Why must religious people impose their beliefs on others? Why can't religious people keep religion out of politics? Why must Muslims kill others over their beliefs? Why can't Christians keep their beliefs out of politics and out of schools?
The same reason you did not keep that thought to yourself.
I am not going to launch missles at you for saying what you just said.
If a person is beating you over the head, are you not going to fight back for fear that he might say, "I'm only hitting you because you are hitting me." Your comment makes absolutely no sense in this context. Religion is the offense. I am playing defense.
Why should the op keep those thoughts to himself? It's a valid question. You haven't answered it either. Why is that?
His thoughts are not causing strife and wars. That is the difference.
In other news, the sky is blue and puppies are cute.
Christians can't keep their beliefs out of schools because they know that if they can infect minds at an early age, they can have a person for life.
So true. The majority of religious people I know were hoodwinked at an early age or have learning difficulties. Easily pliable and not prone to questioning.
Most of the time people don't know how to let it go, move on, and let others be who they are. They think they need to save you, fix you, change you, and you should be molded into their version of who they believe you should be in society. If you don't fit into their social norm, you are an outcast, misfit, and crazy. So of course they must try to convert to you their system of belief because they think they need too! Perhaps really the lesson they need to learn themselves in most cases.
Thank you for your intelligent comment.
know what that feels like, living life as an artist
Wow, so much to work with...
First of all, saying that, throughout history, religion (and the rest of your statement makes it clear you are singling out Christianity) has created more problems than it has solved is completely subjective. This assumes that, all other things being equal, there would have been some kind of peaceful, non-religious alternative which would have filled the vacuum. I've as yet to see any history or any rational interpretation thereof that can support such a supposition.
Second of all, forcing religion out of schools (any kind of religion) does not ipso facto create a more intelligent and self-reliant populace. Schools in communist countries were not exactly known for churning out free-thinking intellectuals. The quality of education in "hard subjects" may have been better, worse or about the same, but their record of turning out people who bucked the system and thought for themselves was not better than ours.
Third of all, if Christianity is true (I'm talking about basic Christian principals, that Jesus lived, that He died and rose again on the third day) then shutting it out of schools may make some people feel better, but it's not a service to anybody.
Less the 31% of Denmark's population believe in God, while it's less the 23% Sweden however, Denmark and Sweden rank among the most well-developed, wealthiest, most democratic, most free, most entrepreneurial, least corrupt, least violent, most peaceful, healthiest, happiest, most egalitarian, best educated, most charitable, and most environmentally compassionate societies in the entire world.
Clearly, religion is not required to sustain healthy, happy, and moral societies.
Uh huh. Did I say that? What religion is required for is to sustain a healthy relationship with God.
Just out of curiosity, what are the statistics for North Korea, Communist China and Viet Nam?
North Korea, Communist China and Viet Nam is forced and is not a fair comparison. How would force Catholicism work?
This is what you said and I was just clarifying it for you incase you didn't know about Sweden and Denmark. I think you make be able to throw Norway and Finland in that mix as well.
"This assumes that, all other things being equal, there would have been some kind of peaceful, non-religious alternative which would have filled the vacuum. I've as yet to see any history or any rational interpretation thereof that can support such a supposition."
Yet Sweden and Denmark both have extremely violent histories pre-Christianity, even to some extent post-Christianity. So my point holds, because I was discussing the past (although I should probably have been more clear on that point.)
The atheist countries are not forced either, because they are countries where the majority of people actively don't believe in deities yet they are not happy societies.
Forced conversion of any kind usually produces results different from what the converting parties envision, I've never argued that. You want to say that atrocities were committed in the name of religion and I will be the first in line to agree. The situations are rarely as black and white as so many on both sides want to paint them, but the fact still stands. It doesn't change my point. The history of humanity in general, including many places that are held to be superior for one reason or another, contain violence, degradation and depravity.
Cheery thought at this festive time of the year, eh?
I'm lost at your point. Are you suggesting Christianity changed violent societies into peaceful ones?
Although history rarely works in the Point-A-to-Point-B linear fashion that many people would like it to, the fact is that Christianity has helped calm some societies down.
There's a reason why so many European countries had popular political parties with names like "Christian Democrat."
Secularism is what has calmed things down a bit. Whenever a nation is under the control of any religion or religious party they historically never have been are still not today largely peaceful. Europe during the middle ages up until recently when they have become more secular was not a peaceful place to be. The middle east is still war like because they are ruled by religious parties and laws. The US even with it's secular society is still largely thought as a Christian nation and they are seen as anything but peaceful.
But the question is, Has the belief in God not the belief in religion. Big difference.
How is that a big difference? Isn't religion just organized belief in God? Aren't both based on blind faith? Sure they are slightly different in that some people may believe in God but haven't yet found a religion conforms to their beliefs, but every major religion starts with a belief in some sort of deity. So belief in god and religion go hand in hand.
There are people who believe in God but are not affiliated with any religion.
They tend to be looking for a religion that agrees with what they think their Invisible Super Being wants other people to do. When they find it - they join.
I think there is something out there that like a god, it is common sense to most people. God is just word, if there is a religion that purely loves people and nature, I'm in.
On the other hand atheist can not prove there is no God, no matter how much atheist try to disprove God exist.
Dark age Religions are easy to disprove, because where are the hard facts to prove there ever changing views and stance.
There you have it folks, everyone is God theory, and evolution is real.
Yes, atheists cannot disprove God but they sure do try, don't they. Furthermore, the hand of God has been guiding evolution. They are not at odds with one another. If anything the course of evolution proves the existence of God. ( A force of omnipresent, creative intelligence, awareness, and ultimately invisible energy. The problem with atheists is, they do not believe in that which cannot be seen, felt or touched. Those who know God have realized the metaphysical, (beyond the physical,) realm of existence.
We can however prove the bible isn't perfect as a God would have made it. You on the other hand have no evidence what's so ever.
"Those who know God have realized the metaphysical, (beyond the physical,) realm of existence."
Realized the beyond physical realm of existence?
Perhaps you meant, imagine a beyond physical realm of existence?
And tell me how you KNOW that such an entity exists. It seems that anyone can blurt out attributes...assign a name to it and tell people to worship it. Where is your proof that these attribute are the aggregate of a factual being?
Again, you have not proven that those attributes, that you stated, are assigned to a REAL being. Until you do, I'm going to assume that this is just whimsical conjecture...nothing more.
This would be one of those times when it is pointed out that reality does not support those beliefs. Glad to helped you out here.
Keep up the good work. A little dose of reality now and then is good for the soul.
Yes, what you have stated is reality to you at present time. Someday, maybe even in in this lifetime, the truth, (of the invisible hand of God silently guiding evolution,) will also be perceived to be true by You. I read that there are bird species which scientists believed had completely died out and then decades later were found to exist again. Of course you will not believe this. Now I, on the other hand, can see how this might happen. When you consider that everything was created in the very first place, how could it be accidental? Watch the happy playfulness of all young creatures including the human! They reveal the essence of the spirit that is behind all life. A mon avis and I am allowed to share it.
And maybe before we are all gone, you'll be brave enough to look directly at reality. To do this you have to let fear go (ATTENTION Castlepaloma) and be brave.
Sorry, but reality is shared by us all, all the time.
It is very highly unlikely the irrational nonsense of believers invoking their invisible super beings will ever gain credibility.
Considering your post history here, it is highly unlikely your words have gained credibility.
As I suspected, gibberish.
No, I mean realized. It is a matter of realization.
Q. Are you GLAD there is no proof of God (for you)? Or would you LIKE proof?
...the invisible, loving and omnipotent God does not have to worshipped. He has everything. The only thing He does not have is our love. But to love Him we must realize His existence. This is up to each individual. There are those who HAVE proven the force and existence of God to themselves and then try to share their knowledge with those who also want to know the truth. You can listen to those who have realized God... or not. God sent Jesus, whether you want to believe that or not... it is entirely up to you. Here is another question: Why do some atheists work so hard to convince others there is no proof of God? Why not let those who believe in God have the proof which they have gained (through self-realization)????
Q. Is there a danger in believing in God?
...maybe what atheists actually detest is the feeling of being EXPECTED to worship God. I believe in allowing each person to be self-motivated in the pursuit of truth. I will not tolerate anyone preaching AT me!
I work on my own awareness, thank you very much.
However, I also agree with atheists that false imaginings provoke a disconnect to reality feedback within us.
and THAT is where the trouble with religion does start!
Religious people need to r e s p e c t others.
If they don't, what good is their religion?
... which brings us to the topic of this forum.
You have NO PROOF of anything you have said. Does that not bother you?
Sounds like whimsical psychotic hyperbole!
Still more whimsical psychotic hyperbole.
Because it is not through any self-realization that these believers find "proof" of God, but rather through a process of psychosis. Psychosis is a serious and dangerous disconnect from reality.
Psychosis is a very serious and dangerous disconnect from reality. I think suicide bombers are a perfect example of the devastating effects of psychotic thinking.
Worship is not the most detestable tenet of your religious beliefs. The most detestable thing about your beliefs is the outright DISHONESTY. Believers have been tricked into self-imposed immorality.
I wish we could get rid of anything that harms. The bible worked 2000 years ago , (assuming) with people who barely lived pass age 30, Jesus was an old man at age of 33. Today it's done, well over done, we are so much more balance with healthy than back in those hardship days. The greatest time for science and one leader was Darwin in evolution which began in the mid 1800s. For most people did not live pass age 40 since the bible, that’s about 1850 years ago. It is the great turning point of ignorance.
Imagination is the closest thing that comes to being God like, from experience.
Religion was ruled the earth with myths, and now it's time to take back the earth by thinking green rather than about gold first and who owns it all.
When each person using their own imagination with common sense and greater with good sense, we can all grow together forward again..
We better change and think faster, because my daughter generation for the first time in modern history is lowering in life expectancy.
I agree with you. But, we have to be careful with imagination. We need to know nature and work with it. Nature is a reality of this plane and it is based on natural laws. We need less imagining and more c o o p e r a t i n g with natural law. Don't you think the Monsanto people are going a little overboard with their imagineering?
And yes, I agree, we need to use our imaginations with common sense (that sense which is common to all mankind) and good sense (for the good of all mankind).
PS I did not know that people were old at age 30 back in the day. That is provable?
PSS Just Curious: What do you mean the bible worked 2000 years ago? Does it not work today?
PSSS What is "done, well over done" today?
Getitrite: Well, with your imagery and all, I can see you would really like to convince ME... But, as I have just stated, I work on my own awareness, thank you very much.
So, I'll go do that now. C YA
Rad Man, I suspect and surmise, based on my own experiences, that there is no proof of evidence of God f o r Y o u, because you do not want to know there is proof of God's existence. I believe that If you wanted to prove it to yourself, you could.
(Q. Have you ever tried to prove the existence of God, (to yourself) instead of always trying to dis-prove it? Just wonderin' )
I said I WANTED evidence. That is such a copout. There is only evidence for believers!!!!! ah ha ha ha.
Perhaps you don't understand what evidence means.
Evidence - the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid
If you have evidence it should be available to all and should indicated your belief to be true. I hope you're not going to court with that evidence.
You've added to your original post so I'll answer your question here instead.
I was born and raised as a Christian. It wasn't until I was 12 or 13 that I noticed the lack of evidence, then I noticed how incredible silly the entire notion is. I didn't mention it to anyone for about 5 or 6 years because I thought it was a part of growing up. You know, like when you realize there is no Santa. I guess not everyone grows up.
It is a personal matter. (Jesus often finished his talks with, "He who has ears to hear..." (The willingness to listen.) For the rest, He gave them the freedom to guide their own will according to the level of their awareness.
BTW The documented carbon dating of the Shroud of Turin was @1400, But, if the actual carbon dating is re-tested and found to be @ 2012, (I heard that someone paid to have the carbon dating falsified) that could be the concrete proof (as opposed to metaphysical proof) you are looking for.
PS Attempting to wake people up (there might be a few) to the fact that they really are just guessing and surmising is not a bad thing, in my opinion.
I believe we do need evidence. I and many others (including Jesus, and all the saints) have proof on a metaphysical level.
Those who know, know they know... You will not have the slightest affect on them what-so-ever. Who knows... maybe God Himself sent you on this mission! Maybe you are like John the Baptist clearing the way for enlightened thinking.
Like you say,
Well it's good marketing practice to only market to the people interested because they will be the most gullible to your persuasions. According to the bible even Jesus understood this.
The Shroud of Turin, now there's a lie for Jesus if I've ever heard one. Even if it dated to the correct time it would only be evidence of the cloth's age, not evidence of God or Jesus being God. But you bringing it up only shows that people will lie for Jesus. The guilty for that crime are the makers of the shroud, the keepers of the shroud for displaying it as if it were authentic and people like you for helping to keep hope alive with rumours.
The spirit of "Santa" is evidenced in almost every single house hold at Christmas time or on birthdays, or on anniversaries, or on special days where gifts and love is exchanged. GOSH! You are just so Concrete...
like heavy asphalt.
But that is OK to be h e a v y... As in " She's so heavy..." (lyrics by John Lennon) so, with that song in my m i n d, I 'll be t r a i l i n g o f f.
Kathryn L Hill Proof
According to the National Center for Health Statistics, life expectancy for men in 1907 was 45.6 years; by 1957 it rose to 66.4; in 2007 it reached 75.5. Unlike the most recent increase in life expectancy (which was attributable largely to a decline in half of the leading causes of death including heart disease, homicide, and influenza), the increase in life expectancy between 1907 and 2007
Life expectancy Wikipedia,
The oldest confirmed recorded age for any human is 122, the maximum number of years any human is known to have lived. Except in the bible of the old man age of 969 years
Era Life Expectancy at Birth
(years) Life Expectancy at Older Age
Upper Paleolithic 33 At age 15, life expectancy an additional 39 years (total age 54).
Neolithic age 20
Bronze Age and Iron Age[ 26
Classical Greece 28
Classical Rome 28 At age 15, life expectancy an additional 37 years (total age 52).
Pre-Columbian North America 25–30
Medieval Islamic Caliphate 35+
Medieval Britain 30 At age 21, life expectancy an additional 43 years (total age 64)
Early Modern Britain 25–40
2010 world average 67.2
My studies show good water, purpose in life, real food and relationship (in that order) are most important to improve ones life expectancy
Science and religion are always fighting it out, rather than working together. Science was done more for life expectany improvement in the last 50 years than religion has for 2000 years. Each Religion base all their knowledge on one book, and for living longer is proof it has not worked because live to die for something better, they imagine.
How smart can one be, basing ones life on one very old book covering too many horrorable hardshiped myths or maybe true stories. This has held us back people for almost 2000 years from advanceing
I see.. interesting viewpoints. I just found out you are an artist. me too.
I like your title, "Everyone dies, but not every one lives." ( I haven't read it yet.)
(This is on topic because sometimes, or often, religion is behind the "not living" part. Sad but true. Which is why there are Atheists. I was an atheist for a while, (a long time ago) but not anymore. I found my "evidence."
( o.k. I just read your dramatic and poetic hub. )
Would rather live an honest life, than to be at war or portent to love my enemies, as many groups do. Can't love if I lie to myself first.
I think you mean pretend. (Portend is an omen.) And you are right, in my opinion: We must keep in touch with our true selves and the Reality feedback within us: tending to reality as opposed to pretending as to what is real. It is something we must always beware of: Accepting that which may not be true. That is why I do not mind the atheists hanging out amongst us, keeping us on our toes.
Jesus is the champion of soul taken, don’t take my soul , one book with wrong ancient translation is not good enough to take my soul and it’s million parts.
The Soul is your truest reality. The lower levels (physical, astral, causal, mental, and etheric) are illusionary and transient. The outer, physical world is always a reflection. Your inner world is the reality. The physical world is represented by sensation. The inner world is represented by peace, joy, and love. As you attune to that inner world, you find that you begin to experience peace and love.
I have experience something God like several times and this no BS plus it works best on hard times. Deep within your being, you open to receive that which is of God. You feel the Spirit and hear a voice whisper the answer the deepest most difficult questions and it awakening to my Soul, the true self. If I ignore this little voice that comes to me I get into big trouble. Now I know what Albert Einstein was taking about and talk about how enlighten Jesus was, yet a myth too.
There is no true reality, it's simply what you think the world is.
That little voice that helps you keep out of trouble has many names, conscience, super ego and many more. All of these things are a function of our brain produced by evolution to keep you and me from doing stupid things. We have no detectable spirit attached to our bodies, but if it makes you feel good and safe to think you do then by all means go ahead. I prefer reality, but that's just me.
W h a t
is it that accesses the brain of each individual?? (we are getting mighty close to the truth here, thanks to the atheists... and they are the ones who should answer.)
I'm not understanding your question or your question makes no sense.
What is it that accesses the brain of each individual? By access do you mean a means of approaching or entering a place? This sounds very invasive to me. Perhaps you should rephrase the question.
w h a t is o p e r a t i n g the psyche, the superconscious, the id, the ego... etc... in each human individual?
In an autistic child w h a t is not operating in a typical way?
Oh, I get it you think your just a puppet and God is the puppeteer. You really should own up to your own mistakes and accomplishments. Thanks God!... The devil made me do it! Come on do I need to explain biology to you as well?
H u h? You a r e confused! A better answer would be: "I do not know." because that is the truth. I thought you were all about truth. Now I see you are all about harassment.
But, I do know, and anyone (with the ability to master their own awareness) can.
Those who cannot, are those afflicted with dementia or mental problems... and those on mind altering substances.
PS I suspect the shooter on the East Coast was on some sort of meds. Just like the shooter in Colorado (Not to mention, the guys in Columbine, Colorado.) We have to stop the use of Adderall and Ritalin and Prozac, ETC. I hope the nation will wake up to the danger of these substances. We should have been told exactly WHAT the guy in Colorado was on, (and had been on... and for how many years,) when he opened fire on the innocent people in the movie theater. Why were we not informed via the media??! Will they tell us in this horrific case?
Off track much?
Not really. To perceive the Truth we must be in touch with our very own Selves.
Just sharin' my viewpoint with anyone interested.
Ahh, you must be American? For some reason you blame mass shooting on ADHD meds instead of asking why a 20 year old kids gets access to guns and ammunition? For some reason Americans have a RIGHT to have guns, but when these guns are used by some depressed person they blame the shooting on ADHD meds.
To make matter even worse you blame dementia on (I can't tell from your statement). Do you really think illness skips certain people based on race or religion? Tell that to my very religious bible thumping father in law suffering from Alzheimer's.
The pharmaceuticals are poisonous to the mind. We need to find a better way... and there is.
I am American. I live in the land of the borrowers, where we need guns to protect ourselves from the Chinese who might invade us to claim American Soil as their own... based on how much we owe them. BTW the interest we pay them is enough to fund their military. What if we run out of money to pay the interest?
So, we need guns.
We do also need clear minded people who are not on pharmaceuticals!
Sure there is. STOP giving out guns. Why does anyone need that many hand guns and ammunition?
To protect our Selves! You are right: In a civilized society we should not need guns, but there are a lot of uncivilized people. We will become more and more uncivilized the more we dope our children, teens and adults. It is enough to make one say, YIKES! Can I go to the mall safely? NO. Can I send my children to school and expect them to return in one piece (and without being molested?) N O !
Is there any guarantee that I can I sit in a fast food restaurant and not get gunned down? N O! Is there a guarantee that I can I walk the streets of Any Town USA and not get held up by a gunman at a donut store? NO!
I witnessed the man in front of me in line at the bank, hold up the teller with a toy gun! After that you can bet the bank put up Bullet proof glass. Maybe people are more civilized elsewhere. If so, good for you. I don't know what is happening here. I hope it is not as bad as it seems. Especially after today. Perhaps that teacher should have had a loaded gun in her desk. Now I am off topic.
You are not off topic, you are off reason. You should note that other countries that have better guns laws have less shootings, and yet the same problems with mental health.
I just took a peep, but I am officially out .. what other countries?
Outstanding. Is it any wonder why the world is in the state it is in?
I need to respond to this one again, because I must have missed the glaring, obvious hole in your logic.
You think the Chinese are going to attack individual residential homes? Your need to protect yourself from the Chinese has let to you stock piling hand guns that are being used to kill yourselves. If the Chinese attack, they'll not attack individuals. There'll be a big explosion. It's your governments job to protect you against such attacks, I know the American public don't completely trust the government with this task, but as a result of this you guys are giving access to handguns to psychopathic angry kids.
The Chinese? Really?
Kids are lined up every morning at various public schools for their doses of Ritalin or Adderall. Actually, now that you bring it up... you are right... we Americans can't have it all. If we are going to make psychotic messes of our population then we should definitely do away with the Second Amendment. Sorry, Thomas Jefferson. Your America is becoming just too dumbed
d o w n.
We no longer treat our kids with any respect or compassion. We give them "brain medicine" because we want all of them them to get good grades. You see, Mr. Jefferson, grades are more important than the individual child's interest and joy of life. It is really pathetic here now.
The truly religious would chime in here and
It's OK... I'm not holding my breath or anything.
If China does invade, don't say you weren't warned. Who knows, they might even come onto Canadian soil. You're gonna want a gun, I think... for whatever reason: Like, lets say they make things so bad for Canada that Canadians start robbing each other.... One never knows.
Utopia will Never be.
Or lets say Russia or Iran drops a Big One on US and our psychotic population runs screaming past your borders. (Unless you have better border control then we do. If so, good... cuz yer gonna need it.)
Again, do you think a hand gun would stop them? And for the record ADHD meds do not make anyone psychotic just more attentive.
I j u s t talked to a young adult who told me all about the horrors he and his classmates experienced as a result of the adults' decisions to have them on legal prescription drugs.
In the light of all that has happened here as far as psychotic young adults shooting up people, I am really concerned.
However, I am not surprised by your response and I do not have an opinion as far as what you believe. I have only stated my opinion, for what it is worth, to anyone.
Then take the kid of the meds. It's not rocket science.
Thats what they did themselves. duh. But they sold their prescriptions to the kids with perfectly good brains... why did T h e y want them.
His answer? boredom.
Think back... did YOU like sitting listening to the wah wah wah of most of your teachers? (There are some good ones, of course.) Wouldn't you have rather been out there doing something interesting to you? Like making money, designing T shirts, learning to play drums, learning auto mechanics? (The auto mechanic departments in the public schools here in Glendale, CA have all shut down.)
Yes, now your talking about the difference between girls and boys. Most schools are taught to the way girls like to think and mould the boys into something they are not. I get that completely because I have 3 boys. But the fact of the matter is we need to give boys the chance to succeed. Let them shoot for the stars and change there mind rather then shoot for McDonald's.
I would tell my son when he was a teen (now 32) he could work for Subway or Ralph's. He would not hear of it! He knew it was beneath him! Actually quite typical of today's youth.. so do not worry about THAT!
I had always worked with my son's interests. Today, he owns his own successful business. He learned programing on his own. (He got his start taking a class out of his own interest. (Yes, school is good for facilitating one's own interests, goals and ambitions. But one must be tuned into them.) He has developed more than three websites for artists, politicians, and business owners like himself. He knew in high school that he would not go to college. After he graduated from high school, he took it upon himself to mentor with top graphic artists and print sales business owners. He learned by getting out there and immersing himself into real-time environments.
Don't worry so much. Inspire their natural enthusiasm. They came with their own mission. Listen carefully. Observe what it is in each one. School is wonderful when one is following one's own will. It is the will which must be strong. If the will remains intact when under the influence of meds, then I am all for it. But most people report feeling like zombies: No emotion, no high, no low.
Having no enthusiasm is not good.
If it is still there, great.
But, I hope the meds are not messing with the sleep cycle.
Check the effects ADHD meds have on an individual's very vital REM during the sleep cycle.
Go to www cchr.com
He sleeps fine thanks. He wants to be a programer or a scientist or computer science. He needs school for that. I am also a graphic artist and understand that no formal education is required although I did have one and most of the top jobs today require a University education and not just community college. The effects of the meds are very remarkable. They actually calm down people with ADHD and help them relax whereas for most other people they would be like an upper.
If China invades handguns will be useless. If they get through the US and Canadian military do you really think your hand gun will stop them.
of course!... But then I no nothing about guns and am very afraid of them. If we get invaded, however, I might go get one and be happy to protect myself for as long as I could.
If China or Russia gets past your military, what do you think would be the best thing for you and your family to do.
1. Get a gun and start shooting only to be killed yourself and leave your family without you?
2. Blend in and shut up to fight another day?
Not blend in. To get RID of any intruder of MY home! What is wrong with you?!
You did not have the British come into your home and take it over! My ancestors fought in the revolutionary war. I can feel that it is It is still in my blood. I would rather die fighting than blend the f in.
Must be nice to lay back in your glorious Canadian-ness.
You have been been told that you must be ready to fight at a moments notice to keep you from reality. No need for universal health care because they need you to keep at your job no matter what because you're afraid to lose your insurance. First the British, then the Soviets, then the Germans and Japanese and now Chinese.
Interestingly Canada has a different version of the War of 1812. You should read it.
Stay afraid if you must, keep your guns and keep up the good work.
What are you saying about universal health care? I am not for it, by the way. I have great health insurance already. And I am paying for it.
I'm glad for you, but not everyone can afford it. I thought Christian were charitable.
The early pioneers tried a communal type of society, which failed. It was only when each family had their own home and land that they were harmonious and successful. I do not want to pay for others' health care when I can barely pay for my own.
That's why we have universal health care. It's fair for everyone and guess what because it's owned by the government you don't have a bunch of corporations raising prices. Why do you think so many American retirees come over the boarder to get their medications?
Have a good day with your really high taxes?
High taxes? Add the tax you pay to the government to the money (tax) you pay for your heath insurance and we'll see who is paying higher taxes.
How Christian of you to have no concern for the health of the poor or unemployed. Did Jesus teach that to you?
You are a horrible person judging from all of these rude and inconsiderate posts. I am calling you names right now. LOL!
You understand N O T H I N G,
I feel utter pity for you.
The saddest thing is that no one will back me up. It is really pathetic.
Have it your way you ignorant sheep.
You barely alive human beings.
Have it your way.
Ouch, I must have hit a nerve. I think it is Christian who call themselves the sheep and Jesus the shepherd.
You want to call yourself a follower of Christ, but don't want to be Christ like. I see why Gandhi said "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."
You clearly no nothing of ADHD meds or what they are used for. I do. You're mistaken if you think the US is the only country using ADHD meds. Canada is no different in that regard, we are however different in gun control, however to many guns get over the boarder can cause senseless deaths. Canada's Total firearm-related deaths per 100,000 people is 9 will only 4.78 in Canada. European countries drop below 2.
One in three kids scores 'below basic' and over 65 percent are not reading at grade level in America. Out of 30 countries, America is an appalling 25th in math and 21st in science. Those test score statistics haven't budged since the 70's despite the effort and resources gone into improving them. About half are from low income families, so it would appear financial status doesn't really play into it.
What would be your solution to this problem?
Within societies, children are treated with more respect and compassion then ever before.
There is a time for learning things about the world and there is a time to fulfill ones interests and joy, but the latter is usually taken on by the parents.
I know. I've wondered often what could be done to improve America's test scores.
Although I am religious and I do think that religion should not be banned from schools, I think it's a little simplistic to simply say that taking God out of schools has been the cause of all this. It's ironic that America's higher education (colleges and universities) are still considered superior to the point that people come from Asia and the Middle East to study here, but our high schools fail to get well-educated kids.
And businesses complain that students come out of school unprepared for real jobs, even menial ones. As a former grocery store cashier, I can tell you that the reason that those registers are so high tech is not because some geek sat in a back room and thought how cool it would be. It's because the simple act of counting back money to people is so difficult for so many.
Children are cherished in some ways more than ever now, but in other ways they are not. As someone with children, I can tell you that the media they consume, even in a relatively sheltered house like mine, can be very anti-childhood. It's not just that kids "can do more than you think they can." It's that kids are exposed to violence and sexuality that produces antisocial behavior and reinforces tribalistic, primitavistic thinking. Don't get me wrong, I don't think that a kid who plays hours of Call of Duty is likely to run out and shoot a school full of kids any more than a kid who listens to hours of Madonna (I know, I'm showing my age) is likely to run out and make like a bunny rabbit. But there is a desensitization to it, a general acceptance that "life is like this" and all is as it should be.
And globally, the sex slavery trade is on the rise (even here in America) and children are still very much a part of that. That is not the product of a society that cherishes children or idealizes childhood.
Dear Chris Neal,
We have to stop measuring the success of our children through tests and the issuing of grades. They need to learn how to do so many things in order to survive in the modern world. Helping them to survive in our world should be the focus of adults, parents, teachers and administrators of schools.
Reports, expository writing, concrete learning before abstract learning (especially in math), projects and research papers, experiments and productions of all kinds should be the focus. Within the environment of the school, mock cities where the students are actually working with money and are mentoring with business experts, could be created. Students could be working along side experts in technology, research and science. Business owners, accountants, scientists, newspaper journalists magazine publishers and graphic artists, etc. should be on board as teachers and staff. Students could also work on location for community service hours in various environments within the community such as car repair shops, hospitals, nursing homes, chiropractic and physical therapy offices, etc.
They should prove their progress toward self chosen goals and interests such as fashion design, graphic arts, theater and script writing, music, music and art production, computer repair and programming and digitally created art and graphics, robotics, accounting, etc. etc. etc. We need to create environments they will be happy to work in while they learn real world skills. The goal should be employment. Higher education will be understood to be a path toward a self-chosen career.
Ask any 18 year old when he is graduating from high school whether he has had a truly worth-while education.
Most will say no.
We need to change that.
We need to activate their interest and work with their innate love of life.
By setting boundaries, (ten commandments are truly useful in this regard,) we can rise above the influence of modern influences which do seem to be increasingly destructive.
( Kim Kardashian's recent and well-publicized behavior is a good example of her total L a c k of values, morals, respect, decency, love of life and ultimately a complete lack of love for our Creator.)
Freedom within boundaries...
Freedom and discipline are two sides of the same coin.
I agree with a lot of what you said, but that actually gets back to teaching basic skills, which is something that has been sacrificed in the US in order to try to get our higher math and science scores up with other countries. It's been a miserable failure. And you need some way to measure that progress, and for better and for worse, testing is still the best way.
Testing should be done when the student has been exposed for an adequate amount of time to the material. Let the students determine when they are ready. Open test dates. What would be wrong with that? You see, many of the founding fathers went to Harvard and graduated in their early teens. We have to stop thinking our kids are less capable than they are. We are keeping them infants for way too long. They have interests from the time they are quite young. We need to feed and inspire their mental interests and determine what they need to know and to master in order to survive. That means knowledge and experience. There are other ways to determine understanding and competency other than grades!
By manipulating challenges in the environment, they learn by practicing and and by doing. Their works reveal their level of mastery. Getting hired has little to do with grades. Perhaps assesment could be done on the level of a job interview.
This program is probably looking way into the future. But, by revealing the future now, we can jump ahead... even if just a little. It requires faith in our youth. Basic skills are very vital. The foundation for reading writing and math must be laid in elementary school. Actually the Montessori method as developed by Dr. Maria Montessori has children of five years old doing the work of third graders. Her methods were based on the child's motivation and love of life. Turn this enthusiasm on early in a child's life and the teacher has an easier time.
Again, without the understanding of how to set boundaries her methods do not work. Unfortunately, most teachers today do not understand the importance of setting boundaries as discipline to the freedom a child actually needs in order to learn.
Fish have fins,
Humans have minds...
And love to use them.
(Montessori had toys and didactic learning materials in her school rooms. She observed that the children preferred reading, writing and math activities over random playing.) Her discoveries are worth looking into.
Times are changing. Today, parents give their children freedom, but not all parents provide adequate boundaries. Boundaries protect the inner life of the child. They are there to keep him on a sure course toward self-mastery and personal fulfillment. They help him learn to guide his will. Adults need to put into the school environment those activities that a child will learn through mastery and practice.
Anyone who wants to glimpse into what the future can hold for our youth, should read the book, The Montessori Method, by Dr. Maria Montessori. Other books are, The Absorbent Mind and the Secret of Childhood. There is hope. And believe it or not, Montessori holds the key. Yes, she was a pioneer in the field of child development a while ago, but she was 300 years ahead of her time, like Christopher Columbus.
Most people still think the kids are flat.
(Montessori also discovered that the child has a natural love of God.)
That's because they are gullible, they believe the lies they are given because they are trusting. They also love Santa, the easter bunny and the tooth fairy.
This is not a comment on that post. I was sorry to read about your son and am very glad that he is getting help. We got bombarded with all kinds of stuff for my daughter, even tried gluten free diet but that had no effect. It's hard sometimes to know what to do, but we keep plugging.
Thanks Chris. Also tried gluten free, but it did nothing. Dairy was and is the key, but it's really hard to take all dairy out of the diet, it's in everything. On dairy his working memory was in the 6th percentile. Without dairy it's just above the 50th percentile. It currently takes medication to keep his wandering mind under control. I fought it the whole way, but once on it within a year his reading level went from two years behind to a year above. All is not perfect though, he always looks for the easy way out and can't spell at all, wonder where he get that from?
If you haven't tried getting rid of dairy yet, give it a try. It's easy and you will see the result fast if it works. All milk and all cheese, yogurt and butter, and you have to read every label for secret dairy ingredients like Caseins. Adhd and Autism are in the same spectrum.
I wish you all the best.
Thanks. My daughter really doesn't consume dairy, so that's not an issue. But I nevertheless do wonder about different things.
We had him test for allergies and sensitivities after we had taken him off dairy. The results showed that he still had significant anti bodies in his system that indicated a severe sensitivity to dairy. We didn't tell the doctor to look for dairy, but we were not surprised by the results. To my son's good fortune asparagus also came back as a sensitivity to be avoided. He's adamant about not eating asparagus, but always wants ice cream. I think my first hub was written about him and our fight against meds, it's in need of updating.
You are the one asking who is operating my thoughts and you assume I don't have that answer. I've explained many times that there is no God and no one is operating my thoughts. There is no need for an operator. You can want a daddy figure if that makes you feel better, but just because you want someone telling you how to behave doesn't me there is someone operating your thoughts.
Then what about the laws of nature? They are universal and exist beyond our thoughts.
The laws of nature exist beyond our thoughts? They don't exist beyond my thoughts.
They exist outside of your thoughts! They exist whether you are aware of them or not! They certainly existed before you were born.
Sure, but my thoughts understand them. The laws of nature do not exist outside of my thoughts, they exist despite thoughts of some.
"They exist despite the thoughts of "some" (all). That is the only (mostly) true statement. One out of three is not enough to be an adequate atheist. Come on!
I'm not an adequate atheist? I'm sorry I don't meet your approval. Well not really.
Woody Allen joke
This guy goes to a psychiatrist and says, 'Doc, my brother's crazy, he thinks he's a chicken.' And the doctor says, 'Well why don't you turn him in?' and the guy says, 'I would, but I and our family need the eggs.'
I do get result from much of this spiritual stuff, we keep going through it because most of us need the eggs. I can't explain well how I get my eggs, only that it works well and why give up real eggs that seem unreasonably to your reality?
Agree with Rad about guns
USA has 50% of the world's budget and 26% are prison. For only 4% of the World's population that is an Offensive budget not a defensive budget.
Agree with Kathryn
If was cherry picking from the bible-" The kingdom is within" is a very good one and would add co-creator with God
Yep. Why else are we here? Until we w a n t to "go home."
HuH? (regarding reply to Rad Man.) You have to admit you are being rather confusing with this one. 26% of the world's budget is prison? What is an "offensive budget?" ( Do you speak French? That explains a lot, if English is only a second language for you.) Could you explain what you meant.( Maybe I am just a dope.)
Yes, the USA has 26% of the world’s prisons are own by the USA. You were comparing China vs USA which China has 4 time the population and second largest prisons in the world.
Prison population per 100,000
I’ve toured the world except most parts of Africa, toured 6 countries in their war zones. From experience you are far safer to not carry a gun. With Hand guns you have 6 times more chance of being shot by having a hand gun than not having a hand gun.
Killing will never solve killing, war solves nothing. China will excess the USA finance in every category accept national defense budget in the next decade anyways.
Dear Rad Man,
I heard that the image was absolutely seared on by energy... some type of burning... on only the first layer on the cloth. It was not painted on. It shows the blood where the sword pierced. It is blood and water, again not paint. My point was that IF this shroud proved to be that of Jesus, it would be the ONLY concrete evidence available. Unfortunately, as you have just made clear, the shroud is not reliable evidence at all. In which case there can be NO concrete evidence of Jesus' existence. So why is belief in Him (and God) a world-wide phenomenon again?
Because most people rather hear the myth stories about a better after life forever.
Here is the sad part, most christians believe most will go to hell, and the rapture won't happen to them, no no no....
Rather hear the story about a better place in the spirit world. It make me happier wail here on earth, must be the over hopeful in me
Can not prove even one God exist, let only 10,000 other Religious Gods. Only claim, not being able to understand them and atheist study religion and have much more religious knowledge than I would. Religious people would count me out because I think everyone and thing is God. I am nor black or white , just mix brown in the middle. Only love holds the world and universe together as far as I can imagine and think God can work if they keep Religion to thou self. Set religious person in a round world and tell them to preach in a corner, they would rather drive us all mad, MAD I SAY
It's easy to convince people there is an afterlife because they desperately want one, but because you want one doesn't mean there is one.
Fear is strong in this one?
If it’s me your addressing you must know me much better than that Mark.
I know very few people who are more tenaciously fearlessness in confronting every problem as I desired to challenge. Ever since 8 years old confronting a very abusive bully Alcoholic Dad everyday, later years I trained him how to live a decent and happy life
Before you claim I have strong fear, my question to you Mark is -
“Why are you so obsess with God, if you are an atheist?
Why are Atheists more obsessed with religion than the religious?
Defending that kind of problem will never be solved in your lifetime. Your atheist group is only 3% of the world’s population. Your confronting the biggest problem known to atheists which is 90% who think or believe in God. Happiest is how we solve our problem, how in the world will you solves this God problem?
Do you accept this fearless Challenge Mark?
Don’t ask me to Challenge God, I’ve already solved it, by acceptance of God in my own way that flows with it.
I could be over reacting from some other strange comment Mark made to me.
Kathryn dose not seem like a Christian fundamentalist and seems open enough for change. Why would she have strong fear?
The US is a fairly unique case and I'm not sure how to actually debate that one. As an actual religious person, and someone who takes it rather seriously, I would be among those who question just how "christian" America actually is.
In reality, the Christianity helped calm things down to a point where people could start thinking about things, and many then became atheist. Or agnostic, whichever they would prefer. I used to talk to a Belgian who referred to himself as agnostic. Nice guy.
World War II really can't be discounted as a factor in European history, and the religious and spiritual forces at play in that even, especially in Germany, are convoluted under the best circumstances. I think you know a lot of what I think, I certainly got into enough debates about Hitler's "christianity" but that really is just the tip of the iceberg, so to speak.
And also as a Christian and a history buff, it's hard to overstate how America being seen (and seeing itself) as a Christian nation during and after WWII affected the rest of the world. Of course there's the famous story about MacArthur requesting missionaries to go to Japan because the Japanese were so hungry to know what god could have defeated them. One of the great failings of the church. But again, there's a reason so many countries had "Christian Democrat" parties.
Yeah - the Christian Socialist Party was a blast.
The Christian Social Party - later know as the Nazis? They sure calmed things down a bit.
Ah, no. I was unaware that Deutschland's National Socialist Party had ever been called the "Christian Social Party." I'll have to look that one up.
No, I was referring to the wave of political parties that included the word "Christian" in their names after WWII.
You could also say living causes more problems than it solves!
#real talk-The Bible promotes peace, not war. It is us humans that act, not the religion itself.
Just like when a snake bites somebody. It isn't the snake that killed the person, it is the venom.
That idea breaks down unfortunately as humans have to go against a peaceful teaching to act out something that is opposite. (If speaking about Christs teachings for example, if speaking about Christianity). A snake's venom is working in a way it was designed to work, not giving an opposite result of what it was intended. So the point the poster made is still a valid point as far as I can see.
So when Jesus said he came to cause division he was lying?
I was simply talking about how the example given was invalid and why. Jesus showed how by example, there need not be any violence, and took violence himself for it, as did his apostles. He scolded the time someone did bring out a sword. This backs up the point trying to be rebutted with the snake comment.
"there need not be any violence, and took violence himself for it"
Those two phrases seem quite at odds with each other. Pacifism is a wonderful thing...until you run into someone that is not. At that point it breaks down rather quickly, depending totally on what the other party wants.
All the judgement talk in Revelation sounds quite violent to me. Having people endure a place like Hell (if it's the eternal torment myth instead of the less evil an-eternal-fiery-pit-that-extinguishes-a-soul-all-together myth) sounds quite violent to me.
You can't have a vacuum. Since I'm not a Muslim, I can't really speak to that. I've read a lot about it, but I'm no expert.
But as a Christian, I will tell you that kids pick up the message one way or the other. Whatever people who believe that religion should be kept out of school, whatever they think will happen, the truth is that if God is not discussed in school then the kids get the message. They think God should be kept out of life, period, which is normal when you're a rebellious teenager anyway. And it was specifically designed that way by many people.
But seriously, why should Christians keep their beliefs out of school? Because it makes non-Christians uncomfortable? But then the Christians have to put up with having their beliefs demeaned. So in the end, the non-Christians become guilty of the exact thing they complain about the Christians for, forcing someone else to abide by their beliefs.
Which means that ultimately, I suppose, might makes right, eh?
But seriously, why should Christians keep their beliefs out of school?
But seriously, why should Muslims, pagans, satanists, buddhists, atheists or any other belief system keep their beliefs out of school?
Maybe, just maybe, because any time a government has been ruled by a religious organization it has turned into a living hell for the citizenry. Maybe because "belief" does not equate with "knowledge". Maybe because the US constitution forbids government endorsement of ANY religion, not just all those not Christian. Maybe because the most common moral found throughout the world (and supported by the Christian god) says not to.
Is that sufficient or do you need more reasons?
We're not trying to impose anything on anyone. We're simply just trying to spread the good news of Jesus so that one may be saved. Muslims are deceived and crazy.
I don't think it's the belief IN God. I think it's the belief that God doesn't exist. If everyone one followed the 2 most important commandments, 1. Love the Lord your God with all your heart soul, mind, and strength and 2. Love your neighbor as yourself all the problems would cease. It's not GOD who's the problem. It's disobedient men and women who blatantly reject His love, counsel and provision. Mix in a few evil entities that fuel the fires of disobedient men and let's all blame God.....to me that's just silly.....
"disobedient" refers to a willfully bad shark swimming in the sea of joy. If only he could be like a playful smiling dolphin instead.
Then you are free to regard me as the most sinful person in the world and expect to see me sometime in Purgatory, then in the Dungeon somewhere, hopefully enjoying myself.
I have no problem with you having your belief(s). My problem is in your assumption that there IS a "god" that demands my obedience and that you feel you can load that assumption onto MY shoulders.
You have your choices, I have mine.
You are presuming that God exists.
Everyone has a free of speech regardless of what your religion is. Be open to everyone's opinion regardless of what it is. That is what makes this world and culture unique. Who ever you believe in would not have created such a diverse crowd. If we were all of the same thing, we might as well be a bunch of robots.
Discussion is good.
I agree that everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Although everyone's opinion isn't truth. What is truth? For some, it's a matter of opinion! hahahaha! But for other's it's a matter of FAITH. Now there are many faiths, but in my opinion, for me personally, my truth, is THE truth, JESUS. God created everything through His WORD. Diversity shows the creator's creativity. That's why we have one race, the HUMAN race, with various ethnicities. That's why green grass grows out of brown dirt, that's why a yellow and black bumble bee with clear wings can fly to a red flower, take white pollen and make golden honey, that's why white clouds float in a blue sky under a yellow sun that hangs in black space. God, our creator is creative. There's a novel thought.........IMHO, of course.
Sorry, we have different ethnicities because of evolution. We evolve or adapt to a new environment.
Exactly.. And it was all part of the grand design to show case God's intelligence, ingenuity and creativity. And just think: Man is created in His image and likeness! WOW.
Please tell me where this information came from that God made evolution to show case his intelligence, ingenuity and creativity. Did I miss the evolution section of the bible?
What is God's image and likeness? Isn't he all powerful and all knowing and everywhere always and immortal? We are none of those things. A loving God would help us become like him, just as a loving parent does. He wouldn't be up there bragging about how smart and creative he is and asking for praise. I think you've been misguided.
That sir is your OPINION and you are more than welcome to it.... But I believe that YOU sir are the one who is "misguided". Your questions are topics for an entirely different discussion which I would be happy to discuss with you at a later time. Thanks for your contribution!
I asked questions to get clarifications about statements you made. You stated that God made evolution to show his intelligence among other things. Where did you get this information from?
You stated we are made in God's image. I asked how can this be when we are nothing like him?
Please answer my question so we can move on.
You have clearly taken what I said completely out of context. Allow me to clarify: Adaptation, not evolution is God's grand design. Men did not evolve from monkeys or all monkeys would be men. As for the rest of your complaint, since you insist, here goes a crash course in your education:
Genesis: 1:26-28 reads,
Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all[b] the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” 27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. 28 Then God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”
This is the book of the genealogy of Adam. In the day that God created man, He made him in the likeness of God.
As for me, I will see Your face in righteousness; I shall be satisfied when I awake in Your likeness.
When I consider Your heavens, the work of Your fingers,
The moon and the stars, which You have ordained,
4 What is man that You are mindful of him,
And the son of man that You visit him?
5 For You have made him a little lower than the angels,[b]
And You have crowned him with glory and honor.
6 You have made him to have dominion over the works of Your hands;
You have put all things under his feet,
7 All sheep and oxen—
Even the beasts of the field,
8 The birds of the air,
And the fish of the sea
That pass through the paths of the seas.
18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19 Go therefore[c] and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen.
Acts 2: 38
Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
For you died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God.
15 Therefore I also, after I heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love for all the saints, 16 do not cease to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers: 17 that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give to you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Him, 18 the eyes of your understanding[c] being enlightened; that you may know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints, 19 and what is the exceeding greatness of His power toward us who believe, according to the working of His mighty power 20 which He worked in Christ when He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places, 21 far above all principality and power and might and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in that which is to come.
22 And He put all things under His feet, and gave Him to be head over all things to the church, 23 which is His body, the fullness of Him who fills all in all.
Man is the image and likeness of God. We have an image, we are self aware, we are conscious, and much more. Our dominion was lost when Adam disobeyed the commandment, the only commandment God gave him; not to eat from a certain tree. Adam was more focused on the one tree he didn't have instead of all of the trees he had. Therefore, he lost his dominion. Jesus came, lived a righteous and sinless life, and then He went to the cross, making it possible for us, men, to regain our likeness of God and our dominion, through faith in Him and his sacrifice.
John 3:16 says,
For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.
13 (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. 15 But the free gift is not like the offense. For if by the one man’s offense many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded to many.
16 And the gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned. For the judgment which came from one offense resulted in condemnation, but the free gift which came from many offenses resulted in justification. 17 For if by the one man’s offense death reigned through the one, much more those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.)
18 Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life.
18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. 19 For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; 21 because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now. 23 Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body. 24 For we were saved in this hope, but hope that is seen is not hope; for why does one still hope for what he sees? 25 But if we hope for what we do not see, we eagerly wait for it with perseverance.
1 John 3:2
Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.
1 Corinthians 1:18-30
18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written:
“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise,
And bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.”[a]
20 Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. 22 For Jews request a sign, and Greeks seek after wisdom; 23 but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks[b] foolishness, 24 but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
Glory Only in the Lord
26 For you see your calling, brethren, that not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called. 27 But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things which are mighty; 28 and the base things of the world and the things which are despised God has chosen, and the things which are not, to bring to nothing the things that are, 29 that no flesh should glory in His presence. 30 But of Him you are in Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God—and righteousness and sanctification and redemption— 31 that, as it is written, “He who glories, let him glory in the Lord.”
1 Corinthians 15:49
And as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly Man.
1 Corinthians 2:16
For “who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct Him?” But we have the mind of Christ.
2 Corinthians 4:1-6
Therefore, since we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we do not lose heart. 2 But we have renounced the hidden things of shame, not walking in craftiness nor handling the word of God deceitfully, but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God. 3 But even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, 4 whose minds the god of this age has blinded, who do not believe, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine on them. 5 For we do not preach ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord, and ourselves your bondservants for Jesus’ sake. 6 For it is the God who commanded light to shine out of darkness, who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.
"The more we EVOLVE into the divine person we are created to be the past DISSOLVES. The more we EVOLVE the wondering who we are is SOLVED. The REVOLUTION of the earth is God's message on the significance of EVOLUTION. Empowerment Thought: Resolve what's really important i.e. to EVOLVE. If you do, you will discover limitless possibilities are within YOU. Peace & Love"
-J. D. W.
Develop gradually, esp. from a simple to a more complex form.
(with reference to an organism or biological feature) Develop over successive generations, esp. as a result of natural selection.
develop - expand - unfold
Job 33: 29-30
29 “Behold, God works all these things,
Twice, in fact, three times with a man,
30 To bring back his soul from the Pit,
That he may be enlightened with the light of life.
Also, why would one think that making us into different ethnicities is an intelligent design? It has been the motivation for countless abuses, deaths, and genocides. Just look at what happened to the Native Americans, and African slaves, and the ethnic cleansing that has taken place in many societies.
It seems that some people are completely mindless when it comes to giving praise to their silly Gods, not even recognizing that this would be the creation of a blood thirsty psychopath...making us into different ethnicities, just so we will have a convenient reason to slaughter each other.
"It seems that some people are completely mindless" Correct. What God has created and designed for good Satan has conspired with man to make it all seem bad. But afterall, isn't that his job? Deception is his greatest weapon and men still chose to believe the lie. He's the Father of Lies and there is no truth in him. Now there's a discussion...
Do you think God created Satan in his image as well? If God is all knowing and all powerful why does he let Satan be so mean to those he loves?
Now you're being silly......The bible says MAN was created in God's image. As for Satan Ezekiel 28 says,
"“You were the seal of perfection,
Full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.
13 You were in Eden, the garden of God;
Every precious stone was your covering:
The sardius, topaz, and diamond,
Beryl, onyx, and jasper,
Sapphire, turquoise, and emerald with gold.
The workmanship of your timbrels and pipes
Was prepared for you on the day you were created.
14 “You were the anointed cherub who covers;
I established you;
You were on the holy mountain of God;
You walked back and forth in the midst of fiery stones.
15 You were perfect in your ways from the day you were created,
Till iniquity was found in you."
Isaiah 14: 12-15
“How you are fallen from heaven,
O Lucifer,[b] son of the morning!
How you are cut down to the ground,
You who weakened the nations!
13 For you have said in your heart:
‘I will ascend into heaven,
I will exalt my throne above the stars of God;
I will also sit on the mount of the congregation
On the farthest sides of the north;
14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds,
I will be like the Most High.’
15 Yet you shall be brought down to Sheol,
To the lowest depths of the Pit.
Man, through Jesus Christ, now has authority and power over satan, but man has to choose it for himself. God is a just God, even unfortunately with satan, but his end is assured.....it's easy for satan to cooberate with man in his fallen state because man, just like satan was as shown above is only concerned about me. me, me, my my, my, i, i ,i.....InIquIty...."But God.... who is rich in mercy......" Angels were created specifically to serve God. Although they had the ability to choose, the didn't have the right. Man was created with the ability and the right to choose.
Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.
Again, you didn't answer my question.
If God is all knowing and all powerful why does he let Satan be so mean to those he loves?
Please don't refer to me as a pig. I've refrained from calling you names, please show the same respect.
I didn't call you a pig. I was referring to the jewels of info., I've given to you. I said "no more pearls...." I leave you to your own devices.....
I suppose you mean those people who keep posting endless, meaningless, mindless scripture when others are trying to have a sensible debate.
I suppose you have irrefutable proof of a being called Satan. I hope you don't think that everyone is going to accept your implication that the bible is a credible source. So, please, let's see your proof.
Please provide proof, or your assertions are meaningless drivel. Thanks
I have already provided more than ample proof from the most reliable source on earth, the Word of God....To continue this debate with you and the others is pointless. I'd only be casting pearls........I hope you guys make use of all the wonderful information of the posts I have left because therein lie your answers!
1. Believer comes into forum, asserting outlandish, whimsical claims
2. Believer is asked to validate claims
3. Believer has ZERO evidence to corroborate claims, and asks that the logical opposition just believe him on faith
4. Logical opposition informs believer that this is absurd...and rightfully so
5. Believer becomes angry, and accuses the opposition of being the perpetrator of the conflict, when in fact it is him
lol! Typical.. Believer presents un-believer overwhelming evidence of truth but un-believer still believes that he doesn't believe! WOW. I leave you, also, to your own devices.....No more pearls.....
TRUTH?! You have not cast any pearls. All you have done is quote insane scripture from a mythical, ancient book, written by dubious, and ignorant authors from the Bronze Age. What a disturbing world view to think that you have actually argued your case reasonably.
I've noticed that you demand a respect from other people that you won't accord them yourself.
Of course you don't think LYING is disrespectful, do you? As that is all I have heard.
I think that demading something from other people that you will not give yourself is disrespectful. It doesn't matter what face you put on it. But as long as we're on the subject, people who judge others by absolute standards that no one can live up to often find themselves being judged similarly, and missing the irony.
Which is actually in the bible. Judge not lest you be judged yourself for the measure in with you judge others you will also be judged
This statement does not necessarily point itself strictly to God.. It can even be applied in everyday life.. For instance, You Read all of the posts here of the beliefs of Christians and dismiss them and deride them as useless drivel and garbage. On the same token, I have seen someone else do the same with your viewpoints.. Despite popular opinion (on both sides), Not everything is tied strictly and unwavering to God. There are some concepts that just are what they are in either case.
It has happened to me plenty of times. I have been called delusional, insane, evil, uneducated, dishonest, ignorant, and many more. I have even been told by one Christian that Satan was whispering in my ear. And I really couldn't prove him wrong...although his assertion was truly absurd.
Let me get this straight...you're saying: I think you are being duped, however, you think I'm being duped...but neither position is superior to the other. I take it that you see it, strictly, as a matter of perception.
Did I specifically say I think you're being duped? No, I did not. I even acknowledged the fact that logic is very practical. There is nothing duping regarding science, but I merely stated that it doesn't explain everything. No, I am not superior to you and my position is not superior to yours. My beliefs are my beliefs and your beliefs are your beliefs. My perception of your beliefs are that they are a conclusion that you decided works best for you regarding your life. If that is what is sustaining you then great. If not.. **shrugs**. I'm certain that once my beliefs can no longer sustain me then I will change them
Thanks for your explanation. I was just asking...was not accusing.
Ok.. I was wondering. Some of your posts would appear to some to have an an accusatory edge to them. I have tried to be careful with my responses as not to be negatively reactive to the first impression. Not sure If i fully succeeded, but you have not been disrespectful toward my responses IMO and I appreciate that from you
Or wonderful you. Nice try, but that kind of jiu jitsu doesn't apply here. You have every right to want respect, but if you come charging into the forum with statement after statement about how all Christians are hypocritical liars who don't respect others, well, what respect are you showing us? And if you try to turn everything around on us with answers like that, what are you showing other than your contempt for Christianity? The Golden Rule, as I'm sure you're aware, is not unique to Christianity, it exists in some form in most major religions and philosophies.
Very good point, But the Golden Rule is flawed in itself in how it is applied. Too often, the golden rule is taken too literally as well
I'm not sure how you can take that too literally. We're supposed to treat others the way we wish to be treated. If you extrapolate, then anyone who treats others with contempt would seem to want that treatment from others, although that's not usually the case. Nonetheless, the rule is about how YOU are supposed to treat others. In it's Christian form, it's also about your relationship with God.
An example of what I mean about it being taken too literally is like teaching others. we have a tendency to teach others certain things based on how it was taught to us. Meaning we apply our teaching style to the same way as our own personal learning style. But the truth of the matter is that everyone is different in their ideas and perceptions. For you, The previous person could be seen as being disrespectful while they may just think of themselves as being upfront and honest. We apply the golden rule (and it's variations) at times as according to our own personal perspective instead of applying it contextually as according to the individual we are dealing with.
I don't doubt that he does merely consider himself upfront and honest. I am rarely more rude and confrontational than when I am being "merely upfront and honest" and my experience is that most people are the same way in that respect. Honesty is not the same thing as a license to be disrespectful and intolerant, and that goes for both sides.
I guess it's hard to find words, that describe your beliefs, that you would deem respectful. I guess I need to replace all of these words, but what would I replace them with:
I judge your beliefs...you judge mine. I don't understand where you are perceiving my judging anyone on absolute standards. Maybe I am just missing the point, but I perceive myself as just a person who points out inconsistencies...somewhat directly.
Can I ask why you would find it necessary to describe anyone's beliefs in the terms you listed? Let me describe your beliefs that there is no God. Your beliefs are valid as according to your interpretation of information provided just like my beliefs are valid as according to my interpretation of information provided. Your believe as according to what you feel works best for you, just like my beliefs are as according to what I feel works for me. Your beliefs are not any of the terms you mentioned IMO. We just have a different set of beliefs. But I personally respect your beliefs and your entitlement to those beliefs.
Your words are an absolute standard. I stand by what I wrote. When you wish to show the respect you demand, you will receive it. If you only want to sneer and insult, then the same will be given to you (by people more practiced in it than myself) which in my experience will simply prove to be further insulation for both of you.
well here is YOUR problem. When a proof is given to you, YOU chose not to believe in the proof, YOU chose to scoff at it, ignore it and YOU chose to go your own selfish way.
This verse is meant for you at this moment
2 Peter 3: 3-4
Knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. They will say, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation.”
Excellent comment, I appreciate your views, belief and faith. Stay strong my friend. God is with you.
I think the title "The belief in God has caused more problems than it has solved!" should be re-written. I am a believer and it did not caused me anything, and trouble. I guess we should not talk about GOD, but we should talk or argue about religion. Every religion has it's own beliefs and own set of leaders, that is why there's always trouble in the community, a never ending debate that leads to nothing but chaos and hatred. It's not God or Allah who told them to kill others, but their leaders. Manipulative people who only do nothing but sit in one chair playing with the minds of the people that can easily be poisoned by words that can cause huge problems but comfort for them "the manipulators".
The word God, is not responsible for man's actions. God cannot be seen, cannot be heard, but others still believes in, including me. We are the ones responsible for what we are doing in this planet. Whether the word God is true or not, or just a word to define the existence of the Supreme Being or GAUTU (Great Architect of the Universe). Still there's no point for us humans to tell that we create mistakes and chaos here on Earth because of God.
The humans are responsible for such actions, the only hard part here is that, lots of us tend to use the word God for our self satisfaction even if the price is the freedom and happiness of other people. When will we learn?
Religious leaders always teaches their followers of things that even them cannot do. They try to impose things that will later limit a person from it's freedom/freewill. They always teach things that they think is good but in reality, it will just do nothing but problems. They teach and teach and teach but fail.
It's not God who's responsible in the participation of religious leaders in the politics, but it's the leader themselves. They have high prides, hunger for power/manipulation, and selfish intents. God did not want those things for us to do. Have you heard God, talk to you about cheating your way to the examinations? Did God told people to vote Obama to be the President of the United States? Did Allah told the Pakistanis to bombard Israel? or Did God even operates the plain with an atomic bomb that destroyed the Japanese Empire? Did God move your hands to eat your foods? Or Did God move your body to have sexual activities with others?
So, Why include the word God in all of this problem? I am a believer but I am not a religious human being. Both are different in many ways and faith is different to. People needs to become a free thinker in order for us to prosper and become successful in life. We need to learn how to critically think in order for us to know what to do and which is better or best to do with our lives and to others. I never listen to religious people, I only listen to myself and to people that I think has a higher level of maturity than others.
Cause if we listen to those religious manipulators, nothing will happen, we will just be stagnant and we will have no chance or reaching our goals in life. The separation of religion and state should really be practiced. I guess, the freemasons are smart enough to have that in USA. Even in our country, there is a separation of Church and State, however, it's just being ignored since this is a religious country, and it's too late for us free thinkers to fight for it because majority here are already poisoned and manipulated by those religious leaders. But at least, our government is trying to do their best to make a gap between the two. Cause if the whole system will be infected by religion, it will fall down. I just wish, God go down here and be the one to teach us, at least it's a real teaching from a real God, not from those people who uses him and the teachings (teaching false meanings of whatever is written and misleading people to be a puppet of their leadership) just to stay on top! There are few religious leaders and people who are doing the right thing, but until when? And how few are there left? I just wish they don't get extinct.
So... It's not God, but it's humans okay? Thanks for its wonderful topic, it caught my attention and it gave my brain a little bit of exercise.
This is a very profound statement and one I can agree with
I suggest you read the topic before defending your beliefs. No one is suggesting god is to blame for anything.
The topic is - "The belief in God has caused more problems than it has solved!"
Operative word being belief in god.
Without a belief in god - there would be no religion. As we know - and you agree - man made religion is the problem. Therefore the belief in a god causes problems, because once you believe in a god, you are open to some one telling you what god wants you to do.
I suggest you re-read the topic again.... Isn't it blaming? The fact that "The belief in God has caused more problems" is written there, there is already a blaming. What do you think we should call that statement if it isn't blaming? We are believing in God, then.... It causes problem.... Then, who is to blame? Even if we blame ourselves, human, God still has a part in this topic, because God is included here, who's the reason of the belief? Who we do believe in, it's God right? Therefore, the topic directly showed that it's because of God, that we are believing in, that's why there are problems here in the world. Why don't we just state religion instead of the word God...
By the way, I would like to clarify some things, I have faith in God and I believe that the existence of God is true, however, I do not follow, faith is very different with follow, aside from the spelling, both have different deep meanings. God is not telling me what to do since I have a freewill. Religion is the one dictating the people, not God. I suggest you read over again what I had written there one by one word by word and go deeper... Better think out of the box....
What we are having here right now is a very good example of the real problem in religion, religious leaders and missionaries spread the word of the bible literally and misleadingly without knowing it's true and obscure meanings... Go deeper, that's what we must do.
"Without a belief in God, there would be no religion?" Are you sure? Religion is created by human beings not by God, we are created by God without those words, factions, guilds, nations, religions and etc... God did not told us to divide ourselves and kill each other. The words "I beleive in God" doesn't mean that I needed to follow "religion" nor believe in religion. The word and faction created by people is not by the will of God. We are created with the purpose of living and taking care of this world and do our own will, not to divide and separate ourselves among others and kill each other. God is a creator and not a dictator, God is singular not plural just like different religion.
If we will only focus in the word God, without thinking any religion or faction just God, do you think there would be problems and chaos?
Imagine, that all people only believe in one God, not religion, do you think there would be chaos and unending debate?
I suggest you read again my post and go deeply... I rest my case
Sorry - can you read English? All I get from your post is a desperate need to defend your irrational belief and ignore the chaos it causes.
We are not created by a god and all the other nonsense you spouted. Where do you get all this? I don't think there is such a thing as god - so when you tell me you know what this god wants or does not want - really, you are making the point the OP made.
Try thinking for yourself instead of telling me what I was created for. You don't speak for a god. That is your religion speaking that comes from an irrational belief in a god. And you know there is only one god apparently - how do you do that? plus you apparently know the true meaning of the bible. Wow. Try going deeper yourself. See reality for real instead of speaking on behalf of this god that doesn't exist. Try speaking for yourself instead - thanks.
I rest my case.
You still don't get my point, I am just trying to clear things out and I am not defending anyone. Can I read English? Yes, can I understand English? It will depend on how we will perceive each others statement. And how we look on each of the meaning that we have read.
I don't speak for a God yes, because I am just a human and not a God. I am speaking for myself because that's what I believe in. The "belief in the existence of God" your just asking me "And you know there is only one god apparently - how do you do that?" Is like this, do you believe in the word love? Friendship? or Intelligence! Have you seen those, have you touched those? But you feel and believe those words right? They are invisible, but we believe in those words. So, that's the same as believing God.... Can't be seen, can't be touched but can be felt by people who believed in. The existence of something sometimes doesn't need proof, for us to believe in it.
It's like this, how do you know that we are not created by a supreme being "GOD"? Do you have proof? Have you found the missing link? Or have you seen how the world and the universe were created?
Don't get mad, I can sense your already heating up... Chill a bit, this will be my last post for this.... If I continue this, I assure you I will not let you win the debate and I am sure you will do the same, and the debate will be unending. My time is being wasted here, have more important things to do, than to have debate with an individual that's is so close minded and "SUPER INTELLIGENT" that did not even see the things and the true meanings of the statements that I was trying to impose... I just wish you can provide me a proof that God really did not exist. Just like what you are asking to some posts and comments in this topic.... Well provide you the proof of the existence of God, once you provide us also the proof of God did not even exist and the proof of the origin of life and universe....
Sorry - the burden of proof is yours. You are the one claiming to know that we were created by a god. Where is your proof? Surely the default is that there is no god without any proof? This is why your religion causes so many fights. You make a claim and insist that I offer proof that you are wrong.
You have been speaking for this god. You specifically told me that you know we are created by a god, you know what we were created for and you know that god is singular:
How do you know all this? Because this is religion. You speaking for god.
I called it.. wasn't fast enough to get it out before Mark, but I knew it
Well done. Of course the burden of proof is on the one making the claim. Any believer who makes a claim and then demands some one disprove it is simply demonstrating why this belief causes so many fights. Don't you agree?
Yep.. That's why I try not to get into things too deeply with you and Rad...LOL.. I'm not trying to fight anyone or anything.
Simple question though, some atheists make the claim that there is no God. So since that theoretically is a claim that is being made, wouldn't that call for proof as well?
No. Would you need proof that the Loch Ness monster did not exist?
Yep because I believe in it, as well as Santa and the easter bunny...LOL
seriously though. I figured that your answer would be no. Which leads to the question of why? Why is it that if you are making a claim just like others are that they have to prove their claim but you don't have to prove yours? seems a little unfair don't you think? I would even think it should be easier for you to prove your claim since apparently proof against the existence of God is easier to obtain
Because it is not a positive claim. How is claiming there is a Monster living in Lock Ness the same as claiming that is nonsense? Are these claims equal? No - they are not.
That there is no Loch Ness monster. This is a negative claim.
yet a claim that people are generally positive of when they make it, So how would that be different? By the way, thanks for taking the time to answer my questions and taking them at least somewhat seriously
You genuinely don't understand the difference between claiming there is a Monster living in Loch Ness and claiming that that is nonsense so there isn't a monster living there?
"There is a Monster in Loch Ness." - Positive claim.
"No - that is nonsense so there is not a Monster in Lock Ness." - Negative claim.
And - do you notice that without the first claim - there is no second claim?
I am aware of the positive claim/negative claim principle. The positivity I was referring to is that people are so positive (as in sure) of what they are claiming.
I am an atheist, but I do not claim that no god exists. I do not assert to know with certainty that there is no god. I simply lack a belief in god, due to insufficient evidence to justify that belief. The theist who claims that a god not only exists, but they are certain of it and possess the key to eternal life, however, has made a huge claim - and such claims should come with huge evidence. It is not my job to prove them wrong when they have done no work to prove their claim right.
I've come to understand your level of atheism JMc. I was speaking more of atheists that assert without a shadow of a doubt. I appreciate your input too. You, Rad Man, Mark, and Getitrite are my favorite atheists. I've learned a lot about atheism from speaking with you four. Thank you so much!!
Thanks, here's my two cents. If God is in fact invisible, perhaps he can still be detected, much like gravity. The bible says that prayers can move mountains, but then others say that God can't interfere because of the free will thing. So this contradiction negates either free will or the accuracy of the bible. Lets start looking for evidence that prayer works, I've looked but come up short. It appears it's been tested, but with somewhat skewed results. It's obvious to me that if one of the religions were right God would be answering prayers from that religion and not others. I've been unable to find any evidence, but if I did I'd question weather this God is worthy of worship.
Which makes sense in itself. It is all again subject to interpretation and belief. As I've stated before I believe that certain ideas in the bible are taken too literally. Also, there are somethings taken so out of context that a lot of Christians externalize things that should be internalized such as getting a new job (when in truth we applied, interviewed well, and impressed recruiters), new house (when we pay for), and other things. The concept of being made in God's image is taken too literally and as such taken way out of context (which leads to an arrogance).
You've got your head on straight. Thanking God for winning a football game is ridiculous as is blaming the devil for a screw up.
Exactly, That's why I have formed the beliefs I have (I won't elaborate on those in an effort to spare you from experiencing my absurdity ). But a condensed version: If (for the sake of argument) there is a God, we don't need him. We were empowered to do things for ourselves.
I don't think you alone in your beliefs and it's actually makes perfect sense to me, otherwise there are to many contradictions.
I'm sure I'm not alone in my particular beliefs, but I have yet to meet someone that will agree with them. I just posted a forum question asking about that. Personally, from my conversations with atheists such as yourself, JM, Getitrite, and even Mark, we live similar lives for similar reasons, but the only difference is that I believe in God and you guys think my beliefs are nuts...LOL
Actually I don't think your beliefs are nuts. I personally completely understand them as I used to think the same way. Letting go of the concept of God is not an easy one. Religion or a belief in God prevents you from thinking about existentialism primarily because you are told what life is about and where we go after we die. It's a comfort that is no easily given up especially when your told even thinking about it get get you into hell.
Yeah.. That hell thinking was stuck in my system for a while until I went back and read the Greek and Hebrew translations and put down King James
Actually, if a heaven and hell (as according to some Christians' idea of each) exists (for the sake of humor and argument) I actually feel better about your chances of getting into heaven than the ones that are trying to place you in hell
We are not making the claim that something exists.
Hope I'm not coming across as combative. I'm asking leading questions to gain more understanding (which I admit is semi-limited) about atheists
No, I'm not claiming anything exists. For instance if I made the claim that my dog can talk. You would say show me and I would then have to supply evidence. If I made the claim my dog could talk and then told you to prove he can't it would be impossible because I could always claim that he only talks when no others are around.
Which makes sense. I can accept that, But then again with that specific comparison, whatever proof you did come up with can possibly be refuted as there being something else. so with this specific example I could draw the conclusion that it would be pointless to try to show proof of God to an atheist since there is a possibility of it being dismissed as something else.
There certainly could be evidence that I would look at closely. For instance I can't tell you how many times someone in these forums states that their brother or sister was saved from death with a prayer and all the doctors with bewildered. We always ask for a case study as evidence and never get it. It seems that believers just take their word for it. I've never seen a theist ask for evidence when a complete stranger makes claims of a miracle. Now from time to time people get better, I get that and it's great but doesn't constitute a miracle on it's own, but what would have if Christians were underrepresented in hospitals and cancer wards? Does the power of Christian prayer work better the a muslim prayer or no prayer at all? That would be evidence worth looking into. I have and found that Cancer is an equal opportunist. It doesn't care which God you pray to or if you even pray to a God.
Excellent point regarding the desire for a case study as well as whose prayers work best.. Now I have a different point of view regarding Muslims (that I refuse to get into on the grounds that I just don't want to deal with that specific argument...LOL)..
On the other hand, If you were a doctor, would you really want to print and post anything that could potentially lend to a misdiagnosis and as such get your license revoked and malpractice lawsuits?
This actually brings up memory that I have an example of.. When I was 18, The side of my neck swelled up so badly that I was unable to turn my head. When I had the tests done, I was told I had a cancerous cyst in my neck and the doctor scheduled me to have surgery to have it removed and tested for sure. When I went to my pre-op appointment, The swelling had gone totally and the doctor couldn't find any trace of whatever was in there so I didn't have to have surgery. He said he had no idea what it had been at that point. Now is it possible that I was misdiagnosed? Yep. Can I prove it? Nope. But the Dr would not post any study stating he didn't know what it was nor how it disappeared because that could be almost incriminating enough that it would cost him his license and a lot of money.
I have no idea what it was, and I'm glad I didn't have to have surgery. There are a ton of possibilities.
Obviously the doctor had no idea what it was yet either that's why you were scheduled for it's removal and testing. The difference is that your not claiming it was a miracle, your claiming you have no idea what it was. Glad it was nothing.
I can still call it a miracle (definition- an effect or extraordinary event in the physical world that surpasses all known human or natural powers and is ascribed to a supernatural cause.). Miracles don't specifically have to be divine. Miracles are just unexplained
I can't claim it as divine (God) because I have no clue what it was and as such can't say for sure if it was something that could have killed me or something that was just inflamed or swollen
Do you ascribe it to a supernatural cause? You said earlier you don't know what it was. The living always stat that it was a miracle. Those that died never get to make a claim. When my brother in law was dieting of cancer at the age of 38 he went to a supposed healer. When she wasn't working and he was getting worse she told it he just didn't have enough faith. Nice thing to tell a dying man.
The modern doctor is so afraid of litigation that he/she must over-diagnose just to be safe. X-Rays have long been used for purely medico-legal reasons.
Sure, it's a two way process, doctor and patient being involved, but society as a whole has driven this fear-based medicine.
You speak as though you have some proof.
And saying that atheists would lie about your proof and dismiss it as something else if you presented it is one of the many reasons this belief causes so many conflicts.
Sorry you read it that way, but that wasn't what I intended. I was just showing Rad that the example provided could lead one to draw that conclusion. I wasn't saying that that specifically would be the case. I'm not sure if you read Rad's analogy regarding a talking dog. Basically I was more playing advocate, not stating my own personal ideals.
I truly didn't mean any of it to be insulting or an attack so if you took it that way I apologize. In the future I will make sure I clarify which is my own personal belief versus me just playing Devil's advocate.
Well - it is pretty insulting to be told that I would dismiss your proof if you gave me some. And that is a standard riposte from believers. As though you have proof and us atheists simply dishonestly discard it.
Show me some proof and I will be all over it. Who would dismiss genuine proof of this beast who will burn you for not believing? Not me.
Like I said, I apologize for the way I wrote it and how it insulted you. It was all speaking on a hypothetical situation that Rad Man brought up.
But I gotta ask, if proof could be submitted and you accept it, would you then choose to follow it?
It depends on the proof. Even if there was proof that a god existed, that wouldn't necessarily mean that I would worship or follow it.
You mentioned that in a different post that you could never follow someone that threatens eternal torment for anyone.
No. I wouldn't. That doesn't mean that if someone could prove that god existed that I would refuse to believe he existed. Existence if different from worship. With adequate evidence, I would have too acknowledge its existence, but I would still choose to not worship it.
Any god who is all powerful, all knowing and all god but still demands to be worshipped is not a god worthy of worship.
Following it and not acknowledging it's existence are not the same thing. If you provided proof of the disgusting creature of the bible - I would probably not follow it, and certainly would not worship it, but I would not refuse to acknowledge it's existence.
I see where you were going with this, but the response to that will be "The burden of proof is on Christians because they are the ones that believe in it"
And which version of God do you think should be the one we force everyone to believe in? The muslim God? The Hindu Gods? The Christian God? If we pick the muslim God the christians are not going to be happy, so we should pick the Christian God, wait the muslims tend to get upset when we even draw a picture of Mohammad, using the Christian God would be like calling Mohammad a fraud. What do we do now? Perhaps John Lennon had it right?
Many of the Colonial Colleges and schools were founded and built by Christians and Christian Organizations. As well as the one room school houses built years ago all across the United States. Plus most of the Hospitals were founded and still supported by Christians and Christian Organizations. Many big charities were founded and supported by Christians and Christian Organizations. They did the work. The point would be moot if not for Christian Organizations regarding Schools. Why would you support the abridgment of freedom, speech and expression in politics?
Does that make up for the hundreds of thousands of dead Natives killed by the spread of disease by missionaries?
Travel is inevitable in the world. Being sick is not a crime. Nor carrying disease without symptoms and unintentionally propagating it. Travelers contract diseases from all sorts of places that didn't originate from their original locations as well. Further, travelers contract diseases from the people they meet and spread that back to their homelands.
I think Colleges and Schools, Hospitals and Charities is better than "claims of hypothetical non-religious" sources /benefits. People could actually go to colleges, hospitals, and charities back then as opposed to having to try to find the alleged hypothetical non-religious benefits.
Well dodged. Does it make up for the thousands of Natives stolen from their parents to be bought up as "good Christians."?
And lest we forget - the primary function of any religious school is to indoctrinate the next generation - is it not?
I think Christianity and its devotion to Charity, Schools, Colleges and Hospitals is a (historically shown to be true for centuries) is a good thing. I think its a good example to counter what "in some cases" non-religion has given us eg mass murdering atheist dictators.
name one that killed people BECAUSE they were an atheist.
The campaign against religion peaked in the 1960s. Beginning in 1967 the Albanian authorities began a violent campaign to try to eliminate religious life in Albania. Despite complaints, even by APL members, all churches, mosques, monasteries, and other religious institutions were either closed down or converted into warehouses, gymnasiums, or workshops by the end of 1967. By May 1967, religious institutions had been forced to relinquish all 2,169 churches, mosques, cloisters, and shrines in Albania, many of which were converted into cultural centers for young people. As the literary monthly Nendori reported the event, the youth had thus "created the first atheist nation in the world."
The clergy were publicly vilified and humiliated, their vestments taken and desecrated. More than 200 clerics of various faiths were imprisoned, others were forced to seek work in either industry or agriculture, and some were executed or starved to death. The cloister of the Franciscan order in Shkodër was set on fire, which resulted in the death of four elderly monks.
Article 37 of the Albanian Constitution of 1976 stipulated, "The state recognizes no religion, and supports atheistic propaganda in order to implant a scientific materialistic world outlook in people."
yeah, and how long did the Albanian "atheist regime" last? less than 10 years or so. It's the exception to the rule - not the norm. Interesting, though, that is the ONLY example you can point to.
You just asked for one. Pol Pot targeted the religious because they were religious.
You're using an association fallacy. The fact that Pol Pot was an atheist has nothing to do with his regime. It's like saying that anyone with a mustache is evil because hitler had one. His atheism had nothing to do with his regime.
It was anything and everything except their atheism? Except they targeted the religious because they were religious, then they pushed state sponsored atheism and even admit its propaganda.
Perhaps they instated atheism and targeted the religious- not because they were atheists but because they enjoyed jazz music? Yea, thats it.
I guess, by that line of reasoning we can close the debate on whether religion is responsible for the violence throughout history. That should cut Hub Pages religion/philosophy postings by a good third.
Not necessarily (although why I'm responding to another comment of yours when you're just goint to tell me how upset I am and how silly I'm being is beyond me).
Some Christians who achieve power actually act with their religion first and foremost, and therefore cause harm. For example, the inquisitors, that felt it was their holy duty as a catholic to exterminate heresy - and the heretics - by torturing them and subjecting them to death at the stake.
Likewise, christian politicians in the religious right cry "moral majority" and actively work to reestablish "tradition christian values" by limiting the rights of gays to get married, work against the woman's right to choose, try to reintroduce prayer and "creation science" in schools, etc. That is their religion that is prompting their political action - and they come right out and say that they're acting on behalf of god. George W Bush flat out said in an interview that god told him to go to war with Iraq. These people are proud of their religion and they use it in conjunction with the power they wield.
While the Algeria atheist agenda does fall in line with that, the other examples commonly used like Hitler (who was a catholic), Stalin (who was a theological seminary graduate) etc are commonly pointed to in this instance - and it is a flawed comparison.
I'm not sure that I can agree it is a flawed comparison. Sticking with Pol Pot, since that was the example used in the post I read; he did target the religious, among many other groups. Sure, you can attribute his goals and behavior to many things. But, if you refuse to allow his atheistic beliefs to be explored as one of the reasons for his violence then you can't, fairly, claim religion causes violence.
Unless, you are saying none of his beliefs motivated his behavior. Which would lead me to ask what might have. And if it was something other than belief that caused his heinous behavior...why do the religious regimes only act badly because of beliefs? Why are they different from other unfriendly regimes whose behavior is not motivated by the beliefs of their leaders?
From what I understand, the Spanish Inquisition was politicians using christianity for their own ends. Not sure if that is right, but I think it is.
That is the larger point. Power has its own motivation. It uses the tools that are at hand to maintain it. We can attribute behavior to religion or the lack thereof; but that doesn't do any more than scratch the surface to find what truly motivates.
I simply find it interesting that many believers can't accept atheistic regimes weren't ultimately motivated by a hatred of God; and many atheists can't accept that religion isn't what truly motivates the violence acted out in the name of religion.
I am trying to encourage the same, believe it or not. I just have a different style. I do not think its a productive or positive forum thread. Not that I would espouse any thread that is of similar nature that adheres to my particular belief. I would consider them unproductive too.
then why post here? By posting here, you're just continuing the conversation, and you're doing nothing to actually stop it.
Does it bother you I post a rebuttal to the thread? I think its important to show all the truth, not just what some want to myopically portray as their personal version of the truth.
doesn't bother me at all - but some people here actually want to discuss the issues with each other. You are talking about wanting to shut it down. It seems that if it's so pointless to you, that you may choose not to post, rather than actually contributing to the conversation and ensuring that it stays going.
I definitely see, on a daily basis, more good done by the belief in God than bad. The charity that is done, positive thinking and fellowship that I witness at my church is far more positive than what is represented worldwide on the news.
I can't speak for what happens overseas or back in time during the crusades, but I think the overall contribution to society by religion is overwhelmingly positive. In all walks of life there are the good, the bad, and the ugly and I can point to negative acts by christians, muslims, buddists, jews, and atheists. If that is the case, then aren't we all at fault, not just those that believe in God? (Which could actually be a point to original sin)
There will always be those that cherry pick stories to fit their argument, but the fact will always remain that no matter what, we ALL will believe what we choose to believe in the end.
Which goes back to the question of individual behavior and group behavior.
There are indeed positive acts committed by CHRISTIANS. However do they outweigh the negatives of CHRISTIANITY?
Christians do do good work (So do atheists and those of other religions). Small groups of Christians do good work as well. (So do small groups of atheists and other religions)
However Christianity as an institution has not been especially positive. It has impeded scientific/social progress. It has caused wars and persecution. At times it has done these things to it's own members.
So does the benefit to individuals outweigh the damage to the whole?
And that's really the deal-breaker.
Christianity as an institution founded schools, colleges, charity and hospitals on a massive unrivaled scale. Just because you cannot fathom that, does not make in untrue.
As it was pointed out, the institution has done a lot of good in society. It was also pointed out that a lot of bad has been done in the name of that same institution. In that respect, It comes down to individual perspective as to whether the good outweighs the bad or vice versa. Obviously, for a lot of Christians the good outweighs the bad (except for those that believe more out of fear than love of God) otherwise we wouldn't be believers. On the other hand, for a lot of atheists, the bad outweighs the good which is why they stopped believing or never believed
I think people gravitate to whatever they feel will make their lives better. And there are those that feel very passionate about that and want to share what they have learned to help others, which can put some people off. Some people find this in the teachings of Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, etc. to help guide them in this journey. Some might never find it and feel that secular is the way to go. And then there are those that use the belief in others to get what they want.
I guess my point is that when we make this decision to believe what we believe, in some way we are also choosing not to believe in other things, which is where things get muddied up. I don’t think that any one is dumb for believing something else; I just think that it fits in their lives. That is where respect comes into play. I have not walked a mile in anyone else’s shoes, so who am I to say they are wrong. We all have to dance to our own song.
I do not think it comes down to an individuals perspective. I think It can be objectively analyzed.
see- history of colonial colleges yale. harvard
see history of hospitals
see top 3 charities
Colleges hospitals and charities. These are undeniable social and educational accomplishments that are unrivaled.
I think people take it for granted that 400 years of hospitals, colleges and charities just appeared out of no where.
I like your conversation though Deepes Mind. You are respectful, polite and intelligent and I appreciate it. I have to take off bbl
What I mean by individual perspective is that sometimes it is up to the individual to decide whether the good works outweigh the bad works factor into their own decision whether to believe in God or not.
These contributions cannot be denied, But on the other hand, neither can the wars that have been started "in the name of God". Nor can the destruction of some of these same institutions in that same name.
Thanks for the compliment. I try to remain objective when I reply as to stimulate thought and discussion on both sides and to be as respectful as possible so that others can respect me and other posters as well. I try to translate as much as possible so that things aren't as quickly reacted to in a negative manner
My point was that all walks of life do good and bad, including atheist, therefore it is not the institution, but the person that is evil, but there are some that do evil in the name of whatever vehicle they think will help them accomplish it.
I feel that a majority of people are good, including atheists. As a whole, on a grass roots daily basis, I feel that religion has vastly done more good than evil, despite what stories are cherry picked from the media because I see it every day.
And when you say deal breaker, does that mean the world would be better off without religion (I know you are talking about Christianity in the above post, but I assume you are talking about the belief in God, ie all religions)
Wow. I see you guys got an early start. Have we made a decision yet on if the belief in God has caused more problems?
Name me ten problems that a belief in god has solved.
1. What to do on Sunday mornings?
2. What to do with witches?
3. What to eat on Fridays?
4. What to do with Jews during WW2?
5. How to protect Gods chosen people in 2013?
6. What to do with Muslims in 1085
7. How to stop science from progressing for a thousand years?
8. How to start a war and feel just in doing so?
9. How do I knock on every door in the area and tell them what to do and think?
10 How to get wealthy on the back of the gullible and stupid.
This is easy. Would you like me to go on.
6. Lack of Shelter
7. Drug Abuse
Please stop lying at me. A belief in god has not solved those problems.Thanks.
It has. I see it everyday through the people at my church.
Religion has kept slavery alive for thousands of years. Religion is not what stopped slavery, humanity was.
Is there only one case of slavery in this world? There is still slavery today.
And it is still being solved. But not kept alive by religion
Then why did you state Religion has solved slavery? Especially when slavery is condoned in the bible.
I have posted on this a few posts back in a couple of places, Rad Man, if you care to look at my responses to this idea.
It has for someone. They fight against human trafficing and have saved lives.
Like William Wilberforce, who used his belief in God to do all he did to stop slavery, so the opposite case can be made as well from history.
There also is no directive at least say in Christianity, to hold slaves, but I don't know what other religions might teach it that some might be thinking of.
The people who stopped slavery, and are involved in human rights of all kinds, operate very often out of a worldview or religion that drives their action and motivations. Others have consciences in them that even if not explained by their worldview, help them to know it is inherently wrong.
Letters written by the apostles and followers of God to those that were in slave owning situations at a time long ago, or slaves themselves like Onesimus, don't teach that owning slaves is something to do. In fairness, we need to recall history as well, and how the world (unfortunately) was. People working of freedoms for debts, for instance, or a criminal working for his freedoms... they were encouraged to pay those debts, and masters were taught to treat them well. These were slaves in slave holding situations already, with a run away slave as the one example.
The religion I believe in, Christianity, teaches that we are truly enslaved by our sin, and promotes freedom in all areas of life, both now and forever. The teachings are opposite of slavery, and I appreciate it addresses the very things that actually hurt all humans in this life and possibly the life to come. I don't know the full teachings of other religions though to speak with such confidence on those. So really it comes down to the religion.
Directives to hold slaves in the bible. Keep in mind that Jesus never spoke out against slavery.
Ephesians 6:5 (NLT)
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ.
Colossians 3:22 (NLT)
Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything you do. Try to please them all the time, not just when they are watching you. Serve them sincerely because of your reverent fear of the Lord.
Titus 2:9 KJV
Exhort servants to be obedient unto their own masters, and to please them well in all things; not answering again;
In none of these does it say to "take" slaves. Unfortunately, until recently slavery was a part of everyday life. Thomas Jefferson and George Washington had slaves; does this mean democracy is irrelevant since it was also a principal these mean also held dear? It seems you would like to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Wow, here is another person justifying slavery. We know it's wrong today and God and Jesus should have known it was wrong then as well. Do you really think I can't find scripture describing when to take them, not that that matters when the scripture describes how to keep them. But here you go anyway. Your Christianity has you justifying slavery.
Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT
However, you may purchase male and female slaves from among the nations around you.You may also purchase the children of temporary residents who live among you, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property,passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat them as slaves, but you must never treat your fellow Israelites this way.
Exodus 21:2-6 NLT
If you buy a Hebrew slave, he may serve for no more than six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave, he shall leave single. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife must be freed with him.
If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave and they had sons or daughters, then only the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may declare, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children. I don’t want to go free.’ If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door or doorpost and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will serve his master for life.
I have never justified it, I only acknowledged a fact that it is history and I can't do anything but make sure it doesn't happen going forward. What would you have me do?
I can tell you Christianity does not promote or condone slavery now. What next?
I have always made it clear that there have been people that used religion for their own personal gains. I have also let it be aware that as a Christian I am learning, as you see I don't recite scriptures. But the argument you are making is something none of us can change, it is history. Acknowledging that is not condoning it. You should be able to tell the difference.
What would you have us do; Dissolve Christianity? If that is the case, there were atheists that believed in slavery as well. We should all give up by your definition because we as humans were part of slavery.
The corporate organized religion of Christianity should be dissolved. The individual belief system of it should remain intact. It is the mob mentality "Christians" that make it difficult for the rest of us. Christianity has lost a lot of people for different reasons. As a lot of atheists have pointed out there is a lack of what would be considered viable (To some of them) evidence that can be provided as proof of God. A lot of others are driven away because their beliefs do not fully line up with the Majority, but rather an individual understanding and interpretation of the Bible
I agree with most, although not with dissolving the corporate Christianity (I don't think those words go together, but for the case of replying, I will use it).
I totally agree it is a personal journey, so I don't worry what the group as a whole is saying. Sometimes Christians should realize that judging is not our job. With that said, I don't worry about the judgments. I am listening to Tool right now and I am sure not a lot of Christians would approve of that, but I don't see where I am crossing the line. It is an interpretation or a personal philosophy.
Organized religion supports charities and hospitals and colleges. They are human beings collectively doing countless good - not mobs. Next time you find yourself sick or in need do not go near a hospital or charity. If you are going to smear them as a mob, and suggest they should be dissolved like an evil dictator would do , so much for your individual belief.
I didn't smear all of them as a mob.. But the Idea that a lot of people subscribe to (nonbelievers and anyone that don't believe as they do are going to hell) is a mob mentality thinking. The thinking that people should be ostracized because they have a different understanding than the collective is mob mentality..
Before jumping to what may be an incorrect conclusion, Please ask for clarification and I will be happy to provide it
Stop making sweeping generalizations with negative connotations and you wont have to clarify.
Personally I did not want to post on this flame thread. But do not confuse me with a doormat that the anti-Christians and counterfeits get away with wiping their feet on. That is why I am here, when I do not want to be.
I don't have you confused in that manner. I really don't.
But If you didn't want to post on this thread then don't.. It's just that simple. It's a matter of choice. nobody forced you to comment on this
But even if I make a generalization, You made the choice to react negatively to it.. That is on you, not me.
I disagree that I acted negatively.
I never did give anybody hell. I just told the truth and they thought it was hell.
Harry S. Truman
If you say so. You even stated that my generalization was negative.. That in itself is a negative reaction. You also assumed you understood my meaning when you responded.. That too was negative.. especially in the face of the fact that you yourself have made generalizations on this thread yourself..But this will be a stalemated conversation based on perspectives so I am bowing out of this one at this point
And who says you told the "truth"? That is the truth as you saw it (a.k.a an opinion)
The corporate organized religion of Christianity should be dissolved.
But you are not going to "conscientiously" object to going to a hospital founded and funded by corporate organized Christianity if you are sick or injured. Why would that be? You build a lot of hospitals, so you dont need it?
The individual belief system of it should remain intact. It is the mob mentality "Christians" that make it difficult for the rest of us.
First you want to dissolve something, then you would be inconsistent just as soon as you needed it.
Who is the rest of us? Is there a committee? Where ya get to lump folks in or out? They bad - you good?
Christianity has lost a lot of people for different reasons. As a lot of atheists have pointed out there is a lack of what would be considered viable (To some of them) evidence that can be provided as proof of God. A lot of others are driven away because their beliefs do not fully line up with the Majority, but rather an individual understanding and interpretation of the Bible
Reeds shaken in the wind. God does not lose people.
Sometimes it is hard to convey a message in posts, so in this forum, I try not to be to hard on anyone, although I do try to get clarification on what they are saying if I don't understand. If I didn't want to be here myself, I wouldn't, but to each his own.
Yes, Jesus what Jesus taught was actually very simple, uncomplicated and nothing like what some organized Christianity looks like today which doesn't help its case. I don't disagree with that, necessarily. Humans have added way too much to it, as we see with Catholicism, and it complicates things.
Perhaps it's time to acknowledge that the bible is flawed and then move on.
But what does that say about your Christian bible that does condone slavery? Do you ever ask yourself why wouldn't God put a stop to it? Do you every ask yourself if perhaps it was written by mere people with an agenda?
Of course. We are all fallible as humans, not just Christians. Does that mean we are all irrelevant? What should we do about it? Give up or try to make the future better. Humankind has had its faults throughout history, but we are hopefully getting better.
You have yet to establish that the Bible condones slavery for us all for all time, as references to how they dealt with their slaves back then only shows us they had them, as did much of the world at that time. It wasn't specific to the ancient Israelites, or early first century people.
People pointing out that slavery was rampant world over long ago and in different ways than we think of in the current century view points, doesn't make them justifiers of slavery. It makes them people that care about the facts surrounding these matters. LIke when someone says, "Christianity teaches slavery..." That has never been established. There are a few different things going on here...maybe I am covering too much ground at once, and also made the mistake that facts of slavery in history would matter.... Two separate topics really, but that play into this.
In truth, the Bible teaches the very opposite of slavery to all people, even to one's enemies. Let us be fair and take things into context a bit more in the name of good debate and truth.
Interesting. In the interest of fairness, perhaps you could quote 10 instances where the bible specifically teaches that slavery is wrong?
You are making the same kind of mistake Mark, as Radman though doing so in a way that seems a bit more clever (though it really isn't). You see, the bible talks to people in regards to the context they lived in at the time, so we do see verses talking about slavery among other relationships they had. They are being given directives. Often, it is their employer, as you don't see them ever talking about your boss, while talking about all other relationships.
We do see the verses and examples I mentioned about God himself freeing over a million slaves, and that Moses and all those people KNEW it was wrong. We see In 1 Timothy enslaving is wrong. We see numerous examples though of how to treat others in general, and this would include slaves if it even includes enemies and everyone else. By the way, it is not clever to set up a trap question that we all know the answer is impossible, but the reasons why, are what matters here. I hope that matters to you.
In fairness, can you give me 10 instances in any another piece of ancient literature from that era or close to it or prior,where that piece of literature clearly teaches that slavery is wrong?
I guess 10 is the magic number to prove things! lol
Mark, If you can't provide the 10 instances from any other ancient piece of literature to show it teaches slavery is wrong, can we rightly conclude that all ancient literature must be pro slavery? Giving you a lot more leeway by the way than you gave me, you get to choose from all the other texts, lol.
Don't be ridiculous. I was just asking you to back up your claims. But - the bible is just another piece of ancient literature now? Like the Iliad perhaps? Mythical fairy tales? Good for you - maybe you will get there.
Mark, it IS ridiculous, but a fair point and rebuttal to your point and silly question. I did back up my claims, and the onus is not on me to prove something that isn't there. There are no teachings in the bible for me to take a slave, that is my claim. I have proven that, but didn't need to because it isn't there. The bible is a piece of ancient literature....they are writings from long ago, that is what ancient literature is, and I include ancient history in that. I didn't say fiction, so not sure why you jumped there, like with the Iliad.
You get to choose from all ancient texts, fictional or non, to show us all 10 examples where they are teaching slavery is wrong. I think this request, makes a bigger point in this whole debate than any really. It sheds light on all of it indirectly.
Ah - the bible is nothing special then? Great. Just another piece of fiction. So what if it says not to enslave people in that case? You did not back up your claims - please stop lying at me. Thanks.
Mark, I understand you post for an audience, and that you count on them to trust your words as you say them, and trust they won't go and read what both you and I wrote to each other back and forth.
My claim, again, is that Christianity doesn't teach us to take slaves. Almost everything you just suggested I said right there is the opposite of what I actually said, and that can be tested against the post you responded to.
In fact, your manner is very sophomoric here, as you twist and distort what has been said. You don't seem to be about truth.
To clarify, I never said the bible was "nothing special", or another piece of fiction. I find your refusal to give me the same answer you asked of me, to show all the obvious here and you had several works from antiquity to choose from, i had only one. I side with Jesus, it is why I am a Christian. I think Jesus got it right. He would never tell us to go get a slave, he taught many things that showed going above and beyond loving, forgiving others, even enemies. If you know the gospels even remotely, you know this. Jesus not only didn't teach us to take slaves, he acted nearly the opposite, becoming a servant of all, and taught his followers the same.
You suggested that the bible be compared to other works of the time did you not? Therefore it is nothing special. Just another work of ancient fiction.
Give me an instance of Jesus condemning slavery.
I don't agree with you that offering you a wider range of books in the idea of condemning slavery, in any way minimizes the Bible, and I don't think it even follows. It doesn't make sense. Jesus didn't need to condemn it, and it was everywhere at the time and in many forms. It was a way of life, but Jesus did an often showed how we were to treat others. That would include everyone, even slaves.
Also Mark, please give me an instance in where Jesus said, "take a slave," or some such form of it. Thanks.
Do you want me to show you where scripture says Jesus says that he is not here to take anything away from the OT?
I see. He says divorce is bad, but not slavery, so therefore he is anti slavery despite never saying anything against it?
No wonder your religion has caused so much ill will.
Again your telling us what Jesus would have said, and not what he said. Use scripture as I had done please.
These are well known teachings, not things he would have said, but said. If you are serious, I will put together scriptures that back that up when I get back. I have to run errands, and am late doing so. My apologies for thinking you knew or had read the 4 gospels, as many here have.
Yes, show me where you think someone thinks Jesus states we should not keep slaves. I'll wait for that, because that would be in direct conflict with what you think your God said in the OT.
Radman, but that was not what I had stated Jesus said. I never said that people said Jesus said we shouldn't own slaves, but it IS inherent in his well known teachings.The onus is on the non Christians here to prove that Christianity indeed teaches people should own slaves. My view is that that Christianity doesn't even address it, as Jesus didn't teach it, and taught to love all, forgive all, be at peace with all, and that would include slaves even if enemies. In all honesty, I can tell here again you are not reading my posts, based on your responses. I know they are not short always, but they have content and reasonableness, logic and facts in them. That is how I debate. I stand by my view, and if others agree they can then defend that view.
I never stated that I would show you were someone thinks Jesus states we should not keep slaves. What is really amazing is that i engaged this long in even debating this undebatable topic, and that is on me. I will take that but I was just so amazed to see some of the things I see here. It goes against all reason and things sane, some of the stuff I see in these forums. It is my day off, and I can't spend this kind of time with such truly and genuinely unreasonable people that are debating against my claim that Christianity doesn't teach we should own slaves. I should have known better.
I'll give you this. Christianity today doesn't condone slavery. I'm aware of that fact, but the bible teaches something different that Christians have resolved because slaveries unethical responses.
I sure I could find the passage where it was written that Jesus said that he was not there to take anything away from the OT.
No, the Bible does not teach differently. If it did, Christians would be pro-slavery. It's not like non-Christians somehow inserted equality into an otherwise pro-slavery ideology. If you actually read the Bible and understand the context, you can't say that it teaches that we should own slaves.
The OT was written by Jews for Jews, that's why they are called the chosen people. It's a great to give Jewish men entitlement. It clearly, clearly set rules on the ownership and the treatment of slaves and never says Jews should not own slaves. It describes how to get slaves and how to treat them. It stipulates the differences between Jewish slaves and any other and describes how to be a good slave. It says nothing of when to stop owning slaves. There are only two scenarios here 1. God was not involved in writing the OT or 2. God was involved and endorsed slavery.
You've made the claim that the bible teaches the opposite of slavery and you back that up with scripture as I've done?
You haven't backed up your point with scripture though Radman. Your point has not been made, and the verses you shared have backed up what I have been saying on this topic. I have asked you questions for clarification on your points, to even try and help you make them in the way I think you MIGHT be trying to make them. When they for instance speak of buying a Hebrew slave, do you honestly take that as a directive for ME or anyone to go and buy a slave? Of course not, and the why behind that matters here.
Love your neighbor as yourself is one verse, and many of the teachings of Jesus, and how he teaches us to treat others. He tells us to love in many verses, forgive in others, go the extra mile, turn the other cheek, love and pray for your enemies. This is all opposite of enslaving a person. I Timothy 1:8-10, includes the word specifically. I assumed you might have known of those basic teachings from Jesus, and you get my apologies. Hopefully, this jogged your memory enough to make the point.
Did you not see all those passages I posted describing who to get, keep and treat slaves? I could post them again, but I hate posting scripture.
You are now purposely missing the points, which shows me you are not really very interested in discussing the truth of this matter. If you had been reading my posts, you would know why those verses don't work, and if you had answered my questions, you would have clarified your position you seem to be taking, which if full of fallacies, as I have explained.
It's possible I missed you post, however you claiming the scripture invalid to the ownership of slaves is ridiculous and self serving. Please explain.
I have explained, again and again and spent a lot of time doing so.
If we take it to mean what you are suggesting, do you wonder at all the Christians of today that are disobeying the scriptures as you read them and interpret them? Do you think they will have to face God one day and explain why they didn't own slaves, as Christians? No, of course you do not. Let me ask you a question...why is that? All my posts address these issues in detail. More is going on there. Do you likewise go after all the other non Hebrew and Non Christian religions and worldviews of the world that held slaves back in those times, in ancient times? I doubt it. The reasons for the answers given to these questions are the answers I have been giving. I am trying to reword them here for clarification now.
You are not understanding me at all. I'm not suggesting Christians should takes slaves to make God happy. I'm suggesting you take a look at this book your worshipping for what it is, not for what you want it to be. Remember the American south spent 4 years fighting to keep slaves. The slaves had to be taken away. It no coincidence the south is called the bible belt.
The liberal south back then did fight hard, but the whole country was pretty religious, and it is not like it is now, were there is such a true distinction between the bible belt and the rest of the country. Many in the North that were fighting for the rights of people and slavery, were very much Christians and working out of that worldview.
Not with anti slavery scriptures, with the reminders of what Jesus taught about people and enemies in general, as stated. Loving your neighbor as yourself for example, I could never own a slave. An opposite teaching. That is one of many.
In fairness to you Radman, I need to stop and ask this regarding the above verses. Do you think those verses are teaching that anyone that reads it ought to go and say, "buy a Hebrew slave?" I just realized, that is how you may be taking it, since you didn't want to be talking about historical context?
Most people, in fact I don't know of anyone that reads it that way, in practice, but then from someone that doesn't read the bible, they might actually think those are directives for us. In fairness, I wanted to ask. That is the only way those verses make any sense that you would use them to say they support and teach slavery is ok.
Yes, if you believe that every word of the bible is the word of God. That's what I'm getting at. Any ethical, moral God would not have endorsed slavery. But Christians in the U.S. held onto these verses to hold onto their slaves.
Anyone using those verses to justify slavery did so without justification though. They were like many people, wanting to justify their wants and desires, and distorting truths to do so.
Much more is going on in history and culturally (sorry, like it or not). To be silent on the issue would have been strange from God and the leaders, and you seem to be only holding t one kind of slavery as well from your current mindset. Like all slavery is off the show of Roots or something, or Gone with the wind. It is not. You keep on ignoring those points I make, like that it was a kind of wage actually, not something for nothing, or just sheer ownership so another is never free. They had to let a slave go after 7 years for instance.... They had rights, there was a reason. I am not saying they were all innocent slave owners, some were surely bad like in Roots or something, getting whipped. They were addressing these kinds of things though.
I actually understand, that this sounds almost like a cop out on my part, at first glance. I am making very fair points in this argument against God and Jesus and the Bible here though. You don't find directives for US to take slaves, you find teachings for THEM in a world that was full of slaves. If it was a command, it would have been taught, and been in the 10 commandments, been taught by Jesus.
They only had to let Jewish slaves go after 7 years, but in that time you could give him a wife and when that 7 years were up you keep his wife and children. He could stay if he wanted to, but he had to stay for life. You were allowed to beat a slave, but not kill them. That was it. You should read the scripture I posted. Don't tell me slavery was better back then, slavery is slavery. Perhaps you should rethink your position on the validity of the bible rather then justifying slavery.
It is literally unbelievable I have to repeat this, but I do not justify slavery, never have, and never will. I am sorry you don't like to read my responses, Radman.
By stating that it was a different time back then so it was okay is justifying slavery.
They really are desperate to defend that book. They will say almost anything to defend it. Not once does teh bible say that slavery is wrong. Not once did Jesus say that slavery was wrong or that the practice should be stopped. He said divorce was wrong, but not slavery. Go figure.......
"The lord [owner] of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers. And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more."
I don't ever justify slavery (like how you seem to mean it, in our current context), or like how Roots portrayed it. A denial that there are different forms of slavery and indentured servitude that is even agreed upon like in the Jacob, Rachel and Leah case, doesn't mean that all slavery is how you seem to be portraying it. I gave an example of my own family member that was a slave even. The bible is addressing the relationship between slaves and owners, not teaching to own slaves like "love your neighbor as yourself" is taught in scripture. That is more of a truth for all time. This is likely why God didn't put anything about telling people to own slaves in the 10 commandments, nor Jesus suggesting his followers own slaves.
I hope this clarifies I am not justifying it, nor that I ever would. If ever it were ME that were an indentured slave, I sure HOPE someone good and just and fair would come along and tell my "master" to treat me well, remind me to make sure to let me go when it was time, and for advice that would help and not hurt me as well. Like don't run away, as that could result in a much worse situation, etc. Finish out the time fairly, etc. It would be awful, true, but there ought to be guidelines and suggestions, as that could be helpful. That could have been any of us, we don't choose where or when we are born. Speaking about two separate yet related things there.
Do you understand the idea of indentured servitude?
Sure I do, but what does that have to do with the slavery as described in the bible? Do you think indentured servitude is an reasonable alternative to slavery? Are you suggesting all slaves as described by the bible were indentured servitude? A good example indentured servitude is the of Peter Williamson (1730-1799).
It shows that you would understand the reason for some of the teachings on slavery to the people of the time, Radman. We know of some examples in the bible of that kind of servitude in exchange for something else. I don't think that it explains it for all the slavery, but we know of unfair slavery by the Egyptians of the Israelites, and God freed them eventually. A God and a Bible that is pro slavery wouldn't have that. I am asking for reasonableness in considering all things, esp within regard to what we know now.
Like, why does it give guidelines for slave owners to treat their slaves in a certain way? Lots more than a purely evil version of slavery as we often think of it today, and it was evil. For a person to willingly become a slave in that sense, in exchange for something else is/was a personal choice. That is something else, and not as you put it, "slavery is slavery." My argument also explains William Wilberforce, and many others view of reasons to stop say the slave trade and all that entailed.
Justifying any slavery is still justifying slavery. Yes they had rules, rules like you can beat the close to death, but don't kill them. You can keep non Jew slaves for life. That must have been written by a Jewish man. Does your God have favourites based on race or clan? Look, but saying that slavery wasn't as bad back then you are justifying slavery. Please stop it. Slavery is immoral and unethical. Do you need an Atheist to tell you that?
This is what I thought would be brought up, which is why I addressed the Onesimus story. (A runaway slave in the New Testament) I shared what I did knowing full well of these verses you posted.
Are you aware of the culture of the world and this area at that time of history regarding slaves? I think we apply modern day thinking, or imagine Southern Slaves or slave ships when we think of slaves and try to apply that.
The context matters, as well as who these letters were being written to, as well as why they had slaves at all. Whereas, you see Jesus teaching other truths that are for all time, and you well point out that Jesus didn't even touch on slavery. He, Christ, didn't teach it, but IF he had you could say that Christianity teaches slavery. It simply does not, and sure enough we see people world over that follow New Testament teachings that know it is wrong to own a slave. Hope this helps. Context, understanding of slavery, knowing what Jesus taught all help in understanding what Christianity teaches. William Wilberforce worked out of that worldview, it was what drove him to stop slavery in his area and era. He was very successful as well, and began a great trend that solved the slavery issue for many people.
As if the culture matters a few thousand years ago. Would you like me to post some scripture that describes how God thinks we should beat our slaves? Slavery is slavery, Slaves are owned and not paid. Slavery was not condemned in the bible because the people who wrote the bible knew that the bible would keep the slaves content. Don't tell me I don't understand the culture, are you going to defend the keeping of slaves in the U.S. in the same manner? Tell me I don't understand the culture that would keep slaves, as if the culture matters.
And don't tell me Jesus would have said regarding anything, please stick to what you were told he said.
The fact still remains that it is a part of history and we cannot change that. Does that mean that religion has no credibility because there were religious people that owned slaves? (there were atheists also, mind you)
I think the point is that does religion condone it now? (namely Christianity since you are making points from the Bible and referencing Jesus)
The answer is no.
I cannot and will not be able to put myself in their shoes because I cannot go back in time. I can only control what I do now.
Right, do what you can now and distance yourself from those who condone and justify slavery.
A reminder, that God himself in the bible freed many thousands up to over a million or more slaves. Hope he gets credit for that, lol. Some estimations are more than a million, based on what they said about males alone between particular ages....
Good point, but for Radman, it is 100% or nothing.
If the bible was written by God I would expect 100%.
That is why you are not practicing and that is your right. I, for one know that humans are fallible.
That is why you choose not to practice religion. You have that right. I, for one, understand humans are fallible and nothing is 100%.
Sorry guys, something is going wrong w/ my thread. I am having technical diffs.
Correct, humans are fallible so we can conclude that God played no part in the writing of the bible as the bible is flawed just like humans.
This quote brings up a question that I have for you Rad. If we can agree that humans are fallible and that the bible is flawed (and as such that God may or may not have played a part in it), Why do some (for the sake of not making a "sweeping generalization") atheists hold so tightly to science as the undeniable truth, especially since a lot of science (again not trying to be general) is built on theories (which can be synonymous with belief)?
Because the theories can be explored and if found false we move on. For me religion holds on to the bible's words no matter what. Listen to these guys justifying slavery. By justifying I mean they are attempted to say that slavery was okay in that time. Do you think they would say that slavery was okay 150 years ago in the U.S.?
You noticed I stayed quiet during that conversation right?
You mentioned theories proven true or false and the end result. What is this proof based on? Evidence that is collected correct and analyzed by people, am I correct?
The idea is we try to find ways to disprove a theory. Someone came close to finding a flaw in one of Einstein's relativity theories a while ago with those neutrinos, but that feel through.
Ok.. So an understanding based on looking at what is presented is formulated, correct?
To be honest I have no idea how Einstein produced or thought up his theories. Mostly math for him I think, but relativity is completely mind blowing.
Ok.. let's look at evolution. how was that theory generated?
Ok.. so by observation someone developed an understanding of materials presented to them?
And why is thread still not presented to me?
Also most of us here are Christians not Jews, but we have to do the apologetics of what Jesus came to change. Make them stick to the NT and dont attempt to do the apolgetics of people back then getting their ear pierced etc. which sounds more like a secular custom of the times. The scribes back then had a problem with writing falsely and attributing some of their customs that would later be condemned as unsound doctrine.
Once again, according to the bible God forced the release of Jews because they were his favourite people. But left them there for a long time before setting them free, but that is according to the bible as there is no evidence of any Jews being kept as slaves by Egypt.
I had found a Great x 7 or 8 Grandfather I found through genealogy searches, that was a slave long ago. He was working off his freedom, though I don't know why, and he was from France. It didn't matter, but he was working for his freedom, and it wasn't the kind where he was whipped or anything, but he owed a debt that needed to be paid to society OR to a debtor for money... These kinds of facts do matter actually in this discussion because it shows you are willing to acknowledge or not the different kinds of slavery there has been and why. My grandfather wasn't laying down in a ship being taken across seas to be sold, but when he got the chance, he worked off his freedom and was so thankful he worked hard, owned vineyards and became quite the successful businessman. All because he obeyed the rules laid out for him, he was allowed freedom later.
So, I disagree with you in part that slavery is slavery, and some DO get paid in that they are paying off a debt they couldn't pay with money they had. They didn't have credit back then, and dealt with debt very differently. IN those contexts, teaching a slave and a slave master what to do and how to be is GOOD advice for both, don't you think? I mean as opposed to the contrary? Treating them good, and slaves staying the time for a debt.... Even Jacob, one of the great fathers worked as a slave for many years for his two wives, to their father. Remember Rachel and Leah? Directives to that slave and slave owner x however many other people doing that sort of thing whatever the debt was, matters, and is actually good. They shouldn't do this, and should do that, etc.
As for Jesus and what he said, I said what I did because of what you were speaking on in regards to what he DIDN'T say. So you could say the same to yourself, right? Culture does matter, I think, AND we don't find any directives for taking slaves as has been pointed out also.
Look again at a more recent post that describes how to buy slaves. You may want to look at the scripture describing slavery in the OT before justifying it. Slavery is ethically and morally wrong, please don't justify slavery as cultural.
Ahh, now come the insults as they often do here do here, when facts are pointed out. Correction, I do not justify slavery, and agree very obviously it is wrong. The Old Testament and especially that section is a recording of history of the Israelites. Don't forget their own God freed slaves.
I think I know why you don't want the facts of the history of slavery to come into play, as it might destroy your personally held beliefs about slavery and religion. Don't accuse me of trying to disabuse you of your beliefs, and far from it, because no matter what anyone says, you can't seem to be dissuaded by the facts that shed light on these things.
Did you have any thoughts on my points made in that post above, as you didn't respond to them? The ignoring of facts that would explain the teachings or directions to slaves and owners in those days, doesn't make them go away, unfortunately, nor does the suggestion that I am a slavery "justifier."
I think my page is acting up, is anyone elses? I posted this earlier;
The fact still remains that it is a part of history and we cannot change that. Does that mean that religion has no credibility because there were religious people that owned slaves? (there were atheists also, mind you)
I think the point is that does religion condone it now? (namely Christianity since you are making points from the Bible and referencing Jesus)
The answer is no.
I cannot and will not be able to put myself in their shoes because I cannot go back in time. I can only control what I do now.
On an individual level - perhaps they are. Do you have to believe in majik to do so? I don't think so.
Of course not. But I have never said atheists aren't good.
Stalin was an atheist and one of his agendas was to eradicate religion from the Russian peoples lives. He killed millions; does that mean atheism is bad for the world since I gave you an example of an evil atheist?
I think we can give good and bad examples of religious and non-religious people, but we would go on forever and discredit each other in the process. It would be a never ending circle.
Mark must be on Wikipedia looking up articles to beef up his defense
He was one of a few of that century, that has helped in the labeling of that century as one of the bloodiest, most murderous of innocents, of all time. As with many things and many ideas and suggestions that don't seem quite right, we have to (anymore) ask ourselves, is that true, and is its opposite almost true? You see this with the media and on all kinds of topics. That, is a sad indicator of the level of thinking and morality we are at in this world, when we can so often ask, "is that really true, and is maybe its opposite ACTUALLY true?"
Right - so a belief in god is secondary and no different to a non belief in god for the examples you gave - yes?
Your question was what problems has religion solved, which those problems have been solved by religions. That is pretty straight forward.
That does not mean that those that don't believe in religion are not capable of doing them.
It also does not mean belief in God is secondary because helping your fellow man is kind of an important part of religion.
But that doesn't mean that Christians are only doing it because they are told to or for salvation, because to come to that conclusion we would have to be mind readers, which none of us are.
I am a Christian and even I can agree that those things have not been fully solved. People of course have been able to state that a belief has helped them with their individual issues, But with some of e others, they are still ongoing
No one said anything about FULLY solved. The question posed to me was what has been solved by the belief in God. If that were the case they would have used the word ENDED and I am sure any intelligent person would not ask the question since common sense says that could not possibly happen. Plus the argument could be made that it could be possible to end 100% of suffering if 100% were Christian. Mark would not ask that question because he is too smart for that.
Yea plus new people will eventually be born that will have problems so as long as we keep moving the goal posts, we can dishonestly discredit anything and everything.
Exactly. Nothing in this world is 100% except death.
Of course. The goalposts will always get moved
I find or observe that those that move the goal posts, tend to people that struggle with the reality of a situation or their views and how they play out. What a strange time we live in when it is more acceptable on any level, to move the goal posts rather than accept something like an idea has failed on its own merits. We aren't at peace with possibly holding ideas that obviously might fail as things play out, so we move goal posts as an acceptable response, then cry we won or the other team isn't playing fair?
I think its meant to be an indicator to ourselves, if we need to move the goal posts or see others. Then comes the punishment and rewards from all levels that we see... A form of manipulation because people don't just willingly embrace bad ideas overnight, they have to be beat down and get wore out fighting what they think is the good fight, all the while watching those that cheat to win, get congratulated and rewarded in all kinds of ways. This has an effect on society.... really bad thing that have happened in history don't just happen overnight, people wouldn't stand for that! They happen slowly, to people that are gullible, weak, and don't think and are distracted.
There is just as much work being done by atheists in those areas as Christians.
Of course. I never said otherwise. Just because I say something good about what religious people do doesn't mean I am saying athiests don't do it. It is not a butterfly effect.
The question posed to me was what problems has religion solved.
That would kind of limit your answer to things that Christianity alone solved. Which is none. There is not one single thing that Christianity has ever done for society in general.
I think it was a provocative post, carefully worded with particular meanings so that you can try to rebut it and obviously so, but with then a fall back to say, "that is not what I said, I said in general." Without being able to read her mind on exactly what was meant, its a lose lose. I just can't believe she even said it at all.
You might need to go back and read the post we wrote before you came. We covered that already. I'm not going to beat a dead horse here.
Firstly... in case you missed it I actually responded to your post several posts after yours. Therefore obviously I did not start when I "came in". I went back to the last post I read and went forward.
My point wasn't covered in them.
The one and only time in history that "Christianity" did anything was during it's formation. That was the only point that the religion was unified enough to do anything collectively. Everything else was done by groups of Christians.
There is no official "Christianity".
If you ruffle over the statements that Christianity causes wars because only certain Christians did it then you also can't claim ANYTHING that "Christianity" has done to benefit society. It's hypocritical. Certain groups of Christians started wars and built hospitals OR ALL Christians started wars and built hospitals. Which do you choose?
Slavery *in america* was started by Christians and it was ended by Christians. There isn't a net benefit there anywhere for society.
And I'm discussing Christianity because it is the faith that I belong to. As that stands then obviously I'm not beating up on Christianity itself. It's your opinions that I am contradicting. Please don't assume you are the whole of a religion and anyone that disagrees with YOU is attacking CHRISTIANITY. That's rising a bit above yourself.
Sigh....Melissa. You assume a lot about me. Go back and cover my posts and you will get it. I will talk to you after that. No offense.
I read them hon.
I am going on what you are showing me. Is there something else I should be going on perhaps? Do you have memoirs somewhere?
You signed up here specifically to argue that your religion is not as bad as the facts would have us believe - right?
He seems to think his word ends the conversation. It's kind of funny actually. He thinks because he has explained something to me I must agree with him. What?
He also appears to assume that if I disagree then I must not have read it.
That's pretty damn awesome.
It is not because you are disagreeing with me, it is because of the use of the words ended and solved. Technically religion has "solved" all of those problems. In a case by case basis. But it has not "ended" them. That is what I am getting at. See my answer below or talk to Deepes he will get you up to speed.
Deepes Mind wrote:
I am a Christian and even I can agree that those things have not been fully solved. People of course have been able to state that a belief has helped them with their individual issues, But with some of e others, they are still ongoing
No one said anything about FULLY solved. The question posed to me was what has been solved by the belief in God. If that were the case they would have used the word ENDED and I am sure any intelligent person would not ask the question since common sense says that could not possibly happen. Plus the argument could be made that it could be possible to end 100% of suffering if 100% were Christian. Mark would not ask that question because he is too smart for that.
Yep, he keeps telling me I haven't read all his posts either. funny. I may be an arse from time to time, but I read the posts.
You have been a perfect gentleman. Never an arse.
Neither have you Melissa, I just think this thread is getting to long, so info is getting mixed up or forgotten.
and if this is typed twice, I am sorry, but my hubpage is crazy with the posts 2day
If you go back and read the previous posts, we covered that already. I'm not going to beat a dead horse here.
Half of all volunteering in America occurs in activities involving the Christian Faith. Half of all charitable giving is to Christian Charities. Half of all associational memberships are Church related. Christians are much more likely than other persons to visit friends, to entertain at home, to attend club meetings, and to belong to all sorts of groups, associations, and organizations.
The Scientific Revolution only happened in Christendom because Christianity taught us that a rational God created a rational universe and gave humans rational minds that could grow in understanding of it and therefore Him.
Hospitals are an invention of Christianity, as are Hospices for the dying. During plagues, for centuries, people would flee the infected cities and history shows that only one group of people were observed going the other way—TO the plague ridden towns: Christians.
Community Schools and the modern University are innovations of Christians—all the Ivy League Schools save one were established by fervent Christians: Yale, Harvard, Princeton, etc. etc. etc.
The spreading of literacy itself is credited to Christianity. Most people through history first learned to read primarily so they could read the Bible.
Nobody other group through human history has even approached the billions of hungry people fed by Christians through the centuries.
No other group has been even close to as successful at reforming criminals, prostitutes, drunkards, and drug addicts as Christians.
It was Christians who abolished slavery, not Atheists, not Buddhists, not Muslims, and not Jews. It was in Christendom that slavery was first abolished in the world.
The number of medical missions to other lands and to the poor at home by Christians is innumerable.
Nobody has taken care of orphans, widows, and the handicapped throughout the last 2000 years as Christians have. No other group has come close to housing as many people without shelter and clothing as many people without clothes.
The number of Christians who have given up comfortable homes to live and work among the dregs of the world is staggering.
No group has done as much to improve prison conditions as Christians.
Government welfare programs are counterfeit Christian Charity, designed to deliver the goods without the Good News.
Christianity has made more people happy than anything ever created on earth. Even today, people who attend church on a regular basis exhibit better mental and physical health, and live longer. They have more stable marriages and fewer disabilities in their old age. They are happier, feel better about themselves, are less depressed, and use less drugs and alcohol. Their children have better outcomes, too.
The more often you attend church the happier you are. 49% of Americans who attend church more than once a week are Very Happy; 41% of those who go to church weekly are Very Happy; 34% of those who attend church once a month are Very Happy. The least likely to be very happy are those who never go to church—23 percent. And the happiest of all Christians are "Fundamentalists."
Your very notion of "equality" comes from Christianity, which taught the world that ALL people, regardless of background, socioeconomic status, educational attainment, heredity, race, ethnicity, male or female, are equal in the eyes of God.
It is from the Christian Faith that you might have an idea of a "sanctity of life," which stems from the truth that human beings are created in the Image of God. That is also why you saw Atheist regimes murder 100 million souls in the 20th Century, because they see human beings are mere animals who exist to serve the State.
What is it about the message and teachings of Christ Jesus, and the life he lived, that makes you so hostile?
Okay, way to much to comment on so I'll just add that it was not Christianity that abolished slavery at least in the U.S. The less religious north fought the much more Christian south (bible belt) to end slavery. Please don't attempt to give give Christianity credit for ending slavery.
Radman, that is a totally made up assumption. What was the ratio of believers in the north versus the south in 1865? If you can find that info, you have done something and I suggest bringing something more than Wiki to prove it.
You were the one who made the claim that Christianity freed the slaves. You back it up. Show me where the north had more Christians and the southern slave overs were not Christians at all. Bible belt is called the bible belt for a reason.
Wait a second, are you going back to the debate we had in the beginning where I said religion has solved the 10 problems I posted? If so, you might need to catch up with Melissa and talk to me later because you obviously didn't get it either.
Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I didn't "get it"
If you had read the posts, you would know that you can't disagree with me because my argument was that everyone was assuming "Solved" meant "Ended". My argument was that it has solved these things in a case by case basis. Everyone understood and we moved on. The debate was over solved and ended. ok?
My comment had nothing to do with solved or not. OK?
And btw, you put Christianity in there on your own when we were talking about religion.
You're correct it wasn't you. It was another fella. James A Watkins I think.
And btw, who said he was talking about the Civil War. Slavery has been throughout the history of the world. Again, you are assuming.
I'm not assuming anything. You guys or at least one of you has claimed that Christianity freed the American slaves. I've made no assumptions at all.
He never used the word American. You created that in you mind. He said abolished the first slaves. Get with him on that because I am not sure what he is talking about. But I do know he never said American in his first post. I would copy and paste it all, but you can go back and read just as well
His words were "It was Christians who abolished slavery, not Atheists, not Buddhists, not Muslims, and not Jews. It was in Christendom that slavery was first abolished in the world. "
I keep saying it was people who abolished slavery. I'm not blaming Christians for it, just stating what in the bible and why you can't claim it was Christians who abolished slavery.
I totally understand where you are coming from and I agree that it was not only Christians that abolished slavery in America. But I also am not sure by what he means about the "first slaves" or something like that. We will need him to clarify.
I would never say that only a religious person does good. I would also never say that religion has not caused problems.
I am only saying that many good things are done through religion. That's all. From Gandhi, to Mother Theresa, to Martin Luther King. Their faith was a strong guidance to them as individuals. Also at my church the amount of charities that are organized do good not only locally, but worldwide.
Atheists also contribute to charities and whatnot.
Crap, I keep having to agree with you. Stop it and say something silly that I can jump all over.
You use modern day views of North and South here, lol. The South WAS very liberal and democratic though at that time. You can use that. The North, was also very religious if you look back in history. On another day people would scream that that war wasn't about slavery at all lol.
Ha ha ha ha. Look up the history of that war please. The only way you can make the claim that Christianity ended slavery is by showing that the Christian north defeated the unchristian south.
The second half of the very first paragraph say "The war had its origin in the fractious issue of slavery, and, after four years of bloody combat (mostly in the South), the Confederacy was defeated, slavery was abolished, and the difficult Reconstruction process of restoring unity and guaranteeing rights to the freed slaves began."
Mmmm, not true. It was the abolitionist movement that ultimately defeated slavery (just in a more roundabout way) and it was (for the most part) very specifically Christian.
I will say that it's novel though, to meet someone who doesn't claim that since the South claimed Christianity that Christianity therefor supports slavery.
Wait a second, you did say that in one of your hubs if I remember.
Once again... members of a group of people putting out the fire started by other members of that same group does not net a positive overall result for the group as a whole.
I don't think that is what I said as I just stated a few posts ago. I am aware todays Christians do not support slavery nor should they. I'm just stating what the bible says regarding slavery. It's interesting when I do this people immediately start justifying slavery.
Whoa, whoa, whoa! Are you really saying that I'm justifying slavery?
No, you've taken another approach. Others have been telling me that slavery wasn't so bad back then and it wasn't the same as the slavery of a few hundred years ago. Your approach seems to be to deny that slavery is talked about in the bible. I'm saying that I'm not attacking Christianity as I know Christians don't hold slaves anymore, but it's still in the bible. I've read it.
I know the history of that war, did I say something that you disagreed with? I don't think that you can establish the North was not Christian, and that South was Christian, based on modern day views of the bible belt, for the time of the Civil war.
The quote you posted doesn't support that view either. What exactly did you take issue with what I said? I was not on the side of the liberal south of that time, for the record. A little bit of running with assumptions is going on about there being such a division of religious vs non religious. That can be said now, and even a few decades ago.
I post the section from wiki because of your comment "On another day people would scream that that war wasn't about slavery at all lol." Did I misunderstand it?
Let's just say that both sides were equally Christian. You've got the Christian north fighting the Christian south to free the slaves. This in no way gives Christians the right to claim Christians ended slavery. People ended slavery. Now if the Christians were the north and Atheists were the south you could say Christian people ended slavery. Now perhaps it wasn't you who made the initial remark, but this is what I've been arguing.
I didn't make that claim, by the way. William Wilberforce http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Wilberforce, made huge strides in ending slavery. He was an evangelical Christian, and I brought him up as an example in history that did a lot for that cause. No one person could, but he did far more than his fair share, and it was against the slave trade that was going on at that time, which was definitely evil.
Here was my first post surrounding this topic, in case others go looking for it too like I just did based on the above claim... (First, what Radman Wrote, then my response to it saying Religion kept slavery alive for thousands of years, and that religion didn't stop it.
" Rad Man wrote:
Religion has kept slavery alive for thousands of years. Religion is not what stopped slavery, humanity was."
"Like William Wilberforce, who used his belief in God to do all he did to stop slavery, so the opposite case can be made as well from history.
There also is no directive at least say in Christianity, to hold slaves, but I don't know what other religions might teach it that some might be thinking of.
The people who stopped slavery, and are involved in human rights of all kinds, operate very often out of a worldview or religion that drives their action and motivations. Others have consciences in them that even if not explained by their worldview, help them to know it is inherently wrong."
That is different than saying I said that Christianity stopped slavery. I think it was no one thing.
Agreed, I think we established it wasn't you who made that claim. Everything else you said in this post is reasonable. Everyone keeps assuming I'm saying Christianity condone slavery, I hope I didn't make that mistake because it would be an error for sure. I did however state what the bible say about slavery.
That is not true. First of all, to say that the South was more religious than the North is a bit misleading, got some figures? Second, it was Christian abolitionists who got the whole thing rolling.
I've said this before, you may not have gotten to it yet, but I was arguing against someone saying that Christianity freed the slaves. Now if the north was Christian and the south were atheists one could say the Christians freed the slaves. But if you Christians fighting Christians it not right to give credit to Christians is it?
Huh? If Christians freed the slaves, even if Christians were also keeping them, then it would be fair to say that Christians freed the slaves. It would be part of a long, historical string of events where what truly defines "Christianity" gets hashed out in larger events. Which, by the way, is not unique to Christianity.
Don't worry about her, she is not even reading the posts. If she had she would not ask me to go BACK over that because we clarified it way earlier. It was acknowledged.
She also didn't even read the post she replied to because she jumped all over Christianity when the post was about religion. There are way more religions than Christianity, but she seems to be on a whip the Christian kick.
It is important never to say "all religious people" do this or "all atheist people" do that etc.
KESS's point is fair enough---we DO, now, after centuries of blood, slaughter, turmoil, and war live in a democracy where we are free to express our views--even ask unanswerable (albeit important) questions. And, Seductor, your icon is after all, Sisyphus trying to roll that big mother rock up that hill, and we all know how far THAT goes. So your question is appropriate.
How about a cliche as an answer? "All anger springs from fear." I rather like that one, perhaps because like most good cliches. . .it's true. Waaaaay back, I can imagine a tribe with a bit of territory and a few sustaining resources discovering that a nearby tribe has more resources and more territory, but fewer men. On top of all that, they look different and wear their skins differently and grunt differently. In no time the leaders of our first tribe have whipped up fear aimed at "differentness". Fear then hate develops in the tribe. The first attack on the strangers follows. Then the victors have to preserve the hate and anger in stories around the fire, and soon Religion is born.
Or something like that. And social groups will always do everything in their power to maintain the status quo. Focusing hate is a wonderful way to keep the folks looking and thinking in one direction only. Sustaining that requires symbols, icons, stories, institutions. Hate is voracious, so it must constantly be fed more hate.
How'm I doing, Seductor?
A few years back I shared a house with some roommates. We all agreed to keep the common areas clean. In other words, we could keep our individual rooms dirty, messy, with clothes all over the place and dirty dishes everywhere without hearing about it from a roommate. However, in common areas (e.g. kitchen, living room, etc.) we had to be mindful of each other and keep the areas clean.
Why can't people do the same in life? Believe what you want to believe when you are in private, but do not impose your beliefs on the world? Here in the US, there is a separation of church and state. Religious people don't get this for some reason. Keep your beliefs in your private rooms. In the common areas, it is separation of church and state. Period.
The problem is the separation of church and state in America isn't complete. If a particular religious group is voting for someone because of their religious views there is not a good separation. Other countries with a good separation don't care about the religious views of a candidate.
So are you saying the separation between Church and State means the religious have to keep their views private?
You sound like the type of Europeans that colonized our culture. Out of fear our language was never allowed to be spoken any where in public. It had to be done in private or there were consequences to pay.
Do you fear the religious?
I thought USA was all about freedom of speech, just as you have freely spoken your mind against the religious?
Yes, I fear the religious. Look at what is happening in Israel and Gaza. The Islamist extremists want to do away with Israel, and back and forth. All this fighting over religion. Maybe they would stop fighting if they suddenly realized that there is no God. They are both wrong, and could benefit by spending their time on worthy causes, like preserving life instead of ending it.
Do you remember the Spanish inquisition, where Catholics killed Christians? What about the fact that Catholics were suppressing knowledge about the universe back in times when the Catholic church did not want to recognize that the Earth was not the center of the universe.
Religion is nonsensical beyond giving people a sense of relief in light of the scary thought that we are nothing but a grain of sand in this vast universe.
Religion should be practiced in private. There are people who believe that snake bites are a form of religion. Do you want those people to display their beliefs near the playground at the park where kids play? No.
I see no point in being afraid of the religious. Perhaps what you may not realize is that if there was no belief in God, these things will still occur. It is human nature.
Nature has taken many more lives than man has and does not have beliefs to justify her actions.
I just stumbled across this info tidbit.
"The Lord Of The Rings, Harry Potter and The Twilight series all present worthy cases, but the Bible is actually the number one most shoplifted book of all time."
That was hilarious. The stealing of a bible. Is that why jails are littered with Christians? Are Christians either not moral or not smart enough to get away with stealing?
I'm sure the Lord wont mind, he can run rings around any Tom, Dick or Harry.
The belief in God has caused more problems than it has solved!
You can say that the way in which many people exhabit their beliefs (whatever they might be) causes ALL of the problems in the world.
And the way in which many people show what their beliefs are is the only thing that makes life worth living for many others.
SOooo it is our behaviour which counts most, regardless of what our beliefs are; no matter the topic those beliefs are reflecting.
I disagree. One of the reasons poor countries are poor is that they have more children than they can afford. Religious people are against contraception. Therefore, religion leads to overpopulation. Overpopulation is a problem caused by religion.
The fact that their land was taken from them which in turn limited their ability to provide for their families played no important role for you? How about the unnecessary killings of the animal kingdom that provided food for these families? Not to mention the forests. Instead the foreigners in pursuit of control, pleasure and greed killed without thought of the consequences. The consequences are evident in the starvation and illnesses of these countries. As you can see. Man is his own worst enemy.
God is not part of the discussion of contraception. He leaves it up to us. It is no longer an issue of religion. Jesus said nothing about it. He brought a new way. Based on love. If you cannot take care of another child you are free to not have sex in order to prevent pregnancy.
Obviously responding to wrong post. Sorry, Penny. It was meant for a ridiculous argumenative comment by Rad Man. I do not agree in the least with Rad Man or with Troubled Man. They are only here to be obnoxious.
Do you call everyone who disagrees with you obnoxious?
First; I apologize for not seeing this post till now. Don't get to get on here much anymore.
Most of the poor people in those poor countries that you speak of have little else to look forward to other than having sex; They don't know when they are going to enjoy their next meal, or when it might come. You can't blame religion for that.
What are you talking about. When the Pope say condoms are a sin and to a country with a population and Aids problem they not be the cause by they are not part of the solution. I do believe the Pope have have finally seen the light in this respect, little to late.
Following the Pope is the problem. Go within to the light within you and to Jesus directly.
I mean, really...Does the Pope meditate or do energization exercises? I doubt it. What can he know?
Has the pope even reprimanded the pedophile priests or allowed them to marry and love women?
@Janesix and Penny of Heaven
I'm confident that you both have minds that work, and opinions and ideas and thoughts that churn around in those minds, waiting to be shared. Beyond, I suppose, being "cute", posts like "Yep" and "LOL" are valueless--a complete waste of time "Yep" to WHAT? And you are laughing out loud at WHAT?. How do you expect other members of this group to DISCUSS your ideas with you when you give them no ideas to discuss?. If one or both of you find El Seductor's questions laughable or simply not worth your precious words, don't waste my time by posting inanities.
@ El Seductor
When I start a discussion, I wait until a few posts are in, then dive back into the discussion and give it more specific direction. It would be helpful if you did something along those lines. Thanks.
Please note it was Kess's post I laughed out loud at.
It was so simple yet very profound. The contrast made me laugh.
Hope that's clear for you.
I don't know if you live in the US or not. The reason Kess's comment is not profound is that in the US there is a separation of church and state.
Perhaps I over reached in my forum details by including Muslims. After all, in many Middle Eastern countries, there is no separation of church and state. In fact, the governments are run based on writings in the bible, quran, etc.
No I am not from the USA. I am from New Zealand. Religion has nothing to do with politics here. It is rarely an issue.
I am not sure what the separation of church and state has got to do with Kess's comment?
He was getting you to explore your own reasons for starting this thread which then should give you greater insight into why religious may air their views. Therefore you already had an answer to you question if he looked within.
So why ask a question that you already have an answer to?
Kess's remark is like asking the defending team why they are protecting their goal. Or like a robber asking the homeowners why they are protecting their home. I am playing defense. Religions are on the offense. If they were not out there spreading their fear, wars, and ignorance, then I wouldn't feel the need to shed some light on the issue.
Not the same - robber asking the homeowners, why they are protecting their home.
Christians can talk all they want, ignoring them all together would be the best line of defense, if they were really that offensively toward you.
I can handle the risk of losing a few jobs or relationship over them for something maybe better at times
It's not the talking that is the issue. It is the fact that they demand that God be included in schools, for example. It is the fact that they base their political decisions on religion (e.g. abortion, contraceptives, anti-gays, etc.). If all they did was talk about religion, then there would be no problem. I am all for freedom of expression.
You post makes no sense apart from the "I feel the need to shed light". The need you feel is the same need religious people feel.
I'm not stifling knowledge, or keeping women from having abortions, or keeping gays from getting married.
Good to know I understand what you are getting at here. I don't get why you think we should not permit the religious to speak. Individuals have their own minds. They either question what they are taught or follow blindly. It is their choice no one else's. We cannot make their choices for them. The non-religious can choose to listen or not choose to listen. All do not listen that is why the are not religious.
If religion becomes a law, that might pose to be a real problem.
Because either you don't find them ethically incorrect, or you believe that it is none of your business. That is your personal conviction, one I agree with, seeing as it's quite rational. However, there are people that believe if they keep their mouths closed and don't fight to change what they consider to be wrong, that it's just as bad as if they were partaking in it themselves, and so they feel they must act.
Thanks. You beat me to the punch.
I was about to say to these individuals, "It's like the blind leading the blind."
El Seductor et al
While endorsing the generality of Mr. Seduction's last post, I'd suggest some fine-tuning. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, for example, guarantees freedom of religion AND freedom of speech. Hmm. Problem here. Personally, I froth at the mouth when some ding-bat jumps on a soapbox in a public square and starts blaring a fire-and-brimstone load of crap about, say, homosexuals being an abomination in the eyes of god and a blight upon the earth. etc. etc. But if the cops rolled in and carted him away merely because they didn't LIKE his message, I'd be the first one to protest. There are ground rules -- if our proselytizer says "go beat them up" or "kill them", uh-uh. Those acts are illegal. You do not have the freedom to advocate violence that is against the law. With that caveat, however, I have to defend this idiot's right to speak. I will even defend the right of Jehohvah's sales agents to come to my door and ask to talk with me and give me pamphlets promoting their elitist concept of the afterlife. Because I have the right to order them off my property.
Historically, hideous religious wars and all the destruction that attends them have accounted for the deaths of millions and the obliteration of entire civilizations. Our focus must be on doing everything in our collective power to stop that destruction from growing in strength and influence. Radical Islam is huge, but we must realize that these madmen are as much a blight on a gentle, caring religion, a religion that utterly rejects radical violence, as they are a blight on US.. So we must be vigilant and keep our respective politicians and decision-makers' feet to the fire. They must come to know the dire price we will make them pay if they fail to promote the kinds of values needed to protect us against repetitions of the worst parts of our history. It isn't enough to just pour another glass of wine, sink into your easy chair, and tap out noble messages on HubPages.
I agree. At the same time, I am usually drinking a beer when writing Hubs.
Maybe you outa stop doing that , this thread is moronic !
Firing them and forcing them to get honest work
Molto buona, ma la volontà di Dio rispondere alla tua speranza in questo mondo violento?
insistence in god has us in the place we find ourselves now . i think. spero in dio. it might be a last hope. i hope not tho.
It is a difficult quandary, Aware, as you indicate. Various religions over 4000 years of human history have been warring with each other, at incalculable cost. Certainly no one religious "stand" has won. But here OUR culture stands, many of our group praying to the God worship of whom has contributed bigtime to the mess we're in! It's sort of like asking a pyromaniac to be your fire chief.
joyfully participate in the sorrows of man. my idea of god does not know we are here. its not mad at us. it doesn't cause problems . it creates suns. spero in dio? hope in god?
hope in what? hope my ideas right.
I am an artist, and it feels and thinks so fantastically sublime, that I insist that everyone appreciate as great what I do.
We have freedom of religion. What is wrong with that, again? And which religion is tyrannizing over others? What Christian religion is becoming political or trying to gain some type of political power? Crazy radical Muslims are the only religious group we need to protect ourselves from and they are obvious and a joke. Well, a really destructive joke. BTW, non-radical Muslims believe in Jesus and God and do not pose a threat.
The statement, "Belief in God has caused more problems than it has solved," is not provable, so why state it.
El Sed.--I'm going to back out of this discussion, because it isn't going anywhere. The topic should probably be "Organized Religion (NOT God. . .). . etc. . .). Even then, if we perused the Religion and Philosophy sites on Hub Pages, we'd probably find that the topic has been done to death. Finally, most of the comments are at a declarative, rather than exploratory, level. Boring. And one simply canNOT argue a topic of such complexity with one or two-word posts. So, adioa amigo! We'll meet again On HUB.
I have a love hate relationship with organized religion. I am not a part of any organized religion, but I am certainly spiritual. Love is my religion and I believe in the Universe. That can be interpreted in many different ways.
That being said, I really appreciate organized religion because it shows the passion that human nature can have. Passion is a beautiful thing when kept in check. There are fanatics that go way over board, and they're the ones that give everything a bad name.
When I am passionate about something, I talk about it, and talk about it and talk about it. I want to share with the world this amazing thing I have come across which causes my Serotonin levels to soar! But there's a fine line between respecting other peoples' boundaries and expressing your joy.
All religions break down to the same thing: Love.
Part of love is respect. Respecting that other people may think differently. And it is an understanding that should be embraced by every one that our world is a rainbow. Every person in it is a different color which helps make it to be the beautiful thing that it is.
Not every one catches on to that part.
While it may be annoying to some or down right dangerous for the very excited to express and push their beliefs, we have to remember that it is THEIR journey to find that balance between respectful love and celebration of their own love. We can give gentle reminders that we are happy that they have found what they are looking for in life, but it is not your way, but ultimately, they need to find the path themselves.
Right. Allowing each person to guide his own will is the heart of love. The will is to the psyche what the heart is to the body. When a religion does not get this and tries to indoctrinate or scare people into believing something, it is actually counter productive to human happiness.
Just one more forum thread seeking to push the buttons of Christions ......Bla blaaa be Bla bla !
And this is another thread I'm tired of... "Paradigmsearch lights a candle in the hopes that this thread will die. Fat chance... " Cut it down, folks. This is not a religion issue. It's just common sense. If half of the forum were about frogs, I'd object to that as well, what with this being a non-frog site. Common on. Enough is enough.
So go away. Do you need to control everything? You want to leave, but you want us to leave first? All you have to do is hit that do not follow anymore button. I do it all the time when I get bored.
Really... what is P.'s problem? I wish P. would not read what is not pertinent to P.'s life!
Hey, we found something to agree on!!!!!!!!!!!!! P. should leave us alone.
Yeah! We are having an obnoxiously great time. Not everyone can hang.
Never mind. My rant mode has concluded. Carry on...
This is not a religion issue. It's just common sense.Or not a frog site
The thread is
The belief in God has caused more problems than it has solved!
It's common sense 85% of people on earth are believer in their Religious God
This is Philosophy and Religion section??? I'm lost now.
The truth is that God is the force within each one of us. He is perceivable, if we keep in tune with our Selves, (as opposed to catering to our Egos; as opposed to being caught up in materialistic pursuits; as opposed to being on alcohol or substances.) The inner life of each of us has been given to each of us. "The Kingdom of Heaven is within." Now, Who said that?
I still wish this thread would go away... Day after day.... Oh, well...
Take your Self and Go. No one here is stopping you. You have free will. Please stop reading what you do not wish to read. It is the Height of Lunacy. Please connect up to your higher wisdom and guide yourself toward
Something To Do!
we don't care what you do, in all actuality.
in fact any new keyboarders are welcome.
But, I just don't want y o u to suffer.
A very sincere LOL. I think I like you. No future rants contemplated. Do cut it down though...?
What did you want me to cut down? before I go.... so I will know for next time...?