Spiritual, but no longer religious
From Adam W
Like many of you, I was raised an evangelical Christian along with my entire family. I went to church on Sundays, bible study on Wednesdays, church camp during the summer, you name it. But during all of that, there was some part of me that realized, on a very deep level, that a lot of it was just total b.s., especially the parts about "non-believers" going to hell.
It is totally impossible to believe that your fellow brothers and sisters on this planet are going to hell and also be happy yourself at the same time. Happiness requires being able to sense the worth and goodness of every human being. Christianity, on the other hand, teaches people that they are worthless sinners. It is a despicable religion that we should do away with. Has anybody else noticed that Chrisitians are by far the most neurotic people in society?
Although I am no longer religious, I consider myself to be very spiritual. Have you guys read the works of Joseph Campbell, where he identifies the similarities among the world's religious traditions? Symbols like being born of a virgin, death and resurrection, etc. are common symbols in many traditions, not just Christianity.
I also encourage people to read A Course in Miracles, which uses the langauage of traditional Christianity, but clearly explains how the notion of sin doesn't exist, that God is a word for the collective Spirit in all of us, and that we are all perfect creations and all entitled to bliss and brotherhood.
The author of A Course in Miracles said that she wrote it to "correct" the errors of Christianity, namely its obsession with judgment and punishment.
Like many of you, I was raised an evangelical Christian along with my entire family. I went to church on Sundays, bible study on Wednesdays, church camp during the summer, you name it. But during all of that, there was some part of me that realized, on a very deep level, that a lot of it was just total b.s., especially the parts about "non-believers" going to hell.
It is totally impossible to believe that your fellow brothers and sisters on this planet are going to hell and also be happy yourself at the same time. Happiness requires being able to sense the worth and goodness of every human being. Christianity, on the other hand, teaches people that they are worthless sinners. It is a despicable religion that we should do away with. Has anybody else noticed that Chrisitians are by far the most neurotic people in society?
Although I am no longer religious, I consider myself to be very spiritual. Have you guys read the works of Joseph Campbell, where he identifies the similarities among the world's religious traditions? Symbols like being born of a virgin, death and resurrection, etc. are common symbols in many traditions, not just Christianity.
I also encourage people to read A Course in Miracles, which uses the langauage of traditional Christianity, but clearly explains how the notion of sin doesn't exist, that God is a word for the collective Spirit in all of us, and that we are all perfect creations and all entitled to bliss and brotherhood.
The author of A Course in Miracles said that she wrote it to "correct" the errors of Christianity, namely its obsession with judgment and punishment.
Comments
Great testimony! I especially liked your comment:
"It is totally impossible to believe that your fellow brothers and sisters on this planet are going to hell and also be happy yourself at the same time."
Those were my exact sentiments when I was a christian. People used to talk about the "joy" and "peace" of knowing Jesus, yet to me, the notion that many people around me would end up in hell did not allow for any such feelings of joy and peace, in fact quite the opposite.
If hell wasn't in the bible, I would probably still be a christian!
Jacstar
But why do you continue to believe in a spiritual world? There is no more or less proof of a god than there is for "spiritual". They just don't exist. It is still a mind game. Erich
'Christianity, on the other hand, teaches people that they are worthless sinners. It is a despicable religion that we should do away with.'
Haven't you noticed that true Biblical Christianity is already being done away with?!
and look at the consequences. Sin and corruption are on the rampage.
"It is totally impossible to believe that your fellow brothers and sisters on this planet are going to hell and also be happy yourself at the same time."
Just because one doesn't like the thought of somebody going to hell doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Hell is a real place. Jesus talked about it more than He did about heaven. He warned people about where are fallen nature will take us.
It is not about what WE want, but about what God says.
Jesus spoke of the dump on the outskirts of the city where the fires rage. That is not the same thing as a place where bodies are burned forever.
Jesus said never works with us.
Hell does not sound like something you know a lot about.
Oh, and sin and curruption you speak of is nothing new on this planet. In essence, there is actually less violence and sin than there was in the middle ages.
Education is the key to getting rid of christianity.
marty
But why do you continue to believe in a spiritual world? There is no more or less proof of a god than there is for "spiritual". They just don't exist. It is still a mind game. Erich
It's not so much that I "believe" in a spiritual world full of ghosts and demons and all of that. Rather, I have a spiritual side to myself that feels connected to the universe and to others. It's more about being in tune with yourself and what's going on around you than believing in a supernatural dimension.
of his superlative attributes is impossible. If Yahweh is all knowing, all
loving, all compassionate, all intelligent and all powerful how could he
allow an inept, holocaustic debacle like billions of people going to hell
for eternity to happen? (See Mt 7:13-14; 25:41,46; II Thess 1:6-9). An all
knowing God would have known it would happen. An all loving, all
compassionate God would have determined that it would not happen. An all
intelligent God would have figured out a way that it would not happen. And
an all powerful God would have accomplished it.
With great power comes great responsibility. Yahweh's power is
allegedly infinite. The Bible teaches that Yahweh will let this hell tragedy
happen. With all of his alleged superlative characteristics this would be
the ultimate in irresponsibility.
happening in our lifetime? Ever read the history of the Roman and
Byzantine Empires? How about some of the Popes and the Catholic Church during the Middle Ages? There's enough sin and corruption there to keep you occupied for years to come!
And as Nina said, don't bother
quoting the Bible. Most of us
used to quote it until we were
blue in the face, until we finally
found Christianity to be sadly
lacking in just about everything
except fear, hate, and nonsense.
I actually should correct my original post. Sin and corruption are one and the same. Corruption is simply a form of sin. Apologies. My meaning was that sin is being allowed to reign in the hearts of men.
Hell is not something we should dwell on. But what it does is expose the ugliness of sin. It is sin that will take men there. I wouldn't wish hell on even the most evil person I can think of. There'll be no more Gospel!
Quote
"Jesus said never works with us."
I don't expect to be 'liked' on here. What would work with you would be if I said something to reinforce the position of an unbeliever.
I believe God's Word and you don't, but the Bible defends itself. History proves that.
Quote
"Oh, and sin and curruption you speak of is nothing new on this planet. In essence, there is actually less violence and sin than there was in the middle ages."
'violence and sin'. You made the same mistake I made. You may have a point that there is less violence now (although I doubt it and don't see how we could ever prove it), but I have no doubt the world has never been so sinful as it is today. One reason is that there has never been so many sinners living in it.
Quote
"Education is the key to getting rid of christianity."
Well, you might succeed in getting rid of Christianity, but you'll not solve the sin problem. We already teach our kids in schools that the universe evolved from nothing. Out of nothing came something. Where's the logic in that? And logic is a key element of your argument.
David
Pardon me, Triple H, but "sin" is a concept that depends on a Christian mindset to exist. If there is, hypothetically, no more Christianity, then there is no more Christian mindset, and thus, there is no "sin". Yes, behaving unethically will still exist, because human nature will obviously still exist, because humans and nature exist independently of religious belief.
And besides, "sin", in concept, is only biblegod's opinion of what's "evil", and what's not. No sane, thinking person would claim that biblegod's opinion is intrinsically "right", or else that would mean that biblegod could wake up one day and decide that rape, murder, and stealing are no longer "sins", but "good" things. And of course, that would then mean that Christians would have to conform to biblegod's Newest Testament. Right?
Well?
"How about some of the Popes and the Catholic Church during the Middle Ages?"
The Roman Catholic Church is an apostate religious system which damns the souls of millions, even billions. It denies the sufficiency of Christ's atoning death to save a lost sinner. It's Satan's masterpiece. It twists the truth of Scripture beyond recognition.
Quote
"don't bother quoting the Bible. Most of us used to quote it until we were blue in the face"
There's no point quoting the Bible if you don't understand it.
2 Timothy 2:15 (KJV)
15Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
Boomslang, you just sound like a sinner trying to deny the existence of sin. Well, it doesn't work. Sin is a sad fact.
Quote
"Yes, behaving unethically will still exist, because human nature will obviously still exist,"
i.e. sin will still exist. Human nature is a fallen nature. Man can try and redefine sin as 'unethical' but the problem he has is that he doesn't have an immovable standard on which to base his 'ethics'. Therefore his sinful nature drags the standard down over time until what was previously 'unethical' becomes 'ethical'.
Quote
"because humans and nature exist independently of religious belief."
I agree with this, but they don't exist independently of God.
Quote
"And besides, "sin", in concept, is only biblegod's opinion of what's "evil", and what's not."
God does not have an 'opinion'. God is holy. What God says, is.
Quote
"No sane, thinking person would claim that biblegod's opinion is intrinsically "right", or else that would mean that biblegod could wake up one day and decide that rape, murder, and stealing are no longer "sins", but "good" things."
God does not 'wake up'. God is eternal. God doesn't 'change His mind' so to speak. All we know of God is what He's revealed to us through His Word.
Quote
"And of course, that would then mean that Christians would have to conform to biblegod's Newest Testament."
The Bible is complete.
God bless
John3:17
Prove, prove, prove. Then i will believe.
Prove that the bible is truth and fact. If you know history, which it doesn't seem like you do, then you would know all the things that have been changed and added so you believe the way you do.
Besides, your god must be some kind of jackass for sending most of his creation to hell for being what he created them to be.... human.
See how easy it is to make dogmatic, unsupported assertions?
You BELIEVE all sorts of magical things about your invisible, three-headed, temporarily dead god. You BELIEVE all sorts of myths and legends. You BELIEVE that only the King James version of of your book is magically god-breathed. You BELIEVE.
You don't KNOW anything. You BELIEVE.
Now, could you please present some reason WHY you believe these interesting things?
Boomslang, you just sound like a sinner trying to deny the existence of sin.
I fully believe that that is what I sound like to you. Fantastic. So then, I guess you won't be too shocked to know that you sound just like a brain-washed, judgemental, self-righteous, religious zealot to me. 'Even? Assuming so, can we now get away from opinions, and stick to the facts? Thanks in advance ; )
Triple H continues...Well, it[the denial that "sin" exists] doesn't work.
It works just fine. Watch: I deny there is such a thing as "sin".
...
...
...
See? 'Works great.
As I said, I don't deny that human beings behave unethically, and that I have done so at times. What I deny, is that an invisible self-existing "mind" made two people out of mud, tossed them in a magical garden, told them not to eat a piece of fruit, a talking snake came along, convinced them to eat the fruit, thus, enraging the invisible "mind", who in turn, decided to make the rest of the human race defective, by "birth-right", tagging them all as "sinners", and then scorning them for being something that they cannot help being. Remember, all mortals are "sinners"; "no one is without sin".
To be perfectly clear, I think it's utter bullshit, and is merely a sad attempt by ancient man to explain what he could not explain, while at the same time, attempting to control his fellow man through fear.
Trip'-H asserts...Sin is a sad fact.
Superstition, and its by-product, ignorance, is a sadder fact.
Trip'-H...Man can try and redefine sin....
Well paint me red and call me the debil!... [[[ I ]]] believe that religionists try to redefine human nature! Wow!..'funny how that works, isn't it?
Trip'-H....the problem he[man] has is that he doesn't have an immovable standard on which to base his 'ethics'.
Yes he does; avoid causing unnecessary harm to other human beings is good start.
But I'm talking ethics, where of course, cultural relativity must be taken into account, as well as mental illness. You, on the other hand, are talking a one-size-fits-all, Universal, Objective Morality. That said, is it moral to....
- keep slaves?
- throw rocks at rebellious teens?
- lynch "niggers"?
- kill unbelievers?
- kill people who work on the "Sabbath"?
- kill non-virgins who marry?
- pelt whores with rocks?
- kill "fags" and "dykes"
Of course, I don't have to tell you what book condones all of those things, or who the "author" is. Right?
And BTW, if you throw out the "Old Law", you throw out the "Commandments".
Trip'- H continues...God does not have an 'opinion'. God is holy. What God says, is.
Right, right, of course. So then, that just confirms that you condone, and/or, partake in all the biblically supported activities I just mentioned above. Right? If not, please explain.
Trip'-H....God does not 'wake up'.
I thought "He" rested on the 7th day?..or wait, maybe that was that just a "cat-nap".
Trip'-H....God is eternal.
Maybe. Biblegod, on the other hand, is non-existent.
Trip'-H...God doesn't 'change His mind' so to speak.
Perfect. So again, we have confirmation that all of the previously stated biblically-supported activities are "moral", and in effect. I await your answers to those questions.
All we know of God is what He's revealed to us through His Word.
Yes, yes, of course....and we know "His Word" is true because "God" wrote the bible; and we know "God" is real, because it says so in "His Word". I hope you'll forgive me for not being astounded by that "logic".
trip-H...The Bible is complete..
Yes, complete non-sense.
God does not have an 'opinion'. God is holy. What God says, is
---
Hey oh holy ONE...
I mean, THREE
Could you define what you mean when you say your god is "HOLY"?
How do we recognize "HOLY" when we see it?
What do we measure "HOLY" against or compare it to?
If god could/did change tomorrow, in some drastic fashion, would you still consider him to be "HOLY", just because he's god, or would his changing in such a way, threaten that "HOLY" attribute you render unto him?
If you say a person is great, that is a relative term, used to compare that person to some other person.
If you say a car is great, you are comparing it to another car, yes?
How do you know that the devil (or some other god-like figure) isn't the "HOLY" one and you have it all wrong?
What is your basis of comparison then, for this god being you proclaim to us?
ATF (Who could never understand why xtians claim their "living" god is HOLY, when there is no other real/living god around, to compare this god against)
Quote
"Prove, prove, prove. Then i will believe."
No you won't. You won't believe until you genuinely repent of your sin and trust Christ for your salvation.
'Ye must be born again'. Everyday you see creation yet deny the Creator.
"Besides, your god must be some kind of jackass for sending most of his creation to hell for being what he created them to be.... human."
Read Genesis. You're also overlooking the price God paid to redeem us.
webmdave wrote
"You don't KNOW anything. You BELIEVE."
At least I know one thing. You don't believe.
Quote
"Now, could you please present some reason WHY you believe these interesting things?"
See my response to Jackie above.
Boomslang wrote
Quote
"I guess you won't be too shocked to know that you sound just like a brain-washed, judgemental, self-righteous, religious zealot to me."
We're all brainwashed. Just depends what with. Truth or error. PS I couldn't care less whether we're even or not.
Quote
"It works just fine. Watch: I deny there is such a thing as "sin".
See? 'Works great."
Sin is still there.
"Perfect. So again, we have confirmation that all of the previously stated biblically-supported activities are "moral", and in effect. I await your answers to those questions."
I haven't got time plus nobody has answered my question re logic yet. See earlier post. Suffice to say that as sinners we are worthy only of death and hell. We've rebelled against our very creator. God's mercy allows us to live. These laws (and the way you quoted them is a disgrace)seem merciful in the light of this.
Athiesttoothfairy wrote
"Hey oh holy ONE...
I mean, THREE"
I am not God. My user name simply describes God.
"Could you define what you mean when you say your god is "HOLY"?"
Imagine standing before a being that knows every thing about you. Every thought you ever thought. Where you would just stand speechless awaiting the verdict. That should give you a good idea of what holiness is.
Adam (author of original article) - sorry for hijacking your comment thread.
God bless
David
John3:17
I've just stumbled onto this site and..what a great forum. I hear alot of anger towards religion and I can certainly relate. My backround is typical: grew up in a conservative church and at 18 said "see ya!". What has been interesting is that I am an organist(I love how music fits into a liturgical setting and the musical quality is high, allowing me to play Bach, Franck etc. on a regular basis. And the pay is good!) so I have been in a religious setting most of my life, even if I don't often share the beliefs that I'm exposed to.
But what I've learned all these years is that there are many paths even within Christianity. Traditional Christianity is dying, as it should. The black and white thinkers of the conservative side are, as you have all pointed out, ridiculous. But their message isn't the true meaning of Christianity. Centuries of misdirection have clouded the true intentions of Jesus and his early followers. But even then, as there is an evolution of thought within scripture from Genesis to the Gospels, so does our understanding of truth in whatever field in life continue to evolve. The literalization of myth has, in particular, been the most damaging development in recent years.
The original post mentioned the writings of Joseph Cambell, which I highly recommend. It shows the value of myth. Myth isn't factual but it can be truthful. Myth is a recounting of what it means to be human. And whether you believe in a spiritual aspect of humanity or not, myth also can speak to one's experience with the divine. But of course this can only be objective.
And so now,as an Episcopalian, I find much of what you all write correct, even though we could be considered on "opposing sides". But I have no wish to convert others , I don't believe in a literal hell (as the previous poster pointed out: Gehenna was a garbage dump!), there will be no rapture, and most importantly, there are many paths, whether they be perceived as spiritual or not.
I'm rambling but my point is to just know your "enemy". I read the bible and, more importantly, scholarly books about the history and so context of scripture. What I found is that the enemy is not Christianity itself but the right wing wack jobs who have no interest whatsoever in the true meaning of their faith.
It is also possible to have the same kind of narrow mindedness in criticizing Christianity as the Pat Robertson's of the world possess in representing it. Modern biblical scholarship and reason easily dispel the annoyingly ignorant trappings of traditional Christianity. Time marches on. While many Christians cling to first century thought, there are those of us who have allowed an evolution of thought to occur. Even within Christianity. The seeds are there if one cares to look.
take care
I have also found that the main criticism that goes on here is of the fundamentalist evangelical attitude - which isn't particularly surprising as it's a very vocal and quite common version of Christianity. There is, indeed, liberal thought within some branches of the Christian church.
However I find it difficult to pin down exactly what such liberal thinking people believe. I've been told that "God is a metaphor" and that "God is simply love, no more, no less" by such friends (one of whom is actually a leader of several evangelical churches!) - but then I ask what they base their ideas of God on, and it usually is the Bible and church teaching. It's simply their way of adapting what is taught to what they actually see of life without rejecting the central premise of the existence of God. Maybe it's too threatening for such people to turn round and ask "what if God doesn't exist..."
I struggle to see the evidence to believe in any particular version of God. While I don't understand the mechanics of love or life, I no longer feel a need to define that lack of understanding as "God". It doesn't mean that such a God doesn't exist, but it is far, far away from the illogical and contradictory omniscient, omnipresent, omnibenificent, all-powerful, judgemental monster that the church has created (as the church leader said to me last week!)
So the question I have yet to have answered by liberal Christians is "why do you believe".
Sir holiness... please prove that the bible is devine w/o using the bible. Until you can prove any of this w/o relying on faith then your argument is pointless and I will continue to believe that the world around me as been evolving for billions of years and will continue to evolve. Just because you think a flower is pretty or the stars in the sky give you deep thoughts doesn't prove anything other than you like flowers and looking at stars.
"Prove, prove, prove. Then i will believe."
Triple-H responds...No you won't. You won't believe until you genuinely repent of your sin and trust Christ for your salvation.
In other words, Jackie, you won't believe in "God", until you believe in "God". That is what the above equivocation amounts to. Isn't it remarkable how that works?
Triple-H continues...'Ye must be born again'.
If ye grow up the first time, ye need not be born a second time.
Triple-H continues...Everyday you see creation yet deny the Creator.
Everyday you see "the creation", yet, deny Ahura Mazda.
Jackie wrote: "Besides, your god must be some kind of jackass for sending most of his creation to hell for being what he created them to be.... human."
Triple-H responds...Read Genesis. You're also overlooking the price God paid to redeem us.
Pretty-please, enlighten us once and for all---has "Jesus" paid "the price" for us?..or hasn't he? It seems that you and your ilk cannot make up your minds on this issue(and many others). To me - and I could be out in left field - but it looks an awful lot like "the price" has been paid for Christians, exclusively. If that's the case, then Christians should not bear false witness by misrepresenting it---to do so makes them "sinners", not-to-mention, hypocrites.
In response to Triple-H, Webmdave wrote:
"You don't KNOW anything. You BELIEVE."
Triple-H, responds...At least I know one thing. You don't believe.
That's a brilliant deduction on your part. Okay, if the "one thing" you know is that Webmdave doesn't believe, is this, then, an admission that you don't know much of anything else?(Not that you need to convince me; I want your side of it)
Webmdave asked Triple-H: "Now, could you please present some reason WHY you believe these interesting things?"
Triple-H responds...See my response to Jackie above.
If we review that response, we see that the reason you believe is because... well, it's because you believe. I guess I need to point out that that is a non-answer, and slightly redundant.
In response to Triple-H telling me I sound like "sinner" trying to deny "sin" exists, I said:
"I guess you won't be too shocked to know that you sound just like a brain-washed, judgemental, self-righteous, religious zealot to me."
Triple-H responds...We're all brainwashed. Just depends what with. Truth or error.
Okay, I'll bear that in mind for a later question I have on that topic.
Triple-H...PS I couldn't care less whether we're even or not.
Ditto. However, my follow-up to that was where I asked you if we can stick to the facts, and evidently, you consider as "fact", unceasingly repeating your unsupported opinions. So, I guess the answer to my original question is "no", then?
In regards to "sin" and "ethics", Triple-H previously implied that there exists an Absolute, Objective, Universal "immovable" moral code, and this code comes from the Christian biblegod, as delineated in the "Holy Bible".
Triple-H later added....God doesn't 'change His mind' so to speak.
In response to that statement, I said:
"So again, we have confirmation that all of the previously stated biblically-supported activities are 'moral', and in effect. I await your answers to those questions."
To review, here are those questions:
"is it moral to....
- keep slaves?
- throw rocks at rebellious teens?
- lynch 'niggers'?
- kill unbelievers?
- kill people who work on the 'Sabbath'?
- kill non-virgins who marry?
- pelt whores with rocks?
- kill 'fags' and 'dykes'."
Triple-H, responds...I haven't got time plus nobody has answered my question re logic yet.
Aaah, I see. You've got time to type out a rebuttal that addresses three different people, but yet, you don't have time to type "yes", or "no".(And "no" is even one less key-stroke)
Repeat:
Triple-H, are the above quoted biblically-supported activities "Moral", and in effect? Do you and your biblegod condone them? "Yes", or "no". I want to learn which you are brain-washed with, "Truth or error". Remember your earlier statement?
Triple-H circumvents the issue, with..Suffice to say that as sinners we are worthy only of death and hell.
Yes, yes... you've "established" that much, ad nauseam. A couple of things.....
1) Since we are all "sinners" and only worthy of "death" and "hell", yada, yada...am I correct in that it's impossible avoid "sin"?(yes, it's a trick question)
2) I'd like to be enlightened as to if the following biblically-supported activities are acceptable/ethical punishments for "sinners":
- Stoning rebellious teenagers?
- killing people who earn a living on "the Sabbath"?
- throwing rocks at prostitutes?
- killing non-christians?
If not, why not? If those things are unethical, how did we determine that, without the help of "God"? 'Listening.
Triple-H...We've rebelled against our very creator.
You've rebelled against reality.
God's mercy allows us to live.
More equivocation---"God" only has "mercy" for those who believe in, and accept "God". That is clearly favoritism...i.e.."teacher's pet"(don't give him an apple, though!...yikes!)
Triple-H...These laws (and the way you quoted them is a disgrace)seem merciful in the light of this.
The way I "quoted them" is how an over-zealous religious bigot might quote them. I did it to make a point. BTW, notice the quotations around the undesirable labels.
Notwithstanding, is "lynching a Negro" any more ethical or less painful than "lynching a 'nigger'"? Is throwing rocks at a homosexuals any more ethical or less painful than throwing rocks at a "queer"?? In other words, your attempt at circumventing the point I am/was making, is quite frankly, pathetic.
"I believe God's Word and you don't, but the Bible defends itself. History proves that."
Hey, who the hell asked for your deluded opinions anyway?
Just toddle off back to your
church and worry yourself sick over what the bibble says and quit bothering intelligent people with your drivel.
You said "...nobody has answered my question re logic yet."
Could you please recap those questions, or direct me to them? I quickly scanned through the posts above, and nothing jumped out at me as specifically pertaining to logic. I have quite an interest in logic and I promise that I will attempt to answer any questions you have very directly.
Have a great day.
Why do liberals like myself "believe"? I don't have any sort of theology. Because I don't know. But I do feel that there is a spiritual dimension to being human. And for me, exploring this in part with my church is inspiring to me. I enjoy seeing the continuing process of change in the church as new ideas are continually presented (at least in my congregation)while still being rooted in the traditional quest for what many call "god". No one else need to follow my example.
It's not about answers but being open to the possibility of a higher level of existence in the here and now. Maybe it doesn't exist! But my gut feeling says it does so I remain open but logical.
To the previous poster: I full well know the website I'm on! Which makes the posts here all the more interesting. Thought I could just have a mature conversation is all.
I noticed that you also said "...the Bible defends itself. History proves that."
Would you mind elaborating on that? I'm always curious when people cite historical evidence (or "proof") of the Bible's claims. Often times what they actually mean, when pressed, is something like "I've been told there is overwhelming historical evidence for [fill in the blank] by people I trust, so that must be the case." I'd be curious to hear whether that is roughly how you reached your current opinion, or whether you reached it in some other way.
Be well.
we do not teach kids that we derived from nothing. I am not a scientist but I know that much, there is much cosmic expoloration and there is more than NOTHING out there.
Also, I did make the mistake of say violence and sin instead of corruption and sin, but I do not believe in the bible god sin, so the point is ridiculous.
There is civilization now and you can not tell me that the world is more corrupted than before all those civilized laws and rules we live by. Not the religious kind, the secular kind.
Jackie's got it goin' on, too.
I just wonder if David HHH is sporting a beard right now? Does he carefully check his clothing labels to make sure his fibers aren't mixed? Does he eschew ham, disallowed shellfish and make sure the meat utensils haven't touched any dairy? Does he avoid touching unclean women?
If god never changes, he certainly hasn't changed his mind about any of this stuff. Hey, maybe Jerry Falwell and that Hagee dude have it all wrong on hurricane Katrina and the reasons for god's wrath!
Athiesttoothfairy said:.... "Could you define what you mean when you say your god is "HOLY"?"
YOU replied:....Imagine standing before a being that knows every thing about you. Every thought you ever thought. Where you would just stand speechless awaiting the verdict. That should give you a good idea of what holiness is.
----
Triple H,
So I guess what you are saying, is that ANY god, or even ANY advanced alien, who had the power to retrieve all my life's memories from my brain, would then be classified as "HOLY" in your opinion, yes?
So I guess it really doesn't matter what their opinions are, or what their actions may have been in their own existence, just as long as they have this particular power to dig into my brain, makes them "HOLY", correct?
I guess they would also have to have the power over me, to then reach some "verdict" about what they found inside my brain to, yes?
Well HHH, thanks for clearing up the matter for me on what it takes to become "HOLY" in your humble opinion.
So now I know.... (or NOT).
You: the Bible defends itself. History proves that."
I second Jim Arvo's request for an answer, to how history proves your bible.
I've read quite a bit on this subject, only to discover there is next to no evidence that your jesus ever existed, let alone existed as some great miracle worker, who then died on a cross and became a walking/flying zombie.
Just can't wait to see YOUR evidence of this jesus, along with your secular history accounts for the OT stories of Moses and the Tower of Babble etc. etc..
ATF (Who see's yet another clear case of Blind Faith believing whatever it wishes to)
"I'm always curious when people cite historical evidence (or "proof") of the Bible's claims. Often times what they actually mean, when pressed, is something like "I've been told there is overwhelming historical evidence for [fill in the blank] by people I trust, so that must be the case."
So true so true. Those statements like, "The Bible has been proven to be historically true," usually don't have any checks and balances. Someone says it, another believes it and passes it on.
I ran across this with a coworker. He is very non religious, yet despite his disdain for organized religion he insisted that there are many predictions that have come to pass that were written in the Bible. When I asked him to elaborate, he had nothing. In other words someone told him and he believed it without investigation and continues to regurgitate the empty lines. That's how the perpetuation of the religious myths keep rolling along.
Hey Adam,
I am with you on the spiritual thing in regards to sometimes feeling like one with the universe. It has nary a thing to do with the supernatural. Last year I ran 12 miles in 95 degree heat and it was spiritual. My mind and body were in another zone and it was like the heat wasn't even there.
I really like your post. I'd never really fleshed out this thought, although it has been simmering at the edges of my mind:
It is totally impossible to believe that your fellow brothers and sisters on this planet are going to hell and also be happy yourself at the same time.
I'm really glad you wrote that! I'm not a believer in the supernatural, but I know what you mean about the spiritual side of things.
Nice post! Too bad it got hijacked by some fanatic...
Kati
This is my question re logic
"We already teach our kids in schools that the universe evolved from nothing. Out of nothing came something. Where's the logic in that? And logic is a key element of your argument."
This is not really a question of logic. It's a profoundly empirical question. When one claims that "Nothing comes from nothing", it is stated as a "common sense" observation about the world. Will you admit that the universe could have been otherwise, with rocks and armchairs popping into existence at regular intervals? (Indeed, if you believe in a creator, did she not create something out of nothing?)
But I must add that "common sense" is often wrong when it comes to physics, and indeed it is even wrong in this case (according to current theories, which have a great deal of experimental support). That is, at the atomic scale, something does indeed come from nothing--and it does so all the time. Do a Google search of "vacuum fluctuations" or "virtual particles" and you will discover that "empty" space is actually frothing (almost literally) with particles that wink into existence, then wink out again. This is not a joke.
The "common sense" principle of cause-and-effect also fails at the atomic scale; virtual particles, spontaneous emission, and radioactive decay are examples of "effects" with no cause. (Note: I literally mean NO cause, not UNKNOWN causes.)
So, the answer to your question "Where's the logic in that?" is, "It's not logic, it's empirical science." And the evidence available today suggests that it is indeed true; something can come from nothing.
We already teach our kids in schools that the universe evolved from nothing. Out of nothing came something. Where's the logic in that? And logic is a key element of your argument.
Since this question was previously directed to anyone, I have a few comments, even though Jim already gave a comprehensive response:
Dear Triple-H,
"GOD DID IT!!!" answers NOTHING; it amounts to question-begging.
'Best,
thanks for responding. You sound like you know plenty about science.
Quote
"That is, at the atomic scale, something does indeed come from nothing--and it does so all the time."
But a process would have to exist for the something to come into existence. Therefore the something doesn't come from nothing, it comes from something i.e. the process. Please don't feel obliged to answer this (because I am guilty of hijacking this thread and the original article deserves plenty of comment), but where did the process come from?
And now back to our regular programming...
-- Jim ArVo
Fine.
Devil's(pun) advocate:
The process came from God; the process exists, because GOD DID IT!
So, once more, WHERE did "God" come from?
Thanks in advance.
"HHH, No, you are projecting your own preconceived notions onto nature. Nature hands us this brute fact: particles pop out of nothing, for no reason. The innate intuition we all have about cause-and-effect and the like is honed from eons of interacting with macroscopic matter, where other probabilistic laws prevail. Things at extreme scales, speeds, and temperatures do not obey our intuitive "laws"; get used to it."
and
"This is not really a question of logic. It's a profoundly empirical question. When one claims that "Nothing comes from nothing", it is stated as a "common sense" observation about the world."
and
"The "common sense" principle of cause-and-effect also fails at the atomic scale; virtual particles, spontaneous emission, and radioactive decay are examples of "effects" with no cause. (Note: I literally mean NO cause, not UNKNOWN causes.)"
So what you are saying is that I must throw common sense out the window in order to believe that something came out of nothing. Well, I guess I can't disagree with that.
Boomslang wrote
"So, once more, WHERE did "God" come from?"
That is what's called answering a question with a question. But I'm glad you accept the fact that at least there must be a "God".
I think that about wraps this up.
Apologies again for hijacking
God Bless
John3:17
Holy Roller responds: That is what's called answering a question with a question.
No; it's called calling the Christian out on his implicit attempt to make his supernatural worldview true, by default. In other words, calling him out on a logical fallacy. The science of "science" doesn't satisfy you, so in turn, you spend all of your time blubbering on and on about how unreliable science and its methods are, thinking that "magic", and "ghosts", and the like, will be true, by default. False.
Holy Roller continues...But I'm glad you accept the fact that at least there must be a "God".
I accept no such thing, and will continue to be unaccepting of it, until you and/or your superstitious ilk provide evidence for your respective "gods".
Oh, speaking of evidence, you previously claimed "Morality" is bequeathed to us via your personal favorite flavor of "Holy Ghost"..i.e..the Christian biblegod. In regards to that, I asked you, three times now, a very pointed question on the matter, that at a minimum, only requires a "yes" or "no" answer. Let's review....
Previously, I said:
"I'd like to be enlightened as to if the following biblically-supported activities are acceptable/ethical punishments for 'sinners':
- Stoning rebellious teenagers?
- killing people who earn a living on "the Sabbath"?
- throwing rocks at prostitutes?
- killing non-christians?
Yes, or no? 'Waiting.
Holy Roller...I think that about wraps this up.
Well, it appears that your worldview dead-ends at "I believe". So yes, that would be a wrap.
God 'less!
Reality 1:01
JA to HHH: "I'd be curious to hear whether that [hearsay] is roughly how you reached your current opinion [about the Bible being corroborated by history], or whether you reached it in some other way."
Comments?
Mark 6:6
Here it is friends, and I say this in true love.
Our God is eternal i.e. uncreated, self-existing,all knowing,holy, sinless. Absolutely inescapable. God actually has the 'power of being'. No beginning and no end. God was and always will be 'something'.
But we cannot begin to comprehend God until we start to know Him. We can only get to know Him when we receive spiritual life. The Bible makes this clear.
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
1 Cor 2:14
This spiritual life is only imparted to us when we genuinely repent of our sins and trust Christ for salvation i.e. you must be born again. Christ is the only way to God. (you know all the verses)
The problem with many 'Christians' is they have never been truly born again. They've never truly repented of their sin because deep down in their hearts they WANT sin. They're not willing to die to their own lives. But sin separates us from God.
That's why Christians talk about dying to their old lives. This new birth is the most wonderful thing that can happen to anybody in this world. You then realise what true life is. Many think they have it when they don't or had it when they didn't.
I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
Galatians 2:20
Without spritual life and light all our thoughts and efforts and ideas are dead works. How can somebody know anything when their dead. Walking around in the dark. I mean Jim Arvo is trying to convince me to reject common sense to accept what he wants me to accept!
Now, I've given you truth here as PURE as your ever going to get it. It's up to you what you do with it.
God bless
John 3:17
Whatever it is that you get out of being a religious mynah, you're a prime example of how religion shrinks the mind.
You've done your duty for your goddess. You've earned another star in your crown. Now go shake the dust off your feet. Good minion.
G'bye.
Uncreated: "To deprive of existence; to annihilate."
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/uncreate
HHH, why do you worship a God that has been annihilated, that means your God would no longer exists.
HHH: "...self-existing..."
So, your annihilated God exists as a non-existing entity – amusing.
HHH: "...all knowing..."
If your non-existing God is omniscient, then we are all "fated" to act according to your non-existing God's knowledge.
If your God created the Universe, then humanity is "fated" by the artists' Purpose...
Here is a paradox for you... If your non-existing God is Omniscient, then this of course includes "Self-Omniscience". If your non-existing God is Self-Omniscient, then your God exhibits no Power or ability to "change".
If your non-existing God can't change "anything", then your God lacks the ability to afford humanity; justice, judgment, benevolence, relief from suffering, answers to prayers, rewards for good deeds, salvation, etc.
In short, HHH, if your non-existing God as you claim is all knowing; then you have logically proven to everyone the complete futility of concerning ourselves with your God concept "or" religion.
HHH: "...holy,..."
Further, if your non-existing God is Self-Omniscient, then they are unable to be Holy, as inherently to be Holy suggests something greater or better than what could be, e.g., Non-Holy. A Self-Omniscient God is "fated", there is nothing grand about manifesting Absolute Universal Impotence.
As a matter of fact, logically speaking, if your God is fated, then you are as well... you making a "personal" claim, that a non-existing God, manifesting Absolute Universal Impotence, as being "Holy", is nothing but "your" fated and meaningless utterance.
HHH: "...sinless."
Your non-existing God has no option to be sinful or sinless, if they are Self-Omniscient and Universally "Fated" - for all time - eternally.
HHH: "Absolutely inescapable."
Your non-existing God's Self-Omniscience, which Eternally "Fates" the Universe can't be "escaped". I.e., your non-existing God is Absolute Impotent for Eternity; no escape from such a condition is possible.
HHH: "God actually has the 'power of being'."
So, does a rock which is equally capable of non-existence and impotence.
HHH: "No beginning and no end. God was and always will be 'something'."
Of course, a rock is 'something' as well, and as equally capable of impacting the lives of humanity as your non-existing God.
HHH: "God bless John 3:17"
Malachi 1:3 - "And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.
HHH, non-existing dragons and your non-existing God have something in common, can you figure it out?
Here... watch this YouTube flick; you remind me of someone who really does well on tests...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dAujuqCo7s&feature=email
"I will continue to believe what I believe, and I am not interested in challenging it in any way."
Fair? If so, you exemplify what is so dangerous about religion. If you have no interest in seeing where your assumptions or presuppositions may be wrong, then you have no opportunity to grow and learn. Any errors that you've made are not only permanent, but amplified over time. That is not an enviable position.
Best wishes.
Could I not say that about you, HHH? You wish for me to believe in a fantastic invisible being, which goes squarely against common sense (e.g. the observation that thinking beings are biological organisms that can be detected directly by the senses).
Here is the crucial point: I can cite copious objective and verifiable evidence for my claims that violate common sense. Can you do likewise?
Deuteronomy, Chapter 10
16. "Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart!"
Now this clearly indicates to me that everyone has a penile appendage protruding from their heart and must be circumcised before you can enter the kingdom of heaven.
Have you done this, HHH?
Let me echo the sentiments of Webmdave, D8, and Jim Arvo... plus, I'll go ahead and add a few of my own thoughts, as long as Triple-H's apologetics are getting shredded to infinity and back....
Triple-H...And he marvelled because of their unbelief. Mark 6:6
Observe...
Marvel: 1. One that evokes surprise, admiration, or wonder.
2. Strong surprise; astonishment.
(ref: American Heritage)
Dear obstinate follower of "Christ",
I'm not sure if you'll continue to post, but I'm fairly certain that you'll be back to read the follow-up comments, and that's all the satisfaction I need.
Now, in "Mark", was biblegod admiring their "unbelief"? Or was he astonished by it? Can you get your two brain cells to work in unison long enough to see the problem with either senario? If "he" was admiring their "unbelief", then clearly, your biblegod admires us(thanks "God") If "he" was astonished by their "unbelief", then surely, your biblegod is not "omniscient", because if "he" was "omniscient", he already knows our future choices, and thus, there's zero reason to be "astonished", or "surprised", by anyone's "unbelief"
Triple-H....Here it is friends, and I say this in true love.
Firstly, if you get your concept of "love" from your bible, you have no concept of the word. Two: while I have emotional attachments to the people in my family, people who, when in my youth, brain-washed me with the "family belief"..i.e..Christianity, I can tell you, unquivocately, that I have no such attachment to you, and thus, I'm not your "friend". That said, I view any such attempt at friendship as the equivalent of a drunk transient offering a recovering alcoholic a beer. 'Hope that's clear.
Triple-H asserts....Our God is eternal i.e. uncreated, self-existing, all knowing, holy, sinless. Absolutely inescapable. God actually has the 'power of being'. No beginning and no end. God was and always will be 'something'.
Total, 100%, unsubstantiated opinion. The above is the fallacy of bare assertion, and as far as I'm concerned, it is the psychological equivalent of the dry heaves---you feel like you've got something smart to say, but nothing smart is coming out. Blaaaht.....
Speaking of...But we cannot begin to comprehend God until we start to know Him. We can only get to know Him when we receive spiritual life.
We've already been over this nonsensical abortion of what you attempt to pass off as "logic". Do you seriously not see the blatant circularity in it? Here, I'll attempt to walk you through it, slowly.
You posit the following, the first two explicitly, the third & fourth implicitly follow, forming a circle:
1) We cannot "comprehend" your biblegod until we "know Him"
2) We cannot "know Him" until we receive "spiritual life".
3) We cannot receive "spiritual life", until/unless we "comprehend him".
4) *See "1".
Duh?
Triple-H...The Bible makes this clear.
Yes, "clear", which is why there's upwards of 1,200 denominations/sects/split-offs of the "One Truth".
And while we're on the subject of the bible being "clear", you have, for the forth time, ignored my simple "yes" or "no" question on morality - or in your case, "Morality", with an upper-case "M"(since you support the notion that we get our "immovable" code of ethics from your "Holy" handbook, the "Bible")
Once more, here is that "yes or no" question for you to either answer, or completely ignore:
Triple-H, please tell the class if the following biblically-supported activities are acceptable/ethical punishments for 'sinners':
- Stoning rebellious teenagers?
- killing people who earn a living on "the Sabbath"?
- throwing rocks at prostitutes?
- killing non-christians?
'Waiting.
PS: If you don't respond, I'll take that as an admission that you realize the absurdity of said biblically-supported activities in this day and age, and thus, a further admission that if your biblegod exists, he certainly has no problem "changing", as you unchangingly insist that "He" DOESNT change. Further, since "God" clearly does change, "His Word" is merely opinion, and said opinion is NOT intrinsically "good".
Triple-H...But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
1 Cor 2:14
**Total, 100%, unsubstantiated assertion.
Triple-H...This spiritual life is only imparted to us when we genuinely repent of our sins and trust Christ for salvation i.e. you must be born again. Christ is the only way to God. (you know all the verses)
Triple-H...The problem with many 'Christians' is they have never been truly born again. They've never truly repented of their sin because deep down in their hearts they WANT sin. They're not willing to die to their own lives. But sin separates us from God.
Ditto...see here**
Triple-H...That's why Christians talk about dying to their old lives. This new birth is the most wonderful thing that can happen to anybody in this world. You then realise what true life is. Many think they have it when they don't or had it when they didn't.
Ditto..see here**.
Triple-H...I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
Galatians 2:20
Ditto..see here**
Triple-H..Without spritual life and light all our thoughts and efforts and ideas are dead works. How can somebody know anything when their dead. Walking around in the dark. I mean Jim Arvo is trying to convince me to reject common sense to accept what he wants me to accept!
::yawn::
ditto, see here**
Triple-dufuss...Now, I've given you truth here as PURE as your ever going to get it. It's up to you what you do with it.
And finally, ditto..see here**
God bless
John 3:17
God 'less!
Reality 1:01
Prove the existence of your god without resorting to scripture or personal experience, or apologize immediately for making a completely unsubstantiated assertion.
Oh, and answer Boom's questions regarding:
- Stoning rebellious teenagers?
- killing people who earn a living on "the Sabbath"?
- throwing rocks at prostitutes?
- killing non-christians?
Also waiting.
...crickets.
I remind you that you are of the opinion that sin doesn't exist.
You and Jim Arvo could be good friends.
Proof. Proof. Proof.
Seeing is believing. Right. This is the great philosophy of man and more to the point,this website (which should be renamed antichristian.net).
You forget that I used to think the way you think. It's not God's way though. God swings it around. Believing is seeing. This is the way God has it. Man doesn't like it, but so what?
I believe Christ is returning soon. Can the world go on the way it's going on? Israel is back in the land and the stage is set for Armageddon. You're on the wrong side if you're not on Christs.
Believe, the proof is in the pudding.
John 3:17
I concede that human beings act unethically, use poor judgement, and sometimes do unnecessary harm to others. You insist that to do such things is to "sin"...i.e..to defy the "Will" of a god. Therefore, the burden is yours to substantiate your opinion on that matter. 'Listening.
Trip'-H...Proof. Proof. Proof.
No---' "proof" you don't listen. It's EVIDENCE, EVIDENCE, EVIDENCE. 'Got any?
Trip'-H...Seeing is believing. Right. This is the great philosophy of man and more to the point,this website (which should be renamed antichristian.net).
If the moniker of this site were "antichristian.net", I highly doubt kooks like you would be allowed to post. Notwithstanding, even if the Webmaster changed the name as recommended, that does jack' in providing evidence that Christianity is the One Universal Truth.
Trip'-H...You forget that I used to think the way you think.
I'll wager that you never thought about such things at all, and in fact, you consider/considered your former indifference on the matter as passive "Atheism". That's far different than active Atheism. 'Two different things.
Trip'-H...It's not God's way though. God swings it around. Believing is seeing.
No, "God" doesn't swing jack-shit; it is Christians who "swing things around" to fit their theology. I'm sorry, but the "believing is seeing" axiom is simply an attempt to make subjective beliefs objective. It's the theological equivalent of, "heads I win; tails you lose". In others words, if you "believe" it, you'll see it. If you don't see it?....well, then you never believed it. Is that about right?
If so, let's see how that theory stacks up when applied to other concepts:
If I simply "believe", I'll subsequently "see"...
- Amon Ra?
- Thor?
- Toothfairy?
- Santa?
Trip'-H...Man doesn't like it, but so what?
Man doesn't like reality..so what?
Trip'-H...I believe Christ is returning soon.
Yes "soon". News flash: People have been "believing" that for thousands of years.
Trip'-H...Can the world go on the way it's going on?
No, not if Theists are going to blow themselves up, along with everyone else, over which version of the same "God" is "True".
Trip'-H...Israel is back in the land and the stage is set for Armageddon.
Your brain is a stage, and the stage is set for Indoctrimegeddon
Trip'-H...You're on the wrong side if you're not on Christs.
Reason is always the right side, pal.
You are still here and still sounding like a catholic school boy. Such a finely tuned defense as yours deserves response. You are not making any sense, honey. You sound scared and I feel sorry for you. There is no reality in your proposals. If the world ends, it will be someone just like you that sees to it.
nina