Concerning the matrix, Neo was the chosen one who was freed from the matrix and then went back in to help others. Imagine the poor saps who witnessed what he could do and learned a little bit about his purpose there. They try to tell others but what they teach is misunderstood and changed to serve their own purposes.
Or imagine those who through some internal experience get some inkling of the matrix and try to figure out what it all means? They try to express their experience to others but they really can’t. Lot’s of potential analogy there. I like it.
Whether you buy it or not is internal to you. But I think, as has been said (Voyager?), we act as if our senses were giving us information about an external reality (even insane people do it) and that is what matters to others with whom we are in contact.
I think I agree with this. If you accept the proposition that there is a next world and that accepting Christ assures you eternal bliss in that world, you would have no hesitation in jumping off the cliff. It might be that the logic of that position is why Christian religions have a prohibition agains suicide. If you accept Christ as your Savior and the next world is so wonderful who wouldn’t rush to get there?
I think that most of the people on this board accept that there is a large variety of Christians, from hateful zealots, to sincere wonderful intelligent people.
Disprove what exactly? That it exists? That it is an amazing ancient document?
I’ve gotten a lot out of the Bible and the teachings of Jesus. I used to see it as “The Word of God” I no longer do. It is valuble and unique, but no more holy than any other book. It might interest you to discover that the life altering teachings in the Bible can be found in other religions, some of them older than the New Testament. For example Buddha taught many of the same things that Jesus taught about 600 years BC.
I have to wonder about your sources. I find that Christians often get there official info from pro Christian sources. That doesn’t mean they are completly wrong but it’s a pretty biased view. If you want intellectual honesty then look at scholastic work that isn’t out to agree with you and see what you think. Consider honest opposing arguements and see what happens.
I’m not talking about belief in God. I am a believer myself. I think belief in God requires a commitment to the truth and an effort to discern the truth from all the tradition and myth.
For having over 3000 posts and the intelligence you have, I would think you would not have to resort to insults. I am also trying to find the facts just as you are. I have actually never had anyone that could point me to any concrete examples of why the bible is false. Could you please show me your source for how camels were not domesticated until 1000 BCE. I have seen counter arguments but I would like to see your findings as well. Just like you said I must check the motives of the writer, I must also think about other peoples motives. I do not know what type of person anyone on here is. I also know that people have different motives for what they say on here and I can only know for sure my own motives. I am fully aware that I do not have all the answers and that is the reason why I am on a message board such as this. Its the reason why we are all here. I am simply looking for reasons why we should believe in whatever it is we believe in.
Thank you for your reply. The reason I am looking at a board like this is to see the opposing views. I have always listened to opposing views that didnt have much credibility in my everyday “real” life. This message board is really a different thing where everyone seems to love thinking which is why I am drawn to it. Like I said, I have never really heard what I would consider scientifically good arguments and thats what I am hoping to learn from being here. I was not raised with any religion in my family and have never even really had rules. From my experience, it has been harder to believe in God because of the relationship than to not believe in God. Just like its easier to not stay with one person the rest of your life. This is why I am hesitant towards other peoples opinions because I know how easily we can take the easy way out. Yes, I am confident we can all agree that its hard to decipher peoples true reason for what they do. It just blows my mind that people can say that all the things around us were just totally random and after this it all ends. No reason for any of it. Scientifically speaking its probably the dumbest thing I could even think of.
Whatever information you get you must process it yourself and it’s good that you are cautious. It’s like trying to put a complex puzzle together and only seeing fragmented portions of the big picture. You and I will experience different things and come to different conclusions. That’s to be expected. When I do my own studying I try to discern the overall tone of what I’m reading. I look for a commitment to the truth to be stronger than the desire to “prove my conclusion” by the author. It isn’t easy. I’ve read several things that seem pretty convincing by themselves only to discover through further study that the author really cherry picked his info. Because of my reverence for the teachings of Christ I expect those who use his name freely to be diligently honest. I have found this is not the case.
I appreciate and respect those, like yourself, that continue to look for answers.
There are a few folks on this board who are extremely knowledgable about the Bible and it’s history. If they participte you’ll find it pretty informative and challenging. I agree with Voyager that ancient historians cannot be looked at the same way we look at historians now. I’ve read some of the people you mentioned and thier passing reference to Jesus could easily be them repeating a commonly accpeted story. It’s not conclusive either way.
I think belief in God is an internal thing. For myself it’s certain startling experiences that form the foundation for my belief that there is a higher power. I understand people having a deep seated sense that God is. Some of it is just emotional. Scientifically we just aren’t there yet, so I don’t understand your comment about science.
I think thats the point. Take for example a question. Any question. Say why is the shirt I am wearing grey? You could say its because a company did a survey and found out what color shirts would sell the best and made x number of grey shirts. You then ask why did they do a survey? Well to analyze people. Why did they analyze people? To find out how our brain works. Why does our brain work? And no matter how many answers you come up with, it will never end. You could have also taken a different perspective and said our eyes perceive the color grey and then answer why our eyes see it and keep going but that would also never end. The point is that no matter how intelligent we are, we will never find an answer. Its a perfect design. It doesnt matter if you are incredibly smart or incredibly dumb. It doesn matter if you’re white, black, or blue. You have an equal shot at understanding it. I have looked at countless threads on the subject and nothing really changes. I dont think the argument is really whether we believe in God. I think it’s whether we think life has meaning. I choose a life of meaning. Some choose a meaningless life.
What would convince you that a phenomenon has been explained? Surely some things have a cast-iron natural explanation, such as germs and disease, planetary motion or the fossil record?
Atheists can choose a life with meaning also. A natural explanation (which is not a random explanation) is not necessarily meaningless.
I meant that certain specific things are inconclusive. Looking honestly and logically at the evidence certainly gives us clear indications. I have several good friends and family members who cling to certain beliefs that I feel are clearly false when looking at the available evidence. How do we equate clinging to these beliefs such as “God wrote the Bible” with worshiping a God of truth and Jesus who said “the truth will set you free” when there’s mountains of evidence to indicate that’s not even logical?
As to a life with meaning. I hope you’re not hinting that those who don’t believe in God can’t have a meaningful life. If so you have too little experience with atheists and are laboring under a gross misunderstanding.
Well first off I just want to make it clear that looking at the evidence honestly and logically is of coarse one of the greatest things we can do. My point was that no matter who you are, you are putting your faith in something. An atheist puts his faith in that life after this ceases to exist (<as an example of what one atheist might believe.) I am not really comprehending how you talk about how “the truth will set you free” and say there is all this evidence to indicate that’s not even logical. Could you please explain what you are referring to? Sin, whether you believe in God or not, holds people down and causes negative consequences. Without it, one is set free.
I was not saying that if you are an atheist that you cannot have a life of meaning. I very well know that there are many atheists who are great parents for instance or have huge meaning in their life. I do have to admit that the atheists that I have met do not have qualities of a person that I admire. That doesnt mean that I apply that thinking to every atheist. Obviously that would be like saying because one black person is bad that they are all bad. Not very good logic since every person is different. If you dont believe in God your entire life is going to be completely different. Being made in Gods image as a good example would mean we are worth the world. Not believing that would lead one to believe that they are not as worthwhile.
Faith is an assertion that something exists with no or contrary evidence. There is no evidence of an afterlife, and quite a lot against. Disbelief in an afterlife is not a statement of faith; it’s fairly obvious. It’s believing otherwise that takes faith.
How can sin have consequences if it doesn’t exist ? Evil, yes, but a "sin"is a crime against a god; no god means no sin.
Hardly. Believing you are “made in God’s image” means you can claim other people aren’t; then you can kill/torture/rape/oppress them without guilt. After all, they’re less than human, or they’d look like you, right ?
Since when has religion made people more moral or compassionate ? As a rule, it’s encouraged, excused and ordered incredible cruelty and ruthlessness.
Faith is an assertion that something exists with no or contrary evidence. There is no evidence that we cease to exist when we die. This is faith in something you cannot see. The fact that we cease to exist doesnt change that fact that you are believing in something you cannot see. My statement still holds. Sin, or evil as you like to call it, will still have negative consequences.
I agree with what you are saying on the basis of not believing in God. Of coarse if sin is defined as going against God and you dont believe in God, then there is no sin. Sin, or evil as you like to call it, still causes negative consequences.
Please. We are talking about true christians. This means having a relationship with Christ and following his teachings. Noone that actually follows Christs teachings is going to kill/torture/rape/oppress since he obviously speaks out against those things. You are referring to religious people who construe anything they can to further themselves. There is no denying that Christs teachings have a positive effect on the world. Christ is about giving up things to help other people.
This is shifting the burden of proof. The argument that there is life after death relies on the assertion that there is an undetectable something called a “soul” that continues on after all evidence of physical life disappears.
The claim that the sould goes on in another world is meaningless unless you prove that there is a soul.
You’re wrong. Among other things, the fact that brain damage damages people’s minds and that drugs affect them is evidence against an afterlife. All the evidence we have says the mind comes from the brain, and if the brain dies so does the mind. There is no evidence for an afterlife; it’s all faith.
You don’t get to disqualilfy people as Christian just because they make you look bad. Christ does talk about killing those who disagree; it’s not quoted much because it makes his unpleasant nature too obvious. The idea that Christianity has ever stood for much beyond tyranny and mass murder is incorrect; you can try to pervert it into a benevolent religion, but you’ll fail. And yes, I definately deny that Christ’s teachings have had a positive effect; I consider Christianity to be one of history’s single greatest evils.
Well, my source was Unearhing the Bible, the book. However it appears that they were wrong, since I found a page from the Carnegie Museum in Pittsburg giving an earlier date. It seems to be a matter of controversy, but I’ll go with the museum.
Do you agree that the accuracy of Biblical transcription is no evidence of its correctness? That would be a start.
The serious errors in the Bible begin with the Genesis story. Do you believe this is absolutely correct? No reason to go into it if you don’t.
If I claim to be atheist but really believe in Christ and God, am I still an atheist? Of coarse not. Anyone can further themselves by using millions of different means. Christs unpleasant nature? You do know Christ was perfect? Your statement implies that you believe that Christ lived.
Please share the reasons why you believe christianity is one of histories single greatest evils.
If you meant correctness as in truthfulness then yes, I agree that the accuracy of the Biblical transcription is no evidence of its truthfulness.
To be completely honest, I do not know what I believe about the beginning and end of the Bible. I believe that what was written back then, is 95 percent the same as what we are reading today. I know myself to be a very realistic person and cannot say without doing more research into the beginning and end of the bible as to what I believe about it. That is what I am in the process of reasearching. However, I know Christ and believe all the teachings of the beginning of the new testament. I know fully well that a non-believer has a hard time with that since they do not know what it means to know Christ. If you would have asked me two years ago what it meant I would have thought the exact same thing a lot of people think. The thing is that I know how realistic I am and I just cannot deny Christ. I have too much proof. Just like I have more proof saying there is a God vs. matter come out of nowhere.
Just as an aside, I think I know most of the errors you are referring to in Genesis. I found a site that tried to show contradictions of the bible but really took quite a few things out of context.
The part I bolded pretty much sums up your arguement. You obviously have some pretty strong feelings about religion in general and Christianity specifically.
It seems a little ridiculous to claim that Christs teachings have had no positive effect. Feeding the hungry. Helping the poor. What about Martin Luther King? Was Civil Rights a positive effect? You might argue {and have if I remember correctly}
that the negatives of Christianity out weigh the positive but to claim no positive effect is just ludicrous.