. He was, however, a vegetarian, and he was very nice to his dog and his mistress; so it goes to show you how you can't throw a label on someone and expect it to epitimize what they are and what they do.

By the way, to show you how open minded I am --- I've got WHAT DREAMS MAY COME playing on the TV right now. Great flick!

[ March 21, 2004, 10:06 PM: Message edited by: batoutofhell ]

only people who can understand and type the english language belong here. . <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="images/icons/tongue.gif" />

yes, i am an atheist. . . .

religion is a political system, with a different figurehead, but a political system none the less. political in that it has a heirarchy, that it recruits followers with promises, it has rules to follow, and ideals.

the fact that there are many different ones currently in existance, and many before christianity, one should stand back and say, "what has been the purpose for man's creation of religion and God?"

my answer is that God is the embodiement of personal hope. the hope that one has when life events are beyond one's control, and uncomprehensible, the hope that one needs to bring some meaning to the unexplainable, and the unknown, particularly the future.

i have been to jerusalem, toured the holy sites, and i do believe that there was a great philospher named Jesus Christ that lived about 2 milleniums ago. . . and he tried to bring a political system, political stability to the region, where mostly, the people were very divided along tribal lines, and mostly an agrian society, in a location where agrian society was very difficult to farm and harvest. . . where unexplainable events were the norm. . .

however, as the world becomes smaller, and there unknowns become smaller, and medicine in particular becomes better and more knowledgeable, there is less need for religion in our daily lives, with the exception that we are all here by random chance, a speck in the universe, and once gone, we will be dead for a very long time. . .

life is wonderful, and difficult, the human experience can produce some very fun times, and some very difficult times. . . once you accept randomness as the prevailing pattern, then you will not need religion as much, but you will accept everday as another opportunity to live and learn. . with only ourselves and our memories as connections with the past. . .

wiftty

whenifindthetime --- very well written! I used to write stuff like that, but the fact is, xians aren't interested in the true history of religion or xianity. most xians don't know what the heck a catholic believes, or a Baptist, or a Mormon, or any of the other 200 denominations of ther own religion. It's scary. People will research buying a house or a car or a college for hours or days or weeks or months; but religious people don't do research on "the business of saving souls." Education has always been the enemy of religion.

Personally, i think it's kind of fun to talk to people who believe in religions and mytholgy and thier cast of characters. I wish xianity was more interesting, though. At least the Romans and Greeks had these sexy goddesses and perverted gods that were nailing mortal virgins and giving the warriors awesome gifts and hanging around on the battelfields, creating storms and other cool stuff.

A lot of very beautiful and inspirational concepts developed out of Asian religions.

Native Americans have rich and incredible and wonderful beliefs.

Wicca has some interestng concepts going for it. I have spoken to people who believe in other dimensions and aliens, etc. All of these things show a lot of creativity and these people smile and are filled with joy and wonder.

And then comes xianity with its angry old man in the sky who is too weak to destroy lucifer and who sent his only son to the desert 2,000 years ago, had him hang around with a prostitute and some closet homosexuals, and then decides to have him bleed to death on a cross; just so anyone who believes this happened can live forever in heaven, and anyone who existed and died before Jesus came to town, and all those who exist afterword and who don't buy into this story can all burn in hell --- which is run by Chief Burner General -- Lucifer. Oh, and it was really nice of god to make sure the poor innocent Jews got blamed for it all! Whatta guy!

Come to think of it; isn't Lucifer a GOOD GUY? After all, where would the whole story of salvation be if there wasn't an alternative? So is that why Jesus and his dad let Lucifer live and run rampant --- because HE needs him to run Hell? After all, who else is qualified to run that place and keep the fires burning? I mean, sure there are lots of meanies throughout history, but can they really be trusted to run the place right, for all eternity?

Oh, and IF the Jews did kill Jesus, doesn't that make them the good guys too? After all, where would humankind be if Jesus got run over by a fruit wagon or died of a STD instead?

This is all so silly.

Incidentally, I have changed my mind --- I think this sort of talk belongs on this MB site. here's why --- if your H or W buys into the whole Jesus story and you don't ... run to the hills! DO NOT HAVE CHILDREN with that person! Watch Carrie if you don't believe me.

Your kids don't need to be eating wafers, wearing crosses, and going from Santa Clause to "god" just so he or she doens't have to take responsibility for his or her own life and decisions.

On the other hand, IF you both believe in this stiff equally, get married and stay married so single atheists don't have to worry about xians being on the market --- except as prostitutes. But PLEASE, leave the kid alone. Let them read some books and make their own decisions about what they should or should not believe. It's the only right and fair thing to do.

[ March 21, 2004, 10:36 PM: Message edited by: batoutofhell ]

BOOH,

I understand what you are saying. I have a couple of responses.

First...I am a Christian, not an Xian. I don't worship a bald man in a wheelchair; I worship who I believe is the Son of God/God Incarnate. I don't know if you do that as a jab...the way some try to eliminate "Christ" from even Christmas by writing Xmas, or if you are simply trying to be expedient, or lazy, in your responses by using the first Greek letter of Christ. I don't know why it bugs me, but it does. That's not to say that you should stop using it...I just wanted to state my "bug-gedness" about it.

Secondly, what I am hearing from you is not your hatred of Christians, per se, but rather your hatred of those who have set up organized religions in the name of Jesus Christ, while in their actions completely defile the name of Jesus Christ. Please do not confuse the two. Anyone can follow the teachins of Christ...He never said that we needed to belong to one church or the other. I know many people who believe in Christ, and live their lives according to His teachings, who have never stepped foot in a church, because of many of the same feelings you have. There is a huge difference between being a good Christian, and simply being the member of a church that labels itself a Christian Church. A lot of people in church, as well as out of church, aren't Christians. Please consider this.

As I am the resident Quotesmith, I would like to add the two following quotes, from one of my favorite authors, C.S. Lewis.

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> C.S. Lewis 'Mere Christianity' page 10-11
Now if once we allow people to start spiritualising and refining, or as they might say "deepening," the sense of the word Christian, it too will speedily become a useless word [as gentlemen did]. In the first place, Christians themselves will never be able to apply it to anyone. It is not for us to say who, in the deepest sense, is or is not close to the spirit of Christ. We do not see into men's hearts. We cannot judge, and indeed are forbidden to judge. It would be wicked arrogance for us to say any man is, or is not, a Christian in this refined sense. And obviously a word that we can never apply is not going to be a very useful word. As for the unbelievers, they will no doubt cheerfully use the word in the refined sense. It will become in their mouth's simply a term of praise. In calling anyone a Christian they will mean that they think him a good man. But that way of using the word will be no enrichment of the language, for we already have the word good. Meanwhile, the word Christian will have been spoiled for any really useful purpose it might have served.

We must therefore stick to the original, obvious meaning. The name Christian was first given at Antioch (Acts 11:26) to "the disciples," to those who accepted the teaching of the apostles. There is no question of its being restricted to those who profited by that teaching as much as they should have. There is no question of its being extended to those who in some refined, spiritual, inward fashion were "far closer to the spirit of Christ" than the less satisfactory of the disciples. The point is not a theological, or moral one. It is only a questions of words so that we can all understand what is being said. When a man who accepts the Christian doctrine lives unworthily of it, it is much clearer to say he is a bad Christian than to say he is not a Christian.

<hr /></blockquote>And to WIFTTy...

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> C.S. Lewis 'Mere Christianity' page 56

I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: "I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept his claim to be God." That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a good moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic-on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg-or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronising nonsense about His being a great moral teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.

<hr /></blockquote>clay

[ March 21, 2004, 10:51 PM: Message edited by: clay_6291 ]

<blockquote>quote:<hr />First...I am a Christian, not an Xian. I don't worship a bald man in a wheelchair; I worship who I believe is the Son of God/God Incarnate. I don't know if you do that as a jab...the way some try to eliminate "Christ" from even Christmas by writing Xmas, or if you are simply trying to be expedient, or lazy, in your responses by using the first Greek letter of Christ. I don't know why it bugs me, but it does. That's not to say that you should stop using it...I just wanted to state my "bug-gedness" about it. <hr /></blockquote>Actually, I used to write Xianity in hopes of annoying xians; but I recently found out that it is a normal and considerate way of spellig it. Something that has to do with the Greek thing. I don't know too much about it; but now i just write it because writing the word "christ" is silly.

Most xians incidentally, don't even know what the FISH symbol is for. I do. So I could actually draw a little fish instead of "christ" and there wouldn't even be any disrespect in that either.

Damn! Well, at least there are other fun ways to annoy xians like throwing bibles out of hotel rooms and into the toilet bowls and then the pools, which I do often.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by batoutofhell:

Fireandice - I really don't have anything further to add to this because it really isn't the place for it; but I would like to make one thing very clear. Yes, I dispise xian-insanity. I am a complete infidel. I am a 3rd generation atheist; but I never have been and never will be anti-semetic. My mom's side of the family are Jews. That of course qualifies me to be a "member of the club". I can't escape it and I am proud of it. It's a heritage. Kind of like being Italian or something. So let's just be clear on that, OK? The Jews have been through enough bull**** throughout history. Enough people hate them for no good reasons, and I have no desire to join the group of uneducated *******s who encourage hate on a gentle and spiritual and educated group that has always minded their own business and tried to improve their own lives.<hr /></blockquote>So, you are not anti-semitic, but you concur with this statement?

<blockquote>quote:<hr />
MMOH said it best, "No knowledge of where we came from is going to come from reading a # of short books written by some bare-assed, half-starved, protein deficient, illiterate jews, wandering around in a desert, in a nomadic tribe, hallucninating from the oppressive heat and conditions in which they tried to eke out an existence." <hr /></blockquote>OK, I get it. You have no problem with the Jewish PEOPLE. But the Jewish religion is utter b******t, is that it? Well, at the risk of repeating myself, it seems obvious that your contempt for people of faith goes well beyond the realm of Christiantity.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />
Xians on the other hand inspire a lot of hatred in "non-xians" by trying to shove their beliefs down everyone's throats. I am sure you are a nice guy. Of course there are nice xians out there who mean well, etc. But why in the world anyone would want to call themself a xian and to openly associate themselves with a group that has caused more misery and naked aggression against mankind than the Nazis is beyond my comprehension.<hr /></blockquote>Bat, I am truly sorry. But you are not alone in your lack of comprehension. That Jesus would love a worthless sinner like me enough to die for me is beyond my comprehension too. But I'm glad He did.

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> There was no "son of god" Jesus, but even if there was --- HE would NOT be a xian. Especially since the mythical Jesus was a Jew. Doesn't that say it all? Honestly. If you want to be close to Jesus, then understand HIS religion as best you can. It seems a lot better than buying into the nonesense written by 70 different people, all over the world, with differents plitical agendas, over the course of 1,500 years.

The BIBLE is filled with so many contradictions! Honestly, how can you believe a word in it? If you are lookng for insipration, there are plenty of inspirational books out there. if you are looking for a hero, there are plenty of REAL heroes to admire; and if you are afraid to die,<hr /></blockquote>

But I'm NOT afraid to die. Christians need not fear death. I don't want to get on the next bus, mind you, but I'm not afraid. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> then do something to immortalize your name and make a difference; but don't just believe a bunch of plagiarized fiction just in hopes of walking around on a cloud or in a garden in some fantasy called heaven with some boring, uneductaed nuns and priests and Jerry Falwell!

By the way, most of my friends are atheists, agnostics, humanists and other freethinkers and as far as I have been able to tell --- they don't drink, do drugs, gamble, beat their wives, cheat, steal, have tattoos, rape little boys, or burn witches. Amazing, huh? And they didn't even have to pray into the air when a waiter brings food to their table, wear gold crosses, spend their Sundays on their knees, shooting abortion doctors, or tring to have teachers or lawyers or judges fired if they don't get into lock-step with the demands of the xian right's agenda.<hr /></blockquote>

By the way, most of my friends are Christians, and as far as I have been able to tell --- they don't drink, do drugs, gamble, beat their wives, cheat, steal, have tattoos, rape little boys, or burn witches, or shoot abortion doctors. Amazing, huh? Especially when you consider how blood-thirsty some people think Christians are. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />
<blockquote>quote:<hr />

I guess god works in mysterious ways, huh? Give the good life to those who can't believe the unbelievable and want some verifiable proof before allowing themselves to be beaten into submission by those who feel they have the burden of converting everyone to the ways of Jesus.

By the way, if atheists had a history of killing and torturing millions in hopes that they can "burn their bodies to save their souls" I would be the first in line to call myself anything else. There's enough ugliness in the world, so why would I want to associate myself with ugliness? I'm sorry, my friend, but xianity has a history that is way too filled with murder and greed and torture and lies and deception and I don't see how anyone with a clear conscience and honest heart can categorize themselves there.
<hr /></blockquote>

I would say that it is HUMANITY that has the history that is way too filled with murder and greed and torture and lies and deception.
<blockquote>quote:<hr />

Oh, and I forgot who mentioned HITLER way back when, but he was NOT an atheist. He was totally into superstitions and mythology, etc. He was, however, a vegetarian, and he was very nice to his dog and his mistress; so it goes to show you how you can't throw a label on someone and expect it to epitimize what they are and what they do.

By the way, to show you how open minded I am --- I've got WHAT DREAMS MAY COME playing on the TV right now. Great flick! <hr /></blockquote>Hitler was a VEGAN???? Well, no wonder he whacked-out. Never trust a person who doesn't like steak! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

I have never viewed this site as a Christian one (although it does have a prayer request forum which I assume is due to the fact that the owner of the site, Dr. Harley, is a professed Christian). In my opinion, however, this site is far more a non-Christian site than a Christian one. If there's anyone that doesn't "belong" here, it's Christians (of which I am one btw).

[ March 22, 2004, 03:29 AM: Message edited by: LoveMyEx ]

post deleted/don't want to be a part of this thread

[ March 22, 2004, 03:25 AM: Message edited by: LoveMyEx ]

[ March 22, 2004, 03:24 AM: Message edited by: LoveMyEx ]

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> Actually, I used to write Xianity in hopes of annoying xians; but I recently found out that it is a normal and considerate way of spellig it. Something that has to do with the Greek thing. I don't know too much about it; but now i just write it because writing the word "christ" is silly.

Most xians incidentally, don't even know what the FISH symbol is for. I do. So I could actually draw a little fish instead of "christ" and there wouldn't even be any disrespect in that either.

Damn! Well, at least there are other fun ways to annoy xians like throwing bibles out of hotel rooms and into the toilet bowls and then the pools, which I do often. <hr /></blockquote>BatoutofHell....it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that you're *TRYING* to start a war here. What gives?

The terms of service state that discussions are to be RESPECTFUL. I see no respect in your post at all. How sad that a group of adults can't have a decent discussion about religion, without people crossing the line of what is acceptable.

For the sake of the Christians here, I certainly hope that their faith allows them the strength to ignore your post and the hatefulness that it implies.

Shame on you.

clay,

the C.S. Lewis quote is just another opinion, so what is your point??

wiftty

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by *^aeri^*:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr /> Actually, I used to write Xianity in hopes of annoying xians; but I recently found out that it is a normal and considerate way of spellig it. Something that has to do with the Greek thing. I don't know too much about it; but now i just write it because writing the word "christ" is silly.

Most xians incidentally, don't even know what the FISH symbol is for. I do. So I could actually draw a little fish instead of "christ" and there wouldn't even be any disrespect in that either.

Damn! Well, at least there are other fun ways to annoy xians like throwing bibles out of hotel rooms and into the toilet bowls and then the pools, which I do often. <hr /></blockquote>BatoutofHell....it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that you're *TRYING* to start a war here. What gives?

The terms of service state that discussions are to be RESPECTFUL. I see no respect in your post at all. How sad that a group of adults can't have a decent discussion about religion, without people crossing the line of what is acceptable.

For the sake of the Christians here, I certainly hope that their faith allows them the strength to ignore your post and the hatefulness that it implies.

Shame on you. <hr /></blockquote>Aeri, these are my sentiments exactly. Thank you for your post for were I to say the same it would probably be dismissed as one of the Christians being defensive about the whole thing. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />

<blockquote>quote:<hr />BatoutofHell....it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that you're *TRYING* to start a war here. What gives?

The terms of service state that discussions are to be RESPECTFUL. I see no respect in your post at all. How sad that a group of adults can't have a decent discussion about religion, without people crossing the line of what is acceptable.

For the sake of the Christians here, I certainly hope that their faith allows them the strength to ignore your post and the hatefulness that it implies.

Shame on you. <hr /></blockquote>*^aeri^* - batoutofhell is a very angry and bitter OP. He is very angry that the woman he chose to commit adultery with is now after him like a crazed sadist. He continues to justify himself as the "innocent" party, blames his "need" to be her consenting adulterer upon her homosexual and abusive husband and his desire to be her "white knight", and thinks that he alone is the "victim" in this case.

It is quite typical of many to "blame someone else" for their own stupid mistakes. And Christianity is often the "focus" of that rage and animosity because God has set a "set of standards" that all people are to obey or suffer the consequences. Most people "rail" and "rant" about anyone being a "higher authority" than themselves and continue to serve "self-interest" as their personal "god."

What so many who rant about Christianity either fail to see, or willingly choose to ignore, is that Christianity is the only "faith" that is based upon reliable, proveable, scientific fact.

In response, and to keep their self-directed desires as supreme, they claim ridiculous things about Christianity (i.e., see the previous post that lists quoted opinions from avowed atheists and unbelievers as the "final proof that their position is "truth".) In short, they do precisely what the Scripture tells us that they will do, they "worship" the "created" over the Creator.

As this thread has shown, it is "fair game" to attack, demean, and vilify anything "Christian", but heaven help us (pun intended) if we speak out for Christ or against sin. For example, it was stated that someone never saw non-Christians advocating anything that would be harmful to others, or thoughts along that line. Let me simply point to ONE example, among the plethora of examples, that refutes such a spacious and utterly false statement....NAMBLA.

But take heart all who know Christ as their Lord and Savior, these "times" are predicted and must come to pass. One can choose to believe that fire will not burn and hurt, at least up until the fateful day that they find themselves cast into the furnace (or microwave if you prefer a modern convenience) and that they must then face the reality of their willful, or misinformed, belief.

"I am the way, the truth and the life..." Truth is simply that....truth, whether we choose to accept it or not. It is not the Christian's duty to "convert" anyone. It is simply our duty to proclaim the truth and each individual is responsible for their own acceptance or rejection of Jesus Christ.

So, in answer to the original thread question, "do non Christians, atheists and agnostics belong here?", the answer is YES...and so do Christians. Sin is sin and has painful consequences. Part of being "Christian" is to try to help others in need, whether they themselves are Christians or not. You cannot "force" help on anyone who doesn't want it, and things of God are "foolishness" to unbelievers anyway. So help where you can, but know that it is always THEIR choice as to whether or not to accept and implement any help that is proffered.

Remember, much of what you "hear" posted here is being posted by individuals with emotions and passions raging and out of control. They are, in most cases, reacting emotionally and intolerant of anything that they perceive as potentially adding to the pain that they already feel, like introspection often causes. There are some, who violently oppose any notion of Christianity because they know that their chosen "lifestyle" would have to change if they willingly submitted their lives to the "lordship" of anyone but themselves. Regardless of their motivation, you cannot "change them." Change comes from within the individual.

You can offer a "reason for why you believe what you believe" so that perhaps others not so dogmatic in their hatred of, or opposition to, Christianity may see that Christinity is founded upon a "proven, real, legitimate PERSON." That person is Jesus Christ, who lived, died, and bodily rose from the dead to set free from eternal death all who would willingly accept the gift that He offers.

Think of it this way, if it helps, you cannot remove the gun from the hand of the person bent on suicide as their "best choice and the best belief for their life." THEY have to come to the point of realization that suicide is NOT the best answer and that there IS another way. But to commit suicide or not to is up to the individual regardless of how YOU "know" it's the wrong choice and try to help them to understand it.

It's also interesting to see, as the preponderance of this thread attests, that we are, as a Nation, rapidly becoming a country where we want "Freedom FROM religion" and not "Freedom OF religion." All that the "Founding Fathers" ever intended with the drafting of our constitution was that the federal government NOT establish a "State Religion."

They left it up to the people to have freedom of religion not freedom from religion. Some were atheists, some were agnostics, some were Christians. They left the "evils" that came from abuses of State sponsored religion and declared that ALL faiths (religious or non-religious) were welcome in this new nation and that NONE of them would be "Forced down the throats of all Americans as the 'recognized' and 'only' State religion."

[ March 22, 2004, 07:36 AM: Message edited by: ForeverHers ]

Sounds like this topic was the place to be last weekend. Sorry I missed out on all the "fun".

Forever - Thank you for the background on Bat. It is obvious he is really hurting - shame to unleash it in such an outlandish way but that is apparently his coping mechanism right now. This is the perfect example of why Jesus' grace and mercy is so needed now. Your insights were right on and God bless you today!

To ForeverHers -
Good reply
I know, this is OT - We were in a discussion before about losing salvation. I believe a person can lose it because there are several examples in this thread where I think it is clearly demonstrated. (My intent is not to hijack this thread).

batoutofhell,

--Damn! Well, at least there are other fun ways to annoy xians like throwing bibles out of hotel rooms and into the toilet bowls and then the pools, which I do often.--

TR--I can't speak for others, but this actually wouldn't annoy me either--

Separation of Church and State? or Separation from Church and State--you decide--

Pennsylvania 1776, Preamble. We, the people of Pennsylvania, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, and
humbly invoking His guidance--

Vermont 1777, Preamble. Whereas all government ought to ... enable the individuals who compose it to enjoy their natural rights, and other
blessings which the Author of Existence has bestowed on man

Virginia 1776, Bill of Rights, XVI .. Religion, or the Duty which we owe our Creator .. can be directed only by Reason ... and that it is the
mutual duty of all to practice Christian Forbearance, Love and Charity towards each other ..

South Carolina, 1778, Preamble. We, the people of he State of South Carolina. grateful to God for our liberties, do ordain and establish this Constitution.

Maryland 1776, Preamble. We, the people of the state of Maryland, grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious liberty

Massachusetts 1780, Preamble. We...the people of Massachusetts, acknowledging with grateful hearts, the goodness of the Great Legislator of the Universe ... in the course of His Providence, an opportunity .and devoutly imploring His direction

Georgia 1777, Preamble. We, the people of Georgia, relying upon protection and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish this
Constitution...

New Hampshire 1792, Part I. Art. I. Sec. V. Every individual has a natural and unalienable right to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience.

Well, I actually agree with most of the things BOOH is saying.

But I think I disagree with his approach.

I would encourage ALL to have respect. It's great to disagree, even better to say why you believe like you do, but please be respectful.

Wiffty, extremely well said.

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> Atheists don't burn books. Atheists don't tell people how to think or what to do <hr /></blockquote>a) Obviously they just throw them into swimming pools or out windows to destroy them, rather than burn them. Big Difference.

b) Atheists don't tell people how to think or what to do? Then what are you, BOOH?, because by your own definition....you are not an Atheist.

bp22...I respect everyone's opinion, because all too often they prove Mark Twain correct...

"It's better to let everyone think you a fool, than to open your mouth and eliminate ALL doubt!"

clay

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by hurting Promise Keeper:
 Forever - Thank you for the background on Bat. It is obvious he is really hurting - shame to unleash it in such an outlandish way but that is apparently his coping mechanism right now. This is the perfect example of why Jesus' grace and mercy is so needed now. Your insights were right on and God bless you today! <hr /></blockquote>It is so easy to attack the messenger when one disagrees with themessage. BOOH, whatever your background, keep your opinions coming: they are a nice foil to all the christian proselytizing that goes on here.

If I hear again how the founding fathers were all christians I think I'm going to puke. Anyone ever read Thomas Paine's Age of Reason? Anyone even know who he was? Is he still taught in American History?

http://libertyonline.hypermall.com/Paine/AOR-Frame.html

For those who do not wish to read a long treatise . . . the following quote pretty much sums up the thought of one of the origional founding fathers.

"I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church.

All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit."

Love and peace to you all. Really. I mean it.

[ March 22, 2004, 10:41 AM: Message edited by: Comfortably Numb ]

Numb and all others that are misquoting Thomas Paine. This is an excerpt from Thomas Paine's "Age of Reason" This clearly demonstrates that he believed in GOD. He may have been against organized religion but clearly he had respect for a higher power.

CHAPTER I - THE AUTHOR'S PROFESSION OF FAITH.
IT has been my intention, for several years past, to publish my thoughts upon religion; I am well aware of the difficulties that attend the subject, and from that consideration, had reserved it to a more advanced period of life. I intended it to be the last offering I should make to my fellow-citizens of all nations, and that at a time when the purity of the motive that induced me to it could not admit of a question, even by those who might disapprove the work.

The circumstance that has now taken place in France, of the total abolition of the whole national order of priesthood, and of everything appertaining to compulsive systems of religion, and compulsive articles of faith, has not only precipitated my intention, but rendered a work of this kind exceedingly necessary, lest, in the general wreck of superstition, of false systems of government, and false theology, we lose sight of morality, of humanity, and of the theology that is true.

As several of my colleagues, and others of my fellow-citizens of France, have given me the example of making their voluntary and individual profession of faith, I also will make mine; and I do this with all that sincerity and frankness with which the mind of man communicates with itself.

I believe in one God, and no more; and I hope for happiness beyond this life.

I believe the equality of man, and I believe that religious duties consist in doing justice, loving mercy, and endeavoring to make our fellow-creatures happy.

But, lest it should be supposed that I believe many other things in addition to these, I shall, in the progress of this work, declare the things I do not believe, and my reasons for not believing them.

I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church.

All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian, or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.

I do not mean by this declaration to condemn those who believe otherwise; they have the same right to their belief as I have to mine. But it is necessary to the happiness of man, that he be mentally faithful to himself. Infidelity does not consist in believing, or in disbelieving; it consists in professing to believe what he does not believe.

It is impossible to calculate the moral mischief, if I may so express it, that mental lying has produced in society. When a man has so far corrupted and prostituted the chastity of his mind, as to subscribe his professional belief to things he does not believe, he has prepared himself for the commission of every other crime. He takes up the trade of a priest for the sake of gain, and, in order to qualify himself for that trade, he begins with a perjury. Can we conceive anything more destructive to morality than this?

Soon after I had published the pamphlet COMMON SENSE, in America, I saw the exceeding probability that a revolution in the system of government would be followed by a revolution in the system of religion. The adulterous connection of church and state, wherever it had taken place, whether Jewish, Christian, or Turkish, had so effectually prohibited, by pains and penalties, every discussion upon established creeds, and upon first principles of religion, that until the system of government should be changed, those subjects could not be brought fairly and openly before the world; but that whenever this should be done, a revolution in the system of religion would follow. Human inventions and priest-craft would be detected; and man would return to the pure, unmixed, and unadulterated belief of one God, and no more.

As for the founding fathers of our nation here are some links that may intersest you. Really the Indians lived here first but if you are talking about why America is America then check these out.

http://history.hanover.edu/texts/adamss.html

http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/revolution/mayflower.htm

http://pilgrims.net/plymouth/history/

http://www.csustan.edu/english/reuben/pal/chap1/chap1.html

http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/society/A0840557.html

And just so you know I was Roman Catholic until age 9 when I became a devout atheist, and at age 34 GOD reentered my life. I am a christian and proud of my Father. How else could you explain your miniscule exsistence in this universe?

Lion:

I have not misquoted Thomas Paine. I put in an exact quote. Why would I post a link to the work of issue if I was going to then misquote it? Sorry. You're wrong, again.

Further, this discussion is about Christianinty . . . not a belief in God. So, you are zero for two. Keep swinging . . . eventually you may get lucky.

I'm sorry for your childhood and your pent-up hostility.

[ March 22, 2004, 02:41 PM: Message edited by: Comfortably Numb ]

ok, I think there is some confusion going on. There are many of us here who believe in God, we don't believe in organized religion, nor do we believe that the bible is inerrant. Because of that we have been told we are NOT Christians, NOT saved, etc. It seems that many Christians are of the opinion that you can't be a Christian without devoutly studying the bible and attending a church. Yet, they also turn right around and say the only way to salvation is with a personal relationship with Christ and belief in his death and resurrection, as well as the trinity.

On a different note, this is an interesting site that I found when further looking into the origination of the bible, the various translations, etc.
Not for the reading of the vast majority of Christians, but some of the rest of you might be interested in reading it.
http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/nhlintro.html

Every time I come to this message board these days I end up with the song "where is the love" by black eyed peas running through my head!!

Dear Numb,

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> Further, this discussion is about Christianinty . . . not a belief in God. So, you are zero for two. <hr /></blockquote>Actually, this is, according to the title, a discussion about NON -CHRISTIANS, ATHEISTS , AND AGNOSTICS .

Perhaps you'd like to read the title again?

(Are you always this rude?)

clay

[ March 22, 2004, 02:18 PM: Message edited by: clay_6291 ]

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by clay_6291:
 Dear Numb,

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> Further, this discussion is about Christianinty . . . not a belief in God. So, you are zero for two. <hr /></blockquote>Actually, this is, according to the title, a discussion about NON -CHRISTIANS, ATHEISTS , AND AGNOSTICS .

Perhaps you'd like to read the title again?

(Are you always this rude?)

clay <hr /></blockquote>No, I'm usually pretty nice. I just don't like zealots.

This entire discussion has been about Christianity. . . perhaps you would care to read the previous posts . . . not just the title of the thread?

I would ask you if you were always so rude . . . but I have read your previous posts so I already know the answer.

[ March 22, 2004, 02:39 PM: Message edited by: Comfortably Numb ]

Hi Jill,

I haven't talked with you in ages. Would love to know how the dating is going? As I recall you love antique cars, I hope I am correct in remembering that...Is this still one of your passions? I also think you may have had two guy interest at the time. Is it still going that good? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

Anyway, on your topic. All people belong here, and that is probably the problem. I have seen athiest and agnostics, pushing their views on here, telling Christians they shouldn't think this way or that way and they should not believe the way they do, and calling Christian's "Bible thumpers" or other names, thinking this is okay to call them these names, as much as I see Christians and religious people pushing their views on people.

When you have such a diverse group of people it is to be expected, and even though, some, no matter what their beliefs, can get disrespectful, I think that for the most part, people have to expect that when they post for advice, all religions, agnostics, athiests, etc., will "push" their beliefs on what they think is correct on others. Why would they say something they didn't believe?

Take care and hope this helps a little,

Anna

[ March 22, 2004, 03:05 PM: Message edited by: Anna2000 ]

Hmmmmm.......

Numb's an over-zealous anti-zealot.

Interesting. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="images/icons/tongue.gif" />

Numb,

For your clarification:

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> If I hear again how the founding fathers were all Christians I think I'm going to puke. Anyone ever read Thomas Paine's Age of Reason? <hr /></blockquote> <blockquote>quote:<hr />I have not misquoted Thomas Paine. I put in an exact quote. Why would I post a link to the work of issue if I was going to then misquote it? <hr /></blockquote>Sorry here you are wrong clearly Thomas Paine gives a statement of faith. Just because he doesn't subscribe to organized religion doesn't mean he isn't a Christian.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Further, this discussion is about Christianity . . . not a belief in God <hr /></blockquote>Hey your 0 for 2. The original post was about non-Christians, Atheist, and Agnostics belonging here. Which incidentally I believe all faiths or non-faiths have a right to be here.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />I'm sorry for your childhood and your pent-up hostility. <hr /></blockquote>0 for 3. I am not here because of my childhood nor do I have pent up hostility. I am here because I want my marriage to be better. I just found it interesting how people who are not of the Christian faith find it so easy to attack us. But send me your address and I will promptly send you my insurance info. Certainly you qualify as some kind of doctor or therapist making that kind of diagnosis. And last but not least and really this is my favorite.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Zealot:
Pronunciation: 'ze-l&t
Function: noun
Etymology: Late Latin zelotes, from Greek zElOtEs, from zElos
1 capitalized : a member of a fanatical sect arising in Judea during the first century A.D. and militantly opposing the Roman domination of Palestine
2 : a zealous person; especially : a fanatical partisan <hr /></blockquote>I am gonna take it that you meant the second definition since we are not in the first century A.D. Am I fanatical partisan because I have the faith that there is a here after. Or are you the Zealot because you vehemently deny GOD.

PS Numb

Since the Bible says whereever 2 or more gather it is a church, <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" /> thanks for attending service with me. Sorry I couldn't resist. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by liontolamb:
 Since the Bible says whereever 2 or more gather it is a church, <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" /> thanks for attending service with me. Sorry I couldn't resist. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" /> <hr /></blockquote>I think technically - the Bible says "where two or more are gathered together in my name there I am in the midst of them--

So --- since we are all gathered here discussing Christ and God - I believe he IS here... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />

And at least two of us believe. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />

Jan

Slapnuts posted: <blockquote>quote:<hr /> I realized that he was at least partially fictional. <hr /></blockquote>He called himself the Son of God, he yet put on a slave's apron and washed the apostles' feet. Their Lord became their servant. In addition he made friends with the outcasts of society, welcomed prostitutes and touched untouchables. He gave himself in selfless service to others. And then he surrendered to unjust arrest, trial and condemnation... All this evidence adds up to an extraordinary paradox. Jesus was extremely self-centered in his words, but absolutely unself-centered in his deeds... This combination of egocentricity and humility has no parallel in the history of the world. The only way to resolve it is to acknowledge that Jesus of Nazareth was and is the Son of God.

Who do you say that He is?

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by liontolamb:
 Numb,

For your clarification:

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> If I hear again how the founding fathers were all Christians I think I'm going to puke. Anyone ever read Thomas Paine's Age of Reason? <hr /></blockquote> <blockquote>quote:<hr />I have not misquoted Thomas Paine. I put in an exact quote. Why would I post a link to the work of issue if I was going to then misquote it? <hr /></blockquote>Sorry here you are wrong clearly Thomas Paine gives a statement of faith. Just because he doesn't subscribe to organized religion doesn't mean he isn't a Christian.<hr /></blockquote>

Since you continue to distort what Thomas Paine actualy said I provide the following:

"Every national church or religion has established itself by pretending some special mission from God, communicated to certain individuals. The Jews have their Moses; the Christians their Jesus Christ, their apostles and saints; and the Turks their Mahomet, as if the way to God was not open to every man alike."

Quite a statement of faith.

Further:

"Each of those churches show certain books, which they call revelation, or the word of God. The Jews say, that their word of God was given by God to Moses, face to face; the Christians say, that their word of God came by divine inspiration: and the Turks say, that their word of God (the Koran) was brought by an angel from Heaven. Each of those churches accuse the other of unbelief; and for my own part, I disbelieve them all .

Again, a strong statement of faith.

"It is a contradiction in terms and ideas, to call anything a revelation that comes to us at second-hand, either verbally or in writing. Revelation is necessarily limited to the first communication- after this, it is only an account of something which that person says was a revelation made to him; and though he may find himself obliged to believe it, it cannot be incumbent on me to believe it in the same manner; for it was not a revelation made to me, and I have only his word for it that it was made to him"

Humm. . . o.k. on to blasphemy:

"When also I am told that a woman called the Virgin Mary, said, or gave out, that she was with child without any cohabitation with a man, and that her betrothed husband, Joseph, said that an angel told him so, I have a right to believe them or not; such a circumstance required a much stronger evidence than their bare word for it; but we have not even this- for neither Joseph nor Mary wrote any such matter themselves; it is only reported by others that they said so- it is hearsay upon hearsay, and I do not choose to rest my belief upon such evidence.

It is, however, not difficult to account for the credit that was given to the story of Jesus Christ being the son of God. He was born when the heathen mythology had still some fashion and repute in the world, and that mythology had prepared the people for the belief of such a story. Almost all the extraordinary men that lived under the heathen mythology were reputed to be the sons of some of their gods. It was not a new thing, at that time, to believe a man to have been celestially begotten; the intercourse of gods with women was then a matter of familiar opinion. Their Jupiter, according to their accounts, had cohabited with hundreds: the story, therefore, had nothing in it either new, wonderful, or obscene; it was conformable to the opinions that then prevailed among the people called Gentiles, or Mythologists, and it was those people only that believed it. The Jews who had kept strictly to the belief of one God, and no more, and who had always rejected the heathen mythology, never credited the story."

And finally.

"It is curious to observe how the theory of what is called the Christian church sprung out of the tail of the heathen mythology. A direct incorporation took place in the first instance, by making the reputed founder to be celestially begotten. The trinity of gods that then followed was no other than a reduction of the former plurality, which was about twenty or thirty thousand: the statue of Mary succeeded the statue of Diana of Ephesus; the deification of heroes changed into the canonization of saints; the Mythologists had gods for everything; the Christian Mythologists had saints for everything; the church became as crowded with one, as the Pantheon had been with the other, and Rome was the place of both. The Christian theory is little else than the idolatry of the ancient Mythologists, accommodated to the purposes of power and revenue; and it yet remains to reason and philosophy to abolish the amphibious fraud."

Now about Jesus specifically:

"Nothing that is here said can apply, even with the most distant disrespect, to the real character of Jesus Christ. He was a virtuous and an amiable man. The morality that he preached and practised was of the most benevolent kind; and though similar systems of morality had been preached by Confucius, and by some of the Greek philosophers, many years before; by the Quakers since; and by many good men in all ages, it has not been exceeded by any.

Jesus Christ wrote no account of himself, of his birth, parentage, or any thing else; not a line of what is called the New Testament is of his own writing. The history of him is altogether the work of other people; and as to the account given of his resurrection and ascension, it was the necessary counterpart to the story of his birth. His historians having brought him into the world in a supernatural manner, were obliged to take him out again in the same manner, or the first part of the story must have fallen to the ground."

"But the resurrection of a dead person from the grave, and his ascension through the air, is a thing very different as to the evidence it admits of, to the invisible conception of a child in the womb. The resurrection and ascension, supposing them to have taken place, admitted of public and ocular demonstration, like that of the ascension of a balloon, or the sun at noon-day, to all Jerusalem at least. A thing which everybody is required to believe, requires that the proof and evidence of it should be equal to all, and universal; and as the public visibility of this last related act was the only evidence that could give sanction to the former part, the whole of it falls to the ground, because that evidence never was given. Instead of this, a small number of persons, not more than eight or nine, are introduced as proxies for the whole world, to say they saw it, and all the rest of the world are called upon to believe it. But it appears that Thomas did not believe the resurrection, and, as they say, would not believe without having ocular and manual demonstration himself. So neither will I, and the reason is equally as good for me, and for every other person, as for Thomas."

Thus Thomas Paine was not a Christian.

Lion: Please read the treatise before you spout out any more opinion about what Thomas Paine believed.

It is obvious that Thomas Paine was not a christian. I stand by my statement that not all the founding fathers were christians.

I have no beef with MOST christians, I have not criticized your beliefs. I simply stated facts dealing with the writings of one of the founding fathers and you responded in a hostile manner because you didn't agree with what I said.

Now maybe that the air is clear we can discuss if non-christians belong here.

I think that they can be here but my opinion is that their opinions are less valued by the audience at large.

[ March 23, 2004, 08:27 AM: Message edited by: Comfortably Numb ]

A few (hopefully short) observations:

Most of the quotes from intelligent athiests/agnostics that clay furnished are quite valid. Those people accurately perceived the ignorant and immoral acts so often perpetrated under the badge of Christianity. They also accurately perceived their own intellectual superiority to the vast majority of professing Christians.

They were over-quick, however, to conclude that a causal relationship exists between ignorance and religious belief, or between intelligence/enlightenment and athiesm/agnosticism. Many of the quotes (such as Twain's) show pithy wit but no serious analysis. I find in them a heap of the same easy assumptions and generalizations for which the authors dismiss religious folk. Intellectual snobbery simply displaces religious snobbery. This fails to impress me.

On the matter of Christians telling others what their faith must include to be truly Christian. Objections to this are rooted in the notion that a person's moral authority does not extend beyond himself. This is correct but does not go far enough: a religious view holds that a person's moral authority does not even extend to himself. It does not exist at all. Only a non-religious world view grants people their own moral authority.

For the religious person, there is no question that some authority greater than the individual exists. The real questions are, "what *is* that authority and what does it say?" We should recognize this basic point whenever we accuse someone of beating others over the head with "their own beliefs," as if those beliefs were a matter of private interest only. In fact, they apply either to everyone equally or no one at all, depending on whether their source is a true moral authority.

It would be stupid for me to argue that, in advocating his religion, a Muslim man is merely asserting the political, social, sexual and psychological views he finds most comfortable and advantageous. That may in fact be his motivation, but it is not the real question. The real question is whether Allah exists and transmitted his message to Mohammed as it appears in the Qu'ran. The psychology of the Muslim's faith may explain why he *does* believe the Qu'ran, but it doesn't tell me whether he *should*.

So much debate over Christianity is a similar waste of time. You can easily show that a lot of Christians are ignorant and unworthy people, as you could with most groups of any kind. But that is not to the point. If a Christian presumes to correct you on matters of faith, a better use of your time would be to answer the following questions:

* Do I identify the same source of moral authority (for example, the Bible) as this person?

* If not, there is no use going any further; concord is impossible. Withdraw from the debate.

* If so, then the difference lies in an imperfect understanding of the authority-source on one or both sides. Be a scientist of interpretation and examine the line of deductions from the source to find where the split is. Apply sound interpretive methods and see if you still disagree with the person or if you need to correct your ideas.

great post, Is........Thank You. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Comfortably Numb:
Now maybe that the air is clear we can discuss if non-christians belong here.

I think that they can be here but my opinion is that their opinions are less valued by the audience at large. <hr /></blockquote>You are defining the audience at large as being predominantly some variety of Christian? Probably so. I've thought about doing a poll to see what the demographic really is in this forum, but there are so many beliefs I've shied away from even trying to come up with the poll categories.

I don't agree that the opinions of non-Christians are less valued. There are a few in this forum that I hold in rather high regard who are atheistic, agonostic, Jewish, or some other variety of spiritual that I can't categorize as Christian. It would be silly for me to ignore the advice and experience of others just because I don't agree with them on highly personal and more ethereal matters.

[ March 23, 2004, 09:57 AM: Message edited by: Dilbert ]

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Dilbert:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Comfortably Numb:
Now maybe that the air is clear we can discuss if non-christians belong here.

I think that they can be here but my opinion is that their opinions are less valued by the audience at large. <hr /></blockquote>You are defining the audience at large as being predominantly some variety of Christian? Probably so. I've thought about doing a poll to see what the demographic really is in this forum, but there are so many beliefs I've shied away from even trying to come up with the poll categories.

I don't agree that the opinions of non-Christians are less valued. There are a few in this forum that I hold in rather high regard who are atheistic, agonostic, Jewish, or some other variety of spiritual that I can't categorize as Christian. It would be silly for me to ignore the advice and experience of others just because I don't agree with them on highly personal and more ethereal matters. <hr /></blockquote>Yes, I think that the majority of people here would identify themselves as christians. We will just have to disagree as to the apparant worth of opinions offered by non-christians. Many people will reject the message just because they do not like the messenger. This works on both sides of the debate.

Issachar posted: <blockquote>quote:<hr /> If so, then the difference lies in an imperfect understanding of the authority-source on one or both sides. Be a scientist of interpretation and examine the line of deductions from the source to find where the split is. Apply sound interpretive methods and see if you still disagree with the person or if you need to correct your ideas. <hr /></blockquote>The primary question in every religion relates to the topic of authority: by what authority do we believe what we believe? And the primary answer which Christians give to this question is that supreme authority resides neither in the church nor in the individual, but in Christ and the biblical witness to him.

This thread has certainly grown and developed in many different directions.... My own two cents:

I have received good advice, suggestions, hints, and an occational constructive 2*4 here from different people of different belief systems; Some have clearly stated their beliefs, others have been more subtle, and some have dealt with direct, practical issues where their religious beliefs have been difficult for me to acertain.

Some are Christians, some are Agnostics, some are Atheists, and a Buddist did at one point in time give me some instights too.

In two of the threads I have participated in I have also shared my beliefs (I am a Deist). I have been told that 'I am wrong', but it was done in what I perceive to a very manner based upon care and concern, and not as 'ramming something down the throat' and keeping with the topic of the thread.

That being said, some of the threads in EN do tend to go overboard by a wiiide margin in the DJ and LB departments, but, when strong sentiments and belief clashes, combined wiht the relative anonymity afforded by the web, this is the inevitable result I guess.

But... those of us that do believe in a/the Creator, be they Christians, or Deists, or Moslems or whatnot....(even though these beliefs differs widely)are just people. Sometimes happy, sometimes unhappy, some are diplomats, some are hotheads, some have lots of issues that manifests itself in here, where blowing off steam is 'safer' than in RL......

On a final note, re Thomas Paine....

Nope.. he was certainly not a Christian. However, the following lines do tell something about his beliefs (that I share as well)

'I freely believe in God as being discovered through nature and reason, rejecting revealed religion and its authority over humanity. I believe that all humans are equal. Further, as God has not shown favor for one people over another and has given us all that we need, that we should follow God's example and give to others as we can. '

Thomas Paine 1737-1809

Eric posted <blockquote>quote:<hr /> Further, as God has not shown favor for one people over another and has given us all that we need, that we should follow God's example and give to others as we can. '
<hr /></blockquote>Where did you get your "God" and how do you know what his example is?

Re: Thomas Paine, Founding Fathers, and America founded on Christianity

1) Thomas Paine wrote "Common Sense" which helped bring about the American Revolution which was the fight for liberty and equality

In it, he said: <blockquote>quote:<hr />The cause of America is in a great measure the cause of all mankind. Where, say some, is the king of America? I'll tell you, friend, He reigns above.

Yet that we may not appear to be defective even in earthly honors, let a day be solemnly set apart for proclaiming the charter; let it be placed on the Divine Law, the Word of God; let a crown be placed thereon.

The Almighty implanted in us these inextinguishable feelings for good and wise purposes. They are the guardians of His image in our heart. They distinguish us from the herd of common animals.<hr /></blockquote>2) Paine mistakenly became infatuated with the French Revolution thinking that it was similar to the American Revolution (fighting for the same ideals). However, the Amer. Revolution was based upon Christain principles (i.e. freedom to worship God). The French Revolution wasn't and was actually opposed to Christianity and also hostile to it.

Paine wrote "The Age of Reason" during this time. It was a support for the French Revolution.

HOWEVER, he later recants and regrets it as he realizes the error of his thinking and recalls his faith in God.

He stated: <blockquote>quote:<hr />I would give worlds, if I had them, if The Age of Reason had never been published. O Lord, help! Stay with me! It is hell to be left alone.<hr /></blockquote>3) At the end of his life, Thomas Paine's last words were: <blockquote>quote:<hr />I die in perfect composure and resignation to the will of my Creator, God.<hr /></blockquote>Our country was founded on the belief that there is a God and that we ought to be free to worship Him. We are the only country founded on such a belief. Democracy and freedom have their very roots in God because God is a God who hates such things as oppression, abuses of power, and false religions. He hates anything in which a person is mistreated and He hates anything in which people go blindly through life trying to make it on their own not believing that there is a God who loves them and who deserves our honor and praise.

Our founding fathers knew these things and believed these things. It is the very reason they left Britain. Our nation was founded on the principles of Christianity although since that time, many have believed that it was indeed not so and literally become enraged when others believe this to be true.

More quotes:

<blockquote>quote:<hr />The God who gave us life gave us liberty... Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction... That these liberties are the gift of God? The Bible is the cornerstone for American liberty." Thomas Jefferson<hr /></blockquote> <blockquote>quote:<hr />The highest glory of the American Revolution was this; it connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity.John Quincy Adams<hr /></blockquote> <blockquote>quote:<hr />We've staked our future on our ability to follow the Ten Commandments with all our heart.James Madison<hr /></blockquote> <blockquote>quote:<hr />You can't have national morality apart from religious principle. George Washington<hr /></blockquote> <blockquote>quote:<hr />Our country was founded on the Gosple of Jesus Christ.Patrick Henry<hr /></blockquote> <blockquote>quote:<hr />The longer I live the more convinced I become that God governs in the affairs of men. And have we now forgotten that powerful friend? Or do we imagine we no longer need His assistance. Benjamin Franklin<hr /></blockquote> <blockquote>quote:<hr />While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but once they lose their virtue they will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader.Samuel Adams<hr /></blockquote>IF you go back and look at the school primers of that time, you will see that children were taught the 10 Commandments and other truths of Christianity. They also prayed in school. This nation was not perfectly founded by any means, but it was indeed founded on the precepts and principles of Christianity and while the pilgrims and founding fathers were imperfect people, they did have a desire to be able to freely worship God and to teach their children to do the same.

And lastly, the basis and beginning of our national holiday- Thanksgiving (which we STILL celebrate today)- was gratitude for the Creator and His blessings to us: <blockquote>quote:<hr />Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly implore His protection, aid and favors... Now, therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday the 26th day of November next, to be devoted by the people of these states to the service of that great and glorious Being, who is the Beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country, and for all the great and various favors which He has been pleased to confer upon us.
George Washington, 1789<hr /></blockquote>

[ March 23, 2004, 03:14 PM: Message edited by: LoveMyEx ]

AMEN LMX!!!

I didn't have time to go search that out - but I agree - and have read that many times!

Thanks for finding that.

Jan

Hootie

This line was part of a quote by Paine, not by me.

It was also in re. the previous references to Paine in this thread.

I do find myself in agreement with some of what he wrote (in general, ie, not limited to this particular quote), and there are things I may not agree with. I am sure he authored things that I have not even read.

If you are asking me 'where did I find this God etc.."... well, as previously mentioned I am a Deist.

The key issue as to my posting was not Paine However, or my particular outlook and views about God, but rather my expriences as to wether 'non-Christians' and others are welcome or not on this board....

As a non-Christian, I have not felt unwelcome, and I have received constructive and what I perceive to be well meaning advice from many people, including some that are Christians...

[QUOTE]Originally posted by LoveMyEx:
[QB] Re: T2) Paine mistakenly became infatuated with the French Revolution thinking that it was similar to the American Revolution (fighting for the same ideals). However, the Amer. Revolution was based upon Christain principles (i.e. freedom to worship God). The French Revolution wasn't and was actually opposed to Christianity and also hostile to it.

Paine wrote "The Age of Reason" during this time. It was a support for the French Revolution.

HOWEVER, he later recants and regrets it as he realizes the error of his thinking and recalls his faith in God.

He stated: [b]I would give worlds, if I had them, if The Age of Reason had never been published. O Lord, help! Stay with me! It is hell to be left alone.

3) At the end of his life, Thomas Paine's last words were: I die in perfect composure and resignation to the will of my Creator, God.

Well this is surely in dispute. This has been dismissed by many historians as christian propaganda. I really don't know. I do know what his housekeeper said, how attended his death:

Paine died at eight o'clock on the morning of June 8, 1809. Shortly before, two clergymen had invaded his room, and so soon as they spoke about his opinions Paine said: "Let me alone; good morning!" Madame Bonneville asked if he was satisfied with the treatment he had received in her house, and he said, "Oh yes." These were the last words of Thomas Paine.

So I must disagree with you that he recanted The Age of Reason and that he apologized for it with his last breath.

Here is some more commentary about that farce:

Did Thomas Paine recant? Did Martin Luther recant? Protestants assert that Pane recanted; Catholics assert that Luther recanted. Neither recanted. Knaves invented these stories; fools believe them.
The church endeavors to convince the world that her opponents are not sincere. She attempts to impeach the intellectual honesty of those who reject her dogmas. She affects to believe that all must at some time acknowledge the truth of her claims. The supreme test is supposed to come just before dissolution. In the presence of death all bow to her authority.

When on his death-bed Paine was beset by emissaries of the church, -- pious nurses, bigoted priests, and illiterate laymen -- who by entreaties and threats tried to compel him to renounce his Deistic and Anti-Christian opinions. What a farcical scene! What a commentary on Christianity! Poor, ignorant, ill-mannered creatures, expecting with silly gibberish and impudence to change the life- long convictions of a dying philosopher!

After his death, Catholics, Methodists, Presbyterians, Baptists, Episcopalians, and orthodox Quakers all vied with each other in inventing calumnies concerning him. The last named sect was especially active in this work, because Paine was the son of a Quaker, and apostasy was as hateful to the Quaker as it was to the Catholic.

About ten years after Paine died, this recantation calumny appeared. Willet Hicks, a Quaker merchant and preacher, a cousin of the celebrated Ellas Hicks, and a broad and liberal man, lived near Paine, and daring his last illness did all he could to alleviate the sufferings of the sick man and make his last hours pleasant. Mary Roscoe, afterwards Mary Hinsdale, was a servant in the Hicks family, and, it is alleged, was sometimes sent to Paine's room on errands. On one of these visits Paine, it is claimed, engaged her in conversation, and recanted to her his Infidel opinions. According to this story, "Paine asked her if she had ever read any of his writings, and on being told she had read very little of them, he inquired what she thought of them, adding, 'From such a one as you I expect a correct answer.' She told him that when very young his 'Age of Reason' was put into her hands, but that the more she read in it the more dark and distressed she felt, and she threw the book into the fire. 'I wish all hid done as you he replied, 'for if the devil ever had any agency in any work, he has had it in my writing that book.' When going to carry, him some refreshments, she repeatedly heard him uttering the language, 'Oh! Lord!' 'Lord God!, or 'Lord Jesus, have mercy upon me!" (Life of Stephen Grellet, Vol. i., p. 125).

What a plausible tale! Paine's "Age of Reason" was published in 1794. After a lapse of fifteen years he desires an opinion of it. Persons of intellectual attainments and mature judgment, believers and unbelievers, many of them familiar with its contents, visit him dally. He ignores all of these and solicits the opinion of an illiterate servant girl! He "expects a correct answer" from her, the more especially as she has read very little of it and is ignorant of its contents.

The calumny quickly found its way to England. The famous English writer, William Cobbett, afterwards a member of Parliament, wrote a refutation of it. Mr. Cobbett's refutation, with a few abridgements, is as follows:

"It is a part of the business of a press sold to the cause of corruption to calumniate those, dead or alive, who have most effectually labored against that cause; and, as Paine was the most powerful and effectual of those laborers, so to calumniate him has been an object of their peculiar attention and care. Among other things said against this famous man is, that he recanted before he died; and that in his last illness he discovered horrible fears of death."

"I happen to know the origin of this story, and I possess the real original document whence have proceeded these divers editions of the falsehood, of the very invention of which I was perhaps myself the innocent cause!

"About two years ago I, being then on Long Island, published my intention of writing an account of the life, labors, and death of Paine. Soon after this a Quaker of New York, named Charles Collins, made many applications for an interview with me, which at last he obtained. I found that his object was to persuade me that Paine had recanted. I laughed at him and sent him away. But he returned again and again to the charge. He wanted me to promise that I would say that 'it was said' that Paine had recanted. 'No,' said I, 'but I will say that you say it, and that you tell a lie, unless you prove the truth of what you say; and, if you do that, I shall gladly insert the fact.' This posed 'Friend Charley,' whom I suspected to be a most consummate hypocrite. He had a sodden face, a simper, and maneuvered his features precisely like the most perfidious wretch that I have known ... Thus put to his trump, Friend Charley resorted to the aid of a person of his own stamp; and at last he brought me a paper ... This paper, very cautiously and craftily drawn up, contained only the initials of names. This would not do. I made him, at last, put down the full name and address of the informer -- 'Mary Hinsdale, No. 10 Anthony street, New York.'"

"The informer was a Quaker woman, who, at the time of Mr. Paine's last illness, was a servant in the family of Mr. Willet Hicks, an eminent merchant, a man of excellent character, a Quaker, and even, I believe, a Quaker preacher. Mr. Hicks, a kind and liberal and rich man, visited Mr., Paine in his illness; and from his house, which was near that of Mr. Paine, little nice things (as is the, practice in America) were sometimes sent to him, of which this servant, Friend Mary, was the bearer; and this was the way in which the lying cant got into the room of Mr. Paine.

"To friend Mary, therefore, I went on the twenty-sixth of October last, with Friend Charley's paper in my pocket. I found her in a lodging in a back room up one pair of stairs. ... I was compelled to come quickly to business. She asked, 'What's thy name, Friend?' and the moment I said, 'William Cobbett,' up went her mouth as tight as a purse! Sack-making appeared to be her occupation; and, that I might not extract through her eyes that which she was resolved I should not get out of her mouth, she went and took up a sack and began to sew, and not another look or glance could I get from her.

"However, I took out my paper, read it, and, stopping at several points, asked her if it was true. Talk of the Jesuits, indeed! The whole tribe of Loyola, who had shaken so many kingdoms to their base, never possessed the millionth part of the cunning of this drab-colored little woman, whose face, simplicity and innocence seemed to have chosen as the place of their triumph! She shuffled; she evaded; she equivocated; she warded off; she affected not to understand me, not to understand the paper, not to remember."

"The result was that it was so long ago that she could not speak positively on any part of the matter; that she would not say that any part of the paper was true; that she had never seen the paper; and that she had never given Friend Charley (for so she called him) authority to say anything about the matter in her name.

"I had now nothing to do but to bring Friend Charley's nose to the grindstone. But Charley, though so pious a man and doubtless in great haste to get to everlasting bliss, had moved out of the city for fear of the fever."

Mr. Cobbett supposed that Mary Hinsdale had really visited Paine, and this supposition was shared by Paine's friends generally. When Gilbert Vale, about twenty years later, was collecting materials for his life of Paine, Paine, he learned from Mr. Hicks that she had never seen Thomas Paine. Mr. Vale says:

"To our surprise, on seeing Mr. Hicks, as a duty which we owed the public, we learned that Mary Hinsdale never saw Paine to Mr. Hicks' knowledge; that the fact of his sending some delicacy from his table as a compliment occurred but a very few times, and that he always commissioned his daughters on this errand of kindness, and he designated Mrs. Cheeseman, then a little girl, but now the wife of one of our celebrated physicians, as the daughter especially engaged, and that she, stated that Mary Hinsdale once wished to go with her, but was refused" (Life of Paine, p. 178).

This accounts for the embarrassment and reticence exhibited by Mary Hinsdale when confronted by Cobbett. She had never seen Paine, she had never visited the house in which he died; she could not describe its surroundings or interior; She had never seen any of his attendants. If she attempted to make any statements concerning them she had reason to believe that Madame Bonneville and other witnesses were near at hand to expose her.

In the neighborhood where Mrs. Hinsdale lived she was universally regarded as a low, disreputable woman, addicted to the use of opium, and notorious for her lying propensities. Nor was her share in the Paine calumny her only offense of the kind. Mr. Vale, writing in 1839, cites the following testimony of Mr. J.W. Lockwood, a reputable gentleman, of New York:

"This gentleman had a sister, a member of the Friends who died about two-and-twenty years ago. On her death, Mary Hinsdale, who was known to the family, stated to them that she should come to the funeral, for that she had met Mary Lockwood a short time before her death; and that she (Mary Lockwood) had said to her: 'Mary, I do not expect to live long; my views are changed; I wish thee to come to my funeral, and make this declaration to my friends then assembled,' and that consequently she should Come. The relatives of the deceased, who were Hicksite Quakers, or Friends, knew the falseness of this statement. Those who had sat by her bedside, and heard her continued and last declarations on religious subjects (for she was emphatically a religious young woman), knew that no change had taken place. Her brother, our informant, had heard her express her opinions with great satisfaction. He and her other relatives therefore said so to Mary Hinsdale, but invited her to attend the funeral. Mary Hinsdale did not attend" (Life of Paine, p. 185).

Collins himself afterwards tacitly admitted the falsity of the Paine calumny. Mr. Vale, on whom he once called, says:

"Finding Mr. C. Colling in our house, and knowing the importance of his testimony, we at once asked him what induced him to publish the account of Mary Hinsdale. He assured us he then thought it true. He believed that she had seen Mr. Paine, and that Mr. Paine might confess to her, a girl, when he would not to Willet Hicks. He knew that many of their most respected Friends did not believe the account. He knew that Mr. Hicks did not, whom he highly respected; but yet he thought it might be true. We asked Mr. Collins what he though of the character of Mary Hinsdale now? He replied that some of our Friends believe she indulges in opiates and do not give her credit for truth." (Ibid.)

The exposures of Cobbett, Vale, and others, while they lessened the influence of the calumny, did not silence it. It mattered little to the church whether Paine recanted or not, but it was important that the masses should believe that he recanted. With most theologians a falsehood is as good as a truth so long as it serves its purpose. The orthodox clergy continued to thunder it from the pulpit; tract distributors sowed it broadcast over the land; no Sunday school library was considered complete without a volume containing it; while the religious papers kept it continually before their readers. The New York Observer, a Presbyterian paper, repeatedly published it, together with other calumnies on Paine. In an open letter to the Observer, Col. Ingersoll, in 1877, issued the following challenge:

[ March 23, 2004, 03:13 PM: Message edited by: Comfortably Numb ]

AWESOME QUOTES!!

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Almighty God, we make our earnest prayer that Thou wilt keep the United States in Thy Holy protection: that Thou wilt incline the hearts of the citizens to cultivate a spirit of subordination and obedience to government and entertain a brotherly affection and love for one another and for their fellow citizens of the United States at large. And finally, that Thou wilt most graciously be pleased to dispose us all to do justice, to love mercy, and to demean ourselves with that charity, humility, and pacific temper of mind which were the characteristics of the Divine Author of our blessed religion, without a humble imitation of whose example in these things we can never hope to be a happy nation. Grant our supplication, we beseech Thee, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
George Washington<hr /></blockquote>In his Farewell Address, George Washington advised his fellow citizens that: <blockquote>quote:<hr />"Religion and morality" were the "great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens." "National morality," he added, could not exist "in exclusion of religious principle." "Virtue or morality," he concluded, as the products of religion, were "a necessary spring of popular government."George Washington<hr /></blockquote>George Washington, at the request of the Congress which passed the Bill of Rights, proclaimed a day of <blockquote>quote:<hr />Public prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and single favors of Almighty God George Washington<hr /></blockquote> <blockquote>quote:<hr />It is rightly impossible to govern the world without God and the Bible.George Washington<hr /></blockquote> <blockquote>quote:<hr />No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the invisible hand which conducts the invisible affairs of men more than the people of the United States. Every step by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency.... We ought to be no less persuaded that the propitious smiles of heaven cannot be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right, which heaven itself has ordained. George Washington<hr /></blockquote> <blockquote>quote:<hr />Let me live according to those holy rules which Thou hast this day prescribed in Thy holy word...Direct me to the true object, Jesus Christ the way, the truth and the life. Bless, O Lord, all the people of this land." "Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that National Morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. George Washington<hr /></blockquote> <blockquote>quote:<hr />Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. John Adams <hr /></blockquote> <blockquote>quote:<hr />Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone, which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. John Adams<hr /></blockquote>Thomas Jefferson, the man "blamed" for the wall of separation between church and state said:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God?Thomas Jefferson<hr /></blockquote> <blockquote>quote:<hr />We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not on the power of government...but upon the capacity of each and every one of us to govern ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God. Theodore Roosevelt <hr /></blockquote>(SOURCE: Library of Congress)

BIBLE VERSES upon which our nation is founded:

<blockquote>quote:<hr />But select capable men from all the people -- men who fear God, trustworthy men who hate dishonest gain -- and appoint them as officials over thousands, hundreds, fifties and tens. Exodus 18:21<hr /></blockquote> <blockquote>quote:<hr />Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord. Psalm 33:12<hr /></blockquote>

[ March 23, 2004, 03:34 PM: Message edited by: LoveMyEx ]

Patrick Henry: <blockquote>quote:<hr />It cannnot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians <hr /></blockquote>

[ March 23, 2004, 03:37 PM: Message edited by: LoveMyEx ]

MORE INTERESTING HISTORICAL TIDBITS RE: AMERICAN'S CHRISTIAN ROOTS:

From the McGuffey's Eclectic Third Reader (preface, p. 5, 1848 (which was used by all school children for approx. 100 years):

<blockquote>quote:<hr />From no source has the author drawn more copiously than from the Sacred Scriptures. For this I certainly apprehend no censure. In a Christian country, that man is to be pitied, who, at this day, can honestly object to imbuing the minds of youth with the language and spirit of the Word of God.McGuffy<hr /></blockquote>Sample of questions from McGuffy's 1st-grade Reader (the 3rd section called "Shorter Catechism): <blockquote>quote:<hr />Which is the Fifth Commandment?
What is required in the Fifth Commandment?
What is forbidden in the Fifth Commandment?
What is the reason annexed to the Fifth Commandment?
And similarly for each of the Ten Commandments.

What offices does Christ execute as our Redeemer?
How does Christ execute the office of a prophet?
How does Christ execute the office of a priest?
How does Christ execute the office of a king?<hr /></blockquote>Article 3 from the Northwest Ordinance:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.<hr /></blockquote>From the Massachusetts and New Haven Colony Law, 1644: <blockquote>quote:<hr />The judicial laws of God as they were delivered by Moses . . . [are to] be a rule to all the courts in this jurisdiction.<hr /></blockquote>From the New York Daily Adverstiser, April 23, 1789, p. 2 (day of George Washinton's inauguration): <blockquote>quote:<hr />On the morning of the day on which our illustrious President will be invested with his office, the bells will ring at nine o'clock, when the people may go up to the house of God and in a solemn manner commit the new government, with its important train of consequences, to the holy protection and blessing of the most high. An early hour is prudently fixed for this peculiar act of devotion and . . . is designed wholly for prayer.<hr /></blockquote>Supreme Court Justice and Founder of Harvard Law School, Joseph Story, from "Life and Letters of Joseph Story," 1851: <blockquote>quote:<hr />One of the beautiful boasts of our municipal jurisprudence is that Christianity is part of the Common Law. . . . There never has been a period in which the Common Law did not recognize Christianity as lying at its foundations. . . . I verily believe Christianity necessary to the support of civil society<hr /></blockquote>Harvard Law Prof. Harold J. Berman, "The Interaction of Law and Religion," (p. 349, 350) 1979: <blockquote>quote:<hr /> Even fifty years ago . . . if you had asked Americans where our system of law came from, on what it was ultimately based, the overwhelming majority would have said, "the Ten Commandments," or "the Bible," or perhaps "the law of God." In the past two generations the public philosophy of America has shifted radically from a religious to a secular theory of law.<hr /></blockquote>

[ March 23, 2004, 04:07 PM: Message edited by: LoveMyEx ]

SOME INFO. ON THANKSGIVING, AND ITS BASIS IN CHRISTIANITY:

The first American National Thanksgiving was in 1777. On Nov. 1, 1777, the Continental Congress declared Dec. 18 a national day of "solemn thanksgiving and praise," after the British troops had surrendered in Saratoga (Oct. 17, 1777). It was the first Thanksgiving Day first proclaimed by a national authority (previously, the Pilgrims celebrated a thanksgiving feast by giving thanks to God and His blessings).

[1) The Continental Congress' Thanksgiving proclamation:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Forasmuch as it is the indispensable duty of all men to adore the superintending providence of Almighty God; to acknowledge with gratitude their obligation to Him for benefits received, and to implore such further Blessings as they stand in need of; and it having pleased Him in His abundant mercy not only to continue to us the innumerable bounties of His common providence, but also smile upon us in the prosecution of a just and necessary war, for the defence and establishment of our unalienable rights and liberties: particularly in that He hath been pleased in so great a measure to prosper the means used for the support of our troops and to crown our arms with most signal success: it is therefore recommended to the legislative or executive powers of these United States, to set apart Thursday, the 18th day of December next, for Solemn Thanksgiving and praise; that with one heart and one voice the good people may express the grateful feelings of their hearts, and consecrate themselves to the service of their Divine Benefactor. <hr /></blockquote>Abraham Lincoln, following the Union victories at Gettysburg and VicksburgIn celebration of Union victories at both Gettysburg and Vicksburg, declared a national Thanksgiving Day for Aug. 6, 1863.

Then, on Oct. 3, Lincoln began a tradition by proclaiming the last Thursday of November as a national Thanksgiving Day, not for a specific event, but in thanks for a year full of blessings.

2) Lincoln's Thanksgiving Proclamation, Oct 3, 1863:

<blockquote>quote:<hr />The year that is drawing towards its close has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added, which are of so extraordinary a nature, that they cannot fail to penetrate and soften even the heart which is habitually insensible to the ever watchful providence of Almighty God....

No human counsel hath devised nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy. It has seemed to me fit and proper that they should be solemnly, reverently and gratefully acknowledged as with one heart and one voice by the whole American People. I do therefore invite my fellow citizens in every part of the United States, and also those who are at sea and those who are sojourning in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next, as a day of Thanksgiving and Praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the Heavens<hr /></blockquote>3) John Adam's Thanksgiving Proclamation, March 6, 1799: <blockquote>quote:<hr />That [the citizen] shall call to mind our numeous offenses against the Most High God, confess them before Him with the sincerest penitence, implore His pardoning mercy, through the Great Mediator and Redeemer, for our past transgressions, and that through the grace of His Holy Spirit we may be disposed and enabled to yield a more suitable obedience to His reighteous requisitions in time to come...<hr /></blockquote>4) Theodore Roosevelt's Thanksgiving Proclamation, Oct. 30, 1908: <blockquote>quote:<hr />For the very reason that in material well-being we have thus abounded, we owe it to the Almighty to show equal progress in moral and spiritual things ... The things of the body are good; the things of the intellect better; the best of all are the things of the soul; for, in the nation as in the individual, in the long run it is character that counts.<hr /></blockquote>

[ March 23, 2004, 04:52 PM: Message edited by: LoveMyEx ]

LoveMyEx,

IF you go back and look at the school primers of that time, you will see that children were taught the 10 Commandments and other truths of Christianity.

http://my.voyager.net/~jayjo/primer.htm

Thorned Rose,
Thanks for that link! I was trying to find one like that. I have seen some stuff from the primers and knew they were very Christian in nature because it was important then for the children to be taught God's Word. But I couldn't find anything online so I appreciate that link. As a public school teacher, it is interesting (and sad) to see how "far" we've "strayed" from our Christian roots. I believe the problems in our society (which I see manifested in the children's lives in my classroom) are a result. It is the law of sowing and reaping.

SJ,
I am at my computer needing to do HW and did this research as a major procrastination break! But now I better get it done since I have class in about an hour and half!

-----After reading such hostility and even what I would consider, blasphemies, against God and against godly men (in this thread... of which are not surprising because people have hated God since the beginning of time and will continue to until He returns), it literally sent chills up my spine (to the point that I sensed evil and did not want to be in the midst of it). After doing some quick research on things I knew but couldn't articulate off the top of my head, I feel "inspired" and wonderfully reminded of why America is the nation that it is.

If it weren't for its Christian roots, in fact, it'd be a whole different story. So many nations today still face civil wars, oppression, anarchy, slavery, massive wide-spread poverty and disease... they still practice things like vodoo and human sacrifice, and so on. And it is a direct result of the fact that these nations, as a whole, do not acknowledge the Creator. They do not believe or give thanks to a God and they do worse, they worship false images and idols.

Interestingly, Christianity is spreading at a more rapid rate in many of these countries than it is in the U.S. It seems that God is working overseas and many people are converting to Christianity.

[ March 23, 2004, 04:40 PM: Message edited by: LoveMyEx ]

ComfNumb,

The debate on T. Paine goes both ways and I'm sure will go on forever. Since he's dead, we can't ask him. Perhaps he was the "Judas" of the Founding Fathers. Perhaps there were indeed other Founding Fathers who didn't truly believe.

The fact remains... this country was founded on Christianity and a belief in God as Creator and Jesus Christ as Savior. All one has to do is look at such things like the Pledge of Allegiance, money ("in God we trust"), patriotic songs, historical documents, early American textbooks, and so on. Even our Constitution which is the basis of our laws.

The laws of our nation stemmed from the laws of God (10 Commandments). It is God Himself who created a system of laws because laws PROTECT people. People view God and His laws as stifling or antiquated or simply mythical and nonsense, but they are not. They are protections for us because He loves us.

If we all followed the commandment "Do not kill," we'd have no murders. If we all obeyed the command of "Do not commit adultery," most of us wouldn't be on this website grieving over our marriages. If we obeyed the command of "Do not steal," we could trust people and not worry about thieves, etc. If we obeyed His laws, peace would rule the land.

It is our sin that causes us to break His laws and do "our thing." And the result is pain, suffering, and even lawlessness (perhaps not in America, but in many places in the world). However, we have a Savior and it is through His blood that we are forgiven for breaking all the laws. If it weren't for Him, we'd all receive the punishment we deserve because we are all lawbreakers. Unfortunately, many people (like yourself) refuse to believe and thus, do not receive God's forgiveness offered freely through Jesus Christ because they remain lawbreakers. Their sin separates them from God. Only Jesus can bridge that separation.

You cannot be forced to believe any of this and perhaps there is a war waging in your soul in which you refuse to believe. I can see it in what you've written here. You think all of this is stupid, foolishness, and arrogance perhaps. You think Christians are judemental and try to force their doctrine upon you. That, my friend, is conviction.

Any person in America is free to speak about God (thanks to those Founding Fathers and Pilgrims who began this nation). In other countries, it is not so. People are beat, imprisoned, tortured, and killed for speaking the name of God or Jesus or Christianity.

I understand that there are those on this board who dislike Chrisitans "proselytizing" but we have an amendment in our Constitution that gives us Americans the right to free speech (within bounds). Thus, we are free to speak about God just as you are free to speak about your hate for God or your beliefs against God. I am free to tell you that there is a God who loves you and you are free to call me a moron.

Anyhow, I rarely offer direct Biblical advice to those here unless they are Christians who are likeminded. However, when we tell others to not commit adultery, we are giving them Biblical advice. When we admonish men on here to love their wives, we are giving Biblical advice. When we say to a man here that he needs to not call his OW, it is because he ought to love his wife and calling his OW is not loving. Biblical advice. Whether you realize it or not, advice can be given that is Biblical but yet not outrightly stated that it is such.

I still personally believe very strongly that this site is far more a non-Christian site than a Christian one simply because of philosophies and types of advice given. Although, I have felt that there are more Christians in the infedelity board, which seems odd, but I think maybe it is because they have reached a place of complete brokenness and despair and often, that is when we turn to God. Just a hypotheses of my own.

If God does not exist (and we are therefore not created with an omniagenda), then upon what basis do we make decsions, IOW how do we order our lives... this is mostly for you bp22, atheism is illogical (and is actually a relgion itself anyways).

Keep in mind that it is necessary to make decisions constantly, and making them in the absence of a difinitive set of principles is simply making default reactive decisons, there is no null decision, life does not allow for that option.

After you mull over the above (if so inclinded) what is the problem with believeing God exists? (a proof that is not necessarily easy, but can be done using atheists own tools). IMO atheists define the notion of hypocrisy, they are generally (in my experience) "worse" than Christians in holding on to illogical postions...a curious phenomena considering their dependence on logic.

Jillybean,

Please ignore this post. I am speaking to all of those who have hijacked this thread, including myself since I have joined in. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

I just have one questions for all the atheists out there? If I believe in God and He doesn't exist, when I die, what have I lost?

If you don't believe in God and He does exist, when you die, what have you gained?

If you think all Christians are hypocrites, then become one and show the rest of us how to be a perfect christian. God knows I could use a good example, as I am the worst. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />

I'm precious

Isn't it hilarious? Atheists spend a lot of time and energy trying to convince you that something doesn't exist. If it doesn't exist, then why are you trying to prove that it doesn't exist.

[ March 24, 2004, 07:02 AM: Message edited by: Wilson48 ]

sufdb,

While I am a believer, and not an Atheist, I see a problem in your argument...

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> Keep in mind that it is necessary to make decisions constantly, and making them in the absence of a difinitive set of principles is simply making default reactive decisons, there is no null decision, life does not allow for that option. <hr /></blockquote>It sounds as if you are stating a belief that Atheists do not have a well-defined set of principles. That's a pretty big leap...

I have friends who aren't believers, but they are people with values and principles. Most of them are in line with mine, in fact. The only difference is that I believe in a Lord and Savior, and they do not. Most of my friends who call themselves Atheists would really fall into the "Humanist" category.

But to say that because someone doesn't have "Christian" values and principles, they don't have any at all, is wrong.

My other point was this...many Christians I know believe that God is in control, all the time. They believe that He guides us in our decisions, if we allow Him to. So how does that fit into your argument? If God is in control, then how do OUR principles effect our decisions? If our lives are "pre-ordained", then what difference does our "free will" have? How do "Free Will" and "Pre-Ordained" co-exist?

I know that you didn't address some of these issues, and this isn't an attack. Just part of a friendly discussion...so don't get all upset. I'm just curious how other's think about certain things.

clay

Clay posted: <blockquote>quote:<hr />I have friends who aren't believers, but they are people with values and principles. Most of them are in line with mine, in fact. The only difference is that I believe in a Lord and Savior, and they do not. Most of my friends who call themselves Atheists would really fall into the "Humanist" category.
<hr /></blockquote>Atheists can be morally upright. People do construct fine ethical systems without God. Even so, questions linger: “Why ought I to be moral at all?” “Why should I do the right thing if it doesn’t pay off?” “Why do human beings have dignity and value?” The God of theism offers solid grounding for moral obligation, accounting for a number of facts that naturalism can’t explain.

Although the non-theist may believe that objective moral values exist without reference to God, there is an ultimate question: What underlies those objective moral values? How did we get to be that way—moral beings who recognize right and wrong? We have to be moral beings before we can know what is moral. Randomness and chance can't make sense out of moral obligation or human dignity.

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> How do "Free Will" and "Pre-Ordained" co-exist?
<hr /></blockquote>It is a tension our finite minds cannot comprehend.

"For indeed, the Son of Man is going as it has been determined; but woe to that man by whom He is betrayed!" (Luke 22:22)

clay, if I was proposing atheists have no principles I would have specifically said that. My point was if an argument was offered along the lines of just live life, enjoy the moment, one doesn't "need" a plan, then that itself is a plan, and not a very good one.

I have debated with many atheists, they usually just get mad at me because I don't discuss "Christianity", I use their own "logic" to debunk the atheist conclusion...and that just seems to irritate them.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by i'm precious:
I just have one questions for all the atheists out there? If I believe in God and He doesn't exist, when I die, what have I lost?
<hr /></blockquote>Your sunday mornings, and if you tithe as the Bible says to, 10% of your income.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Wilson48:
Atheists spend a lot of time and energy trying to convince you that something doesn't exist. <hr /></blockquote>

I wouldn't bother trying to argue that there is no such thing as God, because I can't know that for sure. What I do know is that the Bible is not the "infallible" word of God, as Christians generally believe it is.

Also, it is like telling a child that there is no such thing as Santa Claus. If people want to believe in God though, it's no skin off of my nose.

Hootie...

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> It is a tension our finite minds cannot comprehend. <hr /></blockquote>Sounds like a fancy way of saying "I don't know" <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="images/icons/tongue.gif" />

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> We have to be moral beings before we can know what is moral. Randomness and chance can't make sense out of moral obligation or human dignity. <hr /></blockquote>One might argue that being good to your fellow man, and the development of morality, could be the result of an evolutionary process. Through trial and error, mankind could have learned that it is more expedient and more rewarding to be nice to their fellow man/woman, as opposed to being completely self-serving. As there are always variations in the gene pool, some of the species may not have learned, or could have chosen to ignore, those lessons.

Thoughts?
sufdb...

I'm glad you didn't mean that Atheists have no principles. I think, though, that if you go back and read your original statement objectively, you could see how someone could come to that conclusion.

clay

[ March 24, 2004, 09:56 AM: Message edited by: clay_6291 ]

clay...One might argue that being good to your fellow man, and the development of morality, could be the result of an evolutionary process. Through trial and error, mankind could have learned that it is more expedient and more rewarding to be nice to their fellow man/woman, as opposed to being completely self-serving. As there are always variations in the gene pool, some of the species may not have learned, or could have chosen to ignore, those lessons.

sufdb... Yes, morality is a biochemical manifestation of evolutionary pressures, as it must be. However, if one believes we are created beings then the evolutionary principles are divine. We "understand" them using science, because our brains were created with that capacity.... The Bible just spells them out directly, there will be no conflict between the two methods of examining moral principles (aka right and wrong) because they are the same, as they must be.

Actually there is an article in Discovery magazine this month about exactly that, the evbolutionary sources of right/wrong ...ethics/morality. You might enjoy that.

clay..I'm glad you didn't mean that Atheists have no principles. I think, though, that if you go back and read your original statement objectively, you could see how someone could come to that conclusion.

sufdb...I understand how you concluded that, which is why I did not chastiste you for the conclusion (albeit mistaken). This venue of communication requires shortcuts if one is to get much accomplished...IMO it is best to assume nothing beyond what is actually written, as it is written.....but if there seems the need, then ask for clarification, as you did.

[ March 24, 2004, 10:22 AM: Message edited by: sufdb ]

Even if there be no hereafter, I would live my time believing in a grand thing that ought to be true if it is not...Let me hold by the better than the actual, and fall into nothingness off the same precipice with Jesus and John and Paul and a thousand more, who were lovely in their lives, and with their deaths make even the nothingness into which they have passed like the garden of the Lord.

Thomas Wingfold

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> Actually there is an article in Discovery magazine this month about exactly that, the evbolutionary sources of right/wrong ...ethics/morality. You might enjoy that. <hr /></blockquote>I haven't seen that article yet, but Discover is one of my W and my's favorite magazines. I have to say, though, that it has lost a lot since being taken over by the Penthouse/Bob Guccione group. It seems to be a lot more commercially minded than scientifically minded now. I lean towards Scientific American now.

clay

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by clay_6291:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr /> Actually there is an article in Discovery magazine this month about exactly that, the evbolutionary sources of right/wrong ...ethics/morality. You might enjoy that. <hr /></blockquote>I haven't seen that article yet, but Discover is one of my W and my's favorite magazines. I have to say, though, that it has lost a lot since being taken over by the Penthouse/Bob Guccione group. It seems to be a lot more commercially minded than scientifically minded now. I lean towards Scientific American now.

clay <hr /></blockquote>Penthouse? Crimany, there oughta be a law...

Sci Am has a related article this month as well, called half the brain, the two articles tie in nicely together.....you would probably also enjoy steven pinkers books, especially one About How the Mind Works (or some such)...has a lot about emotions, morality, kinship bonds etc as relates to cognition, genetics, and evolution...

Enjoy.

Well, I wrote back last night, but my LONG post was lost. Didn't have the strength to write it again! Yeah, I know, use a text editor...

Let me address the one issue. What is the problem with religion? Why do I think such a belief if bad?

I'll summarize what I wrote last night.

1. My personal experience in life...my early life (until 18 or so) was very born again like. Yet I also believed in science, so I always tried to "justify" the two together...even taught sunday school a few times to tell everyone what I had "found". Well, after physics, I lost all need for faith. And that's what I think of religion, I think it is a "need". It answers the hard questions, fills people with hope, and provides them a sense of safety, importance, love, eternal life, etc.

Is that a bad thing?

Well, I think it can be...and here is why.

A. My STBX looked at me during my months of tyring to reach her, tell her about my yearnings and longings, and she said "You need jesus". She never looked within herself, she never tried to make an attempt, she never could "grab the brass ring" and run with what life has to offer. I think anytime that religoin gets in the way of a relationship, especially a marriage, it is a VERY bad thing. Yeah, I agree, my STBX might be an extreme rare case. Many here seem to have both faith and a sense of personal development, desire, etc. I can understand how my (and her) upbringing might have been to "extreme" of a brainwashing.

B. I got married at 20. I picked my mate at 12. I know both of these were stronly influenced by religion. I wanted to have sex. I was horny. So I got married. Geez. What a mistake.

C. And this is my biggest problem with religion. I said before, I think religion fills a "need" that people have. Hence my wife's comment...you need jesus. Well, I think that prevents people from finding the real answers, from learning and exploring, and from trusting in themselves. I think people leave to much up to "faith" without fully exploring the possibilities.

Prayer is a wonder example. I despise the attitude of "I'll pray for you", or "I felt the power of your prayers". What's with the power of prayers? Why not just feel this strength, hope, and desire YOURSELF...why do you need to think people are praying for you in order to do so? What if you pissed off your church friends...will no one pray then? And you'll just lie in your bed, and without the power of prayer, die? LOL Silly, yes, but it's the exact idea.

To me, people who accept things on faith, they answer their questions without having to learn, to study, to search themselves.

I think that cuases a lot of low self esteem. I think that is a significant cause in the depression we see. If as a society we depended on ourselves, our own answers, our own ability to question, experiment, and understand, I think we'd be MUCH better off.

Medicine is a wonderful example. Thank god (LOL) that scientist and doctors don't put all their faith in jesus. Luckily they ask questions about how things work, and experiement, and then understand. Becuase of those things, and those things alone, medicine has come a long way.

I don't think the bible has offered any guidance in the world of medicine, science, etc. I think it only provides the answers for the masses, answer that require no thought, no process, no experimentation.

On a clear dark night, many people look up I guess and marvel for 20 seconds about the beauty god created. Then they go inside, sit in front of the TV, and waste a few hours before going to sleep. LOL NO, I'm not saying christians do this...I am saying most americans seem to do this.

On the other hand, there are those who will sit, stare, and marvel for hours. And then they ask the questions. And then they do the experiment. And then THEY understand.

So, that's my biggest peeve with religion. I think it was created as a manner to keep "social order" and also to answer people's questions.

Every society in history, far as I know anyways, from the most remote indian tribe, to the city dwellers, they have all conjured up dietys of some form. I think to answer the "great questions", like why are we here? Where did we come from? Why are we different than birds, etc. And also for social control. It is a wonderful way to get people to be controlled...this religion...and with that control you can do mighty things.

You can fund your mansion, you can blow up people you don't like, you can get armies to march and fight in his name, you can do all sorts of gibberish...with nothing more than this blind faith.

That really bothers me. I think people are like sheep, they want to be led, and they are very content to be led. Answer their questions, give them eternal hope, and VOILA...you have an army.

That indeed can be taken as a DJ or major stroke with a really wide brush. But mostly, I think it is very accurate. There are ALWAYS some exceptions, perhaps many of them, but by and large...in my experience in life, it fits very well.

As for source of morality without religion, I think that developed as social civilazation developed. Wolves live in packs...they thrive better. As do lions. As do herds of antelope, etc. People also are very social critters. We live in packs. Some of us perfer the much smaller packs...LOL...like living in the boonies. But anyways, social critters we are. I think we have developed a sense of compassion, of love, of caring for others, and I think without religion, we would still have that.

There are crooked and selfish people, religious or not. I think our current administration might be a great example of that. I know our corporate leaders most certainly are.

Slappy mentioned santa claus...I had a long comparison of santa and god. LOL They are very similar in my mind. One we outgrow at age 10 or so, one we don't. I think society would be much better off if we all accepted them both as tales...and just relied on ourselves, each other, and searched for the answers.

People always say there's no atheist in foxholes. Well, I'll say this, there's no faith when your on the operating table, either. LMAO

Sure, you'll have faith that you'll awake and the lord's will will be aligned with your own, to live, but why go under the knife anyways?

That is what I think is so "hypocritical" and shows the absolute failure for religion. People adopt modern science and technology whenever it fits them. But when the same science and technology starts to put their beliefs in question, they run for the hills, call it hersey and try and burn people at the stake. literally. Or stop stem cell research.

I wonder, when in 40 years, and you can pop a stem cell from your brain or wherever, and grow a new heart for your body. I wonder if the christians will be doing it, or will they still refuse?

I know the answer...and when they look back to 2003 and read all the fighting the fundamentalist did, they will have to brush it off somehow....Hmmm, let me see, what will be the rationalization then??

I live my life in near agreement with religious views. But I don't cling to the "rewards" it has to offer. In fake, I rebuke them all as bonk. I don't need rewards to do the right thing, to help others, to be considerate. I get my own rewards, I feel good. I believe it is the proper thing to do. I won't go to heaven, nor hell. My life here for 80 years will not determine my ETERNITY. I won't get to see my dead children (miscarriages), my dead brother (he 4, me 6), or my dead dog. I'll die like everyone else, leaving behind only what I have left.

I think people should lose the faith, and find the desire to really learn the answers. Seek out the reason, and understand them.

I do think it holds society back. Back big surprise, that is EXACTLY what it is intended to do.

Slap posted: <blockquote>quote:<hr /> Also, it is like telling a child that there is no such thing as Santa Claus. <hr /></blockquote>BP similarly posted: <blockquote>quote:<hr />Slappy mentioned santa claus...I had a long comparison of santa and god. LOL They are very similar in my mind. One we outgrow at age 10 or so, one we don't. I think society would be much better off if we all accepted them both as tales... <hr /></blockquote>To place belief in Santa Claus or mermaids and belief in God on the same level is mistaken. The issue is not that we have no good evidence for these mythical entities; rather, we have strong evidence that they do not exist. Absence of evidence is not at all the same as evidence of absence, which some atheists fail to see.

Hootie...and I hate to start this again...

But I have to ask...

Can you PLEASE SHOW ME ONE SINGLE PIECE OF PHYSICAL EVIDENCE? Just one?

All I ask is that it is REAL, predictable, provable, anything that "science" would associate as real evidence.

Just one PHYSICAL piece.

Am I the only human alive who hasn't seen the evidence of the supernatural? I really think I am going to start seeking out the occult...I just want to see something supernatural, good or bad. Just once. And I will suddenly have to stop in my tracks and ask "Wow, what was THAT?"

I've seen majic tricks on stage...all I did was look for the mirror/wires/etc. and I couldn't see a thing. VERY IMPRESSIVE...but surely we don't think it was a miracle, do we?

What is the PHYSCIAL EVIDENCE. PLEASE TELL ME.

The bible is a book...to believe it, to take it as the word as you do, that takes faith! You have faith, and believe the book inspired by a diety.

But you have to show me the physical evidence.

That's the difference. In science, we can predict what will happen, perform the experiment, and observe. Maybe we are right, maybe we are wrong. If we are right, and it happens repeatedly, over and over, we say that we think we understand that. If we are wrong, and it doesn't go as we think, than we say we were wrong...and modify the theory, and try again. But there is ALWAYS proof, evidence, reproducibility.

If you can show me proof, that can be supported, predicted, and shown to be repeatable.

If Elijah came back today, and we built the big altar to Baal, and it was not consumed...and then I watched Elijah's sacrifice, and the entire altar, be consumed by god, on demand, 5 times in a row, than I would say, hey, you have something there. It might be god, or it might be one heck of a neat lighting inducer...I'd investigate and determine which. See, that would be proof.

Or if I could see the dead rise off the table...and I could make certian the person was dead...for 3 days....and not be out in the bush were it is possible I just can't detect a heartbeat or other life functions. Let's say if I speared his side and watched him bleed out, I'd be convinced of death. To see him rise again, and to levitate to the sky 40 days later, I would believe something is up...or the aliens were playing games with us. LOL

That is why, I think, we don't believe. You have a nice story...it sounds wonderful...I wish my 80 years here could determine my eternal soul...I really do. Heck, I wouldn't even have to change much in my life.

Actually, on that note, here's a little something for ya.

If I DID KNOW of the almighty, and I was so convinced in his power, I would become the most evangelical convert that history has ever seen. Kinda like I did now, but the other way. LOL

I mean, how can people know that the almight creator of the eternal universe is always watching, and that one day they will be pals with him, nad yet they sin?? You HAVE TO BE KIDDING ME!!!! Do you realize what you are saying? You are letting these miserable 80 years today, in this life, in any ways shape or form hold you back from being the closest possible to the almight creator?

Why is that? Why not have a crown so full of jewels as you walk those pearly golden streets, why don't you do anything and everything, in these meager 80 years on earth, so that you can be as close to him as possible?

See, I don't understand that either. It's like, folks believe what fits them. What is convienient for them. You know, I love jesus and all, but I have to have this BMW...while I drive by the homeless. You know, I have to have 2 or 3 houses, while I fly over the poverty stricken inner city. I have to have the 800,000 house in the burbs...when the homeless sleep in my new sub-zero cardboard box I tossed out.

Hmmmm, I don't understand that. In fact, that too me seems like proof that people just pick the parts that make them feel good.

What did jesus tell Zacheus? And what did he do? Surely zacheus will be walking with your lord in a high place. So why not give your all to jesus today?

I suspect I will get slammed as being instigating...LOL...I'm not. I'm dead serious. For those who take such a literal interpretation, why not lay down your riches, all of them, and walk with the lord? Why did my STBX seem to skip the parts of the bible that said wives, don't withhold nookie from your husband, lest he start to have to think about his needs being met elsewere?

I'll say my saying again....There's no people of faith when their aorta is rupturing, their heart is in arythmea, or their bowels are obstructed.

You know, I can only think of one man in modern times who has given up his riches to follow the lord. Given up millions and perhaps billions, a life of pure luxury, to follow his beliefs. Who can you think of? I can think of only one....Ossama Bin Laden. Can you think of others?
Why not? Why not you?

I'm not talking to any specific...I'm talking to all believers in general. Have you REALLY questioned your faith? Your committment? Your following of your lord? Or do you just kinda take and pick the parts that you think fill your needs for security, for happiness, for eternal life?

Those are kinda fighting words I think....but the best teachers in life teach by asking questions. Becuase they cause you to think. Spoon feeding is one thing, but to think and arrive upon the answer, that's a whole 'nother story.

Hi bp22,

I'll play with you. First, I can think of someone else who gave up everything to follow her beliefs:
Mother Theresa. And I can give you a rather lame proof for God, though you might reject it. Caveat, though--I stole the proof from another person!

Can we first define God? God, in the Judeo-Christian sense, means The One, the beginning and the end, Alpha and Omega. For this purpose, let's use a simple definition, and omit the dogma of Virgin birth, papal infallability, the Resurrection, etc, and keep it really, really basic. Can we agree that for believers,

1. "God" means "Creator of the Physical Universe."

Can we also agree on this next point?

2. Time passes, from the past, into the present, and on to the future.

Given that, can we agree on the next statement?:

3. The past was either finite or infinite in duration. That is, the amount of seconds, days, years, etc. before the present moment (day,month, year...) must have been either infinite or finite in number.

4. History has an end in the present. (The future is not measurable or definable as history.) So if the past was of infinite duration, an infinity came to its end. But this is a self-contradiction.

5. Therefore, the universe did not have an infinitely long past; but a past of finite length. Therefore, it had a beginning. The universe had a beginning at some point.

6. The universe was created. Out of nothing came something. Out of infinity came creation and the structure of the universe, time, the solar system, etc, etc.

7. Thus, if it was created, a creator of the universe, God, exists.

When I was a child, and my dad went on deep-sea fishing trips, I would cry each time the boat disappeared beyond/over the horizon. I couldn't conceive of the fact that he was there; that I just couldn't see him; that my vision was imperfect. I'd cry inconsolably. I'd think that he was never coming back (mind you, I was really young <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" /> ) In our sometimes horrible world, it is very easy to consider God in the same way I saw that boat. "I can't see it...therefore it's not there"

Just rantin'

jo

Is that any different than:

1. god, if he exists, can do anything.
2. have god make a rock so heavy he can't lift...
3. goto 2 (oh, he can't do something)

I'm not trying to "play", it is a serious question to those who so vehemently believe...why are they not doing everything possible to spread the word and take up his cross and follow him? Are they just lukewarm christians, to be spewed from his mouth?? (those are the verses, right?)

Anyways, I used to fight with myself about the lukewarm part...I didn't want to be lukewarm...I was a bit of a jesus freak in my younger days...LOL. Oh well, live and learn.

And regarding mother theresa, I was thinking her as well. But did she turn down a life of riches and luxury? And as a catholic, don't the born agains condemn her to burn in hell next to me? Was she truely saved? I'm not up on Mother Theresa, she was a wonderful woman for all humankind as far as I know. Indeed, perhaps one of the very most selfless people ever.

BP:

I appreciate your thoughtful posts. I will formulate a thoughtful response to the questions you've raised and get back to you.

I'm not trying to start another waring thread...see, religion even causes wars in forumns, LOL.

SO I won't fan the flames of it...so if it gets that way, I call the right now, early, to walk away from the fire.

We have gone through these before...and have always come down to faith. Either you have it or you don't. And I'm personally totally happy with that answer, and I accept that some have it, and I sure don't.

ILMF know's for sure the way these threads can become...and I've had my fill of those.

But, I'm always interested in learning something new, new viewpoints and insights.

And by ALL MEANS, if ever I can witness something of the supernatural kind, I'd totally love to be invited to see it.

And FWIW, after reading some about Mother Theresa, I'd hope that the seat next to jesus at the banquet table is reserved for her.

BP posted: <blockquote>quote:<hr />We have gone through these before...and have always come down to faith. <hr /></blockquote>It's the object of someone's faith (in my case, Jesus). A person can have all the faith in the world but be sincerely wrong.

You are correct in saying that it is a serious question. Eternal life and death are at stake.

Ha! I wish you’d have come and flamed the fires on the virtuous woman thread. You could be like the rodeo clown and distract the bulls from me.
edited to add:
Oh, BP, I meant to ask you… as an atheist, do you disregard the spiritual texts because they assume a higher power(s), or do you see hidden truths about human nature in the stories they tell? If you’d like to discuss this off-board, you can reach me at greengablesmb@hotmail.com.
And by now, you should know I won’t be trying to convert you.

[ March 24, 2004, 02:13 PM: Message edited by: greengables ]

Hi bp22,

What we're talking about--what you're talking about, is belief in God, correct? Not belief in a certain sect of Christianity right? Because I'd be the wrong person to discuss that with; I'm a life-long Catholic. I was talking about belief in God, a Deity, a Creator.

I said "play" because I truly did not believe you could be serious about taking the bible literally re. giving up all material goods as the one way to follow Christ. You don't really believe this, do you? That Christians should spend the preponderance of their time and money on evangelicism. The same Book you quote has God saying "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's". So if you don't believe literally that all believers should don sackcloth and hand out pamphlets on the streetcorner, how is this different from, say, your STBX viewing sex as something other than her literal biblical duty?

That said, I apologize for use of that verb "play", because I can see how you'd find it too light. I'll "spar" with you, then. But bp, methinks thou dost protest too much. You suggested that you had bad experiences within the religion of your youth and in your adult life (as a result of religion)--yours and your W's. To me, that's like getting food poisoning at a sushi bar and putting a good deal of the blame for that E coli on Japan...then holding a grudge against Japan. I am *not* negating your pain. I'm questioning your reasoning. You once believed in God ardently, and now you don't believe in God at all, because of humans' failings. Isn't that a little bit unscientific? The Creator didn't change. You did. You can be an atheist if you wish. I won't try to convert you. You asked for a proof for the existence of God and I offered one.

I don't think what I offered is a false dilemma. Maybe it was. My degree was in the humanities, alas, not the sciences <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />
It's trying to place an argument for a Creator more in the realm of time theory and out of the realm of dogma and hyperbole and scripture, particularly the Bible, which not all theists
hold as sacred text (Muslims, for example).

Again, if time as a measurable construct had a beginning--when the universe was created-- something/someone created it. There is nothing that is made without a maker, right? No product without an artisan? Out of nothing came something. I call the Creator "God", the Prime Mover, Primum Mobile. That is one proof for god.
But again, you don't have to believe. And nothing I can say will convince you. But I don't mind discussing stuff!

jo

I tried GG....I read the last 20 posts on the thread...and all i could think to say was

THEY ARE NUTS!

And I didn't think that would do much good...although distract the bulls, yeah! LOL

Contrary to popular conception, I don't say things just to stir the pot. Or add fuel to the fire.

My STBX had that view of woman I think...she wanted me to be the man, the leader, and she somewhat submissive and following of me. In a biblical sense. But I don't want that...I want an equal partner, sometimes I want to follow, sometimes I lead. But never do I want to lead all the time....no way.

It's just so "goofy" for me to understand that perception of husband and wife, I don't have anything to say...LOL. My, struck for words...LMAO.

GG...no, I think the parables in the bible are often great. Human tendancies are the same today as 2000 years ago, and probably will be the same 2000 more in the future. Hence "it still applies today". But I'm all for an analogy or good parable to make a point...or teach a lesson.

jojojo...I take no offense with the word "play". In the past, here, I have been branded as one to attack the believers. I'm just tyring to point out that I'm not doing that, at all, and won't "play" in that sense. No need to spar or anything either...I enjoy talking. Or typing.

Yes, religion has caused me pain. But I think I wrote above, in one of those very lengthy diatribes, that it is NOT my major problem with it.

Rather, my major problem that I no longer have the "need" for religion. As a youth, I saw no other possibilities. I was immersed in it...religion. SO I bought on. But, as a scientist in training at that time, I also questioned it, and failed to believe it "hook line and sinker". In fact, I used to rationalize how they were consistent, the bible and science. Science can't be wrong, in the sense that it is predictable, observed over and over, and it happens. So, to some extent, whether you call it the manifestation of the creators work, or science, it IS REAL.

So, what happened to me, I lost the need for faith. Once I went off to college and was immersed in science, not religion, I could see the light. I could see thee was no need for religion, and I was just holding on to it becuase of the way I was raised. So poof...it was all gone. All that I thought I believed, was realized to be just a story.

Re-read the above...I say this and more there.

I also say that not all religious people follow like sheep, like I did, and my STBX did. I realize that...and that is good.

Now, regarding creation. I'm an astronomer by profession you know, right? So this one is a little close to home. I'm not a theorist, nor a cosmology expert by any means.

And I'll be the very first to say we don't know all the answers, and most certainly I don't know what happened before the universe began...nor do we REALLY KNOW if it did begin or end for certain. It's certainly accepted that the big bang is the general "idea", but it is by no means fully understood. Nobody has been able to fold gravity into the standard model with all the other forces...hence the work with string theory, rolled up dimensions, and all other things my brain doesn't even try to master.

No, as for something coming from nothing. Yes, that happens all the time actual. Vacuum fluctuations. There are times when particles are created out of nothing, a particle and it's antiparticle. They typicall annhilate within a tincy amount of time, but sometimes they don't. Sometimes something will "attract" one of the other particles, and it will live. And the other one lives too. It is a real phenemena. It's really weird. And it happens.

So, yeah, it is possible that the universe somehow came "from nothing". Although I think there's a HUGE lack of understanding in this point...I sure don't understnad. Also, it is not clear if the universe is cyclic, in that it may open and close. And there very well may be multiple universes. And don't ask me what's outside the universe, or inside a black hole. Yeah, we have found black holes, but nobody really knows what's going on inside....

It's wild stuff.

And 100 years ago, we didn't even know galaxies existed...and there was a huge fight over what they were when first found!

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by sufdb:

I have debated with many atheists, they usually just get mad at me because I don't discuss "Christianity", I use their own "logic" to debunk the atheist conclusion...and that just seems to irritate them. <hr /></blockquote>It would be helpful to define ‘atheist.’ If atheism is defined as the belief that “‘God’ does not exist with 100% certainty,” then yes, this would be easy to ‘debunk,’ as much as any such claim that maintains something can be known with 100% certainty.

However, this sounds like a strawman. At least, I personally haven’t communicated with any professed atheist who espouses this caricature of atheism. If atheism is defined more realistically, however, the position is quite strong.

In the scientific method, for example, assuming (and this may be a big assumption) that you accept the validity of this epistemology, one practically assumes that any claim X is not true until sufficient evidence demonstrates otherwise. Note this does not mean that I can claim that X is absolutely untrue. Nor does it mean that I can claim X is likely to be untrue with a known probability. But it does mean that claim X must not be included in our body of knowledge without sufficient evidence.

Thus, if atheism is defined as such: “I may assume that God does not exist without sufficient evidence to the contrary,” the atheist is on firm scientific ground.

I believe most atheists go further and say: “I assume that God does not exist because there is not sufficient evidence to demonstrate otherwise.” Again, to be clear, this statement does not mean that “God does not exist with 100% certainty.” It does mean that, the claim “God exists” will not be included in our current body of scientific knowledge. This position is, of course, currently accurate. Therefore, if atheism is defined as above, it is (scientifically) accurate as well.

A similar rational and strong argument can be constructed without reference to the scientific method.

In my limited experience, most atheists that I have dealt with define their lack of belief this way. Such a position is not only rational but epistemologically (scientifically) required.

Note: to be precise, only specific kinds of claims (scientific hypotheses) can be investigated with the scientific method. One may correctly say that science cannot speak to the veracity of claims that are not scientific hypotheses (claims such as “God exists”). However, as the scientific method requires that we ignore such claims, these claims are assumed to be ‘not true’ in practice.

Peace of God be with you.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by bp22:
ILMF know's for sure the way these threads can become...and I've had my fill of those.<hr /></blockquote>I'm with you, BP...

I haven't read anything except the first and last pages of this thread - but this from you caught my eye, and I just posted into another "volatile" (albeit non-theologic) thread and just after I did I thought...

"Haven't I had my fill of those?"

BP22, I hope you are doing well

I remember junior year in college learning about the Casmir effect, a quantum mechanical fluctuation in the vacuum, but it was predicted to exhibit a real effect.

Well, here's how science works. HEre's a link:

http://focus.aps.org/story/v2/st28

So these gals/guys have developed the technology to actually perform these experiements. Notice how in '58 it was done and reported with 100% error! LOL And not until was it '96 when it was performed again....with totally new technology.

So, becuase the THEORY predicts it, it pops out of the mathematics, the same mathematical theory that makes OTHER PREDICTIONS, it is expected to be real and true. But not until it is measured, and verified, is it truely accepted.

Sometimes when the theorist can't quite "close the gap" on understand, the experiment will make suggestions. Often the experiments reveal something totally different! That's when it is really fun.

And if ever the experiement shows it "once", and only "once", and never repeats...it is believed to be "highly skeptical".

Great example is Magentic Monopoles. Maxwell's Equations, which define all Electrcity and Magnetism, tell us there should be no magnetic monopoles. BUT, people look. And according to some theories about cosmology, the first 10^-40 seconds of the universe so, THEY MUST EXIST.

But, they have a tiny effect...kinda like the gravitational attraction between the paperclip and you, vs. the earth and you.

So, people look and devise experiements to find these elusive magnetic monopoles. They are EXTREMELY hard to find.

If they are found, "MAYBE" that will provide some evidence towards the theory of understanding more about cosmology, inflation, etc. A non-detection sets an "upper limit" on their number density, how many there are, and that also helps "guide" the theory.

But never will someone tell you "they exist"...until they are found, again and again.

Now, folks at Stanford in the 70's or so claimed to have found one. It is a infamous part of physics. Was it real? Eh, who knows. Is it called evidence? NOPE.

SO, that is how science is done...

For a really interesting read, look for something on solar neutrino problem...
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/ParticleAndNuclear/solar_neutrino.html

There you go.

Notice how in 94, when it was written, it was unknown...but people were investigating, becuase it would either lead to new physics, or new understand about stellar theory and nucelosynthesis.

And read near the very end, that yep, the various instruments built to detect the SNU's have provided new evidence, and led to new theories!

So, that is how science works.

It is constantly changing, as we learn more and more. Sure, we can't answer everything today, but that's OK, I can live with that.

To cast my "faith" in something, that someone created us with a flick of his finger, and be happy with that answer, I am personally NOT ever to accept.

And I believe, that having a society that so strongly IS willing to accept, and in fact will condemn those who don't as evil, satanic, and bound to burn in hell, I personally feel that holds our society BACK in its development, it's acceptance, of each other.

No, we sure don't want to live in a cookie cutter stamped world were everyone is the same. Phew. BORING. But imagine a world without religion, without "faith" in something that can't be seen. Imagine if everyone trusted in themselves to understand, to reason, to have confidence in their own abilities.

I don't know...it seems to me that we'd be better off. No condemnation based on "faith", but rather based on a sense of right and wrong, how to live and treat your fellow man.

Sometimes I think it would be great to return to the feudal days, as long as I was a knight, and could fight off the evil hordes trying to pillage those that I protected within my castle walls! LOL I wonder, would I have created running water? The first telescope? Calculus? Machinery? Probably not, I'm not that bright.

And since back them the church was the leader of life, I imagine I would have followed in its lead. Although, just like in my youth, i can only expect that I'd question it, I'd question the taxation, the hereshy, the inquisition. Heck, I probably would have burned at the stake.

Me thinks I'm not one to follow the leader...if the leader doesn't seem to be rooted in what I agree with.

Slapnuts,

Originally posted by i'm precious:
I just have one questions for all the atheists out there? If I believe in God and He doesn't exist, when I die, what have I lost?

Response quote by slapnuts:
Your sunday mornings, and if you tithe as the Bible says to, 10% of your income.

Slap, you are right. Those are the things I've "lost". But is that really so much? I have given my 10% and not given my 10% and you know what, my standard of living didn't improve when I didn't. It didn't go up when I did.

I know you'll have sarcastic reply and that's ok. What you think about it doesn't matter to me anymore that what I think about it matters to you. Ultimately, we don't have to answer to anyone for anyone except ourselves. If you consider what I say and believe to be moronic or childish or stupid that's ok. If you ever come to the hospital at which I work, I make sure that a smarter and more mature person takes care of you. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

I'm preciuos

ILMF...I am well, and I hope that you are too.

Now go back and do something REAL in your life and be happy! Stay away from this thread...resist...LOL.

How's your son doing? Hope all has turned out well...I remember some dilema's in the recent past.

Be well, indeed.

bp most of what you said was about people, and how they behave, had little to do with whether the universe was created or exists by chance.

Belief in God has to start at..... well, the beginning. NOT by observing how people behave in the name of religion.

So start at the beginning bp, are we created, or not, and justify scientifically/mathematically your conclusion. Might also be helpful to list your underlying assumptions to make sure we are on the same page. For example, I "assume" I exist, I could simply be a computer program for all I know, but I have no other means I am aware of to interpret my "real" existence, except the evidence of my senses, and a brain which decodes, and interprets those inputs. "I think, therefore I am". I could instead "assume" (for example) I am just some link in a cosmic conciousness, and have no real, or individual existence...but I have no "evidence" to support such a conjecture, therefore I won't consider it.

Another assumption is that I must make assumptions, this is not an academic exercise. Life is going to continue, it never stops, so every second I am making decisons based on something, and those somethings must have underlying assumptions, whether I am aware of them or not.

To summarize, so far I assume I exist as an independent, self-aware entity, in somekind of "real" universe (my senses tell me this), and that I am "required" to manage my life (make decsions constantly) or I will cease to exist...and this all becomes moot. These two assumptions require me to make a decision regarding the nature of my existence...otherwise I have no basis for making decisions....you with me so far?

I cannot "prove" any of this dimpsasawa, that is why the atheist position that God does not exist because of lack of proof is an ignorant argument, it provides no means of reaching a useful conclusion, but instead gaurantees a conclusion...there are other tools one must apply to resolve this question.

Last assumption (for the moment) is that the answer to the God question is absolutely crucial, your life depends on it.... If God exists, then knowing what that means has to do with our primary genetically encoded mandate, to live (as a species any DNA not so programmed left the gene pool long ago). If God does not exist, then a similar, but slightly different truth is needed to be uncovered so as to provide the foundation upon which we make decisions...again, so we can live.

The difference is this.....of God exists, that suggests potential life outcomes outside of this universe...and may require somewhat difference choices each day. If God does not exist we have only one mandate (again so we live) and that is to make common cause with any and all living organisms in this universe to uncover the means to repeal the law of entropy.

Thx dimpsasawa for your comments re the need to define atheism, I agree, it can vary. In my travels I have not found atheists to be any smarter, or better at logic than Christians, and most really don't know why they are atheists, they haven't done the work, they just chose it (and the notion since can't prove God, that's good enough). I was born and raised in a methodist family, left the church (for the same reasons bp essentially), wandered about for awhile, finally decided I was an atheist for all the usual reasons....a little self-analysis revealed that wasn't really any different than being a Christian, still had no idea of why we are here, or what we should do about it except "rote". So set out to "prove" to myself there isn't any God, and much to my consternation proved there was, guess that is my "born again" experience. Which is what usually happens to any responsible atheist, they get reborn, kicking and screaming, but nonetheless...reborn.

Hey Sufdb...not sure how to say this, becuase I'm sure I already know what you are going to say, but like I already posted, I reserve the right to walk away. And I think I'm calling that card...

To me, my beliefs are not so philosphical "logic" that you like to write. They are more about the physical facts that I observe, that I measure, that others predict, LOL (I'm no theorist). If you really need to say you exist, and prove that to yourself, than in my mind, you have a desire to tout philosophy. I know someone "great" for you to spar with...LOL...he drives me bonkers. An atheist for sure, but with a touch of desire to intellectualize walking down the street.

I think you need to read again what I wrote. I do NOT base my atheism on the way people live. I base it on science. I base it on the work that I see humankind achieving in development of science, and most importantly, understanding.

Sure, I see the negative impacts of religion. I think everyone can. I don't see the positive, I believe they are a false belief. Is there a benefit to santa claus? I can't really think of any. It's just as easy, and maybe more effective, to tell the kids, if you are naughty, I CAN SEE you being bad, and you WON'T get anything. LOL

I can't prove there is no god. I don't feel a need to do so. I wish there was...I really do. I would love to believe that I would continue on in mind and soul, afer this body dies. Geez, I'd do anything to have that be true. I'd become a vampire to extend my life...if they were real. Heck, I'd sell my soul to satan if I could live forever. But those are all just silly things, none of them are real, not in my mind. It's all just silly talk. Like santa. Tooth fairy.

(Although all things sensual and vampire related are a big turn on! LOL)

Anyways, you will say sufdb that I can't keep up with your logic or something, you already said that previously. I don't care too...LOL. I don't need to.

I'm of the type that wants to see the evidence before I believe things. That always bugged my STBX. She would tell me a story, about so and so, and I would say "I don't believe it" LOL There are many things I won't beelive until I see. And when I see, I will beleive.

Wonderful example....accupucnture. I always thoght it was odd...I never learned about it, figured it was "the occult" from easter religions. well, it made a HUGE IMPACT on my ailing dog one day, as if he was reborn. I was stunned....How could me beliefs have been wrong? Well, I then LEARN something about it...and guess what? Sure, it makes total sense. And a dog is going to be "mind of matter". basically, the treated spots are regions of higher resistivity in the body. Neurlogically, that are "special" points. And apparently stimulating them causes muscles to relax...and relase the tension that is cuasing the pain. Amazing...it works. I'm looking for a horse vet to treat me! LOL

So, I am open to new things, new viewpoints, and most certainly new evidence. But I don't care to philosphize as to whether the Matrix is an accurate portrayal of our existence. I was bummed to learn when I was 12 or so that others had that idea long before me! Even more bummed at 15 to learn that others have suggested the miracles of jesus were alien involvement in our society, a major violation in the prime directive, no doubt, but what a WONDEFUL ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDY, no?

Geez, I think there can be more evidence stated for the existence of aliens than for the existence of god. LOL maybe someplace in area 51 there really are things locked up?? Who knows.
Doubt it though.

Hi bp,

I feel the same disgust as you do when you speak of people degrading and berating others in the name of religion. A good friend of mine who elected to become a priest (Roman Catholic) after college can't wear his collar safely in public anymore for fear of his life and safety. He's been verbally attacked loudly, rudely and in public while dining with family and friends, while shopping, and while attending a Knicks game.
Why? In the name of people denouncing his religion and his beliefs because of the actions of some believers (priests). He's the target of diatribes that make the stuff that we've seen on this board seem pale.

I won't denounce atheists. I'll tell a non-believer why I believe and then the choice is a personal one: Free Will, and all that. And I'll take advice from anyone who is here to build better marriages. That was the point of this thread, right? Can we accept non-believers, or non-Christians as worthy participants? For me, yes.

As for your theory of
"imagine a world without religion, without faith in something that can't be seen...imagine if everyone trusted in themselves to understand, to reason, to have confidence in their own abilities... No condemnation based on "faith", but rather based on a sense of right and wrong, how to live and treat your fellow man"
...your belief was shared by Lennon and by Lenin. But even if we all became secular humanists, I fear that something else would divide us and cause us to hate whatever is different: race, ethnicity, height, favorite Ben and Jerry's flavor.

Why? Because we're human. We're flawed. No one is perfect (except, in my dogma, well, you know who...)

In peace,

jo

Jo, I agree with you...and I think money would be the biggest problem...those who have, those who don't. Maybe that was in my post last night that was lost...

And yes, I even mentioned communism. LOL In theory, it is ideal...of course in practice, it won't work. Some are lazy, some are greedy, and those alone will destroy communism.

I feel very sorry for those priest who are doing good work. It must indeed be tough for them. There's always some bad apples...always. Like you say, it is human, indeed.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Hootie:
To place belief in Santa Claus or mermaids and belief in God on the same level is mistaken. The issue is not that we have no good evidence for these mythical entities; rather, we have strong evidence that they do not exist. <hr /></blockquote>On the contrary, just as Jesus was probably a real person, so was Saint Nicholas, who later became known as Santa Claus.

Stories of St Nicholas, told over generations, have evolved into the story of Santa Claus. One particular story that I've read has St Nicholas leaving bags of gold in a 3 sisters stockings to be used as dowry's so that they would not be sold into slavery.

The stories of Jesus were not written by people who had first hand knowledge of him. It is commonly known that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were not written for something like 70 years after Jesus life.

So while he may or may not have been a historical figure, accounts of his life are historically unreliable because all accounts of him are from secondary sources.

Luke, as an author of second-hand accounts, seems pretty confident of the facts for his part. He anticipates an objection similar to yours at the beginning of his gospel:

"Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word, it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus; so that you may know the exact truth about the things you have been taught."

Am I reading too much into this when I conclude that:

* "Many" people before Luke had already written down Jesus' acts

* The original sources were contemporaries of Jesus who supplied eyewitness accounts

* Luke undertook writing his history with a critical eye for accuracy

* Luke's audience had been previously informed about Jesus through an oral-history tradition that was still current in his own time

If Luke is telling the truth, he had access to enough first-hand source material to be the envy of many a modern historian. Few ancient historical second-hand accounts are as close to being first-hand accounts as that. It's pretty impressive by any standards. And I haven't even mentioned the modern archaeological research that has upheld the Gospel accounts on formerly contested points. It's pretty interesting sheerly for historical interest, apart from trying to establish the Gospels as religious authorities.

BP22,

Thanks!
...and thanks for asking - Son's well, I am well, and as well as staying away from possibly "difficult" threads.... I am actually too busy to stir much here myself.

BTW, EXCELLENT post! (re: existence of magnetic monopoles)
Stay encouraged and positive - I am glad you are well

But, yes...
On topic (as long as I have dabbled here at all)

Yes, Jill - I believe so.
(To answer your very first post)

I hope you are well

bp..Sure, I see the negative impacts of religion. I think everyone can. I don't see the positive, I believe they are a false belief.

sufdb...What are the negative and positives of gravity?

I think the difficulty you have bp is thinking of religion as a choice, or something you decide to do. It is not, it is no different than observing and understanding gravity, or the electromagnetic spectrum, or nuclear forces etc. What you (or I) believe is irrelevant to the truth, we expereince the consequences of getting the truths of our existence right.....or wrong.

You know, people use to think the world was flat, and they lived their lives accordingly, and resisted those who said otherwise, even killing them perhaps....but none of that changed the truth, or the consequences visited on those who got it right, or wrong....and so it goes bp, until we know everything. The physical facts we can observe of our universe are compelling, the greatest proof of living in a created universe is physics itself, that is all you need to "prove" God exists.

btw bp, all this "philosophy" (as you say, to me it is just observational science...but whatever) aside, how does bp order his life, how do you make decisions?

re·li·gion n.
1.
a. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
b. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
2. The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.

Exactly how is that NOT a choice?

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by MyBestFriend'sWife:
 re·li·gion n.
1.
a. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
b. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
2. The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.

Exactly how is that NOT a choice? <hr /></blockquote>Semantics can play havoc in such discussions. I suppose we can say "religion" itself is a kind of choice (given the smorgasboard of choices). I am guilty of interchangeing words like religion, creation, God in my discussions, so let me clarify.

IMO there are but 2 issues relevant to decideing how one orders their life.

1. Is our universe a created one by design, or a chance permutation of unknown (but of undirected...not purposeful) origen.

2. Given the answer to #1, what do we do next. If we decide "science" says we are created, than the next question is what is the nature of the creator and what does that mean to us.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Issachar:
And I haven't even mentioned the modern archaeological research that has upheld the Gospel accounts on formerly contested points. <hr /></blockquote>The thing about archeological evidence is there is always interpretation. Say for example, I created a story of a Jesus figure who died in the plane crash in Lockerbie.

2000 years from now, if there is some interuption to the continuity of written history, say an archaeologist discovers evidence of the crash. People who believe in my religion would say that this proves their faith.

What has archaeology proven about the Bible? We know that most, if not all of the cities are actual places. So what? What else do we know?

Wow, some good responses to my question. Next time someone spouts off that this is a christian site they can be sent to this thread. I am honestly really surprised at the amount of posters who question religion as I do. I do not believe that I am a athiest I am more a agnostic. I believe in a higher power, I just do not believe in organized religion. I want to thank everyone for their responses. This was a very interesting discussion.

Anna- I'm doing great! Got married last fall and couldn't be happier. Kids are doing well. I'm enjoying be a young Grandma. Funny how life can change in 4 years.

Jill

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Next time someone spouts off that this is a christian site they can be sent to this thread.<hr /></blockquote>I have never seen a single person "spout off" that this is a Christian site. Either you have seen this or it's just a sort of "thorn" to you (I'm guessing the second is correct). You kinda make it sound like you've heard it soooo much that you are just exasperated. I know there are Christians here who share their beliefs, but I've never seen one say "this is a Christian site."

However, maybe it'd be important for the nonChristian population here to keep in mind that Dr. Harley is a professed Christian whose books are sold in Christian bookstores; thus, there are Christians who come here thinking this is a Christian site. With enough time and interaction with others, they will quickly see this is the case. Some leave and some chose to stay and since Dr. Harley allows it, they talk about their faith (to the frustration of many nonbelievers).

This site has always clearly been dominated by nonbelievers in my opinion... it is clear to see it both in the advice they give and the philosophies they hold... a disbelief in God and Jesus as Christ. However, I see alot more Chrisitians on the other areas of the MB board and a whole slew of them in the "Prayer Request" forum (thanks to Dr. Harley for making a prayer request area... I suppose this is a reflection of his own faith in Christ). Like I mentioned before, I think it's due to brokeness. Often when people are broken, they turn to Christ as they realize that alone, they mess up their lives! They see their need for God. Obviously, just a hypotheses that I've come up with as I've noticed the differences between the areas of the board.

My guess is that this site will always contain a Christian population, esp. if Christian bookstores continue to carry Dr. Harley's books. And some might even think it's a Christian site since they know that Harley is also a Christian. Why berate them for thinking such a thing? Trust me, spend enough time here and they will soon see it's not a Christian site. It is not hard at all to see it.

[ March 24, 2004, 07:50 PM: Message edited by: LoveMyEx ]

You're right, LoveMyEx, it's not a Christian site or an Atheist site or an Agnostic site. It's a Marriage Builders Website !
So, now that we've established that all are welcome here, can we please get back to the original intent of this site????

LMX- You are totally wrong. I have seen it stated numerous times that this is a christian site, quite recently in fact. I will say that when I see alot of preaching going on it makes me question if this is the right place to be anymore and I have posted here since 1999. It just really turns me off when posters start quoting scripture. I think points can be made without bringing the bible into it.

As a definite ex-christian...Let me be the first to say, and probably I speak for most others here, christian and not, Harley's books are great!

I think perhaps they should be required reading before marriage...LOL. Maybe in high school.

How do I make my decisions? I've been told that I analyze everything...LOL.

I think I judge what is best, best for my kids, best for others, best for me. I put my kids first, and I do what I think is best for them. That is why it was so difficult for me to divorce, becuase it is unclear if it was best. But it appears like perhaps it is...but it wasn't my choice.

Not sure what you mean sufbd. I don't understand exactly what you are asking. I think you are saying, if god doesn't exist, why do we live? What is our purpose?

Yeah, I think you basically mentioned it, life is a byproduct of nature. I don't see any reason "to be" so to speak. I don't think we are entertainment for the almighty, or companions.

Is that what you are asking?

I think the parables of the bible, and most other good "moral" parables, have great litle stories to teach. I don't question the need for people to have a sense of morality, society would be purely a disaster without some sense of rules.

But surely there is no need to "believe" we were created for a purpose, or by a creator, in order to live life, be happy, and enjoy it.

I personally enjoy teaching others. I get a great reward when I see those moments of understanding. It's a great rush for me.

I don't feel like I am "inspired" by a creator to teach...I do it becuase I enjoy it. Does it benefit me? Nope, notreally. I'd probably "gain" more if I plundered, murdered, and stole. But that doesn't interest me, nor would I enjoy that.

So, is that what you are asking? What "guides" me through life?

My curiosity is really what guides me...I have a great job...I get to do what interests me...and learn about which I want to. It's a blast.

I like the thought that someday I will find someone that I can also share these things with. Together perhaps we can learn, explore, and experience things in life that we both enjoy.

Do you think you live for a purpose of pleasing the creator? If so, why have you not dropped all your life to follow jesus, like mother theresa? If you truely believe you live for jesus, to spend eternity with him someday, why haven't you done it totally? Completely? And without any reserve?

Maybe you have...I don't know. LOL A pedaled power PC from the banks of the Amazon...were you work with the natives, to save their souls. (Sorry, couldn't resist)

Is that what you are asking?

Another question for you sufdb...for clarification. You said physics is the proof of god, I think. That is what you meant, right?

May I ask how so? May I ask why you think god is in any way proved, displayed, shown, represented, authenticated, etc through physics?

Physics stands alone...it describes how the world works. It allows things to be understood, predicted, etc.

Why do you think there's any "need" for jesus in physics? How much have you studied physics, so that you really understand, and see how it all stands on itself, consistent, and descriptive of the world around us?

Ah, you did answer my question, BP.

You know I believe in a Creator of some sort. But, for the life of me, I have no idea why he/she/it bothered to create us! LOL.

How can an all powerful, etc. God, such as the Judeo-Christian Bible presumes, be lonely? Lonely enough to create humans?

And how many angel can dance on the head of a pin?

Oh, boy. I need to go to sleep now. NOW. I'm getting sloppy in my thought process. Even by a liberal arts standard.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Slapnuts:
The stories of Jesus were not written by people who had first hand knowledge of him. It is commonly known that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were not written for something like 70 years after Jesus life.

So while he may or may not have been a historical figure, accounts of his life are historically unreliable because all accounts of him are from secondary sources. <hr /></blockquote>Slapnuts, I'm not sure if you just made a mistake here or if you've gotten carried away with your argument, but Matthew and John were not secondary sources. Both were eyewitnesses and firsthand sources.

Beyond that, society routinely accepts secondary sources as reliable accounts of many things. Many biographies and certainly unauthorized biographies are written by interviewing people who knew the subject. My local newspaper is filled with stories from the AP. And how many of our history books are written by people who were present at the events chronicled?

Applying your standard for accepting written accounts, I can't believe half of what's in my newspaper or any of my kids' history books, BUT I should believe the New Testament books of Matthew and John!

Quote by jillybean:
You are totally wrong. I have seen it stated numerous times that this is a christian site, quite recently in fact. I will say that when I see alot of preaching going on it makes me question if this is the right place to be anymore and I have posted here since 1999. It just really turns me off when posters start quoting scripture. I think points can be made without bringing the bible into it.

Now my take:
So jillybean am I to understand that, as a christian, I should keep that and the book I believer in to myself? Yet you and others, who are atheist, agnostic or whatever, are allowed to tell me or anyone else that the bible is a bunch of crap (my personal interpretation of what others have said)?

You have witnessed many people get berated by christians? Well, I can say that I have witnessed many christians be berated by non-christians. I agree that both happen on occasion, but do you think that maybe we "see" things the way we do because you tend to notice more when people you have a lot in common with are put down and don't notice when it's the other way around? Just food for thought. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />

In conclusion, I think everyone has the right to say what they want on this board as long as they are respectful. And before you say anything, I think taht lack of respect has gone both ways at times by different people. It doesn't take long for anyone here to figure out who is and isn't a christian, atheist, agnostic, humanist, or whatever. If those people bother you or me then we can very effectively avoid them or ask them not to address us. And we don't have to address them. And we shouldn't address them, even by inference, if we have asked them not to address us.

I'm precious

[ March 24, 2004, 09:32 PM: Message edited by: i'm precious ]

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by LoveMyEx:
 I have never seen a single person "spout off" that this is a Christian site. Either you have seen this or it's just a sort of "thorn" to you (I'm guessing the second is correct). You kinda make it sound like you've heard it soooo much that you are just exasperated. I've never seen one say "this is a Christian site."
<hr /></blockquote>I have seen it.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Dilbert:
Applying your standard for accepting written accounts, I can't believe half of what's in my newspaper or any of my kids' history books, BUT I should believe the New Testament books of Matthew and John! <hr /></blockquote>You should question what people write in newspapers or history books. Especially newspapers.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Dilbert:
Matthew and John were not secondary sources. Both were eyewitnesses and firsthand sources.
<hr /></blockquote>I stand corrected. Matthew and John were Jesus disciples.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Slapnuts:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by LoveMyEx:
 I have never seen a single person "spout off" that this is a Christian site. Either you have seen this or it's just a sort of "thorn" to you (I'm guessing the second is correct). You kinda make it sound like you've heard it soooo much that you are just exasperated. I've never seen one say "this is a Christian site."
<hr /></blockquote>I have seen it. <hr /></blockquote>I've seen it too. It's an easy assumption. Dr. Harley is a Christian. His books are carried by Christian bookstores. And that logo at the top of every page... I've heard the Christian marital relationship described as a triangle in which the husband and wife become closer to each other as they become closer to God, so the two arrows (H & W) pointing toward the apex (God) is like an ichthus to any Christian who's heard the analogy.

Even if it were an explicitly Christian web site, this forum, as stated in the much quoted but frequently overlooked terms of service, is "open to all." Christians who accept the terms should be prepared to practice as much or more tolerance in this forum as they do in real life.

[ March 24, 2004, 10:11 PM: Message edited by: Dilbert ]

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Dilbert:
 And that logo at the top of every page... I've heard the Christian marital relationship described as a triangle in which the husband and wife become closer to each other as they become closer to God, so the two arrows (H & W) pointing toward the apex (God) is like an ichthus to any Christian who's heard the analogy.
<hr /></blockquote>I could see that, but I've never thought of it that way. I've thought of that logo meaning moving forward together, not upwards, so to speak.

Jillybean said: <blockquote>quote:<hr />I have seen it stated numerous times that this is a christian site, quite recently in fact.<hr /></blockquote>I believe that most of the "regulars" are pretty aware that this site is not Christian (as far as the audience/posters). But maybe they feel it is because it's Dr. Harley's site and he is a Christian and his books and principles are based upon Chrisitian principles. I've seen people say that they are Christians, etc. but never state that this is a Christian site. I guessed I missed wherever you saw it.

I find it completely understandable though that someone would think or say that. I was thinking about how Dr. Harley is a Christian with his books in Christian bookstores and then I was also thinking about how churches have marriage builder seminars and some Christian sites also post this site on their website. So I have a feeling that quite a few people make the assumption that it's a Christian site when they come here. There is no where where it states that it's not.

So if a person sees his books in a Christian bookstore or at a Christian website (of which there are many that are definitely Christian, mostly as far as the material they post but also their forum participators are by and large Christian people... such as www.growthtrac.com or www.crosswalk.org or www.familylifetoday.org or www.christianity.com , all of whom recommend his books on their sites), well... it's only understandable that a person would come here thinking it's Christian. His teaching is also on Christian radio stations. And I think, if I recall correctly, he speaks at churches. So, is it really a surprise that a person would possibly hear him speak in a church, know that he's a Christian, and then think that his website is Christian.

And actually, I would consider the articles "Christian" as far as they are based upon Biblical principals, but one step in the forums, and it doesn't take long to see that there is a vocal nonChristian population (most vocal in the EN forum). I've seen alot of Christian advice given in the divorced and infedelity boards and have yet to see nonChristians express disdain for it. It's just a guess and could be very wrong, but it seems that I see more Christians in those areas and more people give Biblical advice, offer prayer, etc. That's not to say there aren't posters there though that express offense towards Christians. I just myself haven't seen them (like I have in the EN board where there are all sorts of hostilities towards Christians and anything related). But maybe others have.

As for preaching... well, you just gotta live with it I guess. Kinda like "I'm Precious" said. You will probably continue to see posters quote Scripture. I don't think the Christians are going to leave... I see alot of "regulars" that are Christians. And alot of "regulars" who aren't.

Christianity is strong and thriving not only in America but around the world. You will probably deal with "Bible thumpers" the rest of your life because Chrisitanity will never die out. There will always be those Christians who are quieter and those who are vocal.

Personally, and I hope this doesn't offend too much, but I believe that the "issue" isn't just with the Christians themselves but it's with God and the Bible. Bottom line, you don't want to hear it. It's not necessarily the poster who "turns you off." It's the Scripture itself because you do not believe in God and don't want to hear any teaching about Him.

Since the beginning of time, God and His Word (the Bible) have "offended" people because they simply don't want to hear. It will always be that way until the end of time.

[ March 25, 2004, 01:49 AM: Message edited by: LoveMyEx ]

BP,

I can't quite keep up with all the posts here but read the one where you gave your problems with religion and wanted to reply with just a few things.

First there are alot of religions. There is only one though that acknowledges Jesus as the Son of God and Savior of mankind. Even some religions that call themselves Christian don't acknowledge this. They say things like that Jesus was God's son and a prophet, but not God Himself in the form of man.

And I don't understand all of it with my finite mind... how Jesus can be both Son and God, but I've heard it explained like an egg or water. An egg is one egg but it is three: yolk, white, shell. Water is water but comes in three distinct forms: steam, ice, and water. Jesus, God, and the Holy Spirit are one but yet three distinct Beings as well. Anyways... that's my little lesson for the day! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> But I say all that to share that that teaching right there is what distinguishes the Christian faith from other religions.

And yes, it is an act of faith to believe it. I've never heard God's voice and I didn't live when Jesus was alive. But I believe... simply because I chose to and because when I consider such things as the galaxies of the universe and its vastness and order... when I consider the birth of a baby... when I consider the workings of the mind and the body, how each system works together... when I consider our frailty... and so much more... I am convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is a God.

Okay, back to your "problems" with religion.

I would venture to say that even though you taught Sunday school and had a "born again like" upbringing, you probably never had a personal friendship with Jesus Christ in which you considered and believed Him to be your Lord and Savior. Maybe you did? My thoughts are that you probably didn't, but if you did, you can feel free to correct me and share.

I don't think we have a need for faith, but we have a need for God. My belief is that God is our Creator who greatly loves us and that without Him, we are like sheep gone astray. We live our lives as we please and we do our thing, never acknowledging or serving the Lord, but it is like blindness in which we think we are headed in right directions but can't see that we are lost and blind.

Faith is not a need but it is an act and a choice. Faith is the active acknowledgement of God and His Word. It is saying, "Yes, I believe and yes, I need you God." The need is for a Savior and the faith is acknowledging that need.

And yes, you are right, that my faith in God does indeed provide me with a sense of safety, love, etc. Becaues I walk with God, I experience His protections and provisions. And even when He allows me to perhaps face abuse or danger or tragedy, I know that life is temporary and that someday, I will be with Him and this life will pass away. I know that I am His child and creation and I know my purpose as a result. Living as a Christian is by no means easy or problem-free, but I do see the Lord provide and protect in ways that are often a direct result of my prayers or other's prayers. And sometimes He says no to prayers for reasons only He knows. And I accept that too, knowing that He loves me.

OKAY, as to your wife...

I wanted to encourage you to not base your beliefs on the experience with your wife. I will share with you that my husband was/is a Christian man. However, I could describe him in ways in which you described your wife... as not looking within himself but blaming me and so forth. He also used Scripture to suit his purpose. Taking some verses to support his belief that he was right to divorce me and ignoring others (such as "Do not divorce your wives.")

However, I have to forgive him and I have to understand that none of us, even Christians, are perfect. We fail. Christians fail. We, as Christians, really should be the ones of all people loving the most and having the happiest marriages and being the kindest, etc. It is what God calls us to be because it's how He is... loving, kind, faithful, good. I am sure it grieves Him greatly when He sees us Christians not living as we should and giving Christianity a bad name.

But it does happen, and when it does, He does offer forgiveness and IF we repent and change our ways, He does restore us.

I think your wife, like my husband, used Jesus as... well, I'm not sure the words... um... kinda used the Bible as a weapon in which to pound you? And it's understandable that that would turn you off of religion.

I have been "burned" by other Christians. One of my hardest experiences was when I was a Christian school teacher, of all things! And I had certain Christian parents not act very Christlike towards me or I once overheard the church secretary gossiping about me. Do you know though she is one of my closest friends today and I have never mentioned to her how I heard that because I love her and I know that she is a sinner like me, and I have forgiven it. But I did go through a time of feeling very disillusioned with the church and "hypocrites" but I realized that I can't let that keep me from God. And I have to remember that we are all sinners who do wrong, and the Bible says this: "Love covers a multitude of sins!" That is really very profound and true. If we don't love, then we will hold everyone's wrongdoings against them forever. It is love that helps us to forgive. And love is God. God helps us to forgive.

I don't think I'm articulating myself well here 'cause I'm kinda going off on little mini-sermons <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> , but I do hear what you are saying about your wife and how that turned you off. And I guess I want to encourage you to try to both forgive her and also to not let other people shape your faith. And I don't think your wife is as rare as you might think, unfortunately. There is currently a term called "spiritual abuse" which refers to the using of religion or the Bible or God to manipulate or condemn a person. The Bible is not a weapon with which to condemn someone for not "measuring up." None of us measures up.

As for prayer, prayer is basically communication with God. He loves us. He wants to hear from us. Also, when I pray, it is far more than just requests. It helps me to have a humble heart and a right perspective. For instance, it says in the Bible to pray for your enemies (Jesus' teaching). Well, that's hard! I want to hate my enemies, not pray for them. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> Well, when I do pray for them, it really helps me to forgive. It helps me to trust that the Lord is more than able to handle them. It gives me strength and peace but I am not just praying to the wind. I am praying to the Almighty God of the universe.. my Creator who knows me. Prayer, for a Christian, is indeed powerful and I have seen prayers answered, and of course, they strengthen my faith. And sometimes I have prayed and prayed and felt like God has not heard. Sometimes He seems silent. But I continue to pray and beleive knowing that my patience and perseverence is indeed that strength, hope, and desire that you mention.

I think the reason that we pray for each other is because we love each other and, well, God tells us in His Word to pray for one another. It is a support thing. It is similar to the way it is in here, in a way. You receive strength and comfort from knowing that others care and are involved in your life and that they are willing to help you. I find great strength in knowing that others are praying for me because I know the One to whom they are praying! And I know that He can help me far more than I can help myself or a person can help me.

If there is division and problems between Christians... if we "piss each other off" like you said, well, there are Biblical teachings on what to do. You forgive, you ask for forgiveness, you confront if need be-- in love!-- etc.

Actually, people of faith do study and learn and search. And I believe that Chrisitans or people of strong faith have a better understanding of who they are and their purpose than someone who does not know God. I think though that "low self esteem" is something every person struggles with at various times, Christians including, but it's not because they don't study or learn.

And yes, even Christians face depression. We still live in this world just like nonChristians, and it can be a pretty darn depressing world! And a world that can be really rough on the psyche of a person and their "self-esteem."

BP, you mention that you don't think the Bible has offered guidance in the world of medicine and science and that it only gives answers for the masses, but I would ask you in all seriousness, have you studied the Bible, recently enough that you remember it? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> Unless you know it, you cannot truly know what its contents are, and that's where alot of nonChristians are mistaken. They do not know what God's Word says and they make assumptions based on their own lack of knowledge or based on what others say (many of whom also have no knowledge of God's Word).

On a clear dark night... well, I can recall a time when I worked at a camp in the mountains, and a whole bunch of us went up to this rock under the stars and we sang worship songs to the Lord and we prayed and praised Him and we marveled at His Creation. And I remember another time at the same camp, different rock <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> when a whole bunch of us went to the rock (Called "Lookout Rock" I think) and someone pointed out all the stars and constellations and explained the galaxies, etc. and we were simply in AWE. I always remember that night and how I was blown away by the vastness of the universe and it only caused me to revere and worhsip God all the more! It was a reminder to me of His greatness and power.

But yes, you are right, that alot of Christians do get caught up in t.v., etc. But we have to live in this world like you, and we have to work at jobs and provide for families and we face stress and disease and hardhip just like you. We have to pay our bills and we get tired and cranky, just like you. We face infertility and aging parents and mortgages and deadlines, and on and on... just like you. I guess what I'm saying is that we are not perfect and God accepts those Believers who are studied and scholarly and He also accepts those Believers who are simple and uneducated. And there are both, but neither should be judged or condemned. Some of your statements come across more as judgements as Christians.

If anything religion does NOT keep, it is "social order." More wars have been fought over religion than any other issue. People have been killed, tortured, imprisoned for their faith. Christians around the world are persecuted. Religion may be something created by man, but faith comes from God. Christianity is a faith in Christ as Savior and it goes far beyond being a "religion." To me, it is more of a lifestyle. It is my life and breathe. It's not religion that saves me. It's God. It's not religion that I live for. It's God. Religion is manmade and there are alot of religions in the world. And yes, some of them do control people. And oppress people. Christianity does neither.

You also said, "I think we have developed a sense of compassion, of love, of caring for others, and I think without religion, we would still have that."

Yes, I think that there are many religions that are void of love and compassion, but not TRUE Christianity. God is a God of love. He is a God of compassion and goodness. Unfortunately, even us Christians don't always reflect that to others well, but many do.

If society, as you said, relied on ourselves and each other, it would be a far more scary place than it already is! Our hearts are basically pretty darn wicked. We esteem ourselves and our needs more highly than others. Just look at many posts here in which spouses are bemoaning that fact that their loved one is not meeting their needs.

I see it in children all the time (I am a teacher). I have seen evern kindergardeners, already at a young age, lie, cheat, steal, manipulate, etc. Does anyone teach babies to throw tantrums when they don't get their way? Does anyone teach a very young child to steal something or to tell a lie? No. It's our nature. If we relied on ourselves, we'd all eat each other alive (and many people do!).

As for adopting modern science/technology and having surgeries and the like, of course we do! God has given us gifts and we are to use them. I praise God for gifted surgeons who might save a life. Being a Christian doesn't mean we say, "Lord, I have a tumor but I trust you and so I am not going to do anything about it." God would say to first of all, pray about it and second of all, go do something about it... find a gifted surgeon to heal it if possible. Why would God give a person the gift of being able to perform surgery, etc. unless He wanted us to use those gifts?

It's really not hypocritical at all nor is it a failure with religion. It is common sense and yes, even us Christians have common sense. I can have a surgery and at the same time trust God. I can use a computer but at the same time trust God. And so on. We Christians "adopt" modern science and technology because God created humans with the capacity to do such things, make such things.. and we know that He has given gifts and resources. If we call something "heresy," we would do so because it teaches that there is no Creator. Or we believe it tries to usurp the Creator and do things that He never intended. Or it goes against His Word and His law... it is void of love or faith.

I've never run to the hills or burnt people at the stake though, and I'm not sure what exactly you're referring to there.

You said, "I wonder, when in 40 years, and you can pop a stem cell from your brain or wherever, and grow a new heart for your body. I wonder if the christians will be doing it, or will they still refuse?"

Who knows. But why do you let these things keep you from believing in an Almighty God? Bottomline... you are using Christians as scapegoats for your own lack of faith. You are blaming their failures or judging them, etc. as a means of saying, "See, that's why I'm not a Christian."

Throughout this whole post, it's more of a pointing of your fingers at Chrisitans as being the reason why you don't believe.. whether it be your wife or those who burn abortion clinics or those who run to the hills. But God holds you responsible for what you believe or don't believe and you cannot cast that responsibility onto another person.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />I won't go to heaven, nor hell. My life here for 80 years will not determine my ETERNITY. I won't get to see my dead children (miscarriages), my dead brother (he 4, me 6), or my dead dog. I'll die like everyone else, leaving behind only what I have left.<hr /></blockquote>If you are right,BP, then more power to ya! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> But, if you are wrong, I truly fear for you. IF there is any truth to the Bible, then you will be in for a frightful day oneday when you face God and He asks you if you believed. IF you are wrong in what you say above, then your very life is at stake. Eternity is a very, very long time.

You know you will die. No doubt about that. If you are right and you are just reincarnated or just dirt or whatever, then you have nothing to fear. But if you are wrong... IF there is truth to the Bible... if there truly is a Creator who you will face one day, then your very life is truly at stake.

You also said, "I think people should lose the faith, and find the desire to really learn the answers."

But why? Why does people's faith disturb you so much? You might ask yourself more of that. Is it because you are bothered that you hear it? You don't want to acknowledge God so you don't want to hear about God.

BP, I do have a HUGE desire to learn the answers and I had that desire even as a 12 year old which is when I found the answer... Jesus Christ. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> My faith, and many people's faith is a direct result of a desire to know and to find answers. So many people are hurting and filled with despair, hopelessness, and emptiness. People feel it so strongly sometimes that they take thier lives. So many people are lost and confused and they turn to drugs or crime to give them some sort of "high" to help them with the boredom or despair of life. Jesus is the answer. He gives life where there seems to be none. He heals and He gives hope. And some people come to realize this. Their brokenness often leads them to the place of utter despondency and they cry out to God and He hears.

Anyways, it's hard to talk "kindly" with only type to convey it, but please know that I've said nothing with a loud, sarcastic, or angry "voice." I am really tired right now and too tired to go back and edit it all, so I truly hope nothing sounds angry or rude to you.

I was once where you were. I thought Christians were "stuck in the muds" (well, at least my best friend was!). I thought it was no fun, etc. But God kept drawing me to him. I kept hanging out with my Christian best friend (even though I made fun of her faith and "religion"), I kept going to church with her family, and one day, I believed. I choose to accept Christ even though I knew so little. It was the beginning of my life and the best decision I ever made. I have not been spared of pain, I have sinned even as a Christian, I have been betrayed, I have gotten speeding tickets, and I have been far from perfect. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> But I know that God loves me and that Jesus' blood covers my sin and I know that I have life in Him and so much more.

Anyways, this is really, really LONG and my eyes are burning from sitting in front of the computer so long! I don't even know if you will read it, but I hope that you do.

(I kinda answered your post paragraph by paragraph so that might be why it sounds kinda random!)

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Hootie...and I hate to start this again...

But I have to ask...

Can you PLEASE SHOW ME ONE SINGLE PIECE OF PHYSICAL EVIDENCE? Just one?

All I ask is that it is REAL, predictable, provable, anything that "science" would associate as real evidence.

Just one PHYSICAL piece.

Am I the only human alive who hasn't seen the evidence of the supernatural? I really think I am going to start seeking out the occult...I just want to see something supernatural, good or bad. Just once. And I will suddenly have to stop in my tracks and ask "Wow, what was THAT?"

I've seen majic tricks on stage...all I did was look for the mirror/wires/etc. and I couldn't see a thing. VERY IMPRESSIVE...but surely we don't think it was a miracle, do we?

What is the PHYSCIAL EVIDENCE. PLEASE TELL ME.

The bible is a book...to believe it, to take it as the word as you do, that takes faith! You have faith, and believe the book inspired by a diety.

But you have to show me the physical evidence.

That's the difference. In science, we can predict what will happen, perform the experiment, and observe. Maybe we are right, maybe we are wrong. If we are right, and it happens repeatedly, over and over, we say that we think we understand that. If we are wrong, and it doesn't go as we think, than we say we were wrong...and modify the theory, and try again. But there is ALWAYS proof, evidence, reproducibility.

If you can show me proof, that can be supported, predicted, and shown to be repeatable.

If Elijah came back today, and we built the big altar to Baal, and it was not consumed...and then I watched Elijah's sacrifice, and the entire altar, be consumed by god, on demand, 5 times in a row, than I would say, hey, you have something there. It might be god, or it might be one heck of a neat lighting inducer...I'd investigate and determine which. See, that would be proof.

Or if I could see the dead rise off the table...and I could make certian the person was dead...for 3 days....and not be out in the bush were it is possible I just can't detect a heartbeat or other life functions. Let's say if I speared his side and watched him bleed out, I'd be convinced of death. To see him rise again, and to levitate to the sky 40 days later, I would believe something is up...or the aliens were playing games with us. LOL

That is why, I think, we don't believe. You have a nice story...it sounds wonderful...I wish my 80 years here could determine my eternal soul...I really do. Heck, I wouldn't even have to change much in my life.

Actually, on that note, here's a little something for ya.

If I DID KNOW of the almighty, and I was so convinced in his power, I would become the most evangelical convert that history has ever seen. Kinda like I did now, but the other way. LOL<hr /></blockquote>bp22 - A more disingenuous "plea" for proof I have seldom seen.

You already have the "proof" you claim and your "bastion" of scientific reproducability is a straw man argument that compares "apples and oranges."

You made a choice to reject Christ as you became exposed to science and "scientific reason" that is decidely pro-evolutionist and tries to make sound like the "scientific method" is the end-all answer to everything. You know that is false if you have truly investigated "scientific claims" and the modifications of many formerly held "scientific truths."

Some things are forever outside of the realm of the "scientific method." Plain and simple. A simple example: pour me out 2 ounces of love please. Yet do you know anyone who questions the existence of this "thing" called "love?"

I can relate to your position in that as I became exposed to science [yes it was my major in college (Biology)] I "rejected" the faith of my youth. It was not until after I had graduated and was faced with having to be honest with myself that I truly examined the "case for Jesus Christ" and found abundant proof that made it clear that a decision "for" or "against" him needed to be made. HE is the crux of the whole thing. On HIM hangs all the other "arguments" that you might choose to take "punches" at.

You sarcastically asked the most vital question in the whole "debate":
Can you PLEASE SHOW ME ONE SINGLE PIECE OF PHYSICAL EVIDENCE? Just one?

All I ask is that it is REAL, predictable, provable, anything that "science" would associate as real evidence.

Just one PHYSICAL piece.

The one PHYSICAL piece that you "ask" for is Jesus Christ. He lived, he died, he rose bodily from the grave. He was seen by thousands post resurrection. "Christainity" could have been crushed in it's infancy at that time with total scientific certainty IF it were false.

Without going into a lengthy discussion let me simply put it this way. There are only 4 possibilities about this "great moral teacher", as some would like to relegate Jesus Christ to being:

1. He was a legend. Didn't really exist. Was a figment of imagination.

2. He was a liar. He willfully sought to decieve everyone for his own personal gain. Interesting to note what he endured to perpetuate his "lie."

3. He was a lunatic. He was mentally "not there" in the same way that some mental patients believe that they are Napoleon, or anyone else. A nice guy, but totally nuts in the head.

4. He is Lord (God, Creator, Sustainer, the Word, God incarnate, fully man and fully God, etc.)

There are NO other possibilities.

The first 3 "options" have been repeatedly and thoroughly proven to be "bunk" and floated by those whose agenda is to "attack" Christianity. I could, but won't, cite all that stuff. I leave that up to you and your scientific honesty to investiagate on your own.

That leaves the 4th option. That leaves the remaining question (which of course directly ties into the first 3 options also): Is Jesus Christ who HE said he was?

All of the rest of the arguments, appeals to cosmology, etc. nothwithstanding, are distractions at best and pure bunk at worst. If Jesus Christ is not who He said was and did not rise from the dead (we won't even go into other examples of resurrected bodies like Lazarus), then all faith in His IS foolishness. Likewise, if He IS who He said He is, then all of your arguments for rejection of Him are foolishness.

This is simply an "either/or" issue.

Lastly, again with respect to your insistence upon "scientific method", (i.e., reproducability) it has it's limits. Look no further than origin of the universe and origin of life theories. One thing that I learned in biology is the simple fact that "life begets life." Not one shread of "proof" or "evidence" exists that life ever arose from "non-life" through any evolutionary means. But evolutions IS argued for, vehemently, because there ARE only two options, either life arose from non-life through the theory of evolution OR life arose by the purposeful act of Creator. Since those opposed to a Creator have no other option, they must embrace an unproven theory (evolution) on FAITH ALONE, devoid of scientific proof or reproduceability.

pb22, you have made "science" your god while ignoring the limitations that even science has. That is NOT scientific honesty either.

You give me (an all others through your posting) your speculation to support your position and derision of anything related to Jesus Christ because you can't put it in "model" and reproduce it to prove your theory.

But you are right. It does take faith, one way or the other, and an openness to accept that not all things can be proven by the scientific method, yet they are still true.

Now pour me another glass of love, will you?

bp,

You want scientific proof that GOD exsist and that Jesus Christ is real? Well if you go by your definition that if something goes the same way over and over then truely GOD and Jesus exsist. Everyday people all over the world choose to believe in GOD and Jesus. Consistently. If something happens over and over again it must be a scientific fact. I guess the inverse would be true about Atheism then. I guess we won't know for 100% sure until the day we meet our demises. But like somebody said before if there is a GOD then do you really want to get caught with your pants down? How many times have you said to yourself I wish I hadn't of done that? Example: One day I left work 10 minutes early, I was in a hurry to get home. My usual route was bogged down with traffic, in my haste to get where I wanted I took a different route. I got into an accident and for the next two weeks I regreted not taking my usual route. Now that is a small time to regret something when there is the thought of eternity. I was a self proclaimed Atheist I wasn't looking for GOD nor did I think I needed Him. But the truth is He pursued me. I won't get into the details of how He "spoke" to me. And before anybody flames me here He didn't actually talk to me in the literal sense. And this is not meant to be a sermon just more of a food for thought. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />

I can hardly add to the great posts that have already been made, especially to Issachar's and Dilbert's proof to the historical reliability of the gospels.

But, BP, as promised, I want to address a couple of your points:

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> So, what happened to me, I lost the need for faith. <hr /></blockquote>Bertolt Brecht asked, “Can you prove that there is a God?”, Herr Keuner asks another question in reply: “Would it change anything about your life if I could prove to you that there is a God? If you say that it would make no difference, then the question is irrelevant. If you say that it makes a difference, then you have shown that you have a need for God.”

If you are not prepared to think of God as someone who is your Creator and your Judge, and to whom you have an obligation and with whom it is necessary to come to terms, and only think of God as some abstract question as you might say, “Are there people living on other planets,” you really won’t get a proper answer. But on the other hand, if you are saying that, “Yes, it does make a difference to me. I really want to know because if there is a God, them I’m going to try to deal with Him,” you’ve shown that you have a need for God. Keuner’s question shows that our presuppositions (both intellectual and attitudinal) will affect our ability to find God.

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> …So, that is how science works. <hr /></blockquote>Do we substitute “faith” for “knowledge?” The answer is no. Theology can be a true science (a) because the object of its quest to know, God, is real, and (b) because the means and method by which knowledge is sought are appropriate.

In order for you to know another person it requires self-disclosure on the part of the person whom we wish to come to know. You have to notice what is being said, otherwise you can’t have any faith. You have to make an assent. You have to be willing to place at least some trust is what the other person says. Thus, in the realm of persons, trust (faith) is not an alternative to knowledge, but is a means to know. It’s not that you trust because you can’t know, it’s that you trust in order to be able to know fully. Faith is not unscientific. “And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to Him must believe that He exists and that He rewards those who earnestly seek Him.” (Hebrews 11:6)

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> Can you PLEASE SHOW ME ONE SINGLE PIECE OF PHYSICAL EVIDENCE? Just one? <hr /></blockquote>In order for us to know God personally, there must be revelation on God’s part. The difference between revelation and mere evidence is that revelation is deliberate self-disclosure, and is intentional. God’s self-disclosure is normally divided into general (that which is available to everybody through nature and conscience) and special (that which God gives in His Word). God has made the conditions of the world in such a way that human beings should be lead to look for Him and then to His Word to find Him.

How do we know that there is a God? “The starry universe above, and the moral universe within.” (Kant)

Everyone has some knowledge of God and we can’t deny God without doing violence to our own reason. (Hodge)

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by liontolamb:
 bp,

You want scientific proof that GOD exists and that Jesus Christ is real? Well if you go by your definition that if something goes the same way over and over then truely GOD and Jesus exsist. Everyday people all over the world choose to believe in GOD and Jesus. Consistently. If something happens over and over again it must be a scientific fact.<hr /></blockquote>Come now, let's not indulge in such silliness. You know that this is neither how logic works nor what bp meant. Silly rhetorical tricks don't advance the discussion, and this one doesn't even get you points for style or wit. If you have only pat answers, you may want to sit back and remain a non-participant in the thread. Most atheists and agnostics have already heard the pat answers, and ceased being impressed with them a long time ago.

Ya thanks Issachar.

I guess I wiil just go back to my corner.

I guess that sounded pretty harsh. Sorry for the rather patronizing tone. You pushed a minor button of mine, but that doesn't mean I get to forget about common courtesy.

LMX - excellent research and comments!
I'm precious - yes, you are!

Those of you that knock, or support, Promise Keepers will be interested to know that Willard Harley and HN/HN are quoted in the PK March/April 2004 newsletter.

I have seen supernatural works, on occasion, but I don't base my belief on Jesus on the works. I believe the Gifts of the Spirit operate today and I believe, and have experienced, divine healing. I also believe if someone has been genuinely healed they need to go to the doctor to have it verified and documented. If the healing is genuine they should be willing to have it proven and share that miracle with others, using the physical evidence.

Last summer I had my foot run over by a tractor while working on a construction site at church. I continued working for a while but my foot swelled so much I finally drove myself to the emergency room. The ER doctor had my foot x-rayed and showed me the film, staing I had many small bone fractures in my foot. I could see the obvious evidence of that. The x-rays didn't lie. She referred me to a specialist and an orthopedist. Because of my insurance (don't you love HMO's?) I couldn't get an appointment for 2 days. I spent that 2 days in prayer and soliciting prayer. My brother took me to the appointment because I had a soft cast on and couldn't drive. My foot was x-rayed again and the orthopedist came in the examining room with a puzzled expression on his face. He had my previous x-rays and the new ones and was comparing them. He said my foot no longer showed many fractures, just one minor fracture that would heal quickly on it's own. He took me out of the cast and ask me to walk. I could walk normally and the swelling had been reduced to almost nothing. I was back at work the next day and I have had no further problems.

Jesus is real in the world today! He is the same yesterday, today, and forever! I don't need science or intellectualism to validate my faith, though in this case they did.

I have prayed with people and some have been healed quickly, some slowly, some not at all. I will NEVER quit praying for people to be healed. Jesus is real to me in so many ways.

i'm precious- I have never spoken a word against the bible or anyone who believes in it. I have never said it was crap. I just don't want others beliefs thrown at me all of the time. I'm a firm believer that religion and spirituality is a very personal matter.

LMX- I guess unless you go to religous book stores you wouldn't know that Dr. Harley's books are sold there. I ordered mine on line.

Going all the way back to Slap's question about archaeology, a quick Google search turned up a smidgen of info on Luke as a historian.

For a long while, scholars regarded Luke's history as sloppy on the matter of political titles, such as his use of "politarch" for the city council in Thessalonika, since the term was unknown in existing Greek artifacts and manuscripts. Then an arch was discovered in Thessalonika that made reference to the title "politarch". This confirmed that not only was Luke correct, but he had used an exact and specific title instead of a more general one.

Luke provides accurate names and titles for several personages of the first century AD that have been confirmed by modern archaeology, including:

* Sergius Paulus, proconsul of Paphos on Cyprus
* Junius Annaeus Gallio, proconsul of Achaia
* Erastus, city treasurer of Corinth
* "Asiarchs", a local title of authority in Ephesus
* "Protos" ("first man"), title of the chief of Malta

Luke's eye for accurate detail goes right down to his use of correct nautical terms when describing the voyages of Paul. In both his gospel and in Acts, he seems very serious about backing up his claims to have researched the facts as thoroughly as possible.

You will note that none of this "proves" such Christian doctrines as the divinity of Christ or even the resurrection, which is why I've avoided making such claims. For now, I'm content to dispute the idea that the Biblical record of events in Jesus' time is unreliable. It's true that there is not as much external corroboration of the story as we'd like to have, but what we *have* found in external sources tends to support the Biblical record, at least as a history.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by jillybean36:
I guess unless you go to religous book stores you wouldn't know that Dr. Harley's books are sold there. I ordered mine on line.<hr /></blockquote>Harley's books are carried at nonreligious bookstores, such as Waldenbooks, and are found in the Self-Help section. Seeing as this section is typically only one or two shelves wide and everybody and their brother has a self-help book out, I think it speaks well for Dr. Harley and his approach that HN/HN and other books are still being carried. In the case of HN/HN, that's 18 years or so that it's been on the shelf and still moving copies.

Issachar,

I guess the point of that was that there is no hard concrete evidence that GOD does exsist to someone who doesn't have the capacity to believe in something that they cannot see or touch. I have never seen the Great Wall of China, sure I have seen a picture of it. But I have never physically seen it or touched it, yet I still believe it exsist.

There are so many things that we don't understand as humans. But that doesn't mean they don't exist.

Yeah, and I'm sure bp would agree with that in principle. He'd take exception to the example, though, since many people *have* seen the Great Wall, and it would be easy for him to confirm its existence in person if he really wanted to.

With God, it's less easy. Unlike the Great Wall, there's not a persistent "God-manifestation" of some kind that lots of people have seen and that bp could go check out and test for himself. Yes, a lot of people have experienced miracles, but it is difficult for a skeptical outsider to distinguish genuine cases from people who have experienced hallucinations, tricks of the eye, or psychological wish-fulfillment gymnastics. There are enough sham miracles that seekers despair of finding a real signal among all the noise.

You raise a valid question, however, in asking how much evidence is "enough" for bp or another skeptic. Let's say a persistent "God-manifestation" did exist somewhere, and anyone could go see it for himself. Wouldn't a lot of skeptics still reserve judgement against the possibility that they were only seeing some as-yet-unexplained natural phenomenon? Probably. A person ought to consider whether his skepticism is useful or all-encompassing and unassailable.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by liontolamb:
 Issachar,

I guess the point of that was that there is no hard concrete evidence that GOD does exsist to someone who doesn't have the capacity to believe in something that they cannot see or touch. I have never seen the Great Wall of China, sure I have seen a picture of it. But I have never physically seen it or touched it, yet I still believe it exsist.

There are so many things that we don't understand as humans. But that doesn't mean they don't exist. <hr /></blockquote>Along this same line, I think a lot of it comes down to whether or not one will accept the word of others.

Not to pick on people, but Slapnuts and bp22 provide a perfect contrast. Slapnuts has reviewed what has been written and decided he doesn't believe what the author says. I think he's a skeptic in general, but I respect his decision to decide that he doesn't believe what an eyewitness tells him.

bp22, on the other hand, is quite willing to accept what other people say -- as long as they are scientists. He admits that he isn't a theorist and that some of what others have described is beyond his ken, but he still accepts what they say. Likewise, he accepts many scientific theories with holes in them (such as evolution) based on the idea that we just don't know enough yet and that someday we will when science advances farther. In the meantime though, and until there's hard proof to the contrary, he accepts theories and experimental outcomes because he believes what eyewitnesses to scientific experiments say even though he himself has not seen or touched the physical proof. Bp22, I know you've probably heard it said before, but science is just a different belief system in which faith is a factor just like religion.

I, and many other Chrisitians I think, have decided that what the eyewitnesses recorded (and even the secondhand writers) is reliable information. I know there are many arguments about the accuracy of translations and the passage of time, but even with all of those arguments stacked up, I think it's a pretty tough sell that there's not a bit of truth left in the story.

Slapnuts and bp22: I like you guys and I hope I haven't mischaracterized your positions on anything. I have no doubt I'll be corrected or that you'll clarify as you feel you need to do.

I doubt that we are going to establish the existence/non-existence of god in this thread. You either have faith that he exists or you don't.

What is Faith?

Merriam-Webster.com say it is:

Main Entry: 1faith
Pronunciation: 'fAth
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural faiths /'fAths, sometimes 'fA[th]z/
Etymology: Middle English feith, from Old French feid, foi, from Latin fides; akin to Latin fidere to trust -- more at BIDE
1 a : allegiance to duty or a person : LOYALTY b (1) : fidelity to one's promises (2) : sincerity of intentions
2 a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust
3 : something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs
synonym see BELIEF
- in faith : without doubt or question : VERILY

I'm partial to "The firm belief in something for which there is no proof". Christians will never convince someone with a scientific bend to accept things without proof. It doesn't mean that their premise is wrong . . . it just means they can't prove it. They should probably stop trying . . . it can't be done. I think that Thomas Aquinas came close, but he too couldn't get past the need for faith.

Another definition of faith is the irrational belief in the improbable. From the non-christian’s point of view the whole virgin birth, rising from the dead scenario does indeed seem improbable based on their experience and understanding about the laws of nature . . . Is the belief in such super-natural happenings irrational? I don’t really know. Such events would certainly be outside the scope of any experience I have had in this life.

As I stated before this most recent detour started, yes, it ALL boils down to faith. Many many many threads in the past have proven this.

As for me, I appreciate all those who like to speak for me. LOL But I will repeat what I have written previously.

Yes, in fact, I was a hardcore born again christian during my youth. Without a doubt, I felt "the presence of the lord". Without a doubt, I accepted jesus as my person savior, and he fully lived within me. Without a doubt, my committment to him was very real. Ask my old friends...they'll reassure for you that I was very much a believer. LOL

However, I can say today, that I will completely renounce all of my faith, and I will say it is totally wrong, and falsely placed. Wrong in the sense that there is no superior diety, and all such beliefs are "false".

My knowledge of the bible has no doubt waned over the past 15 years. There was a time I was rather up on it all, even did a couple years of bible quizzing...LOL...but never was committed to memorizing anything.

So, you can knock me all you like, but rest assured, my faith was as solid as anyone here.

Thanks to Issachar for pointing out how people like to use "word" to try and create "logic". It doesn't work like that, otherwise jesus couldn't make a rock so heavy he couldn't life it. It's the same silly game with words...a complete waste of time, becuase words are words. I'm not slapping you liontolamb. It is often used "tactic" by many. Sufdb started to get into it yesterday, and I told him I just won't go into the philosophical use of words...Do we really exist? Or are we just someones thought? Geez.

I will also repeat my primary problem with religion, my disbelief, is NOT becuase of all the hyprocasy I see in the world today. It is purely becuase of my understanding of the universe we live in, and my "need" to know what I believe is indeed reproducibly provable, ie not taken on faith.

To those who say the christian life is not easy to live, can you please share a few details about the troubles YOU endure? From my ex-born again days, I used to prophelitize...I used to be persecuted for what I believed. I was called the jesus freak, the bible thumper, etc an so forth. Are these the things to which you refer? Is it the refrain from alcohol, drugs, sex, and whatever "worldly" things? Curious...

Contrary to what has been spoken in my name, and as I have previously written above, I would indeed change my life radically if I was shown any proof in the supernatural, let alone proof of a diety. I'd even have to agree that the proof of anything truely supernatural would encourage ME to believe fully that there is indeed a creator, demons, and all the mess.

Without a doubt, my life would radically change. I would instantly drop my current life and follow up in the followings of something. Certainly if my life here, for 80 some years, can in any way determine my life for ETERNITY...I'd gladly endure the wickedest of pain, suffering, poverty, and persecution to assure that I can live ETERNALLY as close to god as possible.

Don't you?

For those who so strongly believe, why haven't you given up everything to serve him? Would he not prefer to have more Mother Theresa's in the world toay????

I'm not being sarcastic...I'm dead serious. Is that not what he has commanded? WOuld that not bring you more jewels in your crown?

To she/he who asked me before, YES, that is what I am saying...why have you not given up everything in this life, all material possessions, all comforts, in order to do his work? No, not sitting in sackcloth...lol. But how about serving your lord doing his work in africa? Asia? South America? inner cities in the states? Why the fancy cars, house, and lifestyle of comfort?

I just don't understand.

If you were up for the big promotion, and your boss had a need for a presentation or something to be done by noon on Friday, would you not give the extra effort thursday night, stay late, to get it done? Perhaps securing the promotion, the extra money??

Then why not do this for your lord, the creator of all things, and secure your place in ETERNITY!???

I really don't understand why the world isn't completely stuffed full of people giving everything to him.

But I already know your answer. He hasn't called you to be a mother thersea. As someone quote his word before, he says tithe to the church, pay your taxes, and do what you are called to do.

Is there ANYTHING that can't be justified, aligned, or reasoned to fit comfortably with religion/god??

Yes, I personally don't accept things on faith. The great wall of china, it's there, I have seen it (in photos only), and have spoken to those who have touched it. Someday I shall too, I hope.

Yeah, I haven't been to the particle accelerators when they detect the top quark. But I believe those who tell me they have done it, becuase they show their proof. And others have recreated it, on their own, and verified it.

I don't understand how folks try to compare their "faith" in jesus, with fact.

Yeah, so many choose to believe, so it MUST be real. LOL So, weapons of mass destruction or just laying on the ground in iraq too...becuase SO MANY BELIEVED. Heck, even I believed somewhat that Saddam probably had some nasty things. Oh well, I was led astray, by W, and his chronies, who have sent many people to die for their own plans, desires, and wishes.

It all boils down to faith. And that's OK...I guess. If it makes you feel good, then go for it! But I just wish other people weren't hurt so much by it...so often. That's the "bad" I see in religion...even without the wars, the killing, etc.

Did anyone read the links I provided? Did anyone actually spend the time to understand the science behind the links? No...becuase you can't do it in 24 hours...or probably in 24 months. I know I couldn't have anyways.

So, when you sit on that rock at camp, and look out into the vastness of the universe....you see signs of your almighty creator, and it stills your soul and confirms your belief.

When I do this, I am awestruck with the insignificance of us humans. I am awestruck with curiousty of what is out there. Am I am amazed that we, the human race, have been able to learn to much, to actually UNDERSTAND much of what is there today. We have accomplished so much, we understand so much, and yet we have so much to learn! It's great!

But so many are just so happy, so content, to have faith in something else.

It's OK, it just amazes me.

Oh yeah...LOVE. Well, if you read the thread of a few weeks ago, or months now, there is MUCH chemisty behind love. The human feelings of it anyways. So, in fact, and I forget the names of the endorphines, but in fact, you probably CAN POUR 2 OZ of love into a cup. LOL

As for caring, kindness, consideration, and all the other things that many animals display....not just humans...yeah, that's also some kind of neurochemical thing. Don't you feel good when you give your spouse and kids a big hug? I know I do.

I'll say it again though...just one piece of evidence...one piece of proof.

And I'll stand behind science, and would like to hear all the things that science, and the scientific method, fail to "explain". We don't know it all, but compared to 100 years ago, we've come a long way!

Be well all....I'm home with a sick daughter today. Perhaps I should just pray that her strep throat goes away....Why should I use the science of medicine and acquire an anti-biotic? LOL

bp...Contrary to what has been spoken in my name, and as I have previously written above, I would indeed change my life radically if I was shown any proof in the supernatural, let alone proof of a diety. I'd even have to agree that the proof of anything truely supernatural would encourage ME to believe fully that there is indeed a creator, demons, and all the mess.

sufdb....supernatural?

hmmm...so if we take a recording device to an aboriginal tribe and God "speaks" from it, they will now believe in God?

That don't work bp, and it is not how you prove God exists, you use physics, and no, it is not a word game....but unless you (and I) are telepathic, words are all we have to convey information...correct?

You do not prove God exists by works, or deeds, or evidence....you do so by using logic (and applying it to physics). You can (and not saying you are per se) blow that off by saying is all words, but that does not mean you (all of us) won't experience the consequences of a wrong decision in this regard...true. If God does exist, and you don't account for that in your life there could be undesireable consequences...would you agree? Likewise if God does not exist, and you expend resources on the basis God does exist, you have diminished your life, and will experience consequences.

So far your arguments for/against God have not really contained any substance, and that is what I have been addressing. I have only been suggesting the way you go about this, and why one should do so. Frankly your arguments "feel" more emotional than rational, as if you became disillusioned at some point, and now have an emotional investment in your position....it wouldn't surprise me at all if this wasn't intertwined in your marital failure.

re proof

There is absolutely no kind of "proof" that can substantiate God.

Anything we can "imagine" as adequate proof can be explained by sufficiently advanced science....unless the observation involved an unequivocal revocation of the laws of physics...such as placing mars in orbit around earth and experienceing no gravitational consequences....but even that could be explained by proper application of physical laws and engineering application (albeit the equations would be horrendous).

bp,

I understand what you are saying? I can tell you with 100% accuracy why I haven't given up all of my possesions and worldly things to follow GOD completely.

I am a filthy rag, a true sinner. I wish I could give some other reason but the truth is I am just selfish. I thank God that he accepts me the way I am.

Having said that, me evangalizing if that is the word we would like to use here is following Him. I pray with my family something a couple a months ago I wouldn't have done. I think if everyone gave up everything to follow him it would be a perfect society. But in an imperfect world quite impossible at this point in time.

Things I have gained from GOD:

I value my family and friends more now then when I didn't believe.

More respect for others opinions, whether or not I percieve them to follow mine.

Assurance that I won't be here forever, and that there is something much better for me when I move on.

Solace when I am deep in despair.

A good friend to share joys that happen in my life when it seems everybody else is to busy with their worldy duties.

The loss of bitterness that I held on to for so long.

I can discuss the deepest and darkest secrets that I would never share with another human.

I could continue on here but I think you get the point.

Things I haven't given up but continue to try:

All wordly things. Really I admit it freely, I wish it weren't so but it is. My life changed but not drastically. Someday I hope not to be as much as a hypocrite as I feel. But I will never be able to live the perfect life, it is just not possible.

BP posted: <blockquote>quote:<hr /> To she/he who asked me before, YES, that is what I am saying...why have you not given up everything in this life, all material possessions, all comforts, in order to do his work? No, not sitting in sackcloth...lol. But how about serving your lord doing his work in africa? Asia? South America? inner cities in the states? Why the fancy cars, house, and lifestyle of comfort?

I just don't understand.
<hr /></blockquote>Where do you get that everyone is supposed to be poor? The Rich Young Ruler? This requirement was especially suited to this man. His riches were that one idol he had to forsake in order to trust in Christ alone. Jesus therefore required of him what He did not require of other rich men, such as Abraham or Joseph of Arimathea. Their riches did not prevent them from trusting in Christ.

The point is that Jesus knows everyone’s idol. Jesus knows perfectly what is competing in your heart with affection for him.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />For those who so strongly believe, why haven't you given up everything to serve him? Would he not prefer to have more Mother Theresa's in the world toay????

I'm not being sarcastic...I'm dead serious. Is that not what he has commanded? WOuld that not bring you more jewels in your crown?

To she/he who asked me before, YES, that is what I am saying...why have you not given up everything in this life, all material possessions, all comforts, in order to do his work? No, not sitting in sackcloth...lol. But how about serving your lord doing his work in africa? Asia? South America? inner cities in the states? Why the fancy cars, house, and lifestyle of comfort?

I just don't understand.
<hr /></blockquote>bp22 - I have to admit that the bolded part of the above quotation about sums up your knowledge of the subject. That's not meant to "slam you." It means simply that you retain some memories of a juvenile experience and prefer your adult memories based on science. That's fine. I tend to that way of thinking also, it's better to approach things from a more adult and mature perspective.

But you, through the rest of your quoted post above, and through other posts that you have made on this thread, show a markedly less than adequate knowledge of WHAT IS written in Scripture, much less any intrepretation of it. You then resort to an uninformed or misinterpreted paraphrase of Scripture to give an incredulous "aha!, you are all not following Scripture so you don't even believe correctly!"

You seem to be building your whole house of cards argument, or questions if you prefer, from Jesus' talk with the "rich man." When Jesus told him to go and give away all that he had and then come back and follow him. The rich man had asserted that he did all that Jesus had said needed to be done, up to that point. But he held onto his love of money and Jesus used that to point out to him (and to us) that money was his "god."

That is NOT an instruction to be a pauper in order to be a Christian. It merely pointed out that we are to have NO gods other than God in our lives.

As for the various ways that Christians can serve, I might venture to say that there might be a bigger "mission field" right here at home. But regardless, we are not all given the same gifts or calling. It matters not. We are to do all that we can to honor and glorify God wherever we are and whatever we are doing.

Or are you simply envious of people fortunate enough to have resources available?

Regardless, in your lengthy diatribe you failed to address the simple question of "Who is Jesus?" Which of the 4 options do you ascribe to him?

You can rail about all sorts of things, but until you address who Jesus himself is, it's merely an excercise in nonrational verbal diahhrea. You pride yourself, or so it seems from your postings, on logic and the scientific method while at the same time "accepting" that there are some scientific arguments and postulates that you simply "take on faith" because there is no definitive proof or ability to apply the scientific method of reproducable tests.

For example, black holes do exist, right? But does anyone have a credible theory, much less proof, of where the matter and energy go once they are sucked into a black hole? However, we know that matter and energy are both interchangeable and indestructable. So where does all this "stuff" go and what does it "become?"

I'm not talking about a theory when I ask you about Jesus Christ. I am asking you about a real live person of history (at the very least) who made certain claims and who did certain things that were faithfully recorded by eyewitnesses and skilled "scientists" like Luke the Physician.

The claim of "being God" has been made. So which of the 4 possible explanations is the one that you DO believe? Remember, in all of recorded history there is only Jesus who ever claimed to be God, and then backed up the claim with proof.

So if you can stop dancing long enough to answer the question (which you totally ignored in your last post), I would appreciate it. You have laid the "gauntlet down" accusing Christianity and Christ of being false and delusional. I have "picked up the gauntlet" and stand ready to discuss your assertions with you.

THAT is one difference between a adolescent understanding of Christianity and a slightly more mature understanding of it. In a effort to keep the discussion from ranging all over the map, it is my contention that ALL other issues are moot if Jesus Christ is NOT who He says He is. Thus, the 4 possible explanations for who, or what, He is remains the only credible focal point for beginning any such discussion.

I yield the balance of my time back to you, bp22, and await your response.

I really started to feel bad about the hijacking of this thread so I started one that is dedicated to the subject of GOD or not

Sudfdb....What I said was, if I SAW a clear example of the supernatural, something that I could in no way explain, then I WOULD be "forced" to believe that yeah, there might be a creator, a supernatural force, and all that goes with it. I am speaking for ME. And I also have to SEE the evidence, the proof, and also investigate and assure myself it is real. So, while the sufficiently ancient civilation may be struck by a digital voice recorder as you say, I would not be. I can understand how that works. So for ME, it would take physical proof.

That is what I am asking for.

I totally disagree, god will not be proven by logic and whatever application of that to physics you can conjure. Nore is anyting in science "proven" by such things. Things are "proven" by countless, repeated experimentation.

People may make logical arguments which lead in a direction of theory...but theory is theory...it is not proven. It always remains skeptical, uncomplete, and just "the working theory" until proven.

Evolution is a great example. It is a theory...it has big problems, gaps, holes. I'm no evolutionary biologist, I understand that it is currently the best "working theory" we have. People continue to learn more, fill in the gaps, etc.

But never, in real science, that I know of, are things ever "accepted" or "taken on faith" in any way. Philosophy?? That's another story.

ForeverHers...Here's what you are asking from me I think. I apologize I didn't answer you directly, my brain can't keep tract of all the points I wish to make as I am reading and htinking about a dozen posts. Sorry. Didn't skip ya on purpose.

--------------
From ForeverHers (I think):

1. He was a legend. Didn't really exist. Was a figment of imagination.

2. He was a liar. He willfully sought to decieve everyone for his own personal gain. Interesting to note what he endured to perpetuate his "lie."

3. He was a lunatic. He was mentally "not there" in the same way that some mental patients believe that they are Napoleon, or anyone else. A nice guy, but totally nuts in the head.

4. He is Lord (God, Creator, Sustainer, the Word, God incarnate, fully man and fully God, etc.)

-------------

bp22 will add option 5, if that is OK...

And I have to say, I have NOT done any scholarly study on jesus, the man. I do NOT know exactly which book of the bible was written when, by whom, where it was found, who translated it, how many translation it underwent. I am NOT an expert in any way on the vocabulary and vernacular of the day, nor do I understand the change in the wording that would occur by interpretation 1000 years later. Based on what I do know, here's what I'd say about jesus:

5. He was a man who lived and walked the earth. He created a large following of men, speaking about how people should live, the goodness of man, and the potential of mankind. He spoke of love, kindness, caring, sharing, etc. He indeed conjured the anger of the ruling parties at the time, as he spoke against their ruling paridgm, and as people in control in all societies do, they wish to crush the opposition. So jesus was crucified, and no doubt was literally cruicied.

In regards to the miracles, and other "supernatural" events reported to have occured, I do not accept them, personally, as true. I can accept the nature of the "moral" behind the story. I most usually agree with the lesson to be learned. Although I do not believe that the dead rised, the blind could see, and water became wine.

I suspect he was not a lunatic. I certainly don't think there was any desire for personal gain. I do think he was a nice guy, but I suspect he wasn't "nuts in the head".

I think he believed in his cause, he was committed to it, and he totally believed in what he was teaching mankind.

Ossam Bin Laden is not that much different....EXCEPT that ossma has turned to violence in his methods of teaching. But he's clearly committed, clearly not out for personal gain, and clearly in his ways is trying to teach and lead people as to how to live. We don't agree with large parts of his lessons. These lessons I take to be the words of his pals the "clerics" of Islam and whatnot. So, no, I'm not saying jesus and ossama are the same, LOL, I am saying that they have similar characteristics.

Does that answer your questoin?

FINALLY, ALL WHO READ, PLEASE understand...

And PLEASE READ THIS:

My primary problem with religion, god, and all the like...IS NOT THE HYPROCASY OF THE WAY I THINK THE BELIEVERS LIVE. OK, please read that again! Every poster keeps syaing that is my "primary internal struggle" over religion! NO NO NO.

My PRIMARY STRUGGLE is the lack of PROOF! Period.

As the poster above listed her ( I think) reasons for believing....THEY ARE ALL GREAT THINGS! THEY ALL MAKE YOU FEEL GOOD! THEY ARE ALL REASSURING. THEY ARE ALL BENEFICIAL TO LIFE.

But, so is believing in santa claus. So is believing that an apple a day will keep the doctor away. So is believeing that exercise will help you live a long life! So is believing in anything that makes you stronger, provides confidnce, reassurance, and a sense of direction and purpose!

BUT, none of them are necessarily "real"!

Well, I think exercise IS proven to help you live longer and healthier, by and large. Tell that to the select few who die during exercise...

Anyways, my point is, just becuase something "makes you feel better", that is NOT PROOF. Sure, it might work for you. But it isn't "proof".

To allude to politics again, it's like all the "proof" we were "told" about weapons of mass destruction. There were pages and pages, all classified, so we just had to "take it on faith" that Sadaam had everything in the book...or nearly so. And yet, when it comes down to it, there was nothing....apparently...so far.

It's "similar" in my mind. The bible...you can believe it, you can have faith, but it isn't hard evidence.

So, much of America took it on "faith" that W and his friends had EVIDENCE...physical HARD EVIDENCE. So off to war we went, largely, as a nation, supporting him and it. But certainly not all.

So, to me, it is nearly identical. You have faith, I don't. I want to see the hard evidence. Physical evidence.

I think that is what science always says...proof. Not hersay, not "trust me", nothing of that sort. People have taken my words and "restated" them for me. I don't understand everything, LOL, that's true. But that doesn't mean I take anything "on faith" in science. What I don't KNOW, I consider with skepticism, until I understand. That is me, that is my nature.

Did that contribute to my failed marriage? No doubt. I find it extremely difficult to share my life with someone who IS willing to accept things as people say, without analyzing, questioning, and UNDERSTANDING. So YES, I will say that no doubt my attitude contributes greatly to my failed marriage. I think picking my mate at age 12 had WAY MORE TO DO WITH IT, before I knew who I was, what I believed, and what was important to me.

Anyways, please understand, my problem with religion is the lack of proof! I look at, what I see as hyprocrasy, as just a "funny thing" about religion, and those that claim to significance of following it.

Religion, especially christianity, has the wonderful "feature" of being constantly molded to fit all situations.

Anyways, no, I'm very happy with my life. I don't have any envy for the wealth of others. I have what I want, what I need. Sure, I'd like to have more, I'd like to drive a newer vehicle, I'd like to have the cash to finish my house, send the kids to college without questioning were the resoureces will come from. I have made my choices in life, put my kids first. I'm not at all willing to trade away my ability to watch and help them grow, and to spend my "career" learning new things that interest me. Astronomy isn't the career for high finance...LOL. Especially if you're not willing to trade your life away...

Logic doesn't prove anything, let alone god. Physical evidence...that's what is known as proof. In the courts, in science, in FDA testing, etc.

The only place, I think, that physical proof isn't required...is BY DEFINITION...FAITH.

(By the way, I hope nobody is offended are feels like I am "attacking" anyone. I am questioning...and I hope I can get others to question themselves. That is how change occurs in people, when they ask themselves questions, and seek the answers. It's the "being honest with yourself" thing...and it is extremely hard to do. Nothing is harder. )

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by sufdb:
IMO there are but 2 issues relevant to decideing how one orders their life.

1. Is our universe a created one by design, or a chance permutation of unknown (but of undirected...not purposeful) origen.

2. Given the answer to #1, what do we do next. If we decide "science" says we are created, than the next question is what is the nature of the creator and what does that mean to us. <hr /></blockquote>False dichotomy, no? Are these really the only two possibilities? What about 3) the ‘universe’ always existed, no random event about it. Or 4) various combinations of the above. If we assume there is no evidence to support any one of the points above another (a big assumption), 3) is simplest, requires no additional explanation, and is therefore most likely.

Peace of God be with you.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by ForeverHers:


There are only 4 possibilities about this "great moral teacher", as some would like to relegate Jesus Christ to being:

1. He was a legend. Didn't really exist. Was a figment of imagination.

2. He was a liar. He willfully sought to decieve everyone for his own personal gain. Interesting to note what he endured to perpetuate his "lie."

3. He was a lunatic. He was mentally "not there" in the same way that some mental patients believe that they are Napoleon, or anyone else. A nice guy, but totally nuts in the head.

4. He is Lord (God, Creator, Sustainer, the Word, God incarnate, fully man and fully God, etc.)

There are NO other possibilities.
<hr /></blockquote>No others? What about the one that most historians (not theologians) maintain, and that is also compatible with our current scientific understanding of the world: Jesus was a real person, but was not the son of God.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />


The first 3 "options" have been repeatedly and thoroughly proven to be "bunk" and floated by those whose agenda is to "attack" Christianity. I could, but won't, cite all that stuff.

<hr /></blockquote>Really? Have any actual scientific (i.e. papers published in peer-reviewed scientific journals) or legitimate historical (i.e. papers published in peer-reviewed journals of history, not theology) references to support that claim?

<blockquote>quote:<hr />


Lastly, again with respect to your insistence upon "scientific method", (i.e., reproducability) it has it's limits. Look no further than origin of the universe and origin of life theories. One thing that I learned in biology is the simple fact that "life begets life." Not one shread of "proof" or "evidence" exists that life ever arose from "non-life" through any evolutionary means. But evolutions IS argued for,

<hr /></blockquote>Unfortunate that you have a degree in biology and yet don’t understand at a fundamental level what the keystone theory in biology says. The theory of evolution says nothing about the origin of live. That is a field of study called abiogenesis. Whether life was initially created by God or by abiogensis is of no concern to evolution. Evolution is concerned with how the diversity of live developed; i.e. how life changed over time, not how the first form of life appeared.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />


vehemently, because there ARE only two options, either life arose from non-life through the theory of evolution OR life arose by the purposeful act of Creator. Since those opposed to a Creator have no other option, they must embrace an unproven theory (evolution) on FAITH ALONE, devoid of scientific proof or reproduceability.

<hr /></blockquote>No scientific theory, law, or fact can ever be proven. This is a common misconception. The word ‘proof’ should be dropped when discussing science. The best that the methodology of science can ever achieve to this regard is to say that: we believe this to be true with a high level of confidence. This is referred to as a scientific fact. Often, scientific theories and laws are regarded scientific facts. Evolution is regarded as a scientific fact by the scientific community. Not based on faith, but based on over 150 years of scientific evidence. But don’t take my word for it, go to your nearest university library and use a academic search engine to search for ‘evolution’ in the peer-reviewed scientific journals (note: pop magazines, journals of philosophy and theology are not considered legitimate scientific sources). You will find thousands upon thousands of papers presenting data supporting evolutionary theory. On the other hand, here is a list of the papers published in the peer-reviewed scientific journals that present evidence claiming to refute evolution:

That’s the whole list. If you don’t believe it, I would ask you to do the search yourself and report back your findings.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />


I know you've probably heard it said before, but science is just a different belief system in which faith is a factor just like religion.

<hr /></blockquote>Science is a completely different epistemology. It has nothing to do with faith. It requires, among other things, empirical repeatability. Its current 'beliefs' and facts are adjusted or discarded as new evidences are revealed. It maintains no absolute, unquestionable truths.

The peace of God be with you.

Ishcaar (sp?):

I do believe that liontolamb made a valid point a ways back, about people all over the world believing in God and Jesus, consistently. Christianity is a very "old" religion and I recently read an article somewhere (wish I could remember but I can't) that talked about how amazing it is that it has not only remained very much alive, but it is growing and spreading in places of the world where it is not even legal! In fact, the growth of Christianity is like "booming" in certain countries (moreso I guess than the U.S., from what I read).

You take other world religions like for instance, and they do not spread like Chrisitanity does. Most other world religions are dominant within certain cultures (i.e. Muslims in Middle East, Buddists in China, Hindus in India). But people from all cultures, all races, all ages, all socioeconomic statuses convert to Christianity. And when they do, they spread it and make more converts.

Christianity simply cannot be contained. It will not die. Even during the days after Jesus when Christians were thrown to lions and beheaded, etc... Christianity still experienced tremendous growth.

Those are the thoughts I got from liontolamb's post.

I realize that there are those people who have a need for everything to be explained. And in all honesty, I hold nothing against them but it's hard for me to relate because I don't have that need. I don't have to have everything scientifically explained in order for me to believe something is true.

I don't have to have "proof" that the chair is not going to break for me to sit in it. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />

It also doesn't matter so much that like you said, "all athiests have heard the pat answers." I mean, I would consider this: "God is love" to be a "pat answer" to an athiest, but it's so profound, so real, and so good. And none of us knows whether it'll be the first or thousandth time that a person hears it and decides to believe. God's word "does not return void." There is power in His Word and God can use even "pat answers" to touch a person's heart.

The one thing that does turn people off is rudeness and unkindness such as would characterize your reply to liontolamb to which he (she?) graciously sought your forgiveness.

[ March 25, 2004, 05:15 PM: Message edited by: LoveMyEx ]

BP, you asked in one of your posts about what do Christians go through or face? Something like that. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> Sorry, I've read so much that I can't reemmber it all! But you were asking about what they face other than being called a "Jesus freak."

Well, for myself, I have faced my parent's divorce and my own divorce in which my husband sounds similar to your wife and divorced me. I have faced the loss of a job in which I was laid off due to cuts. I am fortunate that I have never experienced tragedy though, like the death of a family member or a crime, etc. I don't know if that is God protecting me and blessing me or not. Even Christians suffer because there is sin in this world. I have been a Christian since I was 12 though and have loved Him since then and prayed, studied my Bible, etc. since then as well. So I do believe that I have been spared from many things as a result.

But, well... let's see.. here are some trials and tribulations in other Christian's life:

A couple (friends of mine) whose 5 year old daughter was riding a scooter/go cart thing and ran into a parked car at such an angle that her neck snapped and she died hours later. These were very kind, upstanding people at my church.

A dear wonderful friend of mine who, after losing her father, know is a caretaker to her mother who has full-blown Alzheimers, who is just frail, sickly, and compltely not in her "right mind." Her and her husband take care of this woman in their home.

A friend of mine whose mother died when she was young.

My ex- husband (he is a Christian) whose 1st wife died of a brain tumor at a very young age, leaving him with 2 young children to raise on his own.

And I know of Christians like Jim Elliot,a missionary who was killed by Indians with spears or his wife who not only was widowed with his death, but whose second husband's death (from cancer I believe) left her a widow once again.

Or take the four missionaries recently who were shot to death. Or the missionary, Graham Stedman (I think that's his name correctly!) and his two sons who were killed by Hindus, I believe, who shot them to death while they were sleeping in a car.

Tragedy touches Christians too. But we don't always view these things as "tragedies" because we know that death has no hold on us and that we will be with Jesus in a far, far better life than this earth.

Sin is on this earth. Satan is real and he is hell-bent on destroying lives, especially Chrisitan lifes. If he can, he would destroy Christianity all together. But he can't. Even death does not stop Christianity or Christians.

So, I think that's kinda what you were asking about? Christians don't have perfect, pain-free lives. Yes, I do believe I have been spared from many things as a result of my faith. I have never feared the law for instance because I've not broken it (well, I have gotten a speeding ticket!). I have never felt I had something to hide or feared someone finding out my "secrets" because I didn't do anything that was shameful and had to be hidden. I didn't fear things like "what did I do last night" (like I overheard a friend once ask after a party) because I've never been drunk. Etc.

But while those things do bless me with great peace of mind in which I am spared some of the worries or problems that others might face, they aren't what save me. I am still very much a sinner and I can't boast of my good works. Any goodness about me is hopefully only a reflection and "proof" of my faith. But it's not what saves me. God's grace saves me. And even though those things give me peace of mind, I still sin and I still battle with it and I still face troubles in this life. We all do.

Others have come to believe in Christ at older ages than what I was and they have experienced more painful things then I have. Some of them have AIDS (Christianity is currently spreading rapidly in Africa, where the AIDS rate is extremely high), some have done drugs, some are murderers like a woman named Carla who became a Christian when. She ultimately received the death penalty and is no longer alive, but even a murderer can come to know Christ and experience joy and peace (even in the face of death).

I accepted Christ into my life at a pretty young age so that helped keep me from many things, but many others don't accept Christ until later in life. No matter. What matters is that one day, this life will pass and we will be with the Lord where there will be no more suffering, no more evil, no more pain. He will "wipe away every tear." For those though who do not believe that He exists and who He is, they will not experience that. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Frown]" src="images/icons/frown.gif" /> I say that with sadness knowing that there are those who EVEN when God does a million things to get their attention, they still will refuse to bow to Him.

Even the thief on the cross, in his final hour, believed and was saved. Who knows if he'd done anything good in his life. He was a thief and had broken the law. But his faith saved him because we are not saved by good works but are saved by faith.

(I don't think you were really discussing salvation and good works, so I kinda took a tangent from the original subject of trials! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> )

[ March 25, 2004, 05:38 PM: Message edited by: LoveMyEx ]

LoveMyEx....I don't mean what kind of tradgies or trial or whatever you want to call them befalls the christian in geernal,

I mean, What trials and tribulations do you suffer BECAUSE you are a christian?

Your previous comment, I think, was "it's not easy being a christian". To me, that means that, becuase of your chosen faith, you have to endure some additional stuff in life, that say an atheist does not.

I'm curious what those things are...

For a missionary to be killed becuase of his beliefs and his spreading the word to the unsaved, that's an exmaple I can except.

Sounds kinda like Copernicus being placed under house arrest becuase he realized the earth wasn't the center of all.

LoveMyEx....I've never been drunk. I stole a beer when i was 12 from a paper route customers porch....that's the last drink I had. And I guess I can't say I have never broken the law! I stole that beer to boot! I don't smoke. I've never done drugs. I don't have anything to hide, no dark secrets, no skeletons in the closet.

If you met me in the mall, you'd never have any idea I didn't believe, unless we brought it up somehow. LOL I don't have an earing, I don't have pierced nipples, I don't listen to head banger music. Acoustic for me, please.

The one thing you will find very different though, is that I have the same peace as you. The same security, the same confidence, the same comfort. The same direction and focus in life....but without the belief in a diety. I trust in myself, and those around me. I trust in mankind's ability, and what we can accomplish. And I think when we die, we die. It's done. It's over.

I hate that...I want to live forever. But for me, placing faith in something I can't believe in, it doesn't work.

And again, in my mind, it does hamper society, as a whole, when people have these beliefs.

You know what I think?

Life is too short for hate.

Peace out.

bp22- <blockquote>quote:<hr />And I have to say, I have NOT done any scholarly study on jesus, the man. I do NOT know exactly which book of the bible was written when, by whom, where it was found, who translated it, how many translation it underwent. I am NOT an expert in any way on the vocabulary and vernacular of the day, nor do I understand the change in the wording that would occur by interpretation 1000 years later. Based on what I do know, here's what I'd say about jesus:
____________________________________

Okay, so the intellectual honesty and dedication to "proof", to scientific inquiry, is conveniently laid aside in favor of uninformed opinion, bias, and conjecture. I guess we could just as easily say that the Earth IS the center of both the solar system and the universe. Mere speculation now, but I think there IS proof out there that others who have studied the subject could point to the the Earth is not the center that all else revolves around. Not too sure about the universe part though. If the universe is without end, I suppose any point within it could be considered the "center" at any time.

But honest inquiry and investigation before forming an opinion would be lacking, or rejected simply because if I found out my "position" was wrong I might have to change some things that I "like." At the best, you state a theory, accept it as FACT, order your life around you unproven theory, and then blast at others who HAVE taken the time to examine the proof and make a decision based upon their investigation.

Such was I prior to committing to an honest examination of the proof, so I know the reluctance you seem to have to actually DO THE WORK, but let me ask you this, isn't that more of the same denial and justification processes used to justify doing what WE WANT, as in an affair also?
____________________________________

5. He was a man who lived and walked the earth. He created a large following of men, speaking about how people should live, the goodness of man, and the potential of mankind. He spoke of love, kindness, caring, sharing, etc. He indeed conjured the anger of the ruling parties at the time, as he spoke against their ruling paridgm, and as people in control in all societies do, they wish to crush the opposition. So jesus was crucified, and no doubt was literally cruicied.
_____________________________________

Okay, so let's see where we are in this examination:
1. He was a legend. Didn't really exist. Was a figment of imagination.

NOPE, bp22 says he WAS a real person.

2. He was a liar. He willfully sought to decieve everyone for his own personal gain. Interesting to note what he endured to perpetuate his "lie."

POSSIBLY, bp22 says "He spoke of love, kindness, caring, sharing, etc." but OBVIOUSLY lied about who He really was, the Messiah and God incarnate.

3. He was a lunatic. He was mentally "not there" in the same way that some mental patients believe that they are Napoleon, or anyone else. A nice guy, but totally nuts in the head.

PROBABLY NOT, bp22 states he seemed in control of his faculties and purposefully preached a moral and upright message, BUT IF HE ALSO 'BELIEVED' HE WAS GOD, THEN HE MUST HAVE BEEN A LUNATIC.

4. He is Lord (God, Creator, Sustainer, the Word, God incarnate, fully man and fully God, etc.)

DEFINITELY NOT, bp22 states unequivocably that HE HAS NOT investigated the person of Jesus Christ for himself and is quite comfortable accepting as 'FACT' and 'PROOF' the conjectures, arguments, and specualation of others and his own 'feelings'. Thus bp22 has claimed the title of 'expert' and is justified in rejecting Jesus Christ based upon NO scientific investigation of his own. He would seem to prefer to be 'led around by the nose' by others. I wonder why someone who professes such "need" for proof and veracity of information would refuse to actually and thoroughly investigate the subject for himself rather than simply regurgitate biased and uniformed views of others.
__________________________________

In regards to the miracles, and other "supernatural" events reported to have occured, I do not accept them, personally, as true. I can accept the nature of the "moral" behind the story. I most usually agree with the lesson to be learned. Although I do not believe that the dead rised, the blind could see, and water became wine.
__________________________________

I owe you an apology. I did NOT understand that YOU are incapable of accepting ANYTHING as being true unless YOU PERSONALLY see it and/or experience it. NEVER MIND that others of equal intellectual capacity to your own might be capable of accurately and truthfully recording and testifying to what ACTUALLY DID HAPPEN.

Throw out ALL eyewitness testimony. Throw out ALL historical documents and evidence. Give me Thomas!!!! To paraphrase, "Unless *I* put my hand in his side and touch the wounds myself *I* will NOT believe."

Open the gates to the prisons and let everyone out that was not convicted upon the testimony and personal observation of the victim ONLY! There is no such thing as "evidence, eyewitness confirmation of facts, or reality" beyond that which the INDIVIDUAL can see, touch, feel, and attest to for themselves.
_________________________________

I suspect he was not a lunatic. I certainly don't think there was any desire for personal gain. I do think he was a nice guy, but I suspect he wasn't "nuts in the head".

I think he believed in his cause, he was committed to it, and he totally believed in what he was teaching mankind.

Ossam Bin Laden is not that much different....EXCEPT that ossma has turned to violence in his methods of teaching. But he's clearly committed, clearly not out for personal gain, and clearly in his ways is trying to teach and lead people as to how to live. We don't agree with large parts of his lessons. These lessons I take to be the words of his pals the "clerics" of Islam and whatnot. So, no, I'm not saying jesus and ossama are the same, LOL, I am saying that they have similar characteristics.

Does that answer your questoin?
__________________________________

No, it doesn't answer the question. You don't even seem to see the illogic of what you said. "I suspect he was not a lunatic. I certainly don't think there was any desire for personal gain. I do think he was a nice guy, but I suspect he wasn't "nuts in the head". (So he's NOT crazy, a nice guy, altruistic, but nuts nonetheless)

I think he believed in his cause, he was committed to it, and he totally believed in what he was teaching mankind. (But he was totally deluded, or lying, about WHO HE WAS. So a lunatic or a liar still remains as a couple of your choices for him. I grant that you have admitted he DID exist and was not merely a "legend".)

My PRIMARY STRUGGLE is the lack of PROOF! Period.

Well, I think exercise IS proven to help you live longer and healthier, by and large. Tell that to the select few who die during exercise...

Anyways, my point is, just becuase something "makes you feel better", that is NOT PROOF. Sure, it might work for you. But it isn't "proof".

It's "similar" in my mind. The bible...you can believe it, you can have faith, but it isn't hard evidence. I'm sorry, let's all throw out all proven and substantiated "textbooks" and begin "proving" things all over again. What an arrogant and illogical statement by one who professes intellectual honesty and the "desire" for proof but has NOT done any investigation on his own!

So, to me, it is nearly identical. You have faith, I don't. I want to see the hard evidence. Physical evidence. No, you don't. If you did you would be examining the proof that is out there already instead of merely spouting opinion based upon NO facts. There are many facts that are NOT dependent upon scientific "touchy feely reproducability." Ask any historian if they can "prove" the existence of any figure in history and by what means they obtain that proof. You throw up the straw man of translational errors, etc. as prima facia proof that the Bible is "unrealiable" for "proving" anything. But have you bothered to actually examine the wealth of data that exists to prove the historicity and accuracy of the bible and the translations? Nope, just another unsubstantiated "shot from the hip".

By the way, has anyone ever told you that telescopes can only see dimly, but that the light has been so distorted from the passage of time that no conclusions of any truth about what really IS being seen can be made? Until you can actuall "go there" and see it with your own eyes and touch it with your own hands, it's merely a figment of your imagination and doesn't really exist.

No, that's not what I believe, but that's the sort of direction that you sort of logic inevitably takes someone....proof rests SOLELY upon what the individual personally sees and can attest to for themselves. But then, everyone else would reject your "truth" because THEY didn't see it and touch it themselves. Seems at best like a bit of circular reasoning, don't you think?

I think that is what science always says...proof. Not hersay, not "trust me", nothing of that sort. People have taken my words and "restated" them for me. I don't understand everything, LOL, that's true. But that doesn't mean I take anything "on faith" in science. What I don't KNOW, I consider with skepticism, until I understand. That is me, that is my nature.
_____________________________

Oh balderdash. You accept all sorts of things that others have done before you. You build upon their observations and knowledge. You repeat experiments and investigations when necessary. You hide behind the term "skepticism" the same way that someone hides behind the term "agnostic." "No decision" becomes a "viable decision" becomes "truth" becomes "intellectual elitism". Okay. Let's park the car in the middle of the intersection because we are "skeptical" about which road to take. We have all sorts of preconceived notions about where each road may wind up taking us so INACTION is the "true and best course of action."
<hr /></blockquote>

Well, once again, I state the truth, that I haven't done the exhaustive search that I assume some of the professional scholars have done, and of course, that means I don't know anything...and I'm condemned by one who choses to do so. I will agree that my 20 years of immersion in christianity and the born again world was my first 20 years, so I will agree that perhaps only the last 10 are significant, and of those, the last 5 even moreso.

(Actually, I have to modify that. I have continuously, always been exposed to religion and fundamentalism. My wife was that way, my family is partially that way, etc. And the folks here, they don't ever hold back what they have to say. And they never should! However, in all cases, in all exposure, one gets constant exposure and understanding to how, in this case, christians think, act, and carry themselves.)

That's OK...(deleted). LOL

I beg you to find the references in any current journals that claim the earth is the center of anything.

As I have stated, I require physical proof. As I have stated, exaclty as the other poster has, in science, once things are seen as reproducible time after time, we start to consider it understood. Yeah, sometimes those things may be called fact. As the other poster said, all things are subject to change at all times. New findings, new understandings, things always tweak.

The historians I know go through great lengths to verify the information they are reporting. This is extremely difficult. My understanding is they look for verification in other reports of the incidents, and also investiagate and understand the people who are reporting. It is then taken as the best understanding, given the sources. Is it considered as FACT? Then what happened to JFK?

In astronomy, we get one thing from say distant galaxies. Light. Only light. We look at the entire spectrum of that light, and from it, we can learn many things. We say we "understand" what we see, becuase 1. We compare it to tests done in the lab and 2. When applying the proper shifts due to things like cosmological redshift, which is a theoretical predicatable calculable number, it all is consistent. That is why we believe what we see is what we think it is.

Have you done your extensive study in science? Do you understand the underpinnings of physics? Have you seen the symmetries of how everything is the same, sorta, on different scales and levels? Have you investigated how astronomers do claim to understand what they see across the universe? Have you investigated the consistencies of theory, and experimental evidence? Do you know how theories had predicted various phenomena, that were then measured?

It is that understanding, that insight into nature, that has forced me to abandon any belief, or need, or ability to believe in something supernatural. From my experience, what I have learned, and what I see, I do not see how, or why, a creator is necessary to explain the worlds around us.

I'm not better than anyone else. Contrary to many in the science world, I do not intellectulize my existence, and sport my superiority. Many many do. I agree with you there. But I don't. I have told you why I believe what I believe, I have told you why I don't believe in a creator. I have also stated that words, so called "logic" are not proof for anything, to me, they are words.

I do believe in what others have told me, as long as 1. I have investigated the source of information and have learned I can trust them and 2. It makes sense and is generally consistent.

So, when my mechanic calls and says I need $700 of work on the truck, I believe him. He has proven his skills to me and his honesty. If the brake guys tried to tell my wife she needed $700 of work on the front end, I'd be skeptical, because I don't know them, and I have heard the stories of how folks like to create work.

When some of the colleauges at work tell me something, I trust them, I will go and look for myself. When others tell me, I don't trust them, I will go and look, extremely skeptically.

It ALL boils down to FAITH...what are you willing to accept? What are you willing to trust? Not just in religion, but in all things in life. Do you trust an electrician to wire your house properly? Any electrician? Do you trust a doctor to operate on your children? Any doctor?

It seems you are saying that the proof for god is the "ancient" texts. I guess I can't ever find myself to believe in something with is 100% contrary to what I can see, day after day, proven to me.

I guess what I am asking for when I ask for proof...show me physical evidence of your living god. Proof from today. Or undisputable proof from before....although I think we all agree that history is tough to "prove".

The egyptian empire has left us tons of religious proof. We can read it, see it, see the monuments, etc. We KNOW the people had numerous religious beliefs.

But do you believe in Inubus? Where's the Ka? (Is that the eye thing god, right?) Are the gods of ancient egypt proven in the same way as the christian god??

Why not?

What gives?

<blockquote>quote:<hr />It is that understanding, that insight into nature, that has forced me to abandon any belief, or need, or ability to believe in something supernatural. From my experience, what I have learned, and what I see, I do not see how, or why, a creator is necessary to explain the worlds around us. <hr /></blockquote>bp22 - Okay, no one said it was "necessary." There are only 2 ways that everything in the universe came into existence. 1)Through natural random processes which many call "evolution" or 2)Through the purposeful act of a Living Creator, by design.

One can easily choose either "model" but it will be dependent upon one's perception of, or belief in, a Supreme Being (i.e., God). Since there are only two choices, one is right and one is wrong.

Of course, if someone wants to try to straddle the fence and not really make a decision they can fall back on the idea that "okay, God created, or 'kickstarted' the whole thing and then turned the eventual outcome out to evolution. That position is analagous to an architect who draws up a beautiful plan for a building, arranges for all the needed supplies to be dumped at the site, and then sits back to let the building assemble itself.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />I guess what I am asking for when I ask for proof...show me physical evidence of your living god. Proof from today. Or undisputable proof from before....although I think we all agree that history is tough to "prove". <hr /></blockquote>The "undisputable proof" you ask for is the resurrected Jesus Christ. It was a "physical" event of the sort that you seem to confine yourself to. But unless you are willing to accept that other "sciences" than "hard science" have any merit, it would do little to satisfy your definition of "proof."

If you want to get into textual criticism and the historicity of the Bible, we can do that, but it's not the same thing as a "scientific method" approach to be able to produce "reproducable" experiments to confirm a hypothesis. It IS recognized as a factual approach to literature and the "reality" of people of history and is how things are "proven or disproven" about the past. NONE of the people doubt that George Washington, for example, actually lived and did certain things. They were faithfully recorded and are available for review. But no one is still alive today to provide "verification" of the actual existence of George. The same is true of trying to obtain a contemporary person who can "attest" to the facts concerning George. But you don't doubt the veracity of his existence or what he did, do you?

What I am talking about here is "intellectual honesty." Not that every little thing is "explainable" because it isn't. Not any more that all things in the physical universe are known and explainable. But there ARE certain constants that remain true. Perhaps the most well-known is E=MC2. There are a lot of others and in your field of astronomy you use some of them.

The same is true of Christianity. There is ONE constant that remains true. That constant is Jesus Christ. ALL of Christianity rests on the person of Jesus Christ, and beyond that, on the FACT that he rose from the dead. Without the resurrection, all of the rest is irrelevant.

So the "proof" you seek rests upon the fundamental of "did Jesus actually rise from the dead" or not.

For that you will have to move your criteria for proof into the arena of the "courts", of evidence, of eyewitness testimony, etc. It cannot fit your narrow definitions of either "reproducable events" or personal observation of some miraculous event.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />The egyptian empire has left us tons of religious proof. We can read it, see it, see the monuments, etc. We KNOW the people had numerous religious beliefs.

But do you believe in Inubus? Where's the Ka? (Is that the eye thing god, right?) Are the gods of ancient egypt proven in the same way as the christian god?? <hr /></blockquote>Please, you are more intellecutally honest than that! There are many religions, both past and present, that have at their center "man-made" claims or attempts to explain physcial things or to control others. They DO NOT have a single individual, attested to by followers and opponents alike, who claimed to BE God. Christianity could easily fall into being just "one of those religions" IF there were no resurrection. Since Jesus Christ himself, not to mention prophecy, said that he would rise from the dead, debunking his resurrection would be the surest way to "kill" Christianity.

You may not "like" it that there could be a Creator behind the wonderous universe, but again it's irrelevant if Jesus Christ IS who he claimed to be. In all of history, up to and including today, Jesus Christ is the only person to both claim to be God and to back up that claim with proof of his power over both the physical and the spirit worlds.

So before the discussion can go any further it remains with you to decide WHAT constitutes "proof" for you. If you want hard, scientific proof, I give you the risen Christ. If you want spiritual "proof" I give you the most faithfully and carefully translated text in the history of man, the Holy Scriptures. If you want historical "proof", I give you Jesus Christ, a man who lived and walked this earth, attested to by followers and foes alike, and who had eyewitnesses to his actions faithfully record the miracles that he performed.

This IS the thing that sets Christianity apart from all other religions, or non-religions of the world. It is centered upon the person of Jesus Christ and no one else. It is based upon his claims and his actions and the actual resurrection from the dead of his body. Since it all rests upon "proof" of who He is, we are back to your definition of "proof" for an historical figure.

By the way, you will get your "current day physical realm" proof too. That will happen with his second advent, but by then it will be too late. So as he admonished people of his time, "you have Moses and the prophets but you don't believe. Neither will you believe if someone should rise from the dead. But this is the only sign that you will receive..."

Seriously bp22, you are making a choice based upon feeling and conjecture but not upon an honest appraisal of the available facts. You are free to do so, but is that what you want to embrace as "intellectual honesty" for yourself?

We are told to love the Lord our God with all our heart, mind, and soul. Faith IS a part of it as it is with many things as you pointed out with your auto mechanic, but so are other things including an intelligent assessment of the facts concerning this man called Jesus.

"Choose ye this day whom ye will serve..." is as applicable today as it was in ancient days. It's a CHOICE that we make. Use all of your God-given faculties to make the assessments needed to make an intelligent, factually based, choice.

And remember, it IS intellectually honest to NOT throw out data that "proves" our hypothesis wrong, no matter how much we thought it was true up to that point. We may not "want" to, but honesty demands accepting that which is true, not that which is desired. I threw out Chistianity as I got more immersed into science and the postulates of some things, such as evolutionary theory. But you know something, there really is not ONE shred of proof for evolution of life and species. There IS for adaptation within a species, but not one instance of an entirely new species "evolving from another." There really is more proof of Jesus's resurrection than there is to support evolution(none).

God bless.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by bp22:

But do you believe in Inubus? Where's the Ka? (Is that the eye thing god, right?) Are the gods of ancient egypt proven in the same way as the christian god??
<hr /></blockquote>Hey Bp22, that's Anubis, not Inubus. Don't you go spelling the name of my favorite Kemetic diety wrong.(Hey, if they're real I want to be buddy, buddy with the guy ensuring I get a fair shake on the scales of truth). Also, it's the Eye of Ra, not Ka. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />

As an aside, there are people that still practice the Kemetic faith although I have yet to meet one.

Thanks NSSO for the corrections...I knew I wasn't on the money with egyptian facts...but I always have been fascinated with their beliefs.

As far as believing in the "risen christ", I will agree with you that you MUST do that in order for the rest of christianity to mean anything.

But, do believe in that, I believe, takes total faith.

You have said that in science, we "accept" that which has been previously proven. You are correct. Every physicist doesn't have to start at 0 and repeat every experiment ever done in order to "see" everything themselves. That is what education is all about.

But NO PHYSICIST will just "accept" things, as taught, until they are understood.

E=mc^2 isn't a "formula" which is just written and "accepted" as fact. It comes from special relativistic theory...and it is totally consistent with evrything else. And it is also experimentally proven.

I understand what you are saying about the "quality" of the bible, and its translation, and its piece as recorded history. I don't know enough about the facts of the bible, and it's passage thorugh history, to truely comment on it "being the most accurate book...".

But, just becuase it is "so", it doesn't "increase the proof" of fact of what is contained in the book. Just becuase it is written, it doesn't mean it is "true".

That requires the leap of faith...to accept...and to believe. That's the difference with history...and science.

History can only be "proven", presumably, by documentation from the day. Its self consistency is reviewed, etc, and it is either believed or rejected as true.

So, yes, I don't doubt the George Washington was a real man, the first President, and a slave owner, but I'm not sure if he cut down the cherry tree or not.

My point is, the historical documentation is very clear, george was a man, he lived.

I also agree, Jesus was a man, he lived. He walked. He talked. And he told people they were his own...(I really like that song, In the Garden, #34 in our old hymnal)

Anyway, I don't believe that he rose from the dead....I don't believe Elijah say the burning bush...I don't believe adam ate the apple...I don't believe in the 7 seals...

I think to BELIEVE those things, in such ancient and loosely recorded history, requires FAITH. FAITH not in historians, and record keeping, and such (as we would have in studying ancient greece, rome, etc) but FAITH that he was lord...

So, I think I understand what you are saying, but I think you are comparing apples to oranges when putting science besides historical documentation.

No matter how good the records are about something as recents as JFK's assination, we still don't really know what happened to him. Sure, he was shot...but by whom? Will we ever know? Maybe if the proper documents are brought to light...but are they authentic? Who knows. Not sure if anyone will ever believe when they ARE released, discovered, found someday.

But science IS something that is self consistent, and measurable.

I don't think you are saying science is 'wrong', I think you are saying it is incomplete.

But I also think you are tyring to build a "statement" that the bible is also something to be taken as "factual", given its course through history.

If we wouldn't accept (many wouldn't anyways) released government papers about JFK, why should we believe the bible???

If the bible was a book, with a christ, or if you were a buddhist, then you wouldn't believe the bible...you wouldn't have the faith to accept it as true.

Anyways, I also disagree, I think it is correct to use the word "necessary" when it comes to invoking a creator. I do think people find it necessary to believe in a creator. Makes them feel better, gives them security and understanding.