The great and all powerful religion thread!

[thisisaformicatable]

There is the inborn idea that there is a higher power, evidenced throughout history and all over the world.

While it seems strange to come to a conclusion and then explore the evidence, here's something interesting on this particular topic:

Atheism: Contemporary Rates and Patterns (link to cache as main site wasn't working for me)

Excerpt:

First of all, the sheer numbers must be contended with. With between 500,000,000 and 750,000,000 non-theists living on this planet today, any suggestion that belief in God is natural, inborn, or a result of how our brains are wired becomes manifestly untenable. Secondly, anyone who argues that theism has neural roots and is a direct result of the natural way human minds work must then explain the dramatically different rates of belief among similar countries. Consider Britain (31-44% atheist) compared to nearby Ireland (4-5% atheist), the Czech Republic (54-61% atheist) compared to nearby Poland (3-6% atheist), and South Korea (30-52% atheist) compared the Philippines (less than 1% atheist). It is simply unsustainable to argue that these glaring differences in rates of atheism among these nations is due to different biological, neurological or other such brain-related properties. Rather, the differences are better explained by taking into account historical, cultural, economic, political, and sociological factors (Norris and Inglehart, 2004; Grontenhuis and Scheepers, 2001; Verweij, Ester, and Natua, 1997; Zuckerman, 2003).

And apparently Vietnam is 81% atheist. Who knew?

 

[Blue_Jay]

This is what the bible must have ment when Jesus said "many are invited, yet few will come". Poor souls, I feel so sorry for them, and for most of the board here to *sigh*.

 

[Rabid Headbanger]

This is what the bible must have ment when Jesus said "many are invited, yet few will come". Poor souls, I feel so sorry for them, and for most of the board here to *sigh*.

Yes, perhaps that is what it meant. Usually when I get invited to be someones slave I reject the invitation, though.

 

[cookiecutter]

The problem is that proof cannot be gained in this case. Another problem is that I cannot give the amount and type of evidence that will convince someone into belief. I can only give the evidence that I and many other people have evaluated to come to, or to support, the decision to believe. I am not sure if I even need to proceed, because if you're looking for more than that, I can't give it.

If there is no evidence to convince someone to believe then it shouldn't be believed. If I can't convince that Leprachauns exist, then you shouldn't believe them. You start out believing and then justify it, instead of actually looking for the truth.

Well it's certainly an exercise in futility, but one I am enjoying. It has caused me to investigate what I believe more than I ever have in the past.

I enjoy it as well

There is the Bible itself. As written it is not a book that any group can gain a personal advantage with. Don’t ignore the “as written”. It protects itself from misuse. This is not the characteristic of a man-made religious text. What I lack to drive this point further is knowledge of other religious texts

It does have the characteristics of a man made text. Inaccuracies, contradictions and things actually wrong.

I have heard many claims that the Bible has a track record of historical and geographical accuracy, and has been cited as possibly the most accurate ancient text. I know this doesn’t prove it’s claims, but if it can be trusted in things we can verify, it lends credibility to the possibility that it is accurate in other ways. But I need to look into this a lot more. You guys have said it has been shown inaccurate in these areas, so I need to look into that.

I also am not entirely clear on the geographical and historical accuracy (Thoth help us out!), but as you said being accurate there is irrelevant to being accurate about the supernatural.

There is fulfilled predictive prophecy. Not just all those little ones that the Bible itself says were fulfilled. But more crazy stuff like predicting the date Jesus would enter Jerusalem, predicting a city that would be thrown into the sea, predicting a building that would be destroyed so that not one stone would be left on top of another, the old testament accounts of crucifixion. More stuff I need to read up on.

Addressed by Thoth.

There is the continuity of the whole Bible with no major theological inconsistencies or contradictions. I need to read more on this. I especially need to read about how the modern Bible was put together.

This is just not true.

There is historical evidence for the existence of Jesus, his crucifixion, a missing body, physical sitings, changed disciples to the extent that they would go to their deaths for what they say they witnessed. I know that there are no lack of religious people who will die for their faith, but these guys were eye witnesses. If they were pulling a scam or lying, then they knew the real truth, and why would they all die for a known lie?

As far as I know, the only account of Jesus is the Bible, and of course it can't be evidence for itself. And I don't think they were pulling a scam, but like every ancient myth, something supernatural was said to have happened when it really didn't. Were the Norsemen writing about Thor lying? Was Homer lying when he wrote the Illiad and the Odyssey?

There are tons of changed lives that I have witnessed and read about.

Anecdotal and irrelevant. I have heard many stories about people's lives changing for the better when they became Atheists.

There is the inborn idea that there is a higher power, evidenced throughout history and all over the world.

Already addressed.

There is a seemingly unexplainable problem with the origin of matter. A problem so profound that even if we heard the answer (assuming it was not God) it would probably be beyond our grasp to comprehend.

Because we don't know things doesn't mean God did it. Just like everything else, you need to prove God was the one that did it.

There is my own experience.

See above.

 

[Rumpole]

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/proof

SYNONIMS: EVIDENCE

You fail at english motherfucker.

So do you.

 

[AchrisK]

If there is no evidence to convince someone to believe then it shouldn't be believed. If I can't convince that Leprachauns exist, then you shouldn't believe them. You start out believing and then justify it, instead of actually looking for the truth.

But look at your own belief in the Big Bang theory:

Not everything has to be proven 100% right to be believable. You only need to look at what is plausible. Right now, based on the evidence, the Big Band Theory is what we have. To discount it because it is imperfect or subject to change is retarded and is the same argument Creationists have been using against evolution. "Just a Theory" ... is not grounds to dismiss something. If new evidence comes to light of course the theory will change.

As science is doing with this, I am doing with my beliefs. I gave many things as evidence that I have heard, and others I have experienced. I am looking into them further. Additionally, it's belief in the supernatural, which adds the need for a deeper element of faith. I have already become more flexible in some aspects of what I believe, and a lot of things are in a holding pattern. But even if I end up holding to my faith, I won't be able to prove it to you. There are elements which require faith and belief and experience, to sort of bring everything together. Again I am giving evidence for my beliefs. I was never trying to convince anyone else of anything other than maybe that I am not blindly following something, and that there are points to investigate. Maybe I want to counter the "...no intelligent person can believe in God..." line. Not for my own sake, to say that I am intelligent and still believe, but the sentiment in general. None of us can know for sure, and so many people have a little nag of "what if", "there has to be more", etc. Apart from requiring everything to be proven via scientific method, it's not that unreasonable for a human to believe.

 

[AchrisK]

Um... it does not predict the date that Jesus would enter Jerusalem. I assume you are referring to the passage in Zech. 9:9. Interestingly "Matthew" misread the original Hebrew of this passage and pictures Jesus riding into Jerusalem on two animals while the other Gospel writers who read the original passage correctly have him sitting on just one animal. Clearly Matthew was "fudging" historical events in order to get it to line up with how he misread prophecy. Not exactly the sign of divine inspiration is it? You can read more about this here: http://www.geocities.com/b_r_a_d_99/twodonkeys.htm

As far as "fulfilled propehcy" is concerned how about some of the false prophecy that the NT gives in regards to the second coming?
See this link: http://www.geocities.com/b_r_a_d_99/comingsoon.htm
And this also:
From the Skeptic's Annotated Bible:

The end will come within the lifetime of Jesus's listeners.


"Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation." -- Matthew 23:36

One donkey or two? You're arguing over minor details, when the prophecy was amazingly fulfilled. I forget how the date thing works, but it was something like "a certain amount of time from this (whatever) point, the messiah will arrive..." Obviously way paraphrased. But he fulfilled it to the day.

Regarding the second coming, a lot of those are taken out of context.

"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled." -- Luke 21:32

is

29 Then He spoke to them a parable: “Look at the fig tree, and all the trees. 30 When they are already budding, you see and know for yourselves that summer is now near. 31 So you also, when you see these things happening, know that the kingdom of God is near. 32 Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all things take place. 33 Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away.

...after an entire chapter describing the events and signs oof the end times.

"This" is referring to the generation in which those things happen.

Also, the Bible already knows what people will be saying:

2 Peter 3

1 Beloved, I now write to you this second epistle (in both of which I stir up your pure minds by way of reminder), 2 that you may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us,[a] the apostles of the Lord and Savior, 3 knowing this first: that scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts, 4 and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation.” 5 For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, 6 by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water. 7 But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
8 But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

 

[skeptik]

What makes you think that any of these "predictions" were predicted before the events actually occurred?

 

[Thoth-Amon]

One donkey or two? You're arguing over minor details, when the prophecy was amazingly fulfilled. I forget how the date thing works, but it was something like "a certain amount of time from this (whatever) point, the messiah will arrive..." Obviously way paraphrased. But he fulfilled it to the day.

Regarding the second coming, a lot of those are taken out of context.

"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled." -- Luke 21:32

is

29 Then He spoke to them a parable: “Look at the fig tree, and all the trees. 30 When they are already budding, you see and know for yourselves that summer is now near. 31 So you also, when you see these things happening, know that the kingdom of God is near. 32 Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all things take place. 33 Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away.

...after an entire chapter describing the events and signs oof the end times.

"This" is referring to the generation in which those things happen.

Also, the Bible already knows what people will be saying:

2 Peter 3

1 Beloved, I now write to you this second epistle (in both of which I stir up your pure minds by way of reminder), 2 that you may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us,[a] the apostles of the Lord and Savior, 3 knowing this first: that scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts, 4 and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation.” 5 For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, 6 by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water. 7 But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
8 But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

You are referring to the passage in Daniel 9 then. And no this passage doesn't work either as the time line given is too early for Jesus to be the messiah.
Secondly it is NOT a minor detail. Matthew has Jesus riding on two donkeys because he MISREAD Zech. 9:9 and is trying to "adjust" history to match up with how he misread Zech. In other words HE'S MAKING UP HISTORY to "prove" Jesus is the messiah.
As far as the Second coming passages. Read them all in their own contexts. They all say the second coming would happen either: soon, within the lifetime of the apostles or before the current generation passed away.

 

[BlackMetalWhiteGuy]

I'm an atheist, because I have a very strong scientific education, I understand the rigorous testing and peer review processes that all scientific hypotheses must undergo before acceptance into the scientific community, and I've yet to see any religion implement a similar system. Also, recent data (2007) shows an inverse correlation between IQ and religiousness, which doesn't surprise me at all.

Not only do intelligent people have a delayed onset of sexual behavior, Half Sigma found that they also have a lower number of premarital sex partners throughout adulthood (18-39). While this is consistent with the above theory that high IQ people are more religious and conservative, this is, of course, not true. Religiousness correlates with lower IQ, and as HS shows in the same post, intelligent people were also more likely to say that premarital sex was not immoral. (Leaving those who did think it was immoral to participate in the bulk of it!)

So not only are religious people stupider, they're also hypocrites.

Furthermore, I strongly object to Christianity and Christians in general, due to their elitist notion of being the "one true religion," as well as their imperialistic, intolerance of other cultures, and of course, their unparalleled sense of entitlement.

 

[Rabid Headbanger]

So not only are religious people stupider, they're also hypocrites.

:Smug:

Indeed.

(Even though I agree with you )

 

[BlackMetalWhiteGuy]

:Smug:

Indeed.

(Even though I agree with you )

Haha, yeah, I'm too lazy to work around the grammar. ENGLISH BAD!!!

 

[AchrisK]

So not only are religious people stupider, they're also hypocrites.

Furthermore, I strongly object to Christianity and Christians in general, due to their elitist notion of being the "one true religion," as well as their imperialistic, intolerance of other cultures, and of course, their unparalleled sense of entitlement.

I know I'm stupider :zombie:

Nice generalizations. Your own statements show that you are an elitist and also very intolerant.

Virtually all monotheistic religions see their truth as the truth. By their nature they all claim to be the "the one true". And if there is truth, which I am conviced that there is, then something is the truth, and more than one contradictory thing cannot both be the truth. So it only makes sense that religions would see themselves as having the truth.

Also, you should evaluate religions based on what they teach, and not on their imperfect members. You will find that Christianity is not that way. Yes you will see instances where God commands the destruction of a particular people, but those are isolated instances and that is not taught as a precept or command.

what is this sense of entitlement you refer to?

 

[Rabid Headbanger]

You know what bothers me? When christians say other religions are lies, and when they themselves get under attack, they wave the freedom of religion/persecution flag. (same goes for islam)

 

[Matt]

You know what bothers me? When christians say other religions are lies, and when they themselves get under attack, they wave the freedom of religion/persecution flag. (same goes for islam)

That bothers me as well, obviously. That's why protestants are (usually) superior.

 

[rfe]

Furthermore, I strongly object to Christianity and Christians in general, due to their elitist notion of being the "one true religion," as well as their imperialistic, intolerance of other cultures, and of course, their unparalleled sense of entitlement.

Not all Christians are like that, you know. Don't let what the corrupt have done shape your mind of what the general Christian is like.

That's why protestants are (usually) superior.

Yes.

 

[zoidberg]

Furthermore, I strongly object to Christianity and Christians in general, due to their elitist notion of being the "one true religion," .

why just christians then? why not islam, judaism, the atheist, and all people with beliefs?

Nice generalizations. Your own statements show that you are an elitist and also very intolerant

but, he was right.

 

[Thoth-Amon]

@AChrisK
You should read this link in regards to Daniel 9:
http://www.geocities.com/b_r_a_d_99/daniel9.htm

Also please read this book if you can:
Bible Prophecy- Tim Callahan
Excellent book discussing bible prophecy and Christian apologetics.

 

[BlackMetalWhiteGuy]

I know I'm stupider :zombie:

Nice generalizations. Your own statements show that you are an elitist and also very intolerant.

Virtually all monotheistic religions see their truth as the truth. By their nature they all claim to be the "the one true". And if there is truth, which I am conviced that there is, then something is the truth, and more than one contradictory thing cannot both be the truth. So it only makes sense that religions would see themselves as having the truth.

Also, you should evaluate religions based on what they teach, and not on their imperfect members. You will find that Christianity is not that way. Yes you will see instances where God commands the destruction of a particular people, but those are isolated instances and that is not taught as a precept or command.

what is this sense of entitlement you refer to?

I've never met a Jew or a Muslim who's claimed that their religion is superior to any other, and the atheists who speak with such confidence provide evidence to support their arguments. I'm also quite familiar with the major concepts that most mainstream religions teach as I had a fairly conservative upbringing. However, it's not the concepts of religion that I object to, it's the mentality that one's belief is superior to another's, without actually considering the other side of the argument, or presenting any evidence to support such a claim.

Also, these isolated instances are not isolated by any stretch of the imagination. On the contrary, I think it's far more likely that they're such large scale events that you're evaluating too small an area to notice their impact. Historically, Christians are notorious for invading foreign lands and delegating themselves the authority to "civilize" the locals.

Some African cities used to be among the most esteemed cultural and economic centers of the world until Christians invaded and layed ruin to their once great society.

The Aztec, Inca, and Maya tribes of South America were some of the most advanced civilizations the world had ever seen until they were weakened and killed by European disease, and the remainder forced into slavery to live out their lives as agricultural servants to the Christian empires and to learn the ways of the Lord, thereby civilization them, and justifying their right to life. In one of Cortez's accounts of the Aztec empire, he even admitted that it was the greatest civilization he'd ever seen, but regretted that he could not allow them to live because they were barbarians for practicing human sacrifice and worst of all, for worshipping idols, as if being polytheistic and worshipping gods other than the "one true God" was somehow a greater sin than sacrificing other non-Christians in the process.

Even today, Iraq, the world's oldest civilization is currently being invaded by the Bush administration to pilfer them of their oil, but allegedly more importantly, to "liberate" them by enforcing democracy, a term now used almost interchangably with Christianity, and good Christian values.

The term entitlement refers to the Christian ideology that they are ordained by God to rule over others. It was one of the driving forces of Manifest Destiny in early American history, just as it is now with regard to the war in Iraq, and the American stronghold over several other small unincorporated territories.

 

[cookiecutter]

But look at your own belief in the Big Bang theory:

I figured this would be brought up. You misunderstand my point. I do not want or need things, including God to be proven 100% true. Absolute certainty is only ascertainable in mathematics. All I want is a sufficient evidence to justify belief. Beyond reasonable doubt to use a cliche. There is evidence to believe in the Big Bang (background radiation is one I know), but there is not one single tiny piece of evidence for God.

As science is doing with this, I am doing with my beliefs. I gave many things as evidence that I have heard, and others I have experienced. I am looking into them further. Additionally, it's belief in the supernatural, which adds the need for a deeper element of faith. I have already become more flexible in some aspects of what I believe, and a lot of things are in a holding pattern. But even if I end up holding to my faith, I won't be able to prove it to you. There are elements which require faith and belief and experience, to sort of bring everything together. Again I am giving evidence for my beliefs. I was never trying to convince anyone else of anything other than maybe that I am not blindly following something, and that there are points to investigate. Maybe I want to counter the "...no intelligent person can believe in God..." line. Not for my own sake, to say that I am intelligent and still believe, but the sentiment in general. None of us can know for sure, and so many people have a little nag of "what if", "there has to be more", etc. Apart from requiring everything to be proven via scientific method, it's not that unreasonable for a human to believe.

Your evidence is flawed as pointed out quite a bit. Because of this your faith is unjustified. If you feel it is ok just to have unjustified faith then nothing I say will change your mind. Also I agree, being religious doesn't mean your stupid. It just means you have decided to accept and irrational and unjustifiable proposition. This is easier for stupid people to do, hence the correlation, but it in and of itself does not make a person stupid.

I've never met Muslim who's claimed that their religion is superior to any other...

Whoa whoa whoa, are you seriously arguing that muslims don't try to push their religion on others? Or you just haven't met one.

@Mathias and rfe: YOUR little Christian sect may be nice and non-confrontational but a large amount of Christians aren't like you and that's obviously who we're talking about. Just look at all the evangelicals. Pat Robertson's hateful TV show is on ABC Family! The Catholic Church is working it's ass off to stop gays from having equal rights while they cover up their sex abuse scandal. We have a right to be pissed off at Christianity.