Might I ask; what was it your Pastor said to help convince you? Do you think that without his aid you would have remained as you were?
Out of interest, and I apologise if by asking I trouble you, but what is your current understanding of why someone who hasn’t heard the Gospel is doomed? I’m not sure personally it makes sense for those who don’t know to be considered bad - it’s sort of like expecting someone to play by the rules without telling them what the rules or punishment for breaking them are. To be good, if it requires a confessing of sins, requires first that we know what things are sins and whether we’re comitting them or not.
I have to truthfully answer that with “FAITH”, and the 10 commandments.
Then their is the Jewish faith (orthodox), To me they bring much creditability to Christianity. From my perspective on it they were looking for a King to lead them out from under Roman control. This King didn’t live up to their expectations and therefore Jesus isn’t recognized by them as the Lord.
But what happened was so much greater than any battle(s) could have ever accomplished.
For so much of the Bible is just proof of how predictably wicked man is. Time after time man failed to follow God. And it is still happening today, But we have Grace now(The New Covenant), and a symbol, (as that is what the basis of some other religions are based on) and that symbol is the “Cross”. yes an ugly stick!
Look at Exodus chapter 32, The Golden Calf. Could that be where hinduism started? I am sure hindus would differ, But I think the Bible makes it quite clear.
But you can’t really argue by faith. So, you have faith. That doesn’t mean what you have faith in is actually true. After all, Hindus, Muslims, and members of every other religion have faith that they’re right. Why is your faith better than theirs?
Considering that Hinduism and the traditions it evolved from started many hundreds of years before the Bible was written, let alone before the events of Exodus, let alone quite a way away from that particular region, I rather doubt that it is.
And there’s quite a lot to Hinduism besides thoughts on cows - that’s kind of like me looking at a priest and suggesting Christianity must have been based on wearing white collars.
That was not something I was taught. I made an assumption, as I am very Ignorant about other beliefs. But why would it be so hard to precieve other beliefs could come from a like situation? “I believe in God” therefore I believe he created the universe. How could a believer not? How could I give any credit to any other belief?
Being God is the Father of Christ(ianity), I am A Believer in The Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
I think the problem is that while it does make sense for you to assume that beliefs that disagree with yours are likely to be wrong, in this case you made a specific claim that Hinduism was created based on a particular part of the Bible. That you can assume that other beliefs are incorrect doesn’t necessarily mean they are incorrect for the reasons you think.
Moreover, you suggested the idea that Hinduism came from a particular part of the Bible was “quite clear”. That it cannot have been so (though certainly it may still be incorrect overall) suggests either that your inference was correct but that the Bible itself is flawed, thus the Bible should not be taken as a 100% accurate source, or the Bible is correct but your interpretation was flawed, in which case your interpretations cannot be taken as a 100% accurate source.
I was hardly speaking in a legal sense, but an emotional one. Christianity disapproves of any pleasure that does not involve the desire to inflict suffering on others. Sex is Bad to them, because it runs the risk of making other people happy. You aren’t supposed to make people happy; you are supposed to go through life hating yourself as a sinner, hating everyone else as a sinner, despising the world in general and looking forward to the afterlife as all that matters.
No harm at all; it’s just fantasy. Morality doesn’t come into it until actions do.
And why not, if there’s no harm ? They also don’t want to be told to commit evil by your demon-god. The vast majority of people are morally superior to your God; it’s better for them to control themselves.
In other words, nothing.
The Bible isn’t proof of anything. Is The Lord of the Rings proof that Sauron is out to get us ?
And yes, people have often “failed to follow God”; that’s why human progress has been possible. Reality is much more useful than God.
An instrument of torture and death; a fitting symbol for a religion so evil.
That IS a core value of religion. You are supposed to rely on faith, indoctrination and revelation, not knowledge or thought.
So, you actively avoid learning anything that might disturb your faith? What if some other worldview gets the facts more correct than yours? Will you reject the evidence of your eyes because of your faith? Did your pastor tell you Einstein believed in God? How do you feel about being wrong?
If you actually read the Bible, really read it in an accurate translation, you’ll see that the Messianic prophecies are very clear, and have nothing to do with Jesus. But you’re happy to ignore any part of God’s word that is inconvenient.
Are you aware of the evidence against Adam and Eve, and the Flood, and even the Exodus? Do you even care?
And to get back to the theme of this thread, ignoring evidence because of preconceived ideas can easily lead to immorality. How do you think bigotry works? People of class X are all stupid and lazy, and I’m not going to look at any counterexamples.
That’s a good point, Voyager. Religion also lends itself very readily to being twisted by people not meaning well to set up an us versus them mentality. For example, the story of Ham, who, looking upon his father Noah’s nakedness, was cursed to be a hewer of wood and a drawer of water, was somehow magically associated with sub-Saharan Africans by Christians in order to justify the practice of slavery in the pre-Civil War south. There was no reason to associate Ham with Africans except to find a reason for treating them as slaves, and make it OK within Christianity. In fact, to make it not only OK, but right, holy to own slaves. Fulfilling a duty. Religion can serve that kind of function, and in that sense, it can act as a deterent to morality rather than as an aid.
You must think for yourself, rather than just accept what is told to you, gbro. Not everyone who calls him or herself a Christian or ever has done so means well. Most do and did, but by no means all. Some doctrines remain out of inertia. Others are created out of self-interest.
It’s nice to see how atheists try to deflect criticism by simply escaping the question or its consequences.
If you talk about murders commited by atheist governments they say, “No, they are not atheist, they are reiligious because of the leader figure”. So, basically, whenever two or more atheists get together, form a group with rules, and then start killing people, it doesn’t count.
There are no reliable statistics, none; and atheists don’t accept that life is more complicated than religious/ not-religious.
The caricature of religious people waking up every day ready to commit atrocities in the name of their god(s) is only that, a caricature. (Some religious people do it, of course, a femtoscopic minority).
All the bad things a person that claims to be religious “count” the same even if they were knowingly done against their own stated beliefs.
“Public” atheism is relatively new in western society. Figuring out how religious a guy who died 1000 years ago was is difficult at best.
prleone said that this was his only chance to do good. What is that **good ** he’s talking about? I guess he means " things I like", for good and evil are not real entities for an atheist to believe in. Atheist like to hide in “societies work better if you don’t kill”, it doesn’t mean it’s good, it is convenient. An atheist eating an apple or raping a baby or giving to charity is engaging in morally neutral activities he may find pleasurable or not and that the society where he lives may find acceptable or not
Since prleone’s taking Hitler’s words as true(c.f. he’s Mein Kampf reference), he didn’t kill Jews (and christians, gypsies, gays, etc.) because he was evil, he did it because he was helping Germany and Germans.
SDMB atheists don’t even engage in the idea that religion may be unable to repress innate evil/crap in our heads rather than creating it.
Religious people don’t **need ** god(s) to tell them what’s good, at least not in the meaning it is usually intended here. A doctor tells me I have cancer, I don’t need him to tell me I feel sick nor did he give me the cancer, he explains and clarifies, that’s what God does. The idea that atheists form their consciences in a vacuum is wrong. In western societies, at least, Christianity has been such apowerful force that even those who actively oppose it may be using categories like good or evil that are - ultimately- Christian.
Jesus may have beed a deluded Galilean carpenter with an equally delude posse of fishermen, but that does not have any impact on the discussion.0.
Because they didn’t kill people because of atheism. They killed because they belonged to groups that demanded killing. Atheism doesn’t demand or command or condemn anything at all; it can’t motivate anyone to do anything. Religion on the other hand; religion demands all sorts of things, and condemns all sorts of things. Not at all the same.
No, that’s the attitude that the religious have. The attitude that anything, anything whatsoever is better than not believing. That it’s better to kill for Kali than live peacefully without faith.
Nonsense; millions do, directly or indirectly. Not just the ones that pick up guns; the ones that lie about condoms, the ones that looked the other way and dragged their feet on AIDS, hoping to kill as many gays as possible; the ones that terrorize their own children or drive them to suicide for being gay; the ones that cheat and defraud in business because God says that anything is justified for profit; the ones that despoil the environment because the Rapture is coming; the ones that supported the war against Iraq because of Biblical prophecy. and on, and on, and on.
Of course; the word of the religious is worthless, their principles nonexistent. Of course they will go against their stated beliefs, as long as they can ram their religion down someone’s throat, or profit in some fashion, or hurt some “sinners”. That’s what happens when your “morality” is based on a self indulgent delusion.
And why isn’t “society works better” and “people are happier” a good enough way to define “good” ? And how does that make it worse than religion, or even as bad as religion, which doesn’t care if it’s good for society and is actively hostile to happiness ?
Because it DOES create evil. And because it’s insane, and can’t do anything but harm save by luck. And because the religious DO behave worse.
That’s not what the religious tend to say. It’s the religious who claim that people need gods to keep them in line, not the atheists.
Yes; Christian values like hating unbelievers and outsiders, disdain for human life, a hatred of pleasure, a lack of concern for the future, an admiration of death and suffering, utter ruthlessness, the admiration of willful ignorance and stupidity, and so on. One of the major reasons that America is so unethical and irrational is because it is so heavily corrupted by Christianity. It’s been a powerful force all right - an evil one.
As for the positive values you no doubt meant to hand credit to Christianity for ( religion is big on stealing credit for things ); to paraphrase a line said about Freud, where Christianity is correct or good, it’s not original; and where original, it’s either wrong and evil. It didn’t invent morality, or mercy, or laws against murder, or any of the things it likes to claim credit for. It’s parasitic at best.
Since the believers keep trying to base their arguments on the myths being right, yes it does have an impact.
The thing that puzzles me is why a Supreme Being who knew the future and all things, created beings, like Humans and devils, knew they would be bad but then punished them because He created them with flaws. If a car maker makes a bad product he is at fault, not the car.
Aji, unless you consider number and quality of life as a good, then any system of morality you judge by is entirely self-contained; that is, it is entirely arbitrary rules set by and followed by a community. There’s nothing wrong with that, but it’s hardly fair to call non-particpants in that community immoral.
Those things you dismiss as a convenience are the rules that pretty much all religions, and atheists, share - don’t steal, don’t kill, don’t lie, don’t rape. (These may all be permitted under certain circumstances, but you don’t run around doing it randomly in your community). They are all considered part of morality. To most atheists, they are considered the lion’s share of morality, along with the further refinements of kindness, consideration, not causing pain, etc.
To various religions, there are additional rules that those communities believe are mandated by their god and must be followed, but that do not actually contribute to the quality of life or the number of people who can survive. Most often, these seem to be in connection with sex, but they can have to do with diet or ritual observance, or flags, or any number of other things. These rituals, these rules for living are detailed in books of received wisdom, such as the bible, the koran, etc. which are divinely inspired. Because of this, not the leaders, I include Communism and Fascism in with Judaism, Christianity and Islam: each has had its book or books of received wisdom, each has had its prophets to which it returned in times of confusion and stress, each has had its rules for living that told its practioners how to better live their lives, each to a varying degree has sought to convert others to its beliefs or to eliminate the non-believers.
But these rules are not actually universal rules, and you should be aware of that. They are in fact arbitrary, and are not even enforced uniformly. The same part of the bible that condemns homosexuality also condemns blending cotton and linen, but you don’t hear much about that from the pulpit, do you? That same part tells us that pigs are unclean, but most Christians eat pork.
It is silly to condemn as immoral people who are not following your rules for morality. That’s like saying someone is playing a bad game of Canasta when they’re actually playing Bridge. Judge us on the rules we agree on (I listed them above, in my second paragraph); I think you’ll find we stack up about even there. People are people. Just about everyone is corruptible if desperate enough (or the price is high enough), and some have considerably lower standards that way than others. The more you do it, the easier it gets, I suspect. For most, I’m guessing whether or not they believe in a god doesn’t enter into it until later, when their conscience really gets a chance to catch up. But I don’t know, because I’m not religious. I just have principles, and so far, they’re working pretty well. THey cost me several thousand dollars this month alone, and I am pretty desperate financially.
