Basically you either have it or you don't:pimp:. If you question it you don't..

That's all there is to it.

So whether or not something is false doesn't matter as long as you consider it beneficial to society? Jesus wasn't the greatest moralist of all time - in fact the ancient Greeks contemplated morality far more extensively than the writers of the Bible and hundreds of years before them too. I think there's this tendency in people to treat it like religion and religious figures can lay claim to morality.

I think that some morality is innate in us but for the most part I think are ethical standards are far more societal. As far as reaching some sort of "enlightened" state of mind by following the teachings of Jesus there's no actual proof for that. You could reach a certain level of inner peace with yourself and others but you could just as easily reach that same level of peace by reading Aristotle, Kant, Smith or Kierkegaard. Jesus isn't the only path nor is he necessarily the best path.

I think by accepting faith (and there's no evidence Jesus actually existed so it would be faith, specifically in regards to how he was created) you're setting up a standard that is dangerous. By using religion as your basis for morality you then have to logically respect anyone else you uses religion as the basis for their morality. Meaning you have to except the abuse of woman and terrorist attacks as moral actions; unless you're willing to be a hypocrite or place Jesus was more "right" than Muhammad and there's no basis for that whatsoever.

Jews have something completely different they believe when it comes to God. They don't believe that Jesus had anything to do with God, let alone be his son or God himself (in human form) therefore they don't really think God/Juses was here on earth at all. I think? I don't know I'm not a Jew.:usehead:

Exactly, the bible has some great knowledge. For example, God didn't want Adam and Eve to eat from the tree of knowledge. To me, the idea behind this represents how our intelligence, emotions, and other qualities that we only possess have led to so many bad things.

Personally, I'm not a christian. Its not the bible I'm really against, its people's intepretations of it, its how church's interpret the book for their members and then lay down their intepretations as rules that a "good christian" must follow. If one is going to look to the bible for insightful knowledge, one should do it outside of a church and keep it on a more personal level and not let their minds be controlled by churches. Another main issue I have with religion is how they worship one or a few particular books, instead of keeping their mind open. There isn't anything wrong with reading the bible, what I don't like is somebody only reading the bible, and just the bible, and only listening to the bible. People need to keep their minds open.

Why is it so damn hard for people to wrap their head around this? It's like people who dislike Christianity use any excuse to make everything seem so literal. Oh and all Christians are bible bashing people that push their religion on everyone else apparently. What a joke.

If the Bible is all one giant metaphor then why follow it specifically? Why not go for other ethical philosophy that is more clear cut? If it's for afterlife purposes than how do you know that the Judea-Christian holy book is the right one?

One problem I have with the bible, is how it is cherry picked to fit whatever social climate we find ourselves in. How could any one conceive of obeying "god's words"in this day and age? there is a whole chunk of Leviticus devoted to detailed explantaion of how to perform the correct animal sacrafice for your amount and type of sin in order to appease god.

Why is this supreme being so nit picky and vindictive?...a control freak god...why bother?



"There is nothing out there, and I'm ok with that", ismy mantra, sometimes hard but ultimately I feel it to be more honest and therefore worthwhile,as self-denial is very ugly.

It could depend on someones background, such as what they were brought up to believe, but it's really down to what you feel is true in your heart. I think there is some element of all religions that have similar moral guidelines that can be applied to further ones spirituality. I think for a lot of religions you have to take some things with a grain of salt. Basically it looks impossible to prove a religion is true, but finding one suits you in particular will be beneficial to your life.

Don't you think the ability to be so selective with religions says something about its validity? It's not like all religion are just a different path to heaven (I'm using heaven to refer to whatever the climax of the religion is) or different paths to different heavens but rather that there is one true path to the one true heaven. So if we had some internal compass telling us which one was correct wouldn't everyone be of the same faith? And if it's merely pointing to which religion is right for you personally, then doesn't that have more to do with your own personality and upbringing as opposed to the validity of the religion?

I think that different religions manifest the same universal truths about the nature of transcendental reality in different ways, which is to say that, yes there really is more than one path to "heaven".
Yes a lot of the primary distinctions between religions are cultural and often one's chosen religion is a direct result of one's upbringing, though that's not always the case.
The unfortunate truth about religion is that spiritual truths are often hidden within culturally or mythologically inspired allegory which makes it hard, especially for the average zealot to make the distinction between spiritual truth and the peripheral structure in which that truth is embedded.

But there's no actual truth to that supposed universal truth you're talking about. I see no other evidence for some transcendental universe other then the existence of religion itself and I don't think that evidence that relies solely upon itself is evidence at all.

I think that you and I are talking about two distinctly different things.

Do you believe in karmic law?

Please do tell us.

Well the implication that I'm making is that its cause and effect on a spiritual level, but very pragmatic nonetheless. The law of physics that states that for every action there's an equal and opposite reaction extends into the psycho-spiritual dimension, certainly there's a different dynamic at work in the quantum level, but in a nutshell, really no different.

http://c4.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/i...513de9218b.jpg


it does make sense right?!?!?!?!?

I don't believe any sort of spiritual realm exists so no.

In your own words how would you define the term spiritual?

I should have said supernatural as opposed to spiritual. To answer your question though I'd define spirituality as the connection that is claimed to exist between the metaphysical and humanity though.

well, the term supernatural is quite literally an oxymoron. Metaphysical is much more appropriate as it it is juxtapose to the empirical.
hmmmm.....I dunno' I wouldn't venture too far away from Newtonian physics if you wish to maintain your present outlook.

Go away.

The Bible has many many contridictions. I personally think that if this was real it could have atleast been put together seemlessly. In the following I am going to provide you a list of contridictions.


War or Peace?

EXO 15:3 The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.
ROM 15:33 Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen.

Which first--beasts or man?

GEN 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
GEN 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
GEN 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
GEN 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

The number of beasts in the ark

GEN 7:2 Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.
GEN 7:8 Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowls, and of every thing that creepeth upon the earth, GEN 7:9 There went in two and two unto Noah into the ark, the male and the female, as God had commanded Noah.

The sins of the father

ISA 14:21 Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers; that they do not rise, nor possess the land, nor fill the face of the world with cities.
DEU 24:16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

Odd genetic engineering

GEN 30:39 And the flocks conceived before the rods, and brought forth cattle ringstraked, speckled, and spotted.

Order of creation

Here is the order in the first (Genesis 1), the Priestly tradition:
Day 1: Sky, Earth, light
Day 2: Water, both in ocean basins and above the sky(!)
Day 3: Plants
Day 4: Sun, Moon, stars (as calendrical and navigational aids)
Day 5: Sea monsters (whales), fish, birds, land animals, creepy-crawlies (reptiles, insects, etc.)
Day 6: Humans (apparently both sexes at the same time)
Day 7: Nothing (the Gods took the first day off anyone ever did)
Note that there are "days," "evenings," and "mornings" before the Sun was created. Here, the Deity is referred to as "Elohim," which is a plural, thus the literal translation, "the Gods." In this tale, the Gods seem satisfied with what they have done, saying after each step that "it was good."
The second one (Genesis 2), the Yahwist tradition, goes:
Earth and heavens (misty)
Adam, the first man (on a desolate Earth)
Plants
Animals
Eve, the first woman (from Adam's rib)

How orderly were things created?
#1: Step-by-step. The only discrepancy is that there is no Sun or Moon or stars on the first three "days."
#2: God fixes things up as he goes. The first man is lonely, and is not satisfied with animals. God finally creates a woman for him. (funny thing that an omniscient god would forget things)

How satisfied with creation was he?
#1: God says "it was good" after each of his labors, and rests on the seventh day, evidently very satisfied.
#2: God has to fix up his creation as he goes, and he would certainly not be very satisfied with the disobedience of that primordial couple. (funny thing that an omniscient god would forget things)


ENJOY!!!!

^Next time you copy and paste, cite your sources.

Atheists love regurgitating tired old "facts".

I ask atheists on this board one question, are you 100% sure there is no God?

The above is why i try to stay away from organized religion, because in all reality, religion is not organized all. All it is, is a corrupt madness of mystical wonder. Over half of the scrolls where burnt or lost in the time leading up too the fall of the Roman Empire. Not to mention that the hebrew language is not understud as a whole just yet.(heh See guys if I put my mind too it, i make sense.)

Hey give me 5 good reasons god is real, no bull crap i felt him in my heart or seen him in a tortilla give me 5 good solid reasons this is all true.
This is a subject i can own people at.

1. Go look up the word "faith"

^there's my five

Exactly...You can't even come up with atleast 2 solid answers to my question.

:laughing: I like you cory, but you can be really inept at times

I was making a point with that post, actually ;)

I find the musings of Travis Mcgee to be helpful right now.

"I think there is some kind of divine order in the universe. Every leaf on every tree in the world is unique. As far as we can see, there are other galaxies, all slowly spinning, numerous as the leaves in the forest. In an infinite number of planets, there has to be an infinite number with life forms on them. Maybe this planet is one of the discarded mistakes. Maybe it's one of the victories. We'll never know. I think the closest we can get to awareness is when we see one man, under stress, react in ... in a noble way, a selfless way.
to me organized religion, the formalities and routines, it's like being marched in formation to look at a sunset."

Any of system of morality we've established never applies completely I've noticed, but where do acts of selflessness come from? Those are neither the act of logic or of self-preservation, so where does the act of sacrifice originate from?

This and other questions are unanswerable by both parties, and I believe we'll be searching for those answers for a little while longer.

Faith by it's definition is believing in something in spite of the lack of evidence. Saying that's evidence for the existence of god is stupid.

I'm agreeing with sleepy on this one..\\

You either have faith or you don't.. If you question it you don't .. If you post asking for people to prove it they cant.. That's where i agree with sleepy cause faith is what it is.. Faith Cory, Gotta have Faith, not physical evidence Faith..

Well sleepy jack, you seem to be another teen who has life all figured out and is more than happy to enlighten us

I take it your an atheist? Do you have proof that God doesn't exist?

I find it funny that you treat it like I'm the one being arrogant here and yet you demand something of me that you yourself can't offer. I am not the one claiming anything exists or I know exactly what happens to me when I die. The burden of proof isn't on me it's on you.

That's not going to go well, I should know... :shycouch: I'm staying right here

I don't think sleepy is a teen btw

No, it's not. I'm more then ready to tell you that I base my idea of religion solely on faith, thus I have no need to provide evidence as I don't consider it a part of my religious decision-making

Atheists argue religion based on facts. If they want to talk facts, then I want their proof that God doesn't exist


By the way, I'm not saying you're arrogant, just confident ;)

perhaps you should define what you mean by the term "God" before asking others to prove god doesn't exist.

I'm not an atheist, I'm agnostic. You could use both terms interchangeably to describe me I suppose but my stance is essentially one of non-belief. There isn't any actual burden of proof on me to justify my stance no matter how much you claim there is. However if you base your religious beliefs entirely on faith (which isn't evidence at all...a comment I noticed you avoided) then it's a cop out and an arrogant one at that since you seem to think it entitles you to a sense of smug superiority.

It's not evidence, it's justification for my beliefs

You're right, there's no burden, it is a voluntary discussion. But it is a sincere question that begs an answer from all atheists

Though since you're agnostic, I suppose that changes my stance a bit

You're ignoring a relevant question^^^^^

The general sense of God. I mean THE God, not A God. As in, the Bible's sense of God