Dear Atheists, Questions From A "believer"

Great Debates
141

Blowero, Point taken. So nothing is impossible, but deemed very unlikely by no objective evidence. So something that you completely believe today can be wrong tomorrow? Okay, I do realize that science is a process, not an absolute. I’m not disagreeing there. I’m not disagreeing with anything you wrote. Darn, where’s the fun in that. IWLN

Barry, But those verified results could turn out to be wrong? Whenever we think we have gained a great amount of intelligence, we need to look back and remember we’re not the first to think so and in a thousand years, your great-grandfather times 40 or so will think we were naive idiots. Don’t ever lose some humility. We still have a lot to learn. Lots of problems to solve.

Voyager, My step-daughters feels that there is too much information missing (markers?). Wants to know why there aren’t chimps in closer, various stages to man, etc. Doesn’t disbelieve it, but from what she’s learned is just not ready to call anybody “uncle”. I don’t know “how” God created man, so this is not a religious issue to me. It’s just confusing that one person seems to think it is “proven”, the next says no.

Ammo52, I don’t have a problem challenging the Bible or disagreeing with a religion, just means I have a brain and I know a book written and interpreted by men isn’t likely to be infallible. Same with a religion. Doesn’t nullify God or prove him for that matter. I just don’t see science or God as an either or choice. About that anvil. I tried 3 times to drop it on my foot. It kept missing. Didn’t see God’s hand snatching it away, so I must have some instinctual information “hard-wired” in. Or maybe God gave me a brain and expected me to use it. I have a lot of faith that if I make poor choices, God’s not going to stand in the way of a learning experience. I told my kids no, when they tried to touch the stove and if they persisted, let them learn why on their own. Now you try dropping the anvil on your foot.:slight_smile:

On a side note. What’s with the invisible pink unicorn that seems to be a “pet” example. I’ve heard so much about it, maybe it does exist? :smiley:

142

What college is your step-daughter going to? I’m in the process of looking for colleges for my younger daughter, and I don’t think I want to send her there. :slight_smile:

I’d have to look up when human ancestors diverged from chimps, but I believe it was between 2 and 5 million years ago. Since then we have been diverging - chimps have been evolving also. There is no reason to think there would be intermediate species existing today - as new species arose, they out competed existing ones, and the old ones went extinct, just like the Neanderthals. We have some fossils of the transition species, but not many, since we did not live in that good place for fossilization, and because there were not many of our ancestors, and they seem not to have spread too widely - until relatively recently.

I can understand why someone who needs to believe in Adam and Eve have a problem with human evolution, but not anyone else. No one can show that a god didn’t invisibly interfere in our evolution, after all.

The IPU has been around five or six years at least. It came from people saying that there is no more evidence for god than there is for an IPU, the point being that you need to think about why you don’t believe in an IPU to understand why atheists don’t believe in your god.

A special bonus is when people ask how can something be invisible and pink at the same time - while believing in the trinity!

143

I am sure these have been answered many many times, but I would like to add my own answers

1. What is the harm in believing in God (pick a God, any God) if it gives the believer comfort. Do you think it’s right to try and convince them that their comfort is a sham? Do you think it implies, gullibility, less intelligence or less growth?

I don’t think there is any harm in believing in God for the sake of happiness. I believe there is harm in believing in God if it makes you want to fly a plane into a skyscraper. I also believe not believing in god and believing that our morality comes from within is a nice way to live
2. How do you explain, not just the origin of man, but the origin of all. What was before that. I realize you don’t have the answer to that and you only really believe what is proved, so I guess I’m asking for your best guess scenario. You can give me the short version. Real short.

Before the Big bang? I haven’t a clue. Nor have I a clue what is beyond the universe or the concept of infinity. But I find the ‘logic’ of choosing to believe a ‘story’ because you can’t comprehend something is illogical (“God must exist because otherwise how do you explain what there was before time began?” I am sure that is paraphrased, but it is an illogical rationale)
Even if I was religious I’d still wonder things like - Who created god? Doesn’t that prove that religion is just as uncomprehendable as things like infinity and what there was before time.

4. When you look into your children’s eyes, does it ever cross your mind that they’re just going to be dust in a few decades. Does all of that lost brightness, joy, potential, just gone, seem sad or just matter of fact or doesn’t it cross your mind?

I don’t have any children. But when I look into my nieces eyes it doesn’t cross my mind that they will be dead in about 7 or 8 decades. I am emotionlessly aware of this fact. I know we are all going to die one day, but I don’t fear death. After death there will be no ‘me’ to suffer it.

5. Not really going to go here, just barely. Doesn’t there being no life after this one make abortion even more horrible, since this little person’s one chance for life is being snuffed. Or does it matter?
Are you assuming all atheists are pro-abortion? I am not pro-abortion. I believe very very strongly that life is precious.

6. Does an atheist ever wish God were true, provable?

I personally would like to believe there is an all powerful God that looks after us, and is not authoratitive, like a magic dictator as some fundementalists like to think he is.

7. When you’re in the depths of sorrow or pain, with no one to pray to or hold you up; what do you do?

Percivere, wait it out, endure.

8. I realize there are a lot of people out here hedging their bets and saying they believe in God and it has about the same meaning as I believe in eating right. For the people you’ve come across who truly do seem to believe, do you see any difference? More at peace? Happier? Or just more irritating?
I am disturbed by a lot of strong believers. Their apparent inability to speak logically scares me. Their seemingly genuine fear of their god saddens me. It feels to me like they are slaves to this imaginary power figure.
9. Have you ever understood why a lot of “believers” talk so weird (almost a Christian version of baby talk) when they’re discussing religion. Okay, I threw that one in for me. Irritates the hell out of me when someone takes on that weird “do you know Jesus” voice. I’ve always wondered why they do it, when it is so likely to clear a room in under a minute.
No
10. When I’ve heard so many universe theories and explanations about time, space and everything having different rules than we understand; why when we say you can’t really apply man’s laws of nature to God does it seem to irritate the non-believer. When so much about the universe is unexplainable, why do you think God should have to be proven or rationalized?

Everything that a person believes in is desired to be proven, otherwise why believe in it?

I don’t understand why we have to come up with reasons for everything, why not just wait until someone has proven something, why do we have to force an explanation? Why not just be happy to be ignorant until the truth is found?

11. Do you ever look around at the beauty of nature, how complex even the function of our bodies are and think, how could this be some unplanned event?

Not at all. I look around and marvel at the beauty of mathematics and science and necesity that resulted in this complex system.

12. Do you think non-believers tend to be more pessimistic? Don’t get your panties into a bundle over that one. I just mean since I believe I have something really awesome to look forward to; I have some of that I get to go to Disneyland feeling. Ceasing to exist just doesn’t have the same ring to it?

I am a non believer and I am not pesimistic. I believe in human nature, human goodness.
For me, the end is something VERY much to look forward to. I get to find out one of those impossible questions. I get to find out who turned out to be right. I get to have a damn good rest!

144

IWLN, With regards to the IPU (Invisible Pink Unicorn) question, I refer you to a chapter in Carl Sagan’s last book before his death, The Demon-Haunted World. This book is a must-have for your collection, well worth the US$10, and should be available in every library if you don’t want to lay out the bux.

The SDMB’s IPU is analogous to Sagon’s invisible dragon that lives in his garage. He’s playing Devil’s Advocate to a skeptic who doesn’t believe there really is a dragon. The skeptic proposes spreading flour on the floor to reveal the dragon’s footprints.

“But this dragon floats on air.”

You propose using an infrared sensor to detect the fire.

“But my invisible dragon’s fire is also heatless.”

So spray-paint the beast to make her visible.

“No good. She’s an incorporeal dragon and the paint won’t stick.”

Sagan says,

I think SDMB references to the IPU really refer to this sort of logic. I can’t prove you don’t have an IPU, but the evidence of its existence may lie largely in the realm of your head. Very true to you, utterly nonsensical to others.

Compare this to almost any religion. See some parallels?

145

The harm is that people can be coerced by a few individuals (the Muslim religious leaders in Iraq releasing politicaly charged religious edicts comes to mind). Or to prevent the advancement of society as is the case of condoms and the catholic church. Of course it is right (I would say fair) to try to convince them it is a sham (in your words). Debate is never bad per se. Many religious people I know fear debate, while many non-believers encourage it. About the last question, yes, no, yes.

Through rational thought. The most beautiful achievement we have reached as a civilization is our body of scientific knowledge about the universe. And the fact that I don’t know something does not lead me to believe in mythical figures when there is no evidence to make it so.

Don’t know what you mean by mixed species. I think it is a fascinating question how something so complex as a human being could evolve from something necessarily simple in ancient times. It seems very likely to me that we have a common background with apes for example. Frankly I don’t pay much atention to creationists. They’re just background noise until they can come up with something better than “the bible says so”.

It seems sad and just a matter of fact (not that I have any children but the same applies to my loved ones).

If I thought any conception was sacred and if I tried really hard to believe in an afterlife and if I didn’t object to your loaded words then yes, I guess it would make it worse. But then does the “little person” automatically go to heaven? It must be a bummer to burn in hell forever without even trying an old fashioned sin or two. Otherwise no.

I wish it was provable either way. I think my idea of a universe guided by a set of universal, fundamental laws is more beautiful than a universe guided by the whim of any God. But beauty does not prove anything. I know it is not a provable argument so I don’t bother with that thought.

When I’m really down, I grieve, I accept that life is not inherently good and I’m not entitled to happiness and then I try to heal.

It depends very much on the person. I must say most religious people I know are bitter people looking for confort but I admit my perception may be skewed. I may only think about it when I notice that person is religious. Others seem to lack courage to go against the establishment. I like it when faith is kept a private thing, not something to be displayed.

Hehe. Same here.

“having different rules than we understand” is a bit convoluted. If you mean understanding with our common-sense, that’s not a significant achievement. Short answer is because God is an atempt to explain the unexplainable with the unexplainable. All that can’t be proven or rationalized is unnecessary or at the very best an hypothesis. I would ask back why are you happy to take for granted something that you cannot apply man’s laws of nature to?

Yes. I don’t question that it was an unplanned, I question how it ocurred.

I honestly don’t know. I have a pessimist streak.

146

LOBSANG, Thanks for your replies. I do think our morality comes from within. We have a choice to be a decent human being regardless of your belief in God. Flying a plane into a building has to do with hate. I did not make a conscious choice to believe in God because I don’t understand the universe. I believe because I feel him, he is obvious to me. The whole, what was there before time began is not a particularly rational train of thought anymore than God is. We know there’s an explanation to the “Universe”, but so far it sounds kind of wacky. God does too. Scuse me while I duck that lightening bolt. I don’t even remotely think that all Atheists are pro-choice. I actually thought it might be just the opposite. Opinion varied, just like it does among “believers”. I have a tough time with a “magic dictator”, just judging from what I feel. I don’t fear God. I am very content to wait for the big answers, while living the best life I can. IWLN

VOYAGER, As someone who believes in Adam and Eve more symbolically than others, I don’t have a problem with evolution. Did the transition species(one would do it) have more (I don’t know the right words) genetic(DNA?) markers between chimps of that day and man a little later. I am having a tough time understanding a lot of it, but it appears that there are still gaps. Yet the next person will tell me no, it’s a proven fact. Seems like we should just say, we’re still working on it.? Aren’t we? And I just can’t feel that IPU yet. He(she?) hasn’t been in my life the way God has. And if he’s anything like God, he can be pink if he damn well wants to be and you better believe it. :smiley:

MUSICAT, Thanks for another recommendation. I vaguely remember reading something of his or watching a documentary. But alas, I only remember it being very interesting. Okay, so the evidence of the IPU aka God’s existence is mainly only in my head. How did it get in so many other heads? Oh, God told me to tell you it offends him when you use the words “God” and “religion” as interchangeable. :smiley: One often doesn’t have much to do with the other. And he said that shirt you’re wearing isn’t your color. Try green. Okay, I’ll quit. :stuck_out_tongue: IWLN

147

PEDRO

  1. If a splinter group claiming any religious or athiest belief did horrible things, would it be the people or the belief that did wrong. I read the Koran, admittedly a long time ago, but do not believe violence in the name of the Muslim faith was advocated. The closest thing I remember was permission to defend themselves against violence. I’m not sure how the edict against condoms affects our advancement either, but since I’m not a big one for letting a religion choose my birth control I think I’ll pass on that one. Debate is never bad as long as both parties are interested in doing so.

  2. The fact that you don’t know something doesn’t make me believe in mythical figures either.:wink:

  3. Not big on traditional creationism either, but not totally into the whole evolution thing either. Still waiting for more info.

  4. Pretty sure an innocent little person (and I admitted to poor choice of words on that one) wouldn’t burn in hell for anything. Don’t buy into the “burn in hell” stuff anyway.

  5. Whim…hmmmm…no comment.

  6. If life is guided by a set of universal fundamental laws, then I realize that as far as our situation, it can be random, i.e. not inherently good, but there should be both sides of the coin too. Why would anyone not be entitled to happiness, or at least as much as they can generate for themselves??? Even as a “believer”, I think this life is random, but since happiness is a state of mind; except under horrendous conditions, it should be attainable to all, at least at times. Did I misunderstand you? None of my business if you don’t choose to elaborate though.

  7. I’ll bet bitter comes in all religions and non-religions.

  8. (Your quote)“I would ask back why are you happy to take for granted something that you cannot apply man’s laws of nature to?”
    Because I don’t have total faith in the ability of man to discern all of nature’s laws. Although, I don’t take God for granted. My belief comes through my experiences and feelings.

Thanks for answering my questions. I know I didn’t answer these questions to your satifaction, but I’m good with it. IWLN

148

No we aren’t. At least not on the essential fact of common descent. There is no scientific disagreement on this point whatsoever. The only dissenting views come from religious proponants not from the scientific community.

We have more than enough transitional fossils to put common descent well into the realm of settled fact. The so-called “gaps” you speak of represent a specious rhetorical strategy called “God of the gaps.”

Basically, no matter how many transitions are found, creationists can always say that another transition needs to be found between those transitions. It’s an infinite regression.

Fossilization is a pretty rare occurrance anyway. It’s really a fluke when it happens at all. Accordingly, we have only a tiny fragment of the entire evolutionary record. It’s like trying to figure out a jigsaw puzzle with 90% of the pieces missing.

149

Hmmm…not sure what your point is here. Mr. O certainly wasn’t talking about disagreeing with religious precepts; he was talking about societal attitudes when he said: “I would just say that accepting the label ‘atheist’ is not the easiest way out, in view of public opinion of atheism, especially in the US.”

I don’t think it is difficult to live with the label “Christian”, because that is what the majority of the U.S. is, and I’d guess at least 95% of those holding political office are (feel free to correct me if you know the actual statistics). I have a hard time identifying with people who claim difficulty in being in the majority.

I have a Christian friend with whom I used to argue a lot about her belief that Christians are “persecuted” in the U.S. - It was all I could do to keep from laughing when she said that. I asked her, since our government is run by Christians, who exactly it was she thought was doing the persecuting. She didn’t really have an answer for that.

I’m not saying it’s any more or less easy to be a Christian, but being a downtrodden minority in the United States is one thing you don’t have to worry about.

150

I’m joining late, so I’ll just skip the questions that have already been well answered.

The harm is that it impedes critical thinking and reduces the drive to find true answers to questions. Without the hindering influence of the church, science would have progressed a lot faster for several centuries.

It doesn’t imply gullibility or less intelligence, but it does imply flawed ability of reason.

I don’t have children, but that’s beside the point. Yes, it does cross my mind. Yes, it’s sad. Death is. So?

Is it horrible every time a woman menstruates? Is it horrible every time I come in a condom?

Not this one.

I’ve never had no one to hold me up.

Never heard this.

Listen carefully. The only reason you even discuss this is that you assume God exists in the first place. There is no evidence of God. None. We have no reason to even try to apply the laws of nature to God, because there’s no evidence that God exists. You’re making a huge assumption and basically asking us to disprove it.

Not in those words, no. I do marvel at the beauty of nature, but I see the wires behind the smoke of mirrors too. Witness the human knee.

Because it freaking works. It gets results. It proves things. It gives us computers so you can ask atheists questions.

So it’s been wrong every now and again. Non-science has never been anything but wrong. As someone said at www.randi.org the other day: “a random psychic would kill to have a track record as good as the meteorologists, the scientists that everyone loves to laugh at”. Science is so far ahead of everyone else that it’s not even funny.

Think carefully about your assumptions. You’re in effect saying that since the best method we have isn’t perfect, we should scrap it in favor of something that’s never shown results or validity. Doesn’t that sound stupid to you?

Not in the sense that I think you mean. When I write artistically, I try not to think too much and write directly from the gut, so to speak. Sure, I suppose I could analyze every great work ever written and try to formulate the empirical laws that control what is great writing, but since the result would be subjective anyway, there’s not much point.

But no, I don’t believe in gut feelings. They’re just wishful thinking, and when they don’t work, you forget it, but when they do work, you tell everybody. That’s just not proper procedure.

151

DC, I really don’t dis-believe evolution, the fact. Some of the conclusions still seem disputed. Think we’re doing pretty good for the amount of time span covered. But I still would like to wait and let a few billion years worth of dust settle some more before I buy the whole package. I am absolutely not a creationist in today’s sense of the word.

BLOWERO, I think my point there was it’s hard for ME to accept the Christian label, although I share some common beliefs, can’t accept others. Not persecuted. Do hate it when someone assumes they know what my beliefs are. MrO was talking generally and I didn’t see it as aimed specifically at me. If it was and I missed it, that’s okay too. Do you think atheists are “downtrodden”?

PRICEGUY,

  1. You’re assuming they haven’t done any critical thinking. Flawed reasoning depends on your concept of reasonable.

  2. Yes death is sad. Foreign concept for me to think it’s the end though and I wondered if it made it more so. I’ve already been given a hard time for this question, so moving on.

  3. Slight difference between that combined spark of life and your condom.

  4. Listen carefully. I believe differently than you do. I’m not asking you to prove anything. You can’t disprove God and neither can I prove him. I caught a lot of flack for that one too. I just wondered why one “not yet explained” was more irritating than a perceived “unexplainable.”

Not saying any beliefs in science should be scrapped, just believe it’s a fallible process and am not as protective of it as you are. I am amazed at what we can do and what we know scientifically, but know we will be considered just a step up from cavemen, scientifically in a few dozen generations. Doesn’t make sense to pat ourselves on the back too hard.

152

Nobody has ever, to my knowledge, managed to produce any kind of rational evidence for the existence of God. No amount of critical thinking or reasoning has produced such. Therefore, I see belief in God as nonrational, which kinda makes any reasoning that brings forth belief in God flawed by default. I’ll welcome correction on this point.

Oh yeah? What?

Why?

I’m not interested in disproving God. Proving a negative is impossible anyway. The burden of proof is on you. You’re making an extraordinary, amazing claim that, if true, would turn everything we know about the universe upside down.

Religious people always fall back on this “I can’t prove, you can’t disprove” shtick. It doesn’t work, because we’re not on equal ground. Your claim has zero evidence, which grants me the right to consider it false until further notice.

Look around you. No matter where you are right now, the fruits and products of science are encapsulating you. The computer you’re reading this on. If you need glasses or contact lenses to read it, thank science for those. The health of your teeth. The house you’re in. The dishwasher humming away. The microwave oven preparing your next meal. All of these and millions of other things.

And you think we shouldn’t be protective of it? Especially when compared to what nonscience can come up with, which is zilch.

Of course science is fallible (although mainly due to the fallibility of the human beings involved). But it’s a lot less fallible than anything else, and it admits its faults, corrects them, and moves on.

153

It is interesting that you have a firm belief in God, yet your beliefs differ from many other religious believers.
Could you summarise your beliefs?
Why are you right and so many others wrong?

And I’m afraid your attitude to evolution (which you admit you don’t understand very well) is moving towards my attitude to religion (and I won the Religious prize at School :cool: ).

Does it matter to you that the Gospels were written 30 - 100 years after Jesus died? (Most if not all of the witnesses were therefore dead.) After all, that is the whole ‘proof’ for Christianity. If Jesus was a man, the whole thing collapses.
By contrast, evolution is based on masses of evidence in many fields (including biology and astronomy).

154

Common descent is “proven” (in a loose, not mathematical sense) because the DNA of closer relatives are more similar than those of further relatives. We don’t have DNA for our direct ancestors, alas. DtC is correct - we have effectively proven common descent of us and chimps from a common ancestor, but we do not know our lineage exactly yet.

Why do so many people believe in god? It might have something to do with the culture they are raised in. Those raised in India have spiritual connections to Krishna, not Jesus. If I had indoctrinated my kids with IPU worship, they’d probably have a deep spiritual connection to the IPU. Why do you think no one in Japan found Jesus before the missionaries came, if god speaks directly to people?

One other thing - you talk of science being fallible as if that should be a shock to us. The major reason science has advanced beyond religion is that it knows it is fallible. Everything done in science involves checking and rechecking conclusions, and all conclusions are tentative. There is no gospel, there are no popes making infallible statements, there is no oath of faith. Newton’s laws were as close to absolute truth as anything is in science, but 100 years ago they were shown to be incomplete and replaced almost overnight.

BTW, the next time you chat with god, ask him if P = NP. Ask him for a proof or a counterexample. He’ll understand. Carl Sagan once wrote that those who claim they’re in contact with UFOs would be a lot more believable if they came back with testable information not yet known. (Some have, and they’ve all been wrong.) I always ask those claiming to talk to god for the same evidence.

155

Of course the leaders are to blame, but religion is their leash on the believers. I find it truly sad how these men can interpret the will of God according to their own political interests at the moment. It’s a perverse effect of faith. This is just one of the many ways I think it harms society. Just on general principles I value independent and critical thought very highly. You could argue that someone thought criticaly and independently about the bible, read the whole thing and came to believe in it. Well then I find that to be extremely poor judgement. The concept of eternal reward and punishment for example is offensive to my inteligence. The practice of confession too. I could go on and on. Does it not seem strangely easy to tie these practices to attempts by the Church to control people during the Middle Ages? I know that you can just whisper the word faith and any argument goes out the window. I accept that, it is a foreign concept to me but then any debate becomes meaningless.

I’d be glad to! I agree that there can’t be happiness without unhappiness. Only fools live in eternal bliss. This goes beyond religion, my feelings on this matter are not directly related to that. But I don’t think happiness is attainable by all. If I were to be crippled tomorrow in an accident, I think the natural reaction would be “why me?!” But I accept that I’m a swell guy and shitty things will still happen to me and there is no point in crying over that. I would grieve, just not over some perceived injustice. It makes it easier to move on I think. It is unfair that some people will never be happy but that is just the way it is. You have a large degree of freedom to live your life (more so for non believers no?) but we are always limited by something. So I try to appreciate the good stuff and make the most of the moment, I never know when it will take a turn for the worse. It came out a bit confusing but I hope you get the idea. I usualy say the universe doesn’t give a damn about me. In the big picture I’m just a tiny part of a not so tiny species of a tiny planet on a galaxy among countless others. I also think it is interesting that a human can have that perception. Of its insignificance on a universal scale. This is opinion, not fact. But if everyone is special, what’s so special about that?

Sure, but I would be really pissed off if I thought I was being punished without knowing the crime.

My point is that I have a lot more faith in the towering achievements of great men and women that came before me to explain what was yet unexplainable than my experiences or feelings. I’m sure a lightning seemed a frightful and mystical thing to civilizations that had no understanding of electricity for example. The huge power of a compact set of equations like Maxwell’s laws amazes me! Its insight written in the language of mathematics marvels me!

It was a pleasure! Thanks for answering my answers. I’m glad that you are willing to give it some thought, even if you don’t agree, instead of just dismissing it immediately. Apologies for any spelling mistakes.

156

This is the killer for me, IWLN, where are the insights of the faithful? The OT is pretty specific in its “cosmology”, apparently this book is of “divine” providence – so how come its description of the physical world is so flaky,… surely God would know about dinosaurs, platechtonics, helio-centricity, evolution and special relativity, but dammit if the whole edifice is devoid of such “insights” – it so abjectly fails to expose that which we know about the “physical” world, why trust this text when it talks of the spiritual world?

In my experience all “sacred” texts fail this test (i.e. “tell us something we don’t know!”), and without a sacred text, why invent a god?

157

GLEE I enjoy your user name. Gives me glee flashbacks every time I read it. Oh, how to summarize my beliefs without someone calling the witness police on me? Okay, I’ll try.

  1. Knowing God has nothing to do with religion. All God based religions have good and bad in them due to their being formed by good and not so good people. All are to some extent influenced by politics, power, greed, competition and arrogance. The world inside a religion has the same faults as the one outside. Since “religion” is a choice, I choose to accept “my opinion” of what’s rational and form my own beliefs.

  2. I believe the Bible is to a large extent man’s perception of his historical events. Part symbolic, part a health guide and part for inspiration. It was written by man, has many different versions and then interpreted from another language. To believe it is infallible is not rational. Just going to give a few examples, don’t have time to write a book. This will just give the traditional theists a chance to think I’m irrational too. :stuck_out_tongue:

A. The creation story is told at a simplistic level that was aimed at what man could understand. It was not meant to be taken literally. It is in no way that I can see at odds with evolution, but to try and explain those concepts would have been impossible. Religions that believe everyone came from Adam and Eve can’t answer the question of all the people Cain came across after he left home (yes that question got me in trouble in Sunday School, just couldn’t let it go). The tree of life was to explain our choices, our freedom to choose, learn by our own experiences, etc.

B. I believe a lot of the old testament is more of a history recap and many of the rules were time appropriate for health and customs. Believe that the “fear of God emphasis” was what worked in those days. There was also some prophecy of things to come, but in hindsight, that is easy to say and not accurate for every sentence. The Bible was not meant to be dissected and a huge meaning attributed to everything it said. Some of it was pure poetic license. And then it’s a choice of which books were included and which were discarded.

C. Jesus. I believe completely in Jesus as a messenger from God, part of his heart. A lot of what went on was supposed to be a symbolic message of love to diffuse the previous “fear me, I am vengeful” message men seemed to have. It was supposed to show us God loved us enough to forgive anything, as long as our hearts were in it. It was to teach us humility and to care for others. It was not a “get out of jail free card.” I do think it says something that so few people were really involved in Jesus’ life at the time and it grew to this extent.

D. Hell. Don’t buy the rings of fire. Do think that we are responsible for our actions and there are consequences, whether in this world or the next. Even if the consequence is just knowing you weren’t all that you could or should be or maybe separation at least for a time from God.

E. The end of this world. That can’t be anything but a symbolic description and men 1900 years ago trying to explain what they were seeing or being told was going to happen. Tough job for people who didn’t know about tanks or helicopters.

F. Death. I part ways big time on some of my feelings about this. I do agree we’re all going to die. I disagree strongly that anyone who hasn’t accepted God with at least his last dying gasp is out. If we all would have had the same life experiences, the same upbringing, same information, same everything; then that might make sense, but not really. A just, loving God takes all things into consideration. I don’t know the facts, but what I know of God makes me sure that death is not the last chance. You may be sent to study hall or something, but everything I’ve seen and felt indicates that the plans for after this life will be fair to everyone. I don’t understand why there is almost a religious smugness to thinking someone knows who’s going to “heaven” or not. I think God has been so over-simplified.

G. I trust God implicitly and get almost irritated at the religions who try and fill in all the blanks with information. We don’t have to know everything now, later will do. That doesn’t mean I don’t have my own thoughts about some of the blanks. I don’t present them as fact though. I believe the old concept of heaven is more in tune with what the writer thought would be cool at that time. I just see it as a place that has different laws of physics and no pain. Not really into harps, so hopefully God will keep that in mind.

H. My husband and I do go to church and do support the church financially, minimally. The bulk of our contributions go to five little old women (part of them nuns) who are working with a hundred families just across the Mexican border. They are helping to feed, clothe and teach them to support themselves and I’m sure the trade off is some religion thrown in. I make it a point to never support a religion or charity that spends too much money on either their image or communication by mail, etc. That’s not about taking care of other people. I vote the way I believe. The only real reason I attend the church I do is that I want to share this part of my husband‘s life. Doesn’t matter whose roof I’m under, only that what I know is true.

Do I consider myself right and others wrong. On some things I don’t really know, on others positively. If you are claiming to know God and your are not good to people in this world, no matter what their beliefs, you’re gonna get busted. Someone who doesn’t believe in God, but lives a good life definitely gets one of the seats closer to the front.

I’m tired, I quit. I know I didn’t explain it well, but have never really tried to pull it all together before and left lots out. In summary: Strong belief in God, ability to reason about the Bible and science, believe who you are is what will count, not what you call yourself and we’ll all find out before this century is over.

158

B]PRICEGUY**

  1. I don’t have a good answer for you, as you know. I can tell you that even with no doubt in God’s existence, most of us who weren’t heavily indoctrinated as children have stepped back and admitted to ourselves that this is not rational, but that doesn’t make it untrue. If 50,000 saw God come down for a quick visit, you would either cry mass hysteria or find a scientific explanation for it. You have to be open to an experience that is beyond your comprehension. Your choice is not to be or it is just impossible for you.

  2. Science should answer this one for you. It has shown us how quickly from day one that spark races to become viable. You should stick to that condom until human life becomes more valuable though.

  3. Because I have been shown more than you have. I have no burden of proof, although I wish I could prove it to you. I do make an amazing claim, but don’t try to force you to believe it. If finding out it was true would turn everything we know upside down, so what. Science is not sacred, it is a process.

When I look around me I do see the fruits and products of science. I am amazed. Science has also added many things to our world which pollute, poison and will eventually destroy it. There’s always good and bad. I just know that what we are and what we can do came from our minds and those were created by God.

159

VOYAGER, Do you want the answer in his language or yours? I’ll ask, but I’ve never asked for proof before and if I get busted, it’s all on your head.:wink: With proof, would you still have a choice to believe?

THE GREAT UNWASHED, So you tell me how you would explain all that to someone who doesn’t know about electricity, science, etc. You’d have a hard time explaining some of that to me. It’s back to my dictionary for me. The Bible doesn’t prove God anyway. Proof would have to be something you experience, not something you read. The Bible only helps some people become more open to the idea of God. The rest is up to God. I didn’t really read the Bible until after I knew God. A book doesn’t prove electricity. It takes a light or a finger in the light socket for personal “revelation”.

160

Ever heard of Occam’s Razor?

Not a clue what you’re trying to say here. Would you mind trying to rephrase it?