Religion… What do you think?

Hmmm interesting thread. these types of things are "fuse topics" to me. they can ignite anytime and someone is often getting offended. I myself believe that everyone has a right to their own opinion.

I myself am agnostic. i don't necessarily "believe" however I don't rule out the possibility of a god. don't confuse this with being an atheist please. I am willing to accept the idea of a god, as long as there exists ample evidence. atheist believe that God does not exist ... agnostic is saying "I don't know" or " at this moment I am unsure" that's where I am...

now with that said I hope everyone here can debate nicely

I dont think you know the difference between atheist and agnostic.

@willpayton: a person who believes the existence of God can neither be proven or dis-proven...

or in other words ... i don't say it/he/she exists, yet I don't say it/he/she doesn't exist

an in between spot ... an "i don't know" btw have u ever watched the show called "Atheist experience" ? despite the name it's not about being an atheist ... it's more about skepticism ... there are some stuff about science that I am skeptical about as well ... such as the beginning of the universe for one ...

Yeah that's what I'd call an agnostic.

That's what I'd call a soft/weak atheist.

Your own description of yourself is that of a soft atheist, not an agnostic.

Yeah I'm familiar with the show. It's (or at least was) a public access TV show from Austin. I'd watched many of their episodes on YouTube.

@artyom: I disagree. If God is a sadist you could stop worshipping him. Question. Do you serve God because of fear of hell or because you want to go to heaven? Or is there some other reason?

@hylian: I said "thought provoking" lol. Meaning it makes you think.

@pooty: I want to go to heaven.

@pooty: >_>

If god were real and a sadist he would have to gain pleasure in your suffering.

@dernman: He may gain pleasure in our suffering. He could end suffering now but doesn't. Then when we die, he could destroy our souls but chooses to have us suffer for eternity. If he doesn't enjoy our suffering, he doesn't dislike it either

@pooty: There really isn't evidence of that. Not stopping something you dislike from happening doesn't indicate he likes or does not dislike it. It could be just a factor of necessity or something else but who can really know god?

@willpayton@lordraiden@frozen@nick_hero22 thoughts?

I like Matt Mccormick's Youtube channel. Anyways, how has your Intro to Philosophy class been going?

@nick_hero22: I actually put it on hold because of starting a new job which hopefully can put me in my career also doing finals for my actual school. My philosophy class is one of those online open courses. I can't wait to get back to it though.

Oh......well I hope everything goes well for you

Religion is nonsense.

@dernman: There is no evidence to support that suffering is a necessity or something else. It could be for enjoyment or necessity. All guesses are equally valid

I never said suffering or anything else was a necessity. If you go back and read you'll see I was only giving an example of other alternative possibilities to address the conclusion you made in your statement.

If he doesn't enjoy our suffering, he doesn't dislike it either

Which I found faulty.

I gave no conclusions. I said " he may enjoy it". Matthew 10:28 says that God can kill the soul. If he allows our souls to suffer when he could just destroy it, that shows he doesn't dislike our suffering enough to stop it

@pooty: You did make a conclusion. You made the conclusion that he doesn't dislike based of the may line of thought. I'm saying even on that may train of thought you can't make that conclusion because there are other possibilities for why he doesn't act to end suffering.

Conclusion: an opinion or decision that is formed after a period of thought or research

after researching his past dealings with humans, his current dealings with humans and his future dealings with humans, i have formed an opinion or decision aka a conclusion. Coming to a conclusion does not eliminate other possibilities.

@pooty:

Now you're saying you did make a conclusion after you said you didn't?

I was addressing the statement and pointed out the fault in the conclusion you made.

Sincerely are you just messing with me?

Hmmm

@looby_loo: Peirce Morgan is a D'ck but so is Penn even when I agree with either of them.

Yes, I made a mistake. I thought you were addressing all my points. you were only addressing the last statement

There is no fault in my conclusion. It has as much basis as any other conclusion that can be formed

No, just a misunderstanding as i pointed out above

LoL at the latest episode of TBBT

If God exists and created us doesn't that mean we're all the son's and daughters of God?

40,000 year old jewellery/bracelet found? This can't be right, though? Anything past the 6-10,000 year range must be fake or falsified, right?

http://m.digitaljournal.com/science/40-000-year-old-bracelet-from-extinct-human-species-discovered/article/432798

"Gate of the Gods" at Hayu Marca, Peru.

http://www.ewao.com/a/1-the-mysterious-gate-of-the-gods-at-hayu-marca-peru

I have a question for both theists and atheists alike if they want to weigh in with their thoughts and opinions. Evolution, outside of creationists, can generally be accepted in religious circles, as the Vatican has shown. The general thought is that evolution doesn't equal atheism, which I'd have to agree for the most part, but, my question is, with the Abrahamic religions, if you take away Adam & Eve, then you take away original sin, so, how do you get original sin with evolution?? Doesn't evolution mess with the doctrine of original sin? I'd like to hear peoples thoughts and opinions.

Doesn't God have an unwavering sense of justice, believing a person should be paid for something that they've done whether it be bad or good?

Hence the need to save some people through the death of Jesus, the son of God, God in the flesh, because of their intentions and actions toward God?

Most will rectify the contradiction between evolution and adam/eve by saying the story of adam eve was metaphorical. Not literal. The story is an easy way to demonstrate that man used to be close to God. But something caused man to turn their back on God. That being said, no where in the Bible does it suggest that the story is figurative. Every time adam/eve, the serpent or the creation days are mentioned, it is in a literal sense. Even Jesus was called the "second Adam". But when science "proved" evolution, religion had to change it's interpretation of the story in order to agree with science.

No. many times his sense of justice contradicts itself. In the story of david and bathsheba, it was the adults who sinned. But God allowed them to die but killed their baby. Moses's brother, Aaron, created a false idol for the jews to worship. God killed 3,000 Jews for worshipping it but didn't kill Aaron. heres another contradiction of Justice:

Exodus 20:5)--"You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me

Deuteronomy 24:16)--"Fathers shall not be put to death for their sons, nor shall sons be put to death for their fathers; everyone shall be put to death for his own sin.

The crazy thing is... both scriptures were written by the same person, Moses. Also, we are all paying for the sins of adam/eve. Because they chose to sin. We have no choice but to sin. Thus we die. We are paying for their mistake

It isn't justice without any mercy.

And through inheritance, all of mankind has the same nature as the humans who sinned before them. Thus, "all have sinned" and "none are righteous".

Exodus chapter 20 and 34 as well as Numbers chapter 34 talks of God punishing the children for the sins of the father as well.

@dum529001:

Doesn't God have an unwavering sense of justice, believing a person should be paid for something that they've done whether it be bad or good?

Maybe but does he see justice or better yet does he see the "pay" the same way we do or when it should happen? If he exists I would imagine that he would see things much differently and not on our limited human scale. Too many people try to hold him up to our level or standards when none of us can truly comprehend where he's coming from. It's assumptions like that that make them think things like contradictions are an issue. Of course it goes without saying that I'm making assumptions also because there is no way to know.

Not really.

A couple of points:

1. While it's true that many religious people accept "evolution" as well as their religious faith, we have to also note that what they call "evolution" is not actually Evolution in the scientific sense. They usually refer to some sort of version of Evolution that was guided by God to form us in the end. This is not Evolution. Evolution is an unguided process and certainly has no end state towards which it moves.

and

2. Yes I think that Evolution is a major problem for Christianity because without Adam and Eve there's no Original Sin, and without that... why did Jesus come to Earth? Why did he sacrifice himself?

I dont doubt that people will come up with all kinds of justifications to resolve this. I dont really care. I'm more concerned with facts and reason than i am with arguing the actions and motivations of fictional characters with people who think they're not fictional.

@dum529001: Mercy isn't needed for Justice. If God wanted to show us mercy, he could have killed adam/eve and started over. Or he could have given them another chance. Or he could have had a lesser punishment for such a small sin. But having billions die and suffer including his own perfect son, for the mistake of two people seems extreme,does it not?

Thanx for the feedback on the previous question. Another question I have is on the golden calf in the story of Exodus, out of (huge) curiosity, how do supposed slaves? who fled Egypt in the middle of the night, so to speak, basically grabbing what they could and fleeing without a lot of notice, create a pure gold calf, not a hand held one, mind you, but a huge golden calf, in the middle of the Sinai desert to pray to? Where exactly did slaves get that sort of gold? How did they melt that much gold in the middle of a desert in the middle east thousands of years ago? who crafted it? or am i reading too much into it?? Did this not bug anyone? or is it just me? at what point does one say this is metaphorical/allegorical? Does anyone still think it's literal and historical? Thoughts....

on a micro level idc...on a macro level its pretty much been used as political propaganda to justify war,imperialism, racism,misogyny,homophobia, etc. so i want it eradicated

personally i think being religious doesn't make sense since you can't prove any of it and basically going off heresay and words of people with no actual proof

God could done that but maybe he didn't because some people would claim he's only God when nothing bad happens. Its not like God hasn't done things like that for that reason, at least partially, before. Having good things coming from most unexpected places and even in the worst circumstances.

@dum529001. Sorry, I don't understand your first sentence

I have a question for all here... Christian, Muslim, Jew, Deist, Atheist...

Will You All Submit Yourselves To The All Powerful GOD DOOM ?

@king_saturn: Pffffttt...Bat-God>>>>God Doom.

@pooty: What do you think of the troubadour last song?

"We praise Thee, Lord, for gentle souls who live

In love and peace, who bear with no complaint

All wounds and wrongs; who pity and forgive;

Each one of these, Most High, shall be Thy saint."

Bat-God doesn't have an Army of Thors nor does he have a Planet Eating Sentinel aka Galactus...

:P

And people ask what's so great about Doom.

No...but he has prep. :P

@king_saturn: Which story is that from? The art work looks amazing.

I'm agnostic, I ain't gotta explain sh!t.

Umm.. interesting. This guy made an end to his Atheism by this video. By how he glorifies the value of LIFE...

I ask the Atheist whether life has an independent meaning out of the pure physical frame so that you can criticize who kills someone?

Aren't we sons of this world?

Aren't we the sons of matter?

Aren't we just star stuff according to Sagan?

What happened to "survival of the fittest"?

Is death more than a stage that doesn't change anything in the frame of the matter and it's motions?

Everything is in continuous motion, even by death!!!

So, physical frame doesn't change by death.

In other words, when you criticize killing, you actually criticize your Atheism!!!! This is because life doesn't have any meaning according to your view itself. Life doesn't acquire its value

from another world away from the physical frame.

OR do Atheists psychologically knows that life has another meaning and that life has another value that is acquired from another world different from ours??!! Based on this, Atheists criticize killers for what they do regarding killing people.

To conclude, Atheists themselves can criticize anyone who kills people. HOWEVER, when the atheists assume that we are only sons of this physical world and that we are governed by physical laws only and that there is not any purpose of our existence, at this moment, not even a single Atheist has the right to speak about killing all the habitants of Earth.