Meh. I'm human. Obviously I'm gonna have some doubts at times. God is a pretty flimsy concept to believe it. Obviously I'm not a very devout christian if that wasn't already obvious. But I enjoy the religion so I figure, why not. Really I'm kinda just talking out of my ass now. Lacking in sleep. So enough replies for me tonite.

So you just blindly believe in because it's better than the alternative? I mean, you admit it's a flimsy concept! But yet, you still believe in it because you don't like the idea that maybe, someday, upon arriving at the transcendental juncture of the afterlife, you may get sent to this really fun place called hell.

You admit it's flimsy. But yet you're still making decisions based on the most hilarious concept ever: hell.

Do you see how this is kind of silly? I mean, maybe you haven't really thought about how you regard things out there, as far as spirituality - which is cool, man. But how Christian are you really?

What, exactly, do you "enjoy" about the religion? The free communion wafers? The thought-provoking metaphor of drinking Christ's blood? Maybe the weekend retreats into a hell hole of Kumbaya choruses and repetitive preaching?

I mean, if you want an "enjoyable" religion, I am sure there's much more awesome things out there that celebrate the individual in lieu of trying to appease some dude in the sky who will throw you into the throngs of hell if you don't worship him properly.

Responses such as that convince me more and more what people claim to believe is quite a bit different than what people actually believe. They think they believe, they want to believe the metaphysical claims of the bible. But it's just not possible to really, really believe it. I think most of the religious are under the influence of Pascal. How can they not be when it seemingly appears to be such a profitable transaction. Providing they get the sprinkle of water and spend their Sunday afternoon in church an exception will be made when they pass on. Exactly as he said, why take the chance? Of course I don't believe this nonsense! But if I at least feign belief my mind/soul will survive my death. People will fall for that.

Except that's not how it works, slick. Belief, at least in the judeo-christian dogma, requires belief in one's heart. You can't do lip service. It doesn't count.

So the person making the rational decision of "I'll stay in case" has to make the rational decision of "Well, now I'm fucked anyway. Might as well screw before marriage." Also, over the course of my ethnographic research, I've met people who are devout believers. Quite a few of them, actually. So your hypothesis doesn't hold water. You're giving too much weight to the rational decision making process in what is inherently an irrational act. People don't often think this through. They're raised in it, they believe it. Period.

win
 

Those born in a family of faith do tend to believe in their "heart" and really believe they believe the nonsense of the bible. But what good is a belief if it does not correspond with reality? Consider what it means to believe a given proposition. A belief is clearly a linguistic representation concerning a state of the universe. If the brain has conquered anything it is the ability to differentiate a belief from a hope. I can hope I have won the lottery. This represents a possible state of the universe. However, it only becomes a possible representation once I have secured a ticket. But believing I have won the lottery is the only thing which opens the floodgate of emotions appropriate to actually having won the lottery. Yet what could be said of my mental faculties if I have not won the lottery but continue to believe I have? Simply believing I am a lottery winner does not change my financial situation unless it happens to be true. When we believe a given proposition as a truth statement, we are making our best effort to map our thoughts onto reality. This is why we have phrases such as ‘wishful thinking’ for when the validity of our beliefs do not connect with reality.

Either God is the perfect creator of the universe or He is not. If it is the case that it is the latter, then it would seem to place roughly 2 billion Christians in a very awkward situation indeed. In the fullness of time there really will be a winner to this debate since logic demands it. If it turns out there is a God who has a plan for me, then all I have is the simple task of revising my beliefs to gain new knowledge about the universe. If it ever becomes demonstratively shown however that there is no God, am I expected to see 2 billion Christians suddenly become atheists? This is unlikely. What then would it say about the mental faculties of those Christians who continue to believe something which is not true?

Notice that Christianity, with all of its fantastically false claims about the universe, actually goes much further. It says, you as an individual, have the ability to change reality through belief. In other words, if only you are willing to believe Jesus died on the cross you can change the destination of your soul once it separates from the body after death. Since sin is original to our species, something none of us are able to evade, our soul from the moment of conception is destined for Hell. But providing you surrender your self-respect and providing you praise and adore a celestial being that has only done his job in creating you, you are able to avoid a very unpleasant place you rightly belong and instead find yourself welcomed into Heaven.

Now you understand what I mean when I say it is just not possible to believe this. And anyone who claims to is simply not being intellectually honest.

I think you're still having a hard time separating logic and reason from what faith is.

Also, I'm not sure how comparing believing in an afterlife is at all comparable to believing one's won the lottery as one can affect you in the here and now and the other will only be once it doesn't really matter anyway.

If a given proposition is true, it is true by virtue, not because we believe it. If this is merely a debate concerning the reliability of faith and reason then reason wins by default. We would have not got this far in the pages of history without it. If on the other hand you mean to tell me that the concept of the afterlife rests solely inside the realm of faith which reason can never hope to explain, then no I won't have that. Either there is life beyond the grave or there isn't. If there is, then that is a matter of truth not a matter of faith. If you also mean to tell me that among all things we must have faith in God to be granted access to this divine afterlife, then no I won't have that either. You have a great deal of work ahead if you want to convince me that Heaven and the afterlife only reveals its path to those who have jetisoned logic and reason and replaced skepticism with blind faith.

The human brain is no longer confined to shadows in the cave. We need to have more respect for ourselves than this. I hope I am making myself clear.

I'm just having a hard time understanding how you can say that necessitating something outside our universe has to be proven in order to exist.

I mean, if we're going that route, then the entirety of the universe stops existing whenever I blink.

Well, it's easy to think of such a thing if you're a dystheist (where God is evil).


Personally, it is my belief that 9/11 was evil and God-Allowed, thus meaning He, for all practical purposes, did something evil.

Why isn't this listed in the dictionary.

O, WOW. You're a jem.

"9/11 was awful, and God allowed it. Therefore, God must be part EVIL!"

What's wrong with you. Really. Have you thought about this at all? 9/11 is the first thing to spring to mind?

And, I mean, how about every second someone suffers in life? Or every tragedy that occurs - does that all mean god could be part evil, too? Because we don't live in utopia?

Sometimes, I wonder how people make these huge leaps for their faith. Instead of accepting something that is much more probable (ie: god is a figment of your imagination and insecurities), you decide that maybe god isn't as perfect as you thought he was! DESPITE what the Bible has to say about it!

I wonder, is Lucifer perhaps Mother Teresa? 'Cause the duality you're implying with god here must apply equally to the devil, I imagine.

You only have the sense of sight?

When I sleep the world stops existing.

(Or perhaps when I blink light ceases to exist.)

God is too much work. I've yet to encounter a reason to believe in his existence or his supposed words.

Doesn't anyone else feel this way?

I just can't be bothered to give a flying fuck. If a fella wants me to devote my precious 70 years of existence to his cause, he'd better be the one seeking me the fuck out in the desert and praying to me.

I always wondered why the lights wink out every minute or two.

Why would anyone even try to argue with solipsism? You can't very well refute it.

It's on Wikipedia, I know that:

www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dystheism

And I highly doubt they would lie about something like that, since they're mostly a bunch of heathens.
Plus the dictionary was written by Christian men. Such an entry would be sacrilige. why not now? no one uses it much anymore.

Yes, that's good reasoning. Sure is. Maybe even great reasoning.

But you CAN hear, therefore certifying that there is something outside, or you should guide yourself to a psych ward, lol.

But yes, solipsis is VERY hard to argue with, since it's pretty much a conversation ender.

And, no. When you sleep, the world doesn't start existing, you do. Since your mind is at rest, and sleep is the first death (according to shakespeare), you have ceased to exist for the time being.

Additional Spam:
Touche.
Well, that is assuming you believe there IS a god.
Good for you, you're letting me skip a step! Since you bring up duality, such a questioning could only result in "There is no God."
You see what NOT going the simple route does? It brings to light SO many things!;)

There are too many circumstances in which all logic points to the nonexistence of god, so as far as percentages go, there isn't one.

Yet still some common proles think that they might have hope of lasting forever, so they cling to the hope that they will, and create the ultimate sadist for their inner masochist so they'll feel rightly punished for their foolishness.:p:p HAHA, Christians make me laugh.

Well, getting back to the original topic....


Here's the thing. Presuppose that God exists. To me this means that he is omnipotent... otherwise he'd be 'a' god and not God... and therefore created the notions of good and evil. Good and evil being define by him then....

.... yes, he does wrong in the sense that he breaks the rules he sets for us. If he never meant for those rules to apply to him though, the he isn't breaking them, and they aren't evil.

So we should do as he says, not as he does?

Pretty much, though saying it like that leaves out the 'why's. Picture this, there was a point in your life when you weren't allowed to cross the road by yourself. Your parents could, but told you not to. They also told you not to talk to strangers or do any number of other things simply because you weren't knowledgeable or strong enough to do it right... even though they'd do those things right in front of you.

God can decide when it is right to end a person's life, but we can't see as far as he can so for us... it would be murder.

Again, this is assuming an omnipotent God.

Do you know how flawed this is.

"God" is "perfect," according to you people. You will use anything to explain away the inconsistencies of your argument, won't you. It's a little depressing that you'd go as far as to call your god a murderer and think that's okay because hey! he knows what he's doing.

Your argument pretty much says that it's okay, because we don't know what he's up to, what with him being omnipotent and all that jive.

"Do as I say, not as I do" is fucking right. I just wonder why people want to be babysat by an imaginary dude. Especially one who is bitter and jealous when you stray away.

Actually, Sassafrass, that's a rather common theological approach these days.

The argument goes that the root of sin is the assumption by lesser beings of the role which they have no right to hold; in particular, deciding who lives and who dies. These are decisions only god can make, as its pretty much his world, as well as him having omniscience and supposedly a "good" nature and plan.

Sass, you seem to be of the opinion that someone who is transcendent to this universe, much less humanity, should be subject to the same restrictions applied to it. Fairness and all that, right?

However, that "do as I say, not as I do" statement doesn't entirely hold up in the whole schema of the christian perspective, because I guess Jesus came, in part, to say "ok dumasses, here's how you do it."

Now, I don't entirely buy the whole argument(or many christian arguments these days) on other grounds. But to say that Hydra is just grasping at straws to explain away inconsistencies is kind of unfair.

So what would happen if we were to do the equivalent of cross the road or talk to strangers? Would we get run over or buggered senseless?

And that makes as little sense to me as the big guy wearing a toga in the sky. I'm sorry, that's not meant to be personal or anything. I understand what you're saying, but the idea is laughable.

Uh, well, I don't believe in religion, so I think anything that even assumes there's a omnipotent presence that interacts with us is a silly notion. More than silly - straight out delusional.

So I don't really care if this Great Thing holds itself to the same expectations as it holds us to - I think the entire concept is archaic and honestly, a little dangerous.

A "perfect god" needs to send down some hippie to bang prostitutes and die on a cross to prove that "aw, god ain't that bad" ??

It's not so much Hydra as a person that I take issue with. I am sure Hydra is a smart person.

But I see these people explaining away all the inconsistencies of a LOT of their religion with what I think of as the "magic sponge." Religion is not help to any kind of logic or sense. It just is, 'cause "God said so."

I just see people warp and misinterpret some pretty direct text and I get frustrated.

It would also be aggravating to have to abide by some guy's rules when he doesn't even follow them himself. It seems so patronizing to me, and I wonder if there are some people in the world that just enjoy thinking that they'll be a kid forever in the eye's of god.

YOU are responsible for YOUR life. Not God. Not Satan. Not Buddha. Not Allah. YOU.