Another Fucking Religion Thread

[unknown]

@ unknown
Motivation for good deeds misses the point of Christianity. The good deeds are supposed to be motivated by love. The love is supposed to come from God. The increased level of love in a Christian's life is supposed to come from being influenced by God because you spend time in pursuit of the knowledge of God. That is not to just say you learn what to do by being near God, but that he has an actual influence on you that helps change your outlook so that loving is at least a little more automatic, or maybe just that apathy is less automatic.

Mmmm. I don't think it does. One of the major premises of the Christian religion is that Adam & Eve gave into temptation and ate from the tree of knowledge. They sinned. So God said, "N00bs! You weren't supposed to do that!" And so they were perma-banned from the garden of Eden. They were punished.

It seems to me that Christianity largely is based on fear and guilt. This is why they have the institutions of confession (and if you're hardcore, corporeal punishment). And basically if you don't follow the ten commandments and accept Jesus, you're not getting any cake and presents at the end of the ceremony. Instead, you get to hang out with all the other assholes and see the guy responsible for tempting adam and eve to eat from the tree of knowledge

the fact that it was the tree of Knowledge has always been of some interest to me. What exactly is that implying?

 

[cookiecutter]

Why didn't god ban the snake? It was his fault. This reminds me of this picture.

 

[AchrisK]

For a guy who punishes people with ETERNAL TORTURE for not following his instructions exactly, god is pretty vague and confusing

I don't really see it this way. I think there is enough information to begin to follow his instructions. You're speaking as if you want to follow it, but you can't figure it out. If a person wants to know God, a person can. If a person chooses to reject God, then they can. Do you want to know God? Does any part of you question the possibility of the existence of God? Have you pursued it to see if it is real?

 

[BlackMetalWhiteGuy]

the fact that it was the tree of Knowledge has always been of some interest to me. What exactly is that implying?

If only those assholes could have kept their hands to themselves, maybe we'd know

 

[cookiecutter]

Do you want to know God? Does any part of you question the possibility of the existence of God? Have you pursued it to see if it is real?

I most certainly did question it. I believed in God until I was 16 even though I was not religious. Then I began thinking critically about it and faced with the total lack of evidence I concluded that God did not exist. I think about this subject a lot and have looked at numerous apologetics (mainly Christian). However, since I am equipped with knowledge of logical fallacies and since I understand critical thinking, nothing has convinced me of God's existence. If some evidence was produced tomorrow that showed that God existed, I would definitely believe, since this has nothing to do with a "rejection" of God. You don't reject Odin, you just don't think he exists.

The reason I claimed god's message was confusing was because he has written multiple books that contradict each other, and there are contradictions even within these books. Also, a lot of things God says and does are really awful and disgusting, so how can he be the ultimate author of morality?

 

[Matt]

The Bible was written by man, obviously.

 

[BlackMetalWhiteGuy]

Does any part of you question the possibility of the existence of God?

Yes, that's why we're atheists.

 

[cookiecutter]

The Bible was written by man, obviously.

If religious texts aren't his instructions what are?

 

[Matt]

If religious texts aren't his instructions what are?

The books (Genesis, most of the Testament etc) were probably written by the prophets, not God himself.

Also, you are extremely annoying when it comes to religion discussion. All you do almost every time someone says something is say "there is no evidence of that" etc and bringing up frankly obvious points that have been discussed countless times before. Of course there are numerous contradictions in the bible; of course there is really no factual way to prove the existence of a god. None of this is new.

 

[unknown]

perhaps because some people want concrete evidence and make sure everything is sound and good before they devote their entire lives (and possible afterlives) to an ideology

 

[Matt]

But you have absolutely know basis for this belief. You just believe what you want without a shred of evidence. I can't wrap my head around this type of thought. It is really alien to me.

NO FUCKING SHIT. It is my PERSONAL idea.

I am really glad I am not you. Going soley on the basis of evidence for everything leaves very little room for any sort of imagination.

 

[Matt]

perhaps because some people want concrete evidence and make sure everything is sound and good before they devote their entire lives (and possible afterlives) to an ideology

Ok?

 

[The Heartbreak Kid]

Also, you are extremely annoying.

Thats more like it, man.

 

[Pessimism]

It's nice to see that many monotheists have completely thrown out their poorly translated books theories about the afterlife for more humane versions that other people have come up with so their faith doesn't seem as bad as it actually is. Personal conceptions of God for the win I guess.


And for the love of anything stop bringing Einstein up when you speak of religion.

Einstein defined his religious views in a letter he wrote in response to those who claimed that he worshipped a Judeo-Christian god: "It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."

 

[cookiecutter]

The books (Genesis, most of the Testament etc) were probably written by the prophets, not God himself.

Also, you are extremely annoying when it comes to religion discussion. All you do almost every time someone says something is say "there is no evidence of that" etc and bringing up frankly obvious points that have been discussed countless times before. Of course there are numerous contradictions in the bible; of course there is really no factual way to prove the existence of a god. None of this is new.

Well you people obviously aren't getting it that without evidence it is incredibly irrational to believe something. I am pointing out to you why you are wrong. All you say is "yes I know I am being dumb, but I am not going to change". If you understand all the faults with you belief, how do you still keep it?

perhaps because some people want concrete evidence and make sure everything is sound and good before they devote their entire lives (and possible afterlives) to an ideology

Yes!

NO FUCKING SHIT. It is my PERSONAL idea.

I am really glad I am not you. Going soley on the basis of evidence for everything leaves very little room for any sort of imagination.

My imagination is fine. I just don't think the things I imagine in my head are true like you do.

 

[Mort Divine]

NO FUCKING SHIT. It is my PERSONAL idea.

I am really glad I am not you. Going soley on the basis of evidence for everything leaves very little room for any sort of imagination.

Yeah, I agree here. I think there is something - slightly 'unhuman' about going about everything based on absolute logic and nothing but empirical evidence.

As far as I'm concerned I just don't think it is important either way to know if there is a God or not. I live my life and don't worry about it.

 

[cookiecutter]

If there was no religion I would feel that way

 

[Matt]

Well you people obviously aren't getting it that without evidence it is incredibly irrational to believe something. I am pointing out to you why you are wrong. All you say is "yes I know I am being dumb, but I am not going to change". If you understand all the faults with you belief, how do you still keep it?

There are problems with everything; nothing is perfect. There are enough good things so I can still believe. Also, who made you the arbiter of right and wrong? You have no more knowledge on this issue than anyone else - you are going by what you personally think, just like everyone else.

My imagination is fine. I just don't think the things I imagine in my head are true like you do.

Yeah ok


---

You may find, CC, that you will never be able to actually hold a constructive debate since you constantly attack/criticize the opposing side. You really shouldn't do that.

 

[CAIRATH]

The Skeptic's Annotated Bible

I guess I'll contribute another random link. An annotated version of the King James Bible (there's one for the Qur'an and Book of Mormom as well) from a humanist/science-worldview perspective. I like this site because unlike other sites that often take Bible quotes and place them squarely out of the context they were in, this site links to the actual passage in an online version of the King James Bible. Which means that you can easily look up the context of the passage and judge for yourself how you feel about it.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

One of my beliefs is that there is no "right" religion...there is one divine power for all religions, etc. This is hard for me to explain, but here is my basic idea of it:

Atheists - go and stay in the grave
Christians - go to their own heaven
Satanists - go to hellz
Pagans - go wherever (fuck I don't know..)

etc

Right, uh...fuck off. This is some 4th grade sandbox shit. Inventing new things to make you feel better and more secure about your religion is silly and childish. That is also not a very Christian way of thinking. You're going to YOUR Hell.

I'd also like to point out that your response to unknown's EXCELLENT point was really a failure. Sry d00d.

I think there is something - slightly 'unhuman' about going about everything based on absolute logic and nothing but empirical evidence.

So, please elaborate on how utilizing reason to test things with rational bases is inhuman (remember that "reason" is the archetypal defining characteristic which sets humans apart from other animals before responding or I won't even consider your answer to be thought out at all).