On a beautiful summer day, I found myself at a party talking to a friend. I had mentioned how some Mormon missionaries were out in my neighborhood and said something about wanting to convert “them”. At this point, a girl who had been eavesdropping turned to me and asked, “But what would you offer them?”
“I don’t have anything to offer. Maybe some more free time on Sunday.”
To which she replied, “I would prefer hope and salvation over a few hours back.”
I removed myself from the situation, it wasn’t my party and I didn’t want to cause a scene. The debate we would have had comes down to Pascal’s Wager. To sum it up, Monsieur Pascal theorized that belief in God was rational based on game theory and probabilistic outcomes.
To Pascal, there were two choices – believe in Christianity (I’ll address this later) or not. Along with these two choices are two possible outcomes – go to heaven or don’t.
| Christian | Atheist | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Go to heaven | Extremely good outcome | Very bad outcome | |
| Don't go to heaven | Harmless outcome | Not a benefit |
As we can see, an atheist can’t go to heaven (or at least according to Christianity, heaven is gained by faith not works). The two possible outcomes for our atheist is God is really and won’t allow the atheist into heaven or God is not real and our atheist doesn’t go to heaven because heaven doesn’t exist. Either outcome for the atheist results in a losing proposition.
For a Christian, their faith is justified in the next life and they get to go to heaven which would be an extremely good outcome, or their belief was wrong and there is no God and no heaven in which case they are no worse off than the atheist. Even if we assign a very small probability of God existing, the benefit is so great, Mr. Pascal would have you believe, that the only rationale choice here is to be a good Christian. Since this is the only way to heaven and the reward is so great, a rational person would have to be a Christian. Who wouldn’t want a little “heaven insurance” at the cost of a few prayers and a few hours in church? You’d have to be crazy not to, right?
Hey, thanks Blaise, but your little game theory diagram is woefully simplified. The problem isn’t choosing between Christianity and atheism. How amazingly Eurocentric of you to lay these out as your only two possibilities. In Western cultures, the choice comes down to the big three Abrahamic faiths of Judaism, Christianity, and Muslim. Even within these faiths there are Reform Jews, Conservative Jews, and Orthodox Jews. Muslims have the Sunni and Shiite denominations. Christians? There are Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Baptists, Lutherans, Mormons, etc.
That’s just the Western World. The Eastern World has Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, and that’s just to name a few. The choice isn’t so easy between Christianity and atheism, is it?
Now ask oneself why one has chosen their faith? The most likely reason is because it was the faith inherited by their parents. They have been indoctrinated into the faith at an early age before rational thinking has been established. In the theists basic desire to be perceived as good, they absorb their religion and cling to it as true. Still, one could ask what harm does religion do? For starters, it divides humanity rather than unites, see the following list of just a few of the atrocities done in God’s name:
Jews
- Detailed genocide against rival tribes throughout the Old Testament
Christians against Jews
- Spanish Inquisition
- Crusades
- Holocaust
Christians against Muslims
- Crusades
- Bosnia
Muslims against Christians
- Crusades
Shiite against Sunni
- Iraq
Protestant against Catholic
- Northern Ireland
It is without exaggeration to say that millions of people have died because they have different unproved religious beliefs inherited from their parents along tribal lines. Now imagine that Earth was invaded by an alien force with superior technology. Imagine, if you will, that humans were kept in cages and forced to fight each other to the death for the amusement of the aliens. Would you kill your fellow man and hope to gain favor with the aliens or would you resist by any means necessary and strive to regain human dignity? Which is the more moral option?
I propose as my answer to Pascal’s wager, two choices and two outcomes. The choices come down to theism (of any religion, not just Christianity) vs. atheism. The outcomes include going to heaven or not going to heaven.
| Theism | Atheist | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Heaven | Inherit the “correct” beliefs from parents and go to heaven at the expense of every human who inherited the “wrong” beliefs | Stand up to a corrupt God and demand dignity for the entire human race beyond my tribe | |
| No God/No Heaven | Worship a non-existent deity and not be rewarded in the afterlife | Concentrate on this life and focus on the issues that matter |
If God only rewards those who follow the “correct” faith and faith is inherited from one’s parents, then the God who refuses to prove his existence is playing favorites over his creation based on tribal lines pitting groups of humans against each other just like our aliens. If, by chance and chance alone, one is born into the right religion and curries favor with God Almighty, then this person is actively collaborating with the enemy of humanity. The atheist may find himself in hell for his disbelief, but at least he is not a traitor. Until God accepts that religion is His responsibility and can provide some real proof and guidance as to His plan, He is completely unworthy of our worship. To continue to worship a deity that arbitrarily divides us as a species, rewards a chosen few for their faith in which there is no evidence, and has deliberately chosen not to intervene when His name is used inappropriately is no different from collaborating with the alien cage fighters. By dividing humanity amongst different sects with conflicting ideology and allowing war in His name, God is evil. To worship a deity like this is to commit an act of treason. Unless God proves his existence and changes the outcomes, we as a race owe it to ourselves to not worship Him.
349 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 349 of 349Well, it looks like you know a little about a very deep and complicated subject. I suggest you keep investigating. You know about 10% of what you need to right now.
The founders of the USA took a position on God in the Dclaration of Independence. Their position was that the USA will be founded as a nation under God because the nonexistence of God was not proven by any person.
Today, proofs of God are increasing. My proof is in my book titled 'The First Scientific Proof of God.' I also teach this book at http://georgeshollenberger.blogspot.com/
There is no fence to stand on in between the ideas of God and no God (atheism). Based on the founders, can you make another post and explain why any atheists exist in the USA?
George Shollenberger
WV
the more you know life you fear death
George, you are obviously a fruitcake.
From your blog:
"I expect these blogs and the related blogs of other people to be detected by Jesus Christ and those higher intelligent humans who already live on other planets."
Do you really expect people to take you seriously when you come out with nonsense like that? Unless, of course, you are being ironic. But I doubt it.
It's a wonder that NASA ever made it to the moon with lunatics like you working for them.
There are (at least) two major problems with your argument:
1) Faith is not always something inherited from one's parents. There are many great people of faith in the history of the world who came to faith on their own after living a life of disrepute. Since you seem to be obsessed with Christianity, the great example there is St. Augustine. Go read his book, "Confessions".
2) It is a flawed syllogistic argument which asserts that because people have committed atrocities in the name of faith/religion, therefore faith/religion is false. It is even more illogical to make the corollary assertion that God does not therefore exist. And it is a severe misunderstanding of the God question to attribute the actions of supposed people of faith to the deity which they claim to worship, unless you believe that those subject to a deity are merely puppets controlled directly by their god (which is a puerile assumption).
Your attempt to disarm Pascal's Wager in public like this merely reveals to world how intellectually inferior and unconvincing most atheistic reasoning can be.
My advice to you is to ditch any and all of Richard Dawkins books that you might own. That guy is doing the cause of atheism a great disservice with his unsupported dogmatic assertions and evolutionary pseudo-science. Until atheism raises up a credible intellectual giant of the likes of David Hume or Bertrand Russell, then people like Dawkins and Sam Harris are going to continue to give atheists a collective bad image through their intellectual inferiority.
All men seek happiness. This is without exception. Whatever different means they employ, they all tend to this end. The cause of some going to war, and of others avoiding it, is the same desire in both, attended with different views. This is the motive of every action of every man, even of those who hang themselves. --Blaise Pascal
I seek my happiness in God; you seek it without.
I will agree that much evil has been accomplished in the name of the God of the Bible, but I will interject that those individuals will judged rightly by their own actions and motives.
The final point is individual accountability. It is not my role to justify what others have done who claim common faith with me. I believe that there is an afterlife in which every person must give an account for this life and will be rightly judged accordingly.
For this life, faith is my joy...not my fire insurance. Pascal's wager is flawed. Following the God of the Bible (as manifest in Jesus Christ) for the sake of escaping hell is an insufficient motive to accomplish the desired outcome.
I've never understood atheism at its core, especially posts like this. Atheism is blatantly polemical. The atheist defines himself by what he does not believe exists. Why bother?
If there is no God, what is the basis for morality?
If there is no God, what separates humanity from the rest of the animal kingdom?
The only thing that you truly know, that you have not been taught; that you have not learned, beyond bodily functions is...
That you exist and that you did not create yourself.
Everything and anything else is just belief. That is why you are able to choose your belief beyond your own existence.
Believe it.
Edgewalker™
agnostic = it is impossible to prove the existence of God and it is impossible to prove the non-existence of God - therefore the whole discussion is meaningless.
The agnostic position is NOT the same as the atheist position and considers both theist and atheist positions without merit.
Believing in God(s) has nothing to do with religion. You cannot automatically divide atheists and theists along religious lines.
Imagine a huge circle which represents everything there is to know - every fact about every thing in existence. Now imagine a much much smaller circle inside of the big circle, which represents the sum of man's knowledge. Now imagine an even smaller circle inside the second circle, which represents the sum of one individual's knowledge.
With this visual representation, I immediately realized there is so much I just don't know and then concluded that without the facts, it would be supreme arrogance to state "There is no God" as a fact.
Thus I decided since there is really no way to prove or disprove the existence of God, I will rely on faith and believe in Him.
kjd
Great bit of writing.
Regarding the commments....Yes we all know that Stalin comitted crimes agains humanity in the name of Communism.
But the quesion is - did Stalin have faith in Communism? Did he believe in Communism?
I'd argue that he did.
The problem is not theism - but faith.
Faith - blind faith. The un-questioning acceptance of something without proof is the mechanism which allows evil to occur.
The solution to theistic faith is not atheism. (Although atheism is a good start.) It is scepticism.
Challenge everything. (even this post)
Kris, it's just as well that not everyone is a simple-minded as you. Where would we be if scientists relied on "blind faith" to expand human knowledge. We'd have no modern medicine, computers, transport systems, telecommunications, etc.
It bugs me that people like you are lazy enough to sit back and reap the rewards of intelligent, scientific inquiry whilst professing to "have faith". If everyone in the world "had faith" like you, we'd still be living in caves.
Religion is a mask for ignorance. Just because you are too stupid to try and understand the world around you doesn't mean that the rest of us shouldn't try.
There are only 2 reasons for war. Greed and Insanity - Religion is just a convenient banner flown to hide this greed or insanity. Greed being by far the most prevalent.
To me religion is illogical to accept as fact but quite logical to accept as faith.
Mankind does not like "not knowing" and religion is a convenient way to know without actually knowing. it gives meaning. But since logic can not and never can support religion (it is fiction after all) we call it "faith"
Thats fine and oddly enough quite logical.
It all comes down to meaning of life kind of stuff. We want an answer and we believe faith gives us that answer. In reality I think faith was a fiction created by greedy people to allow for the control of other people. From inception to today religion is by and large used to control people not guide them.
I believe SOME people may have created religion with the best intentions in mind but most were war mongering or control nuts.
The CONCEPT of religion is fine and its actually fascinating. The actual "usage" of religion throughout the world is pretty sad to me.
In all probability when we die nothing happens. Thats it your corpse just rots. Its cute and poetic to think that our "soul" goes on to better and greater things but in all likelihood the soul is nothing more than our sentience realized.
In fact scientifically THAT IS what happens. No probability its 100% as of right now.
100% of evidence says thats what happens 0% of evidence supports any religion. not a tiny percent not 10% or 1% or .01% absolutely 0% (that IS why its called faith)
You can believe in something with a little evidence no matter how small. you can NOT believe in something with 0% evidence. Its impossible. you may say you believe in god but you don't your simply using the wrong words. you have FAITH in god. you have FAITH that god exists. Belief requires SOME evidence even if just logical and not empirical or physical.
But thats fine. I have no major issues with religion. I DO have a problem with it being shoved down my throat. :-)
Plus at least as far as the Christian God goes I could NEVER believe in GOD for it would require me to abandon my own beliefs.
I believe in freedom and Free will. but Free Will and god CAN NOT coexist. you can twist warp and explain away all you want its irrefutable. GOD and Free Will can not coexist. So you either have free will and there is no god (as described by Christianity) OR there is free will and no god. I choose free will. They just had to make him all knowing didn't they.
I've always had a problem with a god that demands worship. Just because the entity in question is a god doesn't make demanding such things any less evil than, say, if it was an ordinary human.
Or, IOW: "Any deity worthy of being worshipped, would not want it."
OOps goofed that last part. ie there IS a god and you can not have free will.
ALSO I am not an atheist. I am none of the above. to me atheism is a religion therefore I can not be atheist.
I am simply human. No title.
Nice discussion.
Given that the Abrahamic religions all consign non-believers to the fiery pit of hell, and that each of them is centered on ‘revelations’ which assure us that their creed alone possesses the Truth, it would seem that the god of Abraham should have been much more explicit. If it is possible for a poor mortal like myself to see this, one might wonder why an omniscient and omnipotent god could not have foreseen the problem and simply have written the critical texts in kilometer-high letters on the moon.
"Thus I decided since there is really no way to prove or disprove the existence of God, I will rely on faith and believe in Him."
Illogical. If you can say I know so little that I can not say there is no god....
then
I know so little that I can not say there is a god...
is equally true.
SO which is it. both meet your "logical" circular argument.
also there is no "circle" of knowledge. Knowledge can not be represented by a circle since a circle by definition is FINITE while knowledge is infinite. So no matter how "big or small" our specific circle of knowledge may be its infinitely smaller than knowledge as a whole.
So we use probability based on what evidence we have (no matter how big or small it is). the probably that goes does not exist ? some positive integer.
The Probability that goes does exist ? 0
the ONLY supporting "evidence" of god's existence so far is a book written by man.
Not much evidence there ehh?
To top it off accepting god exists means denying that we have free will therfore denying freedom at all.
what is the point of living if you have no free will.
Yes the bible says we have free will but it also says god is all knowing. These can not coexist. the only way for "god" to endow us with free will is for god to GIVE UP all knowing knowledge. to LIMIT god to make him finite.
If you are coming to a turn and I KNOW you will turn left before you are even born and I CAN NOT BE WRONG then there is no choice. YOU WILL turn left. turning right was NEVER an option. Period.
No free will.
With those conditions I CHOOSE to not believe in god.
Also
"The idea that worshiping the god of the bible would be a treason against mankind is an interesting and compelling one"
No its not. worshiping god is not a treason against mankind. worshiping god BLINDLY and against the best interests of mankind is a treason. Slightly different but important.
I have no problem with faith so long as its not as the cost of my fellow people.
Pascal's Wager is fundamentally flawed. The most that it is capable of doing is provoking curiosity. By no means will simply changing what you say grant you access to this place called heaven.
It is flawed on two major points. One Belief means nothing. Two Heaven is not some amusement park that we want to go to.
One Belief is not enough:
First of all looking at this from a biblical stance. Belief means nothing; or rather what does belief really mean? If belief means that you know and believe that this god exists and that Jesus came to earth to take the punishment for our sins, then that is only the beginning. Even Satin and all of his dominion have “belief” in that way. They know God exists and they rebel against him daily. So anyone who thinks that if they take this leap of faith into “Thinking” God exists then resting there till they die, will have an unpleasant awakening. Jesus commands us to follow Him. He wants our priorities. He wants us to know that he is God, yes, but he wants our reaction to be grateful love of him for what he has done for us on the Cross.
Secondly let’s look at this from a secular viewpoint. The fact is that we are Creatures. The same God who makes the Laws of the Universe in Physics, created us with Laws of Man to Man and Man to God. This is the Old Testament laws you may think of such as the ten commandments. So just as you see the laws of nature such as gravity, and know that something holds them to be true, you see the laws of man and know that they are true. Well, sean what are you saying, how do I see laws of Man?
(
Well, The bible commands us not to Fornicate which means no sex before marriage. Why does God command this? Is it because he hates us? Is it so that we won’t have fun? Well, no if he hated us then he wouldn’t have created us with so many nerves down there that feel so good when we have sex. The reason he commands us to not have sex before marriage is: when you interact physically with someone, it makes you “Feel” more attached to them than you really are. Why would it do that? Well, it’s a chemical reaction inside our bodies that makes us want more. In a marriage, where the two people are already sure of an emotional connection which they willingly commit their lives to each other, this chemical reaction results in an unbreakable bond. Well sean are you saying if you don’t have sex before marriage you won’t get divorced? No obviously not, statistics show that to be false. But what I am saying is that Physical intimacy is meant to unite two people in an extra way. And when you have sex before marriage, it jeopardizes that “Knowledge” that you are truly compatible with someone. It jeopardizes that because you are bringing in an extra variable in the relationship by introducing the chemical attachment which takes place. You are ruining the best chance of a rational decision to spend the rest of your life with a woman who you think you love.
And all of that is true for a world without STD’s and the dilemmas associated with killing unborn children, and unplanned pregnancies. The reasons are compelling not to have sex. Thus it is a Law between Man and Man (or woman in this case).
)
Which leads to the point: are the “Laws” of Humanity which are displayed in the bible for us or for God? Well some are for us, and some are for God. Jesus commands us firstly to Love The Lord our creator. Secondly to love one another. Which draws another fallacy. If an atheist says: “well I am a good person… I try to do good to other people.” Does God care? Well sure he wants you to Love one another, but I think he might be more offended that you look around at all of creation and invent ways to explain how he didn’t create it, then turn to the heavens and say: “If there is a God, he is Evil”
Two What does Heaven Look like?
Well here is the other problem with all of these arguments. People like to think of heaven as pearly gates with an old bearded man standing at the door asking for tickets as if it was a nightclub. The truth is, Heaven is Being with God. Hell is being away from God or separated from Him. People say you will get a special room and more things if you are a better person… No, this is crowd control. People say that so that they can control kids, not so that they can have a closer relationship with our creator. I think it looks more like this. Think of your favorite football team. Now imagine them in the superbowl (I know that might be hard for some Dallas fans out there). Now think of a friend who likes football but doesn’t follow it too closely. If you both get tickets to the superbowl you will both be really excited, right? I mean it’s the superbowl!!! But the one who is a more devoted follower of the team will get a lot more out of the game. When his team wins he will relish that moment far more than the one who just likes the sport. The devoted fan who knows all the players names and numbers, and all of the play book, He will have a greater reward with his ticket than the fan who just likes the game. But once again, there both at the superbowl, and that’s pretty cool.
The problem is that no one really knows what heaven looks like. So we think of it in these rational ways. But when God created Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, They walked with God. They were sinless. They were blameless, and they were with God. God gave them one command: “Do not eat of this tree for you will surely Die”. They ate, and the consequence of their sin was Death, and they were no longer able to walk with God. That law… the consequences of sin is death, still stands today, as it did for the Jews. The Jews had a sacrificial system whereby they would use a scapegoat to pay for the sins they committed. The problem was that as humans we are greedy by nature, and they would give the goats and lamb which were not very fat, keeping the best for themselves. Obviously this was not the point of the system, and so it would not “Pay” for their sins because of the content of their hearrt. Enter Jesus. He lived the perfect life on earth (spotless lamb) so that he could die for our sins and pay the punishment for our sin. He says that Whosoever believes in him will have eternal life. Which brings us back to the first point. What is belief? Is it simply knowledge or is it where we put our hope.
Bottom Line:
Whether you’re an atheist or a follower of Christ, you put your hope somewhere. Either on the things of this world: the creations of this world and the theories we invent to describe it; or on the Creator of this world who tells us who he is by the our own language in the Bible and Did make himself known to be both Just and merciful by sending Jesus to die for our sins in our place. You can read the bible all you want, and look around the world to see all that is created; or you can pull the shades over with human logic, and human reasoning spending hundreds of years developing theories to try to explain how God “simply” cant exist.
If someone ever bothers defining "god" in a matter that is not inherently illogical, I would start considering debate on the subject. Until then, the discussion is equivalent to the discussion on Karziplochsters.
Atheists are not off the hook for mass murder - Josef Stalin and Pol Pot are recent examples.
You do point out 3 issues with tribe-oriented people - intolerance of others who don't belong to their tribe, focus on the afterlife to the expense of real life, priority of what they believe over what they do. Certainly religion can be a tribalizing force, but so can many other mechanisms, such as nationalism (US exporting democracy to Iraq and beyond), racial discrimination, gender bias, etc.
Just because people screw something up, it does not mean that the concept has no validity. Pedophile priests, Father Robert Drinan, and Mother Theresa are all Catholics.
Groucho Marx once said "I wouldn't want join a club that would have me as a member."
If there is a God, he must be regretting the fact that access to heaven is limited to those that believe in him. The place must be full of halfwits and lunatics.
No thanks - I'll manage without an afterlife, thank you very much.
You all waste your breath by not pointing out the obvious flaw. GOD does not cause humans to create suffering or even create suffering and blaming god for giving free will is like blaming the sun for the cold. As cold is the absence of heat God is the absence of evil and choosing god is about choosing not to do evil. Choosing no evil would cause no killing no wrong doing even to those who have the oposite beliefs. As jesus said those who live by the sword die by it and by his example we know that the only true way to god is through no violence. Even when he was lead to death beaten and abused he chose not to fight or even speak badly of his accuser because he was OF GOD. Dont blame god the the acts of man you only promote your own ignorance of the subject. Also no where has god ever said that all other religions are incorect and to kill them. The bible had battles yes as did the koran but that is not because of god but morethe inability of man to understand the similarities of all the religions of the world. While i choose to be a chrisitian i know that other religions also lead to heaven and in the end it is the choice of god to deciede who is right or wrong not of man. Thus your arguement only shows a need for god as many more have died at the hands of those who thought they were gods than those who have believed in them.
Prove that the God of the bible is corrupt.
What does inheritance have to do with Faith?
You compare Christianity to the crusade. What does that have to do with Christianity many religions claim to be Christian. Christianity is defined by Jesus and Jesus never wanted people to kill each other.
Also you oversimplify Islam.
You can read about Judaism in the old testament(Hebrew Bible) it talks about Jews worshiping Satanic idols and doing all kinds of stuff when there God didn't agree with any of it. Just because people behave a certain way doesn't mean thats what their religion teaches.
It's like if I said atheism promotes murder because Stalin an atheist killed about 40 million people.
You seem ignorant, your propaganda is unoriginal. Myself am ashamed of what people call Christianity but its an equivocation of words.
I hope you understand that it requires faith to not believe in a God or a Higher Authority.
By the way, I don’t believe in religion, but I believe in God based solely patterns within nature. And I don’t define what God is or isn’t.
People make religion, not God, thus we as humans create religions that reflect our own human nature. Therefore, your negative statements should be directed at faulty religions, not God.
Hi There,
Just wanted to chime in and say that your logic is flawed...pretty much from start to finish. There will be questions that you have to answer before your arguments even become valid.
The real question for you is this: if there is no God, than does your rant have any true meaning? Why are you even upset?
Start there and work your way forward. Good luck!
My biggest problem with Pascal's Wager is that, even if there really was an omniscient deity, shouldn't it be able to tell the difference between someone who really believes in it vs. someone who just claims to? It's just not possible to will yourself into believing something that deep down you know is complete BS.
Not great, man. I am an atheist as well and was glad to see a top Digg post for your little-diddy. But you over simplify and characterize just like Blaise. "Faith" acquired by parents before we are able to rationally think for ourselves, hardly. Trust me, I've encountered and read of many a Christian who was converted in latter days of life (C.S. Lewis, anyone?) Furthermore, your argument against the division religion causes is just too simplified. Buddy, we atheists would probably cause just as much pain. Humans are humans, with or without a god, we'll find something to divide us. Think it through.
Actually your very statement that "religion divides rather than unites" lies in contradiction to the adjusted wager table
Inherit the “correct” beliefs from parents and go to heaven at the expense of every human who inherited the “wrong” beliefs
I believe the root cause of much of today's conflicts as well as that of the past are cultural or ethnic divides rather than religion.
Religion ususally accompanies the ethnic divide, but it's not the horse that draws the cart.
Even the crusades (both versions) can be addressed with this understanding.
O, BTW, the Bible talks about this factor in Genesis 11 (Babel).
Just for the record, Hitler was NOT an atheist:
"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."
--Mein Kampf
So I was up all night last night, praying. I used to be an athiest. But at about 6 am as the sun was rising, I experienced god for the first time in my life. I never believed before, but then I felt called to read the bible for the last 4 hours and then I found this, how can you refute it?:
Habbukamos 3:21
God exists so truly that He cannot be thought not to exist. For it is possible to think that something exists that cannot be thought not to exist and such a being is greater than one that can be thought not to exist. Therefore, if that than which a greater cannot be thought can be thought not to exist then that than which a greater cannot be thought is not that than which a greater cannot be thought; and this is a contradiction. So that than which a greater cannot be thought exists so truly that it cannot be thought not to exist.
Q.E.D.=G.O.D.
An atheist's effort to argue against the existence of God seems absurd. If God doesn't exist in your reality why argue against His existence?
Analogous to this would be starting a blog arguing against the existence of Peter Pan!
If I truly believe Peter Pan is myth/fantasy, then why in the world would I expend so much energy to prove he doesn't exist?
It seems, atheistwager, your argument is with the stupidity and foolishness of those who have conducted some of the most horrible atrocities in the name of stupid and foolish ideas of god or gods.
As for arguing against the existence of God Himself, I just don't see the rationale or logic behind why! You sure are taking a lot of time arguing against someone you don't even think exists!
@ RON ("The real question for you is this: if there is no God, than does your rant have any true meaning? Why are you even upset?")
Ron, some people are upset about religions because they make some people believe they have the right to kill someone in the name of their religion.
The bible for example also discriminates women ("subordinate to men", Corinthians 11:3-10) and gays ("kill them both", Leviticus 20:13). The catholic popes stance against using condoms caused millions of deaths and will cause millions more in the years to come.
You must understand that even these few examples alone should actually, by my moral understanding, suffice to make you "upset" about religions. Why are you not upset about these facts?
To all you guys saying that Atheists were the greater mass murderers. (PolPot, Stalin or even Hitler - he wasn't too keen on religion either, was he?)
This argument is not at all in your favor. Yes, belief-systems like Stalinism, Stone-age Communism or Fascism possibly killed more people than the one or other religion. But no one is saying catholicism or whatever is worse than fascism or stalinism.
Lmao :-P
great blog by the way, I really loved your wager :-P
And congratulations to all the response. I hope it motivates you to keep your blog going for a long time.
NAKE
I was going to point out a flaw in logic in the main article, but then I saw your crazy post? I am an atheist and strong in my faith-or lack of faith. All I want to know is, is all your "that than which a greater cannot be thought exists so truly that it cannot be thought not to exist"
really in the bible?
Also, it's silly, I can easily think of a thing that is "greater than that than which a greater cannot be thought".
What's your point, and what does QED mean?
Is that some funky new bible translation?
NAKE
I was going to point out a flaw in logic in the main article, but then I saw your crazy post? I am an atheist and strong in my faith-or lack of faith. All I want to know is, is all your "that than which a greater cannot be thought exists so truly that it cannot be thought not to exist"
really in the bible?
Also, it's silly, I can easily think of a thing that is "greater than that than which a greater cannot be thought".
What's your point, and what does QED mean?
Is that some funky new bible translation?
Thanks for posting the rebuttal to Pascal's Wager. As you note, the assumptions it makes are invalid, unless we want to discuss the wisdom of religion within that narrow, imaginary version of reality.
However, I don't agree with your replacement wager. You assume that God requires a specific means of worship ("inherit correct beliefs from your parents"). That is not a reasonable conclusion to reach from a study of the scriptures of Christianity and other religions. Calling God an "enemy of humanity" is absurd far beyond any assumptions made in Pascal's Wager. Religions generally believe that "God" created humanity. If part of his reason involves the human race worshiping/obeying him according to some set of rules, then isn't it reasonable to assume God would see that demonstrating his existance and plan was necessary? I conclude that *if* God exists, he does not care if we all worship him or understand everything at this time.
Since we cannot conclude, based on available knowledge, that God is corrupt, the athiest/heaven box has several possibilities we know of, and the reality could be some additional option we have not guessed.
Perhaps you're saying "I'm not talking about some imaginary God, I'm talking about the one that the fundamentalist Christians and Muslims teach about." Well, then the Atheist's wager is not about God's existance, or religion in general, but only about specific organized religions. Given that many people believe in God, and they disagree with each other, it is reasonable to conclude that perhaps God might exist, but that religious people are generally likely to be mistaken about his nature or intentions.
Your conclusion appears to rely on the idea that religious people have caused more harm to humanity than atheism. It is unreasonable to conclude that religion is evil and atheism is good because people are violent and cruel in the name of religion. Atheistic belief systems have been misused to kill more people in the 20th century than religious belief systems have caused in all human history. Many religious people are peacemakers, dedicated to humanity, and selfless, in the name of religion. Likewise, so are many atheists, in the name of atheism. Trying to broad-brush either religion, or atheism, because some people in both groups used their beliefs to justify evil is not reasonable. And finally, Scripture in general does not suggest that God is happy with humanity. Religious sectarianism may be the choice of evil people, not God.
I am a different "Josh" than the previous people commenting under that name. Hopefully this will eliminate some of the confusion."
>ethan<
Typical athiest. You doubt god but you haven't even read any of the bible! It explains everything.
You replied: "it's silly, I can easily think of a thing that is "greater than that than which a greater cannot be thought".
What do you mean you can easily think of a thing that is greater than that than which a greater cannot be thought?
That's silly.
No, it's impossible! You're just mad cause I found a solid proof for god right in his book and you can't refute it!
and Q.E.D is Attic Greek
qudon eraphus demusos
Which means: count the loves of god
Hi, great post!
Full disclosure: I do believe in God, but you have hit on the inherent intellectual dishonesty and blindness apparent in many of my religious friends/acquaintences. No God as you have described is worthy of worship. I REALLY like the idea that worshiping a god like this is treason against humanity. If God is all-loving, then many of God's alleged followers have somehow really screwed the pooch. Please continue the writing!
This is a rather weak argument to Pascal's wager, here are two very strong arguments frequently given:
1. People cannot consciously override their own beliefs. That is, even if you were held at gunpoint and were forced to "believe" that 1+1=3, you could only lie to the gunman, but an omniscient god will still know that you don't truly believe that 1+1=3. Similarily, if you choose to believe in God simply because it makes statistical sense to do so, a super intelligent and omniscient God probably would not qualify you as a Christian worthy of heaven to begin with.
2. Second, and most powerful argument is that the decision of belief is not limited to two choice. You are not choosing between Christianity and Atheism, but also you are considering Islam, Judaism, and countless other religions and even ones that haven't been invented yet! Why? Because Christians don't think Muslims and Jews go to heaven, and so on an so forth. So for any given religion you believe in, you are given a small chance to go to heaven if your particular religion were true, but condemned by the rest. Finally, lets not ignore the probability that God up there favors those who think logically their whole life =)
Well, I'll say off the bat that I am a Christian, but this is probably one of the most clearly articulated points of atheism I've read. I applaud your ability to be less confrontational in your approach than many.
I have very little for you in the way of answers, though with this statement fresh in my mind I will probably begin looking for my own. My one comment will be that in your list of atrocities in the name of God, do keep in mind that the majority of those events had nothing to do with the actual religions that sponsored them.
The Inquisition, crusades, schism infighting, modern jihad, and wars of genocide in the name of religion are all cases of people using the name of God to force populations into obedience without questioning the orders of the ruling body. Christianity and Islam both contain strict calls to pacifism. In the teachings of Jesus, this is actually unqualified (turn the other cheek, telling Peter to put away his swrod, etc), while the Koran (forgive my spelling) allows defensive combat to protect the innocent (the original meaning of jihad - not wars of retribution).
It is interesting that most of the arguments against religion do not consider the one true argument: the religions are flawed and failed. Whatever the true God is like, the institutions raised in the name of God are now structures of political and social control more than any spiritual guidance or real moral enhancement of the world. The difficulty is to see past the flawed and broken church systems and see the reality of God underneath. It is still there, for those who are really seeking something.
Watch atheists, by means of knowledge, rip Creationists a new one . Check out these amazing videos:
Video:
What is Religion and why do we need it?
Video: Meaning of the universe: an ex-atheist vs an evolutionary biologist
Author of this article: You say the Holocaust was Christians against Jews? Then I say you are ignorant of the history of the Nazis and their leaders' interest in some very strange spiritual things which were very anti-Christian (making those who believed and followed them anti-Christian by association, acceptance, and denial), or you are being cheap and categorizing the Nazis as "Christian" because they are from what you might call "Christian Europe". Cheap use of a demographic title? I am not an atheist because I have found atheists have made philosophy and science into a reactionary, uncomfortable church, and they don't even know or acknowledge it. Science is a tool. There is no perfect knowledge given by science, because science is constantly being rewritten, and therefore exists in a shapeshifting, transitory state. Only those with a small scope of reality can assume that science has reached everywhere in reality and come back with answers. Science is, in reality, a realm of questions and tools. One day, if humankind makes it that far, people will look upon modern science as we look at stone tools. Your belief that science and philosophy are infallible is faith. Also, the Nazi Party was actually a product of certain philosophies, including Strauss, Nietzsche, Hegel, Heidegger, Schmitt. Atheism these days is leading to a similar outcome. Funny how a philosophy's accepting of certain lies leads to Christianity being blamed here for an atrocity inspired and enabled by that same philosophy. I warn you, there is a real Christianity, and then there are those who wave it as a false flag and leave corpses behind them. They are not one group. Your lack of discernment serves your purpose, to the detriment of the integrity of your cause. Some say the religions are flawed, but only the arrogant do not see the inadequacy of their own philosophy. I wish you all luck against the unknown when you realize you have let your hearts atrophy. I pray that is not your end, though, and guess in whose name I pray?
While it's too late to post something that's noticeable here, due to all the ignorant fell8ing, I'm still going to leave something.
Think about this:
Whether God created man or man created God, the fact that you're talking about it is enough to show it exists.
I can say that to me, YOU are nonexistant, as YOU could be something my neighbor made up. I have no empirical proof of YOU. But the problem is that once YOU have been conceived of, you exist. --To say otherwise would be to deny the existence of things as close to your heart (I should think) as mathematics, which does not truly exist, but merely is something humans conceived of to help explain the natural universe. How is that different from theism? From animism to monotheism and all stops in-between, there is no difference. One's ignorance of math does not make it non-existent. And to think that if you've only heard about basic math, to think you understand things like imaginary numbers, differential equations and other forms of mystical mathamatics is absurd.--
To wit: I can then call myself an AYOUIST and ignore everything about YOU. Does that get me anywhere? No.
It seems that you'd be one to deny the nose on your own face, since you can't see it. And that to admit your nose exists would open up the possibility that you could smell what's coming out of your mouth and then you'd have to admit that your rhetoric stinks.
Which could be your own version of hell.
What is Nake smoking?
qudon eraphus demusos and Habbukamos 3:21 are vaporwords. Did he spell them wrong or did he just make this stuff up?
I agree with Paul. If you don't believe in God, then why create a blog about it? Chances are, you aren't going to convince a large cross-section of any religion that they are entirely wrong. Some people might be convinced, but the majority will not.
This aside, why would an atheist care? I, too, do not believe in Peter Pan as I also do not believe in a flying spaghetti monster. But if I ever meet groups of people that believe in such a monster, shall I then create a blog about it? No. Everyone would think it was either a joke or that I was being absurd. If your goal is to change the world, then work towards that--people will inevitably follow, as there are many people who would agree with that cause. In fact, there would be religious people that agree with that cause. I'll be quite honest: it seems that you are swinging a bat in the air, trying to make sure that if there is a God, that you fought against him. Except that you don't believe in God at all, which means that all you'll be doing is updating this blog using the hours you save by not going to church.
NAKE
Yea what are you smoking?
You seem so certain about everything, don't you? But none of your certainties are worth the hair off a woman's head! You're not even sure you're alive, because you live like a dead man! But I'm sure, I'm sure about me, about everything, surer than you could ever be, sure of my life and sure of the death that awaits me. Yes, that is all I have. But at least I have as much of a hold on death as it has on me! I have been right, I am right, I will always be right! I've lived my life one way and I could just as well have lived it another. I've done this and I've not done that, and so? Nothing matters. I know why, so do you! Throughout this whole absurd life I've lived, a dark wind has been rising toward me from somewhere deep in my future, across years that are still to come! What do other peoples deaths or a mother's love matter to me? What does your god or the lives people choose, or the fate people think they elect matter to me, when we're all elected by the same fate, me and billions of privileged people like you, who also called themselves my brothers? Can't you see, can't you see that?! Everybody is privileged, there are only privileged people. Everyone will be condemned one day, and you will be condemned too!
Ethan.
While I find all arguments for and against theism interesting, I also find them to not be very helpful in making a final decision as a human being on how one should live ones life.
I have spent some time organizing my own thoughts in what I feel is a logical manner. The first question we have to ask ourselves is: why have religion?
While an afterlife is one benefit of following one of any various religions, an afterlife cannot be proven, nor can the existence of a god or gods. Therefore, the true benefit of religion (considering only this lifetime and what we know to be true) is giving hope and strength to the followers of said religion. If one believes they are in the right, whether theist or atheist, such a person will feel more confident about their life decisions and will tend also to worry about the future less.
A theist gains strength from their god or gods, just as an atheist gains strength from lack of belief in a god or religion. One may be content with the idea of a heaven, while another finds comfort in reincarnation, and yet someone else (ex: humanist) would find comfort in the idea of this being the only life.
So long as the "right" answer cannot be derived, we must make the most logical choice given available concrete facts. Therefore, each person who has a religion which gives them strength and comfort has made a logical and correct choice, and each person who feels weaker or in some way more hopeless or helpless because of their religious choice has made an illogical and wrong choice.
Can the loudmouth god-lovers in this forum please stop using the argument that if there is no god, there is no point in living or obeying laws? If you asked MOST law-abiding people if they think WWJD with every decision they make they'd honestly have to answer no, because let's face facts here... they do it because of society, laws, and a conscience.
If god was disproven one day, we wouldn't all become baby-killing bank-robbing rapists the next. And if you believe anything else, you need to study human behavior. Sure, a few fundies would have their heads explode and go off the deep end but that's nothing a few shots of tequila and a good hard slap back to reality can't solve.
Personally, I don't know if there's a god or not, and quite frankly it has no effect on how I live my life. I was raised RC, but quickly realized that the church is made by man and therefore flawed so I bid it "Adieu" (frenchies might understand the joke there) and just decided to live by science.
I can't say I'm completely atheist 'cause I've seen some things that to this day I can't explain but I wouldn't say I'm a believer. I think churches and religions are for people who NEED to believe that there's someone else in control of their life, or of a higher power who adds meaning to everything bad that happens to them. (ie. the dying and the unfortunate)
Life is life. Suck it up, buttercup.
I'm just sick of people telling me that I NEED to believe or that I'm going to hell for not following their way. And it sickens me to think that the U.S. is run by religious fanatics. America, do you REALLY want to be free? Forget Iraq, NAPALM THE BIBLE BELT!
PS. The documentary "Jesus Camp" makes me simultaneously confused and angered. I'm sorry, but evangelicals like those seem more like a cult than a conventional religion. "Don't drink the kool-aid!"
Hey, I can see where you're coming from and I just wanted to say something about it.
First of all, if I'm a Christian, I win one of the two results of death and tie with the other.
If I'm an atheist, I lose one of the two results of death and tie with the other.
The first result is Christians are right: that God is real and that heaven and hell are very real places.
The second result is Atheists are right: that there is no god and that heaven and hell do not exist, and when we die we simply cease to exist.
So if I'm a Christian, and result number 1 is true, then I will go to heaven. If I'm a Christian, and result number 2 is true, then when I die I simply cease to exist. I have had just as good of a life as the Atheist and there is no difference now because we are both non-existent.
And if I'm an Atheist, and result number 1 is true, then I will go to hell. Hell is a very real place, you don't want to spend the rest of eternity there. So I lose that result. If result number 2 is true, then I, an Atheist, will simply cease to exist when I die. I have also probably lived a good life but now I am non-existent, so I have no advantage over the Christian.
So as a result of this, we can see that the Christian has the advantage. The Christian wins one result and ties the other, and the Atheist loses one result and ties the other. So, to conclude, I ask that you would look at the facts.
Sincerely,
Master Jedi Dan
P.S. -- God loves you.
Master Jedi Dan - I'm an atheist, and I can confirm that in Pascal's wager I'm actually the one that wins.
If there is no heaven, then I simply cease to be. Fine by me.
If there is a heaven, then I'm glad I'm not going there, because I'll be forced to spend eternity with a bunch of tedious, self-righteous god-botherers. Also fine by me.
And you're not going to heaven, because you are quite clearly a Jedi.
I just kinda wanted to point out/suggest something... If you're an athiest, you're making your stand against "God" and every other "faith" here on earth. In my opinion... this is the equivalent of a person who finds me detestable (because of the acts done by me or in my name) taking a stand against me by avoiding me (and possibly telling other people to do the same). If you're a Christian, you can still say "I'm sorry I'd like to opt for the flames of oblivion because you're obviously an almighty douchebag" (or what the hell ever).
I'm a Christian, and I'd just like to suggest going to "hell" for your fellow man. Check into it; it's much better for your self-image than standing for nothing in the name of nothing/no one.
Why is it that all atheists believe that Christians believe in God because they don't want to go to hell. Well for the record, for most true Christians this has absolutely nothing to do with it. I would say the reason Christians do believe is well beyond your grasp or understanding.
I'm an atheist, and I'm not taking a 'stand' against anyone. This is no different than if you were told that 'Kermit the Frog' created the heavens and the earth - you wouldn't believe it, but that doesn't mean you're taking a stand against Kermit.
Furthermore, while Christianity has gotten to be one of the bigger ones, in time it will probably be known as Christian Mythology.
Actually, here are my feelings on Christianity (or any such religion). I think that most people don't really BELIEVE it; it's a just-in-case, get-out-of-hell-free card. Case in point: If I really believed that the wages of sin was death and to burn in hellfire for all eternity there would be no amount of money, sex, or drugs you could EVER offer me to do a damn thing wrong. For a person to believe this and still commit sins they either have to be the dumbest people in the world.
I'm an atheist, and I'm not taking a 'stand' against anyone. This is no different than if you were told that 'Kermit the Frog' created the heavens and the earth - you wouldn't believe it, but that doesn't mean you're taking a stand against Kermit.
Furthermore, while Christianity has gotten to be one of the bigger ones, in time it will probably be known as Christian Mythology.
Actually, here are my feelings on Christianity (or any such religion). I think that most people don't really BELIEVE it; it's a just-in-case, get-out-of-hell-free card. Case in point: If I really believed that the wages of sin was death and to burn in hellfire for all eternity there would be no amount of money, sex, or drugs you could EVER offer me to do a damn thing wrong. For a person to believe this and still commit sins they either have to be the dumbest people in the world, or the most demented.
I wish I had time to read all the replies, but I don't.
A few things:
You assume Christians are fulfilling the will of God, that Muslims are fulfilling the will of Allah, and Buddhists are fulfilling the will of Buddha. I'm a Christian, but I'd never defend the Crusades!
What if a person wanted more land and power, so they sent troops across Europe to take land 'in the name of God' and kill those who resisted, when in reality, the God is whose name they claim to be fighting is having his heart broken? Your flaw in logic is assuming that because someone claims to be a Christian, they are fulfilling the will of their God. That's untrue. Humans are fallible, by the definition of any religion or Atheist belief. So, because someone claims an action in the name of a person or God, that doesn't make it true. Don't let a human representation of God define God for you; find out who he is for yourself. Just last week I beat a kid up and said, 'My brother told me to do it.' When my brother found out, he got pissed and beat me up. You get what I'm saying?
Also, I believe wholeheartedly that extremist Muslims blow themselves up in the name of Allah because they feel led by him to do so. I don't believe Allah exists, not in the same sense that they do. I am not admitting the existence of their god as the true God by acknowledging actions done is his name, I am merely recognizing that Allah is an idea or a person or a spirit who effects their life.
As for God proving his existence - he already has. I have felt the presence and influence and seen the effects of something that can be nothing other than the God who he claims to be in the Bible. That being said, no one, NO ONE, has ever been 'argued' or 'debated' into faith. God is desperate to prove to you that he exists and that he loves you more than you can imagine, but you have to be willing to accept it, and if you're constantly fighting against him, you won't see it. Read the story of Saul, whose name changed to Paul, as an example.
Finally, to respond to the comment directly above mine: in Christianity, there are three things that influence a person: their own nature, the Holy Spirit (or God) and Satan. Our nature and Satan want to indulge our own desires and live selfishly, but the Holy Spirit convicts us of that. That is what leads to repentance and accepting forgiveness. When Jesus died, he paid the death for ALL of my sins, including those I haven't committed. So when I get pissed off tomorrow and yell at someone, I'm not going to hell for that because I've already been forgiven. We try not to sin, but any Christian who claims to be perfect is a foolish liar who is a VERY poor representation of our faith.
God is "evil"...
Where do you get the standards by which you judge certain actions to be good or evil? Are they objective and unchanging?
If they're not- then all you're doing is faulting God, not for some real fault, but for going against your particular preferences.
If, on the other hand, the standards by which you condemn this notion of God are objective and unchanging and knowable to all human beings-
Where do they come from?
Religion... Oh my God..
Religion does not offer God in any sense of the word so I will call it Bod.
The biggest human scam in history. Human arrogance dictates that Bod is of a human like nature, full of wrath, envy, love, hatred etccc. and even looks like some white American straight out of suburbia. Why would that be? could it be something to do with our self proclamation of the super intelligent species - The Homo Sapien?
Religious scriptures are so human with all there idiosyncrasies, insecurities and contradictions, lies, dominace, Me over you etc.. Read them.. THEY ARE WRITTEN BY HOMO SAPIENS. THERE IS NO BOD ABOUT IT.
Homo Sapien civilisation relies on dominance and control of the masses and that is why organised religion exists in the first place. It is a vehicle to control the masses. THERE IS NO BOD ABOUT IT.
Religion is made by homo sapiens believed by homo sapiens and most probably the death of homo sapiens. Do you think that the cockroaches destined to survive our self-destruction would give a rats ass about the dearly departed humans? Well neither will bod for that matter.
Religion is mumbo jumbo for the weak minded masses in order that they have something to fear from death... Therefore do as I Say and you have nothing to fear. The reasons are there "religious people "- Just Open your Eyes.
It is time the human race got off its arrogance arse and respected the 99.99999% of other living things on this planet. Humans are a bunch of opportunists and in reality not particularly intelligent. We are well on the path to self destruction and exactly how intelligent is that conclusion?
The notion of Bod made up by homo sapiens shows the outwardly thinking minority the lack of free thinking and intelligence in the majority.
Bod is for Braindeads
I have to say, from a critical observer's point of view, this article is way too biased to be given credit (I could go into statistic rules and such, but I'll save all the readers the trouble). I agree with the writer in the fact that God cannot be scientificly proven, but saying that religion is th cause of all major conflict is absurd and a shallow way of analyzing problems like this. The real cause is the desire for power and uniformity. When everyone is uniform, conquering and controlling humanity becomes much easier. Those blaming war on solely on religion are ignorant, narrow minded itiots, and those who are intollerant because their belief system are the same.
Right now, if the whole world were to be destroyed except for about 10 couples (that were pretty much insane) they could raise their children to believe just about anything. They could tell them that the earth was flat and ruled by a giant Octopus. They could teach them it was the Great Octopus's will for them to have sex with their brothers and sisters. "Everytime you get gas son, that's the Great Octopus telling you he's real." Of course those kids (hereditary insanity notwithstanding) would believe this as fact. As they grew up, some would have their doubts - but they'd probably be sacrificed to the G.O.
I'm sure some of you intelligent Christians know that there were religions BEFORE Christianity. Where the hell was your god then? Throwing lightning bolts at people?
Wake the fuck up!! As someone said above, religion is a way to control the masses. Whereas in historic times you may do something the government didn't want you to do and they might not ever know about it since the nearest court was 200 miles away. That probably wouldn't scare you, but god would.
Even the settlers of this country knew this which is why they tried to have a separation of Church and State - which still doesn't really exist. Why do I have to have 'In ?God We Trust' on money (that is actually the property of the government). Why is it against the law to marry more than one woman? That's a religious thing. The only thing hurt there is emotions. Of course, there needs to be some kind of order so that maniacs aren't allowed to run around and kill who they want when they want, but if I cheat on my wife, she'll get over it. If I marry someone else while still married to her she'll accept it or she won't - why is that the court's business? If I'm not 'married' I can have sex with as many women as I want. I may be a man-whore, but I haven't broken any laws.
The only sad thing is that those who believe this gibberish will never get the I-told-you-so from anybody when they die, cause that'll be it. Unless of course you come back as an angry dog that wishes he could tell everyone that there is no god, but can't form the words so starts biting people until he's euthanized. Just a joke...I don't believe in reincarnation, either
respond to this one next: http://www.mountainretreatorg.net/apologetics/whyibelieveingod.html
http://www.mountainretreatorg.net/apologetics/whyibelieveingod.html
darren said..."Religious scriptures are so human with all there idiosyncrasies, insecurities and contradictions, lies, dominace, Me over you etc.. Read them."
Your comment shows that you are not familiar with the scriptures. Is there a particular verse that you have an issue with?
Yours is an old argument, but no more valid, today.
For humanity! I am a human patriot! To hell with me then, I will stand up and fight!
First of all, I, also, have to disagree that you put Holocaust under Christians against Jews, because that had nothing to do with Christianity! Second I agree with all of your of the other statements you made! After one year in the US I am really glad to go back to Eastgermany with 20 % atheists.
Religion was not created to "control the masses" but it has been used to. Any smart human being knows that religion can be miss-used in order to control people, but doing so is what is called a fornication of ideas. for example: killing in the name of peace or marriage for personal financial gain. Religion should not be structured in a governmental way (Ex: catholic church and the papacy). If all religion was structured this way, i might believe you. In my church anyone is free to preach, and in my church group we take into account many things such as the fact that it was translated, leaving the possiblility for misinterpretations, and in an effort to counter this, we read out of variuos translations. Furthermore, we allow EVERYBODY to share their own interpretations with the whole group. Could this be a method of controlling the masses? No, it is a way of embracing others thoughts and interpretations of the bible. AND A QUESTION FOR ANY ATHEIST: Have you even read the bible? I, a seventh day adventist have read and analyzed Richard Dawkins' "THE GOD DELUSION" and thought it had some good points, but nothing disproving god. Did you know that the bible gives guidelines on what to eat in order to live long? well, it does, and they are healthy according to modern science. Coincidence? i think not.
great read. i've always thought that common sense dictates that we at the very least question the existence of various gods.
Josh, another point of mine: 'Interpretation'. Some things are taken at face value by Christians, other things that even they can't believe are said to be parables. Yes, I've read a lot of the bible. What about in revelations and talk of dragons?
yes you are right I have better things to do with my life than waste my time trying to decipher a volume of junk supposedly written 2000 years ago. 20 years ago I tried to read it but it bored the hell out of me. Indeed during that time main stream religions had me in their grasp. A 10 year old choir singer I was. Their ideas failed me I saw the truth behind it all. Religions have very good reasons to entice you into their pack. Take a look at the bank accounts of head envangelicist's or whatever the f*** you call them. The fact is that sriptures have been interpreted so many times over the years they bear no resemblance to the original. Religious people do so enjoy quoting and taking the snippets that they like. VERY HUMAN.
The fact that it still exists and is held in such high esteem is proof of its success as a dominatrix. BOD IS WRATHFUL that's the secret and Pascals wager explains the psychology. Pascal was an atheist and saw through the deceipt himself. Religious belief through either fear or reward is a false belief. Religion has a scary motive.
You say my argument is old and invalid today , you obviously don't read the news.
Today is the moment. The past should remain in the past where it belongs.
Black dice, the "dragons" mensioned in revelations are merely represent sigifigant evil powers (world power governments perhaps?) and high paid "Evangelicals" as they call themselves, obviously are in it for financial gain, which, as i have previously stated, is a fornication of ideas, kind of like being a kindergarten teacher in order to exploit children. ANYONE can interpret and skew ANYTHING to mean what they want it to. ever head of the Contitution?
Qualified Bible translators realize the weight of responsibility to transmit God’s thoughts and declarations as accurately as possible.
They also feel a responsibility toward the readers who depend upon a translation of the inspired Word of God for their everlasting salvation. (2 Timothy 3:16, 17; John 17:3)
Man has had a tendency to misinterpret scripture. The apostle Paul, though commended the Beroeans for their diligent evaluation of what was written. (Acts 17:10, 11)
Darren, use your head! No one can mislead you unless you let them. Religion is your relationship with God, and the Bible is broken down into verses, ideas to meditate on. No need to try to digest the whole thing at once.
As to it’s validity, human nature has never changed. Cain killed Able. Pride, sexual immorality, spiritism and greed are as old as dirt. The Bible can be used by humans like an owners manual. God knows how we are made.
Nice
Josh,I hear what you're saying but I don't believe that you or your brethren are the norm. I appreciate that yours is a far healthier approach. We can go on blaming religion for historical miss-doings. Humans are the ones at fault but religion was and still is the vehicle. On the scales of society it's so easy to place people in box to box and that is the danger. As you and your brethren are aware every person is different and that is the beauty of life. We should celebrate our differences not highlight them as grounds for hatred. I work a job worldwide and meet many different people of all backgrounds. Most humans have the same desires.. shelter, food, friends, family and a bit of fun on the way.
My money currently goes into a businees in mexico. I have 2 employess.. 1 was a prostitute and the other is a gay man. Both would be rejected by main stream religious BULLS**T. The former she is so happy now making food and its the only break she ever had. She cannot read or write that's why she did what she did. There were no other opportunities and she has a son to feed. The latter was kicked out of home before finishing school. His personal sex life was a no no according to his religious freaking family. What the F*** his sex life has to do with anybody but himself I have no idea.
Religions.. they are so unnaturally obsessed with how other poeple lead their lives and interfere in things that have absolutley nothing to do with them.
Religions can literally go to hell.
I agree with you darron in the fact that religion is a possible catalyst for war and other such dreadful activity, the root of the problem is not religion. Say religion did not exhist at all, and never did. Humanity would notice other diferences in lifestyles, judge those who are different as outcasts. War, possibly genocide, ensues. The deeper problem is the desire for power and uniformity. Most people like to be around those who are very simular to them. Getting rid of religion would put more emphasis on other differences. One thing i find amusing about the people you have hired is the fact that in the bible it says "judge, and thou shalt be judged", so stereotypical judging christians are about the biggest hippocrites in the world. Furthermore it states that all sin is equally evil in the eyes of God, so if someone has sinned, and believes that being gay or being a prostitute is the worst thing that anyone could be next to being a murderer, then maye they should look at what they have done. I used to be very judgemental, but now recognize that judging somebody is no better than slapping someone in the face.
Qualified Bible translators realize the weight of responsibility to transmit God’s thoughts and declarations as accurately as possible.
HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT STATEMENT TO BE TRUE?
We all perceive things differently. What is green to me may be blueishgreen to you. Your interpretation of the bible will certainly not be my interpretation.
Qualified???? it's subjective there is no absolute about qualification. Translators are human so therefore overloaded with faults and short circuits.
For me they translate Bull into more bull.
And why the hell is the bible necessary in the first place? I mean all the poor folks that lived before the bible had no chance of living to bods demands so unfortunately they all go to hell. They didnt have bods bible to read about bods ways. Bod didn't give them poor suckers any chance did he/she/it?
You know what I hear most people complaining about in this blog? Religion. If you want to know the truth, I'm not too big on religion, either.
Someone brought up the point that I, being a believer, have taken the time to read this post and many other scientific, or simply blatantly anti-Christian/religion websites or blogs, whereas many people arguing against it have never even gone to church or read a Bible. I don't understand everything about the Bible, nor do I understand everything about all the science I've read. I have, however, taken the time to study and digest and question both. And I haven't been brainwashed, either. I left church for a few years, lived as if there were no God, and I was miserable. When I recommitted myself to God, my life changed. Fact. You can't argue that point.
I'm not trying to defend my religion or my church, though. Hell, they're both pretty messed up. What I would ask you do to, though, is to try to look past all the human faults inherent in the church, to see Jesus.
Darren, you said you helped support a prostitute and a gay man. Do you know who Jesus spent time with? Mary Magdalene, who probably was referred to as something close to a 'dirty whore'. Zaccheus, a traitor to the Jewish people he was a part of and a thief. Poor fishermen. A Samaritan, which is today's equivalent of an Orthodox Jew and an Arab hanging out, because Jews and Samaritans HATED each other.
Christians are guilty of spending too much time hiding behind the doors of our sanctuary, closing ourselves off to this world and being 'elite'. If you want to hate someone or something, hate us, hate the church we've created. Don't hate our God. Read about Jesus' life. Find one person in need he neglected. You can't.
There are a lot of Christians who Jesus would look at today and say, 'I don't know you.' He turned his back to the religious people of his time, because they were full of themselves, they thought themselves to be above the society which they were meant to be loving, and he loved those who his 'followers' had neglected. Now, as it was back then, there are religious people who 'follow' Jesus. However, there are also religious people who practice what James called 'true religion': "Pure and genuine religion in the sight of God the Father means caring for orphans and widows in their distress and refusing to let the world corrupt you." Where is the fault in that? Where is the evil, mind-controlling God?
There are Christians who are going to Africa to open orphanages for children whose parents died of AIDS. There are Christians who have gone to the Gulf Coast of America to pray with people who lost their lives in the hurricane a few years ago and to help them rebuild their homes and their lives. There are Christians who spend their evenings with homeless people who are desperate for a friend, and just buy them a cup of coffee. We don't preach, we don't warn them to 'turn or burn!' Jesus never did that. We sit there, we listen to them, we love them, and when we're by ourselves, we pray for them.
THAT is real religion. Loud music, or organs, or wars, or judgment, or hypocrisy, or anything else like that is not true religion. It's humans twisting something good to benefit themselves, to make themselves feel justified and affirmed. Read the Bible, see what Jesus, our God, has to say about how we should treat people, then decide if real religion is evil and meant to control the masses. But as must as you don't want Christians to pass judgment on you, we don't want you to pass judgment on us.
"And why the hell is the bible necessary in the first place? I mean all the poor folks that lived before the bible had no chance of living to bods demands so unfortunately they all go to hell. They didnt have bods bible to read about bods ways. Bod didn't give them poor suckers any chance did he/she/it?"
That's a question answered in the Bible, too. You don't have to necessarily accept the answer, but you're asking questions about things which you haven't even studied. How can you say you hate religion, the Bible, God (Bod), Christians, whatever, when you haven't taken the time to see what they really stand for? I don't know how you vote, but do you want the world to judge YOU based on who your president is? Or would you rather they get to know you PERSONALLY, discover that, hey, he may be an American (or whatever), but he's not the same as the rest. Maybe someone HATES Bush, but can like you. So, what if, hey, not all Christians are the same. And if you'd learn about the basics of what Christianity is, you'd realize it's not all the hubbub right-wing, evangelical, Fox News-watching Christians make it appear to be.
I plan to go into field of science for a career, and see no conflict between scientific fact and what the bible states. Many Christians dont believe in evolution, but why would god create forms of static life in such a dynamic world. Darwin was a briliant scientist who noticed that different enviroments weilded diferent types of animals, many the same species. Science can answer questions up to a point. "Why do things fall" and "why does paper burn" are questions science has answered. "Why does gravity exhist", "how was all matter and energy created", and "what is infinite" are questions science probably wont answer.
,
How can you say you hate religion, the Bible, God (Bod), Christians, whatever, when you haven't taken the time to see what they really stand for?
Mike, I hate religion that is true. I do not hate people either religious or non religious. Nor do I hate objects like the bible, Nor imaginary things like Bod. Also, I have good friends from many different faiths namely catholics, muslims, hindus, buddhists and I even know the odd new wave christian. What I see in my view of life is how the major religions black box people. The very act of being in some particular religion segregates you. It is an us and them scenario. I know enough of the bible that Jesus rejected the current religions and that is the key. Religions should not exist. Through time they become corrupt and false. Exactly what you see in the news today.
what you see in the news today is using religion for personal gain. there are other "You and Us" situations out in the world causing trouble. Overwhelming Pride in the country in which you reside is one. (is there a name for that?) The cold war is a PERFECT example of this. partisanship is also a signifigant YAU situation. All of the above make people different from each other.If only someone could make all these differences go away, then everything would be oh-so-perfect. Oh, wait, someone tried that already! Does hitler ring a bell? the point is that peple need to learn to be more tolerent.
I wouldn't argue with you about that. I think we're talking about two different things. I agree that religion is influenced by humans, therefore is flawed and imperfect. I would never defend religion.
I would defend Jesus. You say you don't like religious people who black box those around them. Those are the people Jesus rejected. I'm not just trying to make you like me, it's what he did. The Pharisees who said, 'You have to do this and this and this and then be like us and then you might be saved' are the very people Jesus said he didn't want to spend time with. The people who were sincere and in need are who he reached out to.
I know I'm imperfect, but I do my best not to black box people like you're talking about. Christians do it, absolutely, but hopefully mature Christians see how wrong that is. Right now I'm going to a Bible college, but I spend my free time down at Starbucks with the drunk, crazy homeless guy, the flaming homosexual, the guy who hates God and church, and the guy who leads worship at a local church.
I don't hang out with any of them as an outreach or an assignment, I hang out with them because they're my friends. I love 'em. It's that simple. I'm not glorifying myself, that's just how it is. That's the best defense I can offer to the idea that we black box or segregate. I'm really sorry if that's been your experience with religious people, and I don't doubt it has, but that's not what Christianity is meant to look like, that's people messing it up.
in·ter·pret v. To explain the meaning of.
trans·late v. To render in another language.
qual·i·fy v. To declare competent or capable; certify.
We now have the technology to type our ideas and have them translated into many languages at once.
Bible translation is not a new science. Hebrew Scriptures needed to be translated into Greek the “Lingua franca” of Christ’s time.
The translators of my bible expressed their concern for the serious task they had taken on, on the foreward page of my bible. I believe them.
As to bull into bull, don’t knock it until you’ve tried it. The words have a lot more power than realize. (Hebrews 4:12, 13) God didn’t have to, but like a loving father, he lends guidance.
He far from unjust (Deuteronomy 32:4).Those that never knew, will have plenty of time to learn after being resurrected.
P. S. There is no hell.
Mike, good comment! Where did it go?
This blog is about God or not. He has been accused of all sorts of things on this page. Let’s tell the truth. Where the Hebrew Sheol or Greek Hades are used substitute grave.
Hell is known for eternal torture, not waiting. No good father would punish his child to the extent of that myth. God’s reward is everlasting life. Whether, they believe it or not, I haven’t read one post that says this life is so bad he wants to die.
Argue, yes, die, no!
I realized the irony of the fact that I was saying it was superfluous to argue about it at the same time I was starting an argument about it. I kinda figured since I myself said it wasn't essential to the faith, it was silly to bring it up.
I have tried it and I have knocked it. The bible is simply a dozen or so humans interpretaion of THEIR idea of Bod, and should be treated as such. The bible is simply an opinion out of millions of possibilities.
Some of it I would agree and some I would certainly not. I mean...
kill people that work on sabbath, Don't eat shelfish? Killing your own son? What utter garbage. Do the right thing look into your own self for the answers.
The bible has been elevated to a completely unjust level and that has been achieved by religion.
Lead your own life do not let the bible bashing freaks kick you down.
More than scriptures, God has been misunderstood. People hang there imperfections and other folks cruelty on his reputation with the help of his enemy Satan.
I would not put my trust in a God that has been falsely accused, so many times over so many years. Except that I have come to know the real person. How many times we invited to do so. (Isaiah 55:6, 7)
Not all preacher are in it for the money. Talking (or typing) to other people about the good we have found, makes God all the more real and awe-inspiring to ourselves.
I don't know if I would be so flippant as to say the Bible is merely a few dozen peoples' interpretation of God. First off, it matters very little which translation of the original Greek or Hebrew you read, the message will be the same. The purpose of releasing new translations isn't the change the message, it's to put it into terms relevant to the culture it's within. The Bible claims to be the inspired Word of God, which means it's not merely a human interpretation of God (Bod), but is one of God's tools through which he reveals himself.
Some of the things you say are just ironically funny, D. I don't know if you realize it, but you are arguing against religion and arguing for Jesus. Jesus was accused of breaking the law for working on the Sabbath, but he shut the religious kooks right up by explaining what the Sabbath was really for. God gave Peter, an Orthodox Jew, a vision of all foods being clean to eat because the Old Law, which was only meant to open our eyes to our own inability to fulfill it, is dead. These things you find so ridiculous about religion are the lies and misconceptions Jesus came to break, and are weights I, as a fully active, practicing Christian, don't carry.
If you finish the story about Isaac, the son who would be sacrificed, Abraham never killed him. God was asking for total commitment and obedience, and definitely in a very extreme manner. But he didn't make Abraham kill his son. And he blessed Abraham for his complete commitment.
And we can't "look into our own selves" for the right answers. Looking to ourselves is what leads to the religions that start wars, the politics that start wars, the drugs that make people feel fulfilled. Based on what I've seen and experienced, both personally in my life and in the world around me, I would contend that human nature in inherently bad. We need help. So looking into a flawed person, myself, will be of very little use in helping a flawed world.
Mike, yes I actually do admire the story of Jesus. He was a rebel hanging out with the riff raff and told the self righteous pigheads where to get off. A great guy. But the concepts described by the bible and presumably Bod are quite absurd. In fact they are so absurd they are highly amusing when you actually disect it all.
Let's just take a look...
Bod was bored and decides to make 3 levels of existence. No 1 is bottom and call it hell that's were he will send living things that don't conform to his written standards. level 2 is the testing ground called earth and that's where mortal beings will be tested and then level 3 is where the rewards are dished out forever.
So he starts making things in his own image and I was just told on another post that apparently all the new things created are dammed by default. They have original sin that they are personally responsible to rid themselves. Weird. So Bod let's his play-things live a little in an apparently freewill environment. So his first scripture is sent to some special chosen one. I beleive that scripture is the one about not eating pigs, shellfish and killing homosexuals. He tests that to see how it goes down. He's not happy they need to proove themselves a little more and asks a selected few to kill their own offspring in Bods name. Before they actually do that he reveals it was just a joke! Bloody weirdo.
But he's not finished yet he get's even more bored or obsessed with his neat little game and decides to change the goal posts. So he sends his own son to deliver a new set of rules and now looks to see what direction they take. I mean what the F*** is it with this Bod? Is he so insecure and in need of constant worship and attention? why? what kick does he get out of it. Surely he must enjoy seeing things fail too so he can use his no 1 level. The Bod described by the bible has all the traits of human psychology. I do not swallow it
Rewards and punishment are a human concept and that's how the bible works. It is a human creation. it has nothing to do with any God that there may or may not be.
If there is a God it would be far more intelligent than anything described in the bible. Also a God would be far above requiring worship and gifts to keep it happy That is what humans require it's a measurement of their 'apparent' success.
You say we cannot look within ourselves? Are you freightened of what you might find? Religion stops you from doing that it blinds you from the truth of life and survival. You can dress the wars in the past as you like. They are all about survival of one race over another. Either for resources, land, egotistical madman or just riches. It's domination over the masses and the vehicle is religion. Why? Because the side must believe that they are the just and good cause. So it's in the name of the great and almighty but ever so slighly "insecure"... BOD that they go forth.
For the record Communism and fascism are religions.
Survival... well it's not a bad thing... everything in nature has to survive. All the wars in the past has led to you and me having the great privilege of life. Therefore the result of the wars has been a good one for us. Millions have suffered so we have an opportunity to exist on this planet. That is why our LIFE should be lived to the full and in the most positive manner that it can be.
You know what...? I started to explain the Garden of Eden and basically clarify what you were talking about, and I realized it was turning into an entire essay.
Darrin, I respect your views. I think they're misguided, just as you think mine are, but I can still respect them. "I do not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." That's a quote I hold in pretty high regard.
So, instead of debating with you and potentially causing a fight, I'll just agree to disagree. I have felt the real presence of God in my life entirely too strongly to ever doubt his existence or reality. I could still turn my back on him, as I've done in the past, but I could never deny him.
No amount of facts or debating or logic will lead someone to Jesus. The only thing that leads someone to faith is personal interaction with him, and that doesn't happen over Internet blogs. So, I hope your interactions with believers in the future will shed us in a better light that it seems they have in the past, and I hope at some point you will be willing to ask Jesus to reveal himself to you. If you ask with an open heart, he will show up.
That's all. I can't prove I'm right, and the Bible tells me countless times over not to engage in useless debates over trivial aspects of my faith, and I'm afraid that's what I'm starting to do.
I hope we've helped each other to see the other's point of view a little better and can both be more understanding and accepting in the future.
And I'm sorry I spelled your name wrong...twice.
Darren, I feel differently than Mike. Reasoning on ideas is good for both of us.
Imagine how God must feel about being blamed for man’s greed, selfishness and pride. He created free thinkers who can realize the dream of living life to the full, in the most positive manner possible.
We have proven ourselves to be unable to govern ourselves. When he set out the Law through Moses he was dealing with one people, Israel. Fresh out of Egypt, rules against eating pork and shellfish probably saved as many lives in the wilderness as burying their excrement and recognizing diseased people as unclean.
Jesus on the other hand offered God’s protection through his guidance, not with hard and fast rules but with principles. When we apply them in our lives we are rewarded, here and now and in the future.
Check out my "Agnostic Atheism Wager" in the side bar of my blog:
http://www.agnosticatheism.com
aA
mike, I agree with you in entirety. I respect your beliefs and would never push my own in self-proclamation that they are the absolute truth. I will argue them but that is the limit.
For me the majority of the ideas and concepts in the bible are so absurdly stupid and ignorant that the only possible explanantion is that it is the product of the human imagination. It is certain that on one day, in the far future, that 'the bible' along with all its flavours of religion will be relegated to the realms of the mythological Greek gods.
Maybe then the human race can go forward in a more intelligent and prosperous manner.
PS. No problem about the miss-spelled name. Was good talking to you.
Wow! What a nerve you touched my friend!
My argument goes on a separate track.
Atheism is a faith-based system in and of itself.
One can argue it has a dogma "rationalism or scientific inquiry", and has an unshaking belief in the NON-existence of God.
One could argue that truly only Agnostics approach the problem as a being without any faith at all, because they are open to all ideas.
To those who have mentioned a flaw of this argument being that some people argue that any god-fearing person goes together:
If someone ever brings this up as a counter, they have effectively undermind the whole argument of Pascal's wager anyhow. The point of the wager was to get people to believe in the Christian god specifically. By arguing that a person can get into heaven regardless of what religion it is, has thus undermined the credibility of the claim that you need to follow their religion. Such a belief goes against the doctrines of most major religions, and thus undermines any legitimacy in all religions.
Exactly, I am not labelling myself an atheist either because that in itself is a 'religion', along with its unsubstantiated claims. Richard Dawkins dissapointed me. He has published some fantastically insightful books... BUT "The God Delusion" ?... it really wasn't neccessary. I thought he was more intelligent.
The real issue today is that the luny christian right are on the war path. They are so hell bent on their 2000 year rapture, we are in serious danger of seeing it happen. Suppose that will be an act of Bod too.
WHAT A F***ING DISASTROUS RACE WE ARE.
Good insights and I totally agree on your point about the simplification of Pascal. To his credit, he was speaking with Westerners and at that time there wasn't much other religious influence. But, he even over simplified Christianity. Its not (well shouldn't be) about getting into heaven, but worshiping the creator and following in Jesus' teachings.
Your response to the wager is a great one against Pascal. It limits faith to being about heaven, but like you said its against Pascal and not faith.
I think you have an interesting idea there, except I think your wager is geared towards the abrahamic faiths, as they have the concept os heaven/hell, salvation/damnation, etc.
I'm polytheistic, and my faith does not have salvation, and the gods don't particularly care if you worship them or not. In the afterlife, there is a punishment place which is reserved for those that have committed acts of evil, such as murder, rape, etc. A disbelief in the gods would not damn you.
I'd also like to point out that most, if not all, the conflicts you cited as being done in the name of god were not about god at all. The true reasons for those wars and conflicts were about greed and power. Religion was used as an excuse to gain support for their cause. People nowadays are still using religion to convince people to fight for their cause(and blow themselves up), the true reason being lust for power and control.
I would agree with most of your post except when you listed the Holocaust as perpetrated by Christians against Jews. That is patently false. The Holocaust was a product of the eugenic/racist mindset prevalent in the early 20th century in Europe which inherited almost nothing from Christianity. It has its roots in the social Darwinism theories of the time. It wasn't committed by "Christians" per se, it was committed by Nazis, and conflating the two diminishes your credibility.
Fact: Hitler was a Christian (Catholic and the Catholic church never excommunicated him).
Fact: Most Nazis were Christians (Catholics and Protestants).
Fact: Jews were a target for extermination because of the centuries-long Christian hatred toward Jews.
Fact: Hitler in his own words: "The man [speaking about Karl Lueger (1844-1910) belonged as a member of the anti-Semitic Christian Social Party, he became mayor of Vienna and kept his post until his death] and the movement seemed 'reactionary' in my eyes. My common sense of justice, however, forced me to change this judgment in proportion as I had occasion to become acquainted with the man and his work; and slowly my fair judgment turned to unconcealed admiration. Today, more than ever, I regard this man as the greatest German mayor of all times.
How many of my basic principles were upset by this change in my attitude toward the Christian Social movement!
My views with regard to anti-Semitism thus succumbed to the passage of time, and this was my greatest transformation of all.
Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.
It [Christian Social Party] recognized the value of large-scale propaganda and was a virtuoso in influencing the psychological instincts of the broad masses of its adherents.
The anti-Semitism of the new movement [Christian Social movement] was based on religious ideas instead of racial knowledge.
If Dr. Karl Lueger had lived in Germany, he would have been ranked among the great minds of our people.
My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter.
Only in the steady and constant application of force lies the very first prerequisite for success. This persistence, however, can always and only arise from a definite spiritual conviction. Any violence which does not spring from a firm, spiritual base, will be wavering and uncertain.
What we must fight for is to safeguard the existence and reproduction of our race and our people, the sustenance of our children and the purity of our blood, the freedom and independence of the fatherland, so that our people may mature for the fulfillment of the mission allotted it by the creator of the universe.
Here, of course, we encounter the objection of the modern pacifist, as truly Jewish in its effrontery as it is stupid!
... the world has no reason for fighting in our defense, and as a matter of principle God does not make cowardly nations free...
Never forget that the most sacred right on this earth is a man's right to have earth to till with his own hands, and the most sacred sacrifice the blood that a man sheds for this earth.
For when a people is not willing or able to fight for its existence-- Providence in its eternal justice has decreed that people's end." (Mein Kampf)
"Him who helps himself will the Almighty always also help" (Speech at Hamburg on 20 March 1936)
I don't necessarily think that the best argument against theism is that if God exists, he sucks. I think the best argument is that we must follow our better judgement, and not compromise our ideals because of fear. This is simply integrity. To allow oneself to be saved, even though it goes against your basic judgement, is simply a lack of personal integrity and self respect.
@ aleksandrina
Just because Hitler said he was a Christian, let's not say the Holocaust was a Christian effort. A true Christian strives to be Christ-like. Christ was a Jew. His half-brother James was a Jew. His disciples were Jews. The people he reached out to (Zaccheus, for example) were Jews.
I can claim to be a baseball player, but I may never actually play in a baseball game. So if I say I'm a baseball player, then I go and start kicking the ball with my feet and trying to kick it into a hoop and tell you that's baseball, does that make it true? No, it makes me a liar.
If a person claims to be a Christian, then goes and kills millions of Jews and says that's Christianity, does that make is Christianity? No, that makes that person a liar.
Please, please, please, please, PLEASE, if you're going to discuss 'Christianity,' talk about it as it should be, which is Christ-like, not what mentally unstable genocidal dictators say it is.
I understand that people have taken what Jesus taught and twisted it to fit their motives, but that doesn't mean it's what he taught. In the same way some Muslims choosing to wage war against America doesn't reflect the true teaching or feelings of the majority of their people, people that do wrong or unjust things in the name of Christianity don't reflect the truth of the beliefs or the majority of Christians.
Re: Mike,
First, I prefer facts to your wishful thinking, that is, I rather talk about Christianity for what it has been through out the history instead of idealizing it.
Second, I never said that Christians practiced/practice the things Christ/Jesus of Nazareth taught. For indeed, as history demonstrates, the majority of Christians were/are not Christ-like.
BTW Christ/Jesus of Nazareth never called anyone "Christian" and never authorized anyone to be called so.
i as a muslim living in a free world of thought and knowledge...i understand you point quite well..yews religion is dividing us more htan any prophet or god would ever have wanted us humans to be...but i still think that is not valid enough reason to doubt the obvious...but i still respect ur point..when i have a better reason or way to explain i shall let you know..great post!!
"Re: Mike,
First, I prefer facts to your wishful thinking, that is, I rather talk about Christianity for what it has been through out the history instead of idealizing it.
Second, I never said that Christians practiced/practice the things Christ/Jesus of Nazareth taught. For indeed, as history demonstrates, the majority of Christians were/are not Christ-like.
BTW Christ/Jesus of Nazareth never called anyone "Christian" and never authorized anyone to be called so."
Are you really anyone to say who is and who is not Christ-like?
You seem to want to keep your own debate unreasonable, as you've now made it clear that any definition of "Christian" or "Christianity" needs to be YOUR own definition (authoritarian thinking), and not one that considers how people qualify to be called an actual Christian, despite the use of the name in describing populations in a demographic sense having nothing to do with the religion (and no matter your implication that the name "Christian" is invalid since it was not authorized by Christ - in an attempt at a clever attack you seem to have forgotten the basic reason for such a clear and descriptive name.)
You've pretty much ruined any more chance at a reasoned debate about Christianity, you insult a Christian's input as wishful thinking when it was an entirely valid attempt to get you to see a massive flaw in your reasoning and cease the slander.
It's easy for you to say he was idealizing Christianity in an attempt to dismiss what he said. Well, an ideal of something is often not far from what the definition of that thing. We're trying to tell you what Christianity is, and how it is commonly misunderstood, and that the name has been used and abused.
But, you seem to be ignoring us and trying to paint a picture that Christianity is evil. I have to question that. What's unfortunate is that you want to talk about Christianity in history, when truth in history is hard to come by and interpretation is so easy. Your bias is obvious, and you really, really want to blame Christianity for the Holocaust.
So, once again, are you willing to start over and admit that a Christian "demographically" is not really an actual, practicing Christian, and therefore your idea that Christians are responsible for the Holocaust is based on the incredibly cheap use of the title "Christian" where you should say German Nazis?
It would be good for your philosophy class to learn to avoid contrivance altogether.
You would be the first person I know of to wish to remove blame from the Nazis of Germany, rather than just deny the Holocaust ever happened. And, by simply switching the name to "Christians"!
Re: Ving,
It is simple, every tree is known by its fruit. People who do not behave as Christ/Jesus of Nazareth behaved are not Christ-like, as simple as that.
And yes, Christ/Jesus of Nazareth did not call anyone "Christian" and did not authorize anyone to be called so.
Reread my comments, in them I said nothing contrary to facts, and there is no flaw in anything I said.
Do not expect me to dismiss facts just because you prefer idealizations to facts.
These are ugly facts of history: the Holocaust was perpetrated by the Nazis and the majority of Nazis were Christians, including Hitler himself. Jews were a target for extermination because of the centuries-long Christian hatred toward Jews.
Again, it is very simple, every tree is known by its fruit, or as the popular saying goes: actions speak louder than words. In applying this principle to Christians, the actions of Christians through out the history speak louder than their justifications.
As a side note, I know that there were and are the doers of good among Christians just as among people of other persuasions (religious and none-religious), and in no way I discount such people.
Bible student, I spent a day thinking about what you said there and you are right, god does get a bad press. But, I feel this problem lies squarely at religions doorstep. "It's an act of God" rants the religously brainwashed waving their bibles above their heads.
This apparently holy book is so miss-guided it is shameful. I will take Islam and Christianity as examples. I believe they are branches of the same diseased tree. Islamic culture towards women is absolutely disgusting. The cause is the miss-use of their holy book. Exagerating the things the leaders like and watering down their dislikes. Also, the bible is shamefully derogatory towards women. Years ago in the christian world it was the norm to have women as the underspecies of Man. All those years of a crap life for women and all down to 'The Bible', which is obviously the imagination of men. It is ludicrous... Simply on your sex you are relegated to secondary citizenship. Nowadays, in christianity, the homosexuals get it in the neck. Shame on that book and all the religions that follow it.
What the hell has your sex and/or sexuality have to do with how god may or may not view you?
The only entity that will see you in the viewpoint described by the bloody bible is another human being.
Therefore that book is the work of Man with all his prejudices and hatreds inside it... ready to be abused for dominating who the hell they like.
Forget translation burn the bloody thing.
Religions should move with the times. I mean for christs sake they are stuck in the dark ages and I see no progress. In fact the opposite is true, they are dissapearing up their own ARSE.
I can stomach the jesus bit with a few modifications. Take out the son of god part (I don't believe he ever claimed that. It was added for effect). While your at it take out all those miracles because they're straight from the tooth fairies wand too.
I'd be suprised if anyone read this far, but here goes.
SnowKittenz said:
"Also, with your argument concerning things that are bad done in "Gods" name. For such an argument to be hypothetically acceptable, you would have to accept that a God does exist, therefore contradicting yourself completely."
That is quite an incorrect statement. As an example against this statement, consider the following:
I can carry out any number of evil deeds in the name of my cousin Joe. Simply because I do not have a cousin named Joe does not make my action any less real, or any less evil than what it truly is.
Unless someone can somehow explain that one a little better...
I agree with you in almost everything. But I do not like that you seem to thing faith equals religion or that for every faith all of the others are wrong and God condemns people for not inheriting the right religion. Tha is making faith and religion a cartoon.
And no, I am not a religious person. Theism is not the same as religion, nor faith is. I would believe that table if it were more objective.
The key to dismantling pascal's little box there is to realize that you cannot choose your beliefs. If I could believe in heaven, then why the hell not? I don't feel any faith in god, and god would certainly know if I was faking it, so its a pointless argument.
Nick
Pascal's wager isn't neccessarily like that. It would give you the push you need to learn more about God and then to finally believe in him
An awesome piece, nicely done. The review at Russel's Teapot was right on the money about this being "one hell of a first-post".
@ aleksandrina
You didn't really present 'facts'. You presented a long quote from a speech. I can talk until I'm blue in the face about whatever I want, it doesn't make it true. I can claim to be a member of the army, but if I never actually enlist, train, or fight for them, I'm not in the army. Hitler and his crew saying they're Christians, doesn't make them Christians.
As for being nit-picky about terms, that's meaningless. It's not the word that's important, it's what the word represents. In Israel, many people don't use the term 'Christian,' they say 'believers.' If you can handle that better, because Jesus never specifically said 'Christian,' him and his disciples said believer. However, because his name was Jesus CHRIST, calling his followers 'Christians' isn't much of a stretch...just think about it for a second.
So, does someone saying they're a Christian mean they are? No. Let's talk about true Christians vs. 'Christians,' at least. You say Christians have committed heinous acts throughout history. I say, people falsely claiming to be Christians have committed heinous acts. Look at this from a personal standpoint: you just compared me, a law-abiding citizen of my country who has spent the last two years of my life in a Bible college reaching out to people around me trying to make their lives better, a person who visits with students, prays with them, a person who went to the Gulf Coast of America to help rebuild homes for those who lost them, a person who went across the world to Israel for the simple purpose of telling people we love them - you just compared me to Hitler. You threw me in with his army and ideals at the drop of a hat. I'm not supposed to be offended by this? There is not one thing Hitler did or said that I agree with or support, yet I claim to be a Christian, a believer. One of us is lying. Do my actions and words match those of Christ more closely, or do his? If my actions or words match Christ's more closely than his did, than I am the Christian, and he is the liar. He is the egotistical mass-murderer.
Again, claiming to be a Christian is implying that one holds up the beliefs and teachings of Christ. If a person's life doesn't reflect that, they are liars. Period. They are 'Christians,' while those of us who truly do uphold the teachings of Jesus and love those around us get a bad rep because you generalize us.
Furthermore, if you would study into history more, you'd find stories of Christians doing good things, too, but you probably haven't spent the time to do that. You bring up the Crusades and the Holocaust, both perpetuated by liars who were desperate for power. Study the life of Mother Teresa or Pope John Paul II. Study the life of Jesus, the birth of my faith. Don't just jump on the stereotypical bandwagon, please.
Real quick, for Darren:
The role of women in the Bible was grossly misrepresented for too long. In the Garden of Eden, where Eve is blamed for eating the fruit, Adam was right there watching. Shared blame.
Paul, the man responsible for most of the New Testament, not only condoned women in ministry, he recommended them, welcomed them, and attended church meetings hosted by women.
I hope that helps, if only a little.
Let me clarify:
I don't think Christians are perfect. I've been a real dickhead in my time. Yes, we have been guilty of doing bad things to good people and bad things to bad people, but no more than any group of people on this planet. But to say true Christians, or believers, are guilty of things like the Holocaust...that's not right. I believe in God and his Son, Jesus, and neither of them would ever have wanted that, and I would never want it. Christians hated Jews because they blamed Jews for Jesus' death. You know who I blame? I blame myself. Right at the top of the list of people responsible for Jesus' death, is my name. I hold myself accountable for that death; not you, not the Jews, myself. Keep these things in mind before you generalize Christians or accept everyone at their word.
@ aleksandrina
I just reread your comments. You said:
"It is simple, every tree is known by its fruit. People who do not behave as Christ/Jesus of Nazareth behaved are not Christ-like, as simple as that."
That is my point. To be Christian means to be Christ-like. So a person who is not Christ-like, i.e. Hitler, is not a Christian, no matter how much he wants to think or say he is.
hi atheists wager. someone pointed me to your blog and asked what i thought. even though it is not a direct response to your post, i thought you might be interested:
http://nakedpastor.com/archives/901
mike, fair enough. I remember once talking to a smoking muslim man and asked "does you wofr smoke too?", he looked at me as though I had suddenly sprouted 2 heads and replied "women are not allowed too smoke".
Your arguments are sound, guys like you should get more air time on Christian FM.
Good luck
Darren thanks for considering my post. Sorry for the delay.
re·lig·ion n. 1. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe. 2. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship. --American Heritage Dictionary
Only if the second definition is perverted, does the first part become invalid. "It's an act of God" or worse “It’s God’s will” has become an excuse for bad behavior.
This week, we were told, over and over, "guns don't kill people; people kill people." There is nothing wrong with book. Unfortunately, most folks don’t know what is printed inside. Nothing new though, in the middle ages the Roman Catholic Church forbade laymen to read the Bible, to end dissension.
According to the Bible, women were created as a helper and a complement to man (Genesis 2:18). My wife reminds me that Abraham is instructed to “Listen to her voice.” (Genesis 21:12).
Jesus put them in first place. The Samaritan woman at the well was the first one he preached to (John 4:6-27). Mary Magdalene was the first to see Jesus alive, again (John 2:11-16). Peter wrote that we need to be “assigning them honor”(1 Peter 3:7).
The primary point of the scripture used to condemn homosexuals is that God was letting them alone (Romans 1:24-27). That lightning bolt that fools pray hit them, hasn’t been seen in millenniums.
When he was explaining Lazarus‘ death, Jesus identified himself as the “Son of God” (John 11:4), also at John 3:18. His father is quoted at Matthew 17:5, as are the demons(Mt 8:29).
Remember, the Bible is God’s invitation, not a weapon. Some read it and join the party. Others, mock it. Man could not possibly have written such a masterpiece. The prophesy alone, is beyond him.
For organised religions I think the second definition has become well and truly diverted from the first. I cannot see a main stream religion today that has the sound enough foundations to represent a god. Maybe it's because the biggots have the loudest voice. Your's and mike's interpretations seem somewhat more open minded than most and that is encouraging.
However I don't accept reward or punishment after death - that is dealt out in life.
I do guide myself by 2 rules and I must admit they are straight from the bible that I rigorously deny.
Do not judge lessed you be judged
&
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
My notion of a god connects ALL life and matter in ALL universes and without plan, design or goal and it ceases to amaze.
So much hot air being blown around in here. And at least some of it is capable of being put to rest for all time.
I had what was in all probability a direct encounter with a soul once. (If you want to know the details, the story's at:
theninepointfivetheses.blogspot.com
In the first post you see.)
Y'all know the way at least some of this can be settled? Forever and ever amen? (I'm referring to the soul part.)
By scientific experiment.
By detecting souls experimentally. In a laboratory.
I'm a rationalist. If you, personally, think souls exists---isn't detecting them in a laboratory the RATIONAL thing to do?
By the way, I think souls exist. I think their existence can be deduced RATIONALLY, by the scientific method, by the completely unbiased, coldly objective analysis of human behavior. I mean, IF souls exist---it MUST be possible to deduce this from their effect on human behavior.(But then you gotta prove in the lab.)
I have the analyses on my blog. Plus a suggestion for how to conduct the experiment.
I offer up a challenge to all who believe in souls.
PROVE IT IN THE LABORATORY. Put your money where your mouth is, man!
You know one thing that's NEVER been done in this argument over souls?
They've NEVER observed death in the lab. NEVER!
Oh, there have been some very crude experiments, but there has never been serious scientific observations of death in the lab.
Given the quite-literally centuries-old argument over souls, this is a strange thing.
So once again, I CHALLENGE THOSE WHO BELIEVE IN SOULS TO PROVE IT IN THE LAB.
Go to the lab and build a Mark 1 soul-detector.
And once again, I think the people who believe in souls ARE TOTALLY CORRECT. I think you moonbeam-dancing, ley-line-loving, fuzzy-headed woo-woos are gonna turn out to be completely dead-bang right on this particular issue.
Dangit...
I just wrote a response to Darren and to Jeff, but lost it...
Darren, I basically said that there are mosre Christians than you realize who think like I do; all I've been doing is telling you what I've been taught and have believed. The problem is, us moderate Christians don't have radio shows or picket lines. If we did, we wouldn't be moderate anymore :-) But I'm glad we can agree on some points and disagree in a civil manner.
Yesterday my dad and I had a heart to heart about religion and it proved to me why Pascal's Wager doesn't work in practice, let alone under the scrutiny of logic.
After telling my dad a story about my previous night's activities (which included going to a strip club, a bar, and nearly getting arrested for climbing up a building because I was drunk and it was fun), dad started crying.
You would think a good Christian father would be crying because of how far my life seems to have strayed from the path of Christ, but that's not why dad was crying.
He explained that the tears were cried out of jealousy; my father envies my life because I'm able to live my life for myself, I get to taste the pleasures forbid him as a young man, and yet I remain a good person. Dad grew up not knowing the most simple pleasures because they were "sinful" in the eyes of the church and an ultra-indoctrinated family who never questioned the church's reasoning (if there was any).
Pascal's Wager fails because there is plenty to lose by accepting any religious doctrine that Pascal just disregards. I cry for my father that it took 50 years of living to finally get it.
I myself am atheist not of of disbelief in god, but in pure not caring. "Religion is for those needing answers, I have no questions"
I've read most of the posts and wanted to chime in:
It seems that there is a lot of confusion on what "religion" is. Christianity, and religion, is and should be more than a set of beliefs or proclamations of faith. The Bible is full of passages criticizing people who claim to be religious but let injustice go on. In Amos, God states that he hates the songs of worship coming from the Israelites, and will not listen to them until there is justice in the land (justice meaning care for the marginalized). Instead, religion is the practicing of the beliefs, with the importance lying on the actions over the words. In the New Testament, the author of James states that true religion is looking after the widows and orphans. Jesus also stated that it is hypocritical to tell someone in need that you care for them but not help them out physically.
The problem at hand is that many people define Christianity by what they see "Christians" to be practicing. They see people who go to church an hour or so every week but fail to really have any qualitative differences in their lives. They also see people who use religion in their own favor, even promoting acts of injustice.
As noted earlier, a distinction must be made between people who truly believe what they proclaim and act it out, and those who just use religion for their own purposes. God is not man, and man is not God. While Christians are called to live a life that reflects God, many fail.
In the end, I sympathize with many of the athiests here who have negative experiences with religion. I am a Christian, and even I many times am ashamed by what other humans do to each other in the name of Christianity. However, I think that instead of criticizing religion, an athiest should try to encourage those who do believe in a God to live a life that is virtueous instead of one that is self-centered or ignorant. There are many religious people who do great things in the name of their religion. Most of the international aid and development work is done by these type of people. There are few things that drive a person to give up the luxuries of life in a first world country to move to Sudan to work with refugees. So while athiests and Christians disagree about many fundamental things, one thing that should be shared together is a concern for those in need, whether here or across the world.
Re: Mike
I never compared you to Hitler nor to anyone else; I do not know anything about you except that you claim to be a Christian.
And I never said that none among Christians did anything good.
A Christian is anyone who claims to be a Christian, and a Christ-like is anyone who behaves like Christ.
So for instance, while Hitler was a Christian, he was not Christ-like, and while Mahatma Gandhi was not a Christian, he was Christ-like, and Martin Luther King was both Christian and Christ-like.
@ aleksandrina
"A Christian is anyone who claims to be a Christian..."
Hah. Okay. I play baseball for the New York Yankees and I'm a professor of sociology at Columbia University. I'm making a claim that those things are true. Does that mean they are?
Do you realize how idiotic this really is? Think about it, "stand up to a corrupt god" Who the heck do you think you are? You make it sounds as if it would make any difference! If this so called gos is as corrupt as you say he is then he is most certainly not going to listen you and if he really is there and he doesn't like you he will send you into eternal damnation.
It shows an utter lack of intelligence to believe something as downright stupid as this. I would much rather be wrong and die knowing that I did my best and left a good legacy of upright morals to my family and those around me. Then to be wrong and stand in front of an all knowing and just God and be regretful of my stupidity on earth for the sole reason that I wasted to live my life MY WAY.
God the Father pulled a giant chunk out of the sun. Then the temperature of space froze the earth's surface to a crust. Remember pluto , the north pole and the south pole is frozen. God the Father is made out of nuclear white draft sun material, to last over millions of years. Look in Revelations chapter 1 near verse 17.I do not preach sugar, sweet, kind, loving, tender sermans.
There are two questions:
1) Is there a God?
2) If there is a God, what is the nature of God?
1) The answer to #1 is 'Yes!'
Why? Try to imagine nothing. What is nothing? What distinguishes the nothing from the something? Answer: time! If nothing ever changes, then nothing exists. It's like the old chestnut, 'If a tree falls in the forest but no one is there to hear it, does it really fall?' Can anything exist without an observer? If you are in the forest alone and there is no observer, do you exist? Clearly, yes, because you are your own observer - Cogito, ergo sum. But without time, not only is there no observer but no thought nor action. In the absence of time nothing exists.
Time, then, is like a border between the nothing and the something. It is the primary dimension.
One thing we have discovered through science is that everything seems to boil down to vibrations, vibrations in every conceivable dimension, of which we only perceive a fraction.
All existence is a seething mass of vibrations in all dimensions - and that existence is God! We, our universe, and countless other lesser and greater universes are all but a part of the mind of God.
You think that existence is not self-aware, omniscient? Think again. We are less than microbes in the cosmos, a miniscule part of the whole, yet we are self-aware and see, to a certain degree, beyond ourselves. If a small insignificant fraction of existence can be self-aware, what hubris is it to say that the entirity of existence, God, is not self-aware and cannot control the course of that which is part of itself?
God is everything and everywhere and we are all a part of God. To deny that is self-denial.
2) The answer to #2 is unknowable! We may be able to say something about how God thinks but we will never know what God thinks or why. We are far, far less to God than an ant is to us. Have you ever killed and ant or given it a second thought? Does that make you heartless? A Buddhist might say, 'Yes!'
Our poor intellect can never fathom the mind of God. Who are we to say how God does something. To those who argue against evolution I say, 'We are both the creations of God and a part of God. Who are we to presume we know how God decides to do something - whether he waved a magic wand or directed the course of evolution; or how long he took to do things. A age for us may be an eyeblink for God; or vice versa.'
If a rock fall from a cliff and kill someone, does that make it evil? Perhaps it fell on a future mass murderer, or the progenitor of one, in which case it might be considered benificent. In the same way we cannot judges the actions of God - real or perceived. We simply do not know enough to make a just judgement.
Is God responsible for all the world's ills or is it we ourselves?
Just like our cells are part of us yet do not control their own fate and know knothing of our conscious thoughts, so we do not control what happens to us nor know the mind of God.
The thoughtless are strong here.
Let me address just some of the comments. For those who say you can't apply logic to god or his actions or come close to understanding him/her - please give a cogent definition of god. You can't can you? What is he/she? A thing outside of nature (then he cannot interact with nature)? Made of nothing (then how does he/she exist)? I await your elucidation on this matter.
How about "belief" then? At what point did you decide that the deity you worship was actually the correct one? If you worship Yahwah/Allah, then how do you know that Shiva is not displeased? Or Zeus? Or Thor - the list is endless.
On atheist's point in life? How about a beer and children and enjoying the world and people in the exceedingly short time we have before we reach the mental state we were in before we were born (i.e nothingness). And puppies! Atheism is in fact an eye opening philosophy in that it forces us to seek the peaceful path and let people live their lives as they see fit and allowed within society - meanwhile we will be amazed and bedazzled by the universe around us and treasure the fleetingness of our life.
Finally - bad people do bad things. Some are atheists, some are theists, but I challenge you to find an atrocity done in atheism's name. I will not have any difficulty in responding with a list of horror done in theism's name.
Dave,
so what's your point?
Your argument is that there *can* be a god who is a vast being etc etc etc
Assuming that God is one of the ones we know about (christian god, muslim god, etc) then i can argue against this god through the appropriate sources...
e.g: Christianity:
the bible... way out of date.
the god is constantly shrinking and changing from a wrathful being (Old Testament) to Love 'n Cuddles the Bearded man in the sky who never hurts a fly.
plus many other inconsistencies in the whole argument (often common to more than one religion) which you should have noticed long ago... therefore I shan't bother trying to convince you.
Assuming that god is not one of the ones we know about:
if this is the case then he has not presented himself to me so i neednt worship him, so why bother discussing it? For all you know this god can be a pig/elephant mutant hybrid divine avatar on planet Zork, Nebulon 5. It's possible. Big deal.
Q.E.D.
I am tired of people turning God into a mistery and the earth was created, because God created it, so wake up and stop being atheistic. The earth is not a t.V. show, so wake up it is real. It is thousands of miles around in size, made of dirt, sand, water, minerals and hot lava.
Have you ever considered the greatness and peace that comes from following the religion of Zeus? I highly suggest it. At least Zeus is a fickle and emotional god, whose stories are interesting and fun. No "mystery" there - the Greek pantheon's motivations are just as human as yours or mine.
And, as a bonus, you don't have to worship. Just read, learn neat history and philosophy from an ancient culture, and have something interesting to talk about at parties.
How is "go to heaven" an "extremely bad outcome" for the atheist? If atheism is correct and heaven does not exist, it simply could not happen, so whether or not it would be "bad" or not is 100% moot!
Satan,
Satan satan (2), Satan Satan Satan (3 x Satan +2 Satan = 5 Satan)
5 Satan x 12 = 600 Satan
600 Satan + 13 + 21 = 63 Satan
633 Satan + 3 x 11 Satan = Antichrist.
Please receive your mark ... here (please enter forehead or right wanker wrist)
I just want to add that I would rather spend an eternity in hell than spend five minutes in heaven with ANY religious fanatic. Have you seen them? They're nutjobs!
I must say your article really creates a confusion whether to believe or not. Have you forgotten the word "free will"? remember that God gave us that so that we can experience the fullness of being a human. This division among people of every religion is a created by us because of the "free will" we have the choice to do whatever we think is right and to believe what we want.
I choose to believe in God even though I don't go to church to hear mass and I hardly even pray. You people choose not to believe and I respect that but please don't say that God caused or let wars happen. Have shame on yourself for blaming God for this.
Way to go for the guy who got it right, although I must admit Zeus is mean for not letting poor Eris come to the party.
All hail Discordia
I just want to inform you that you only portray the Protestant faith in what you wrote. It's a little more Eurocentric than Pascal in my opinion considering the fact that over one billion people are Christian while only 200 million are Protestant. True Christianity (honestly, Catholicism) does not believe in the concept of Sola Fide (faith alone). It's a terrible heresy that has somehow took hold in this lazy society. Jesus taught to love others, not just have faith in His existence. I agree with almost everything in this article, but it does not prove anything. By the way, the slanting done about the inquistion, crusades, et cetera are outrageous. Look up the facts please.
Very informatic website. I got many business contact details here.Hindu Guru Photo, Saints Sadhu Wallpapers, Swami Pictures, Hinduism, Sadhu, Sadhu, Sadhvi, Mahatma, Famous Person, Wallpaper, Photo, Images,
Hindu God, World Famous Guru, Swami, Sadhu, Swami list
Great read, I've never subscribed to Pascal's "wager" anyway. It's just like saying the flagellum is such a complex machine with a u joint and couplings and a valve, they say it is so complicated it had to be created by a designer. hahahahahaha Science rules!!
I hate getting into conversations about religion with people -- like recently I got into a debate on religion with a friend, didn't turn out so well for him. But at the same time, its not like I converted him or whatever.
--------------------------
The Atheist Perspective
Post a Comment