Should christians love money so much ?!

[Francesco]

Fancesco

Those others you are talking about constitute more than half the world population. Doctors, lawyers, philosophers, teachers, panel beaters - all having a separate faith to yours. How could this be. Sounds like mass psychosis.

I would like to know your journey and whether you indeed are born again.

Fancesco sounds to me like a Spanish/Italian Catholic from way back!

If you have struggled then that would be good to read about. Even so - all religious cultures and history of struggle as part of their makeup. It adds gravity. It shouldnt be so hard. God just IS.

Hi AR

There is more than just a name in a forum.

Why should mass belief in a culture be linked to mass psychosis in a modern society? Just observe how many people are already harassed with the demands of making a living in a competitive society. With whatever intellect people have they rather dedicate that to getting some expertise that may provide a leverage to get ahead in life. People would naturally seek some recreation with their day off before the daily grind begins again. Thoughts of spiritual pursuit would be considered difficult, complex and may lead to somber and costly commitment. There is common sense appeal of not attracting unwanted attention and get along with the crowd than stand out to be persecuted. There is a cautionary parallel from the travails of the German society while Adolf Hitler was implementing his Final Solution.

I did not come from a Christian family. I was attracted by the integrity of Christian school friends and their acceptance. I acquainted myself with the major religions and many variants of Christian groups before settling on the current understanding but still within the Nicene Creed. I had my spiritual struggles relationally and moments of doubt with scientific queries before I moved on in faith. Nothing spectacular.

Faith is going as far as the 'eye' can see and then one more step.

 

[Francesco]

Francesco,

After how much deep study did you dismiss the spiritual validity of, say, the Book of Mormon? If the most recent "documented" appearance of christian angels in a 'holy book" doesn't make sense to you, on what intellectual basis did you dismiss the idea that the Jews are right and that the NT is a false start or, alternatively, that the Koran, clearly subject to less rewriting, political editing and translation error than the NT, isn't on the money?

The scriptures of a faith determines the eventual limits of its followers. About the faiths you mentioned, read their scriptures for yourself and see whether there are independent verifications a reasonable person can accept. Observe the history of its leaders and the outcome of their faith. Observe any dependency between the scriptures and the worldly benefits to its early leaders and see whether it has probable divine origin or merely man-made to the worldly benefits of its leaders. Will the faith lead to progress, meaning or a random 'big mess' that you do not need a faith to produce. Listen to what their god is doing through the testimonies of the living believers. Seek earnestly

I wouldn't want to give way to another rant of my feelings on the above faiths.

 

[aussierogue]

I agree that it is not mass psychosis (I would never claim that because its disrespectful) - it is sociology - my point is that their beliefs and yours come from the same palce and most would argue with the same validity. Or alternatively they would argue yours is less valid than theirs. (and vice versa and the fight for religious supremacy goes on)

Intellectually it comes from the same spot.

Casius clay and Cat Stevens chose a different route

Anyway lets move on.

 

[urban cowboy]

Religion is ultimately belief in magic.

The difference between the various religions is ultimately only a question of which magician.

Athiests simply don't believe in magic.

Richard Dawkin's got asked this question in 2005:
"What do you believe is true even though you cannot prove it?"
Dawkins replied:

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]I believe that all life, all intelligence, all creativity and all 'design' anywhere in the universe, is the direct or indirect product of Darwinian natural selection. It follows that design comes late in the universe, after a period of Darwinian evolution. Design cannot precede evolution and therefore cannot underlie the universe.[/FONT]

So, if Mr Neo-Atheist himself believes in it even though he cannot prove it, does that make his beliefs "faith" based??? sounds like he believes in magic to me...

 

[Token Funder]

Richard Dawkin's got asked this question in 2005:
"What do you believe is true even though you cannot prove it?"
Dawkins replied:

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]I believe that all life, all intelligence, all creativity and all 'design' anywhere in the universe, is the direct or indirect product of Darwinian natural selection. It follows that design comes late in the universe, after a period of Darwinian evolution. Design cannot precede evolution and therefore cannot underlie the universe.[/FONT]

So, if Mr Neo-Atheist himself believes in it even though he cannot prove it, does that make his beliefs "faith" based??? sounds like he believes in magic to me...

No..it's the sort of dishonest quote-mining common on inteliigent design sites.

If I can give you one tip about quoting scientists in attempt to support of the same old tired arguments, check the original source

, as many pious thiests are quite comfortable telling porkies for jesus.

Look at the original and note the bit that somehow dropped out of "your" quote. You might also take the time to read the entire interview.

As an aside, i was fortunate enough to meet Professor Dawkins in Brisbane last week and he is charming individual

 

[Token Funder]

The scriptures of a faith determines the eventual limits of its followers. About the faiths you mentioned, read their scriptures for yourself and see whether there are independent verifications a reasonable person can accept. *snip*

I wouldn't want to give way to another rant of my feelings on the above faiths.

I have...have you? They are as "reasonable" as anything in the Christian texts (as edited and codified...but that's a whole 'nother topic) and have the fail the reaosnable person test in the same way, unless of course you consider staffs turning to snakes to be a reasonable proposition.

BTW, I'd be interested in an answer to my original questions. What specifically about, say the Book of Mormon, is illogical and unreasonable in a way the NT isn't?

 

[AlmostBob]

religion, billed as The greatest Action Story Ever Told

 

[Hoffy]

I'll read this again late tonight after a few bottles of red. It may all become clear to me then.

The wine didn't help.

 

[aussierogue]

cmon hoffy you can do better than that! What a cop out.

TF - Richard dawkins. If there was ever a man who didnt know god it is him. What a humorless, dry, flat individual. Did you see his interview with Denton?

Glad he is on your side!

 

[Hoffy]

cmon hoffy you can do better than that! What a cop out.

TF - Richard dawkins. If there was ever a man who didnt know god it is him. What a humorless, dry, flat individual. Did you see his interview with Denton?

Glad he is on your side!

No cop out at all. If you can make sense Truong's post, please help me out.

"god is nothing more than overarching unity that gives meaning to everything....." I think is his main point. But again, my life has plenty of meaning and no need for an overarching unity to provide it for me.

I'm sorry, I just can't fall into the camp of - if we can't explain something, we'll just pretend an omnipotent super natural being did it. Surely we have all moved on from the dark ages.

 

[RPI]

I agree completely Hoffy. The bible itself has been re-written so many times by so many people, the Koran not so much but then it was supposedly written by mohammed, an illiterate. The other delusions I won't comment on because my knowledge is limited.

For simplicity if we just concentrate on the christian bible. I am yet to see explained how someone who is educated and intelligent can beleive the bible is the word of God. I would love the believer's to try and explain it to the rest of us. I am not talking at this point about beleif in a deity. Purely that the bible is the word of God. The original stories were oral, past on through many generations. Then it was written, edited, translated etc. so mamy times that if you compare chapters today from the ancient texts and translate them. then compare to today's text they are unrecognisble. Eg many of the references in the old testament in old scriptures, torah or pre-Jesus days it was not God but God's. We created man on our image etc.

Secondly if we then look at beleif in the Christian God. You pary to him but he doesn't actually respond verbally, you can't see him. Their is no discernable proof of his existence whatsoever.

sO basically imagine if now, at your present age, you were for the first time introduced to the bible and the christian God. You had no previous experience of religion but were educated and taught to question what you were taught, to look at sources and not take them on merit but to further investigate their validty, motivation of the author. So then along cames a guy telling you about this invisible guy in the sky, you can't see him, hear or ever prove he exists. But he created everything and here is this book called a bible that explains everything. the book is full of contradictions, has both an evil vengeful, murdering god and a loving god who is protector of his followers. And as bonus it is based on stories thousands of years old, start orally, translated etc. The book would have less vality then a medieval alchemy book when compared to a modern chemistry text. You would think the guy is an absolute lunatic, how could anyone beleive such a far fetched story with no proof, let alone follow the rules of book written when the majority of people were illiterate, didn't even consider the world let alone think it was flat etc.

So please explain to me how someone with an inquisitve mind can beleive it and again using faith as a resaon is purely an excuse for a lack of evidence

 

[Y33]

RPI, Not getting involved in the religious discussion but I have had the same thoughts you have about, electrons, neutrons, etc and all these other things I read in books and will never see or touch.

In the past people believed the world was flat and all sort of things but no time frame has ever been attributed to the discovery of the truth. Is a time frame needed to show if God exists? Could the time frame be when we die? Maybe death is the only time we can know the real truth and then again maybe not.

 

[RPI]

Hi Y33
Good point. But I guess the difference is that other people have seen those things/ and or you can use experiments to verify their existence. But I guess if you looked at the theory of dark matter, no one has actually seen it, however various experiments can confirm that there is something there either that or einstein was wrong and one of the basic theorems we use in many things is wrong and we need to go back to the drawing board.

Yes there could be a timeframe. If God's existence could be proven or even substantial evidence of his works then it would throw all my thinking out of the window but I could be converted to beleiving in him. However if he turned out to be the god of the bible, then he is an evil, egotistical murdering being that I wouldn't want to know, let alone worship. Then if god's existence was proven the bible of today could not be proven as the word of god as it differs so significantly from the first written versions, let alone what ever the oral stories where. So on the balance of probabilites I would say that there is no god.

I like the atheist advertising they did on the London buses: "There is probably no god, so stop worrying and get on with your life". Done purely to highlight the amount of religous advertising we are subjected to.

 

[Token Funder]

now I get where your hate filled attacks come from...actually i pity you...

you read it which ever way you like - there are dozens of examples out there regarding Dawkins being caught out - but of course to you they are all lies - everyone that disagrees with you is either lying or a fruit loop... you are a waste of time...

no atheist/evolutionist/whateverelse'ist has told porkies though have they??? can't think of any examples (piltdown man, lucy, so many millions of others out there to find with a simple google)...oh wait, they are christians spreading more lies...

pfffft

(1) Nothing hate-filled, just pointing out the obvious
(2) You edited the quote and took it out of context. Feel free to try again with something factual and honest.
(3) Piltdown man was an an attempt at paleontoligical fraud. The nature of science is that such "finds" are subject to peer review and it other scientists discerned the fraud. That's the way science works. All knowledge stands subject only to the extent to which it survives retesting and scrutiny. If it doesn't hold water it will be torn down. Religion is the antithesis of this approach.

Lucy is one of the most striking and significant paleontological finds in history. What of it?

 

[Token Funder]

cmon hoffy you can do better than that! What a cop out.

TF - Richard dawkins. If there was ever a man who didnt know god it is him. What a humorless, dry, flat individual. Did you see his interview with Denton?

Glad he is on your side!

Facts tend not to have a personality.

They just are.

 

[aussierogue]

Facts just are hey!. Like the world is flat...

Dawkins lacks perspective and peception it shows in his personality.

Stop relying on techinical analysis.

Just like the dots example - some people will never see it...

Your stance is the same as a fundamentalist right wing christian. Both are from the same part of the ego. You should just say you dont know - or even saying you dont care is more relevant!

Why do you care - another one of those social anthropologists hey. Facsinated in why people go to church? Take up golf!

 

[Hoffy]

Why do you care

It bemuses me why you keep asking why an atheist would care. Are you blind to the impact that religion and this belief in "god" has on society and the lives of all of us?

It behooves us all to find a cure to the malady the religious are suffering from. We can't develop a cure until we understand the affliction fully.

 

[Francesco]

Francesco,

After how much deep study did you dismiss the spiritual validity of, say, the Book of Mormon? If the most recent "documented" appearance of christian angels in a 'holy book" doesn't make sense to you, on what intellectual basis did you dismiss the idea that the Jews are right and that the NT is a false start or, alternatively, that the Koran, clearly subject to less rewriting, political editing and translation error than the NT, isn't on the money?

Some online sources:

Orthodox Jews believed in OT. After Jesus, NT was consistent with OT. First disciples/apostles of Jesus were Jews.

Jesus fulfilled OT prophecies -
http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/messianicprophecies.html

Mormon -
http://www.bible.ca/mor-contradictions.htm

Koran/Islam -
http://www.faithfacts.org/world-religions-and-theology/contrasting-christianity-and-islam

http://www.abrahamic-faith.com/shamoun/Is_Muhammad_a_true_Prophet_of_God.html

http://www.islamreview.com/articles/lying.shtml

 

[Token Funder]

Facts just are hey!. Like the world is flat...

Dawkins lacks perspective and peception it shows in his personality.

Stop relying on techinical analysis.

Just like the dots example - some people will never see it...

Your stance is the same as a fundamentalist right wing christian. Both are from the same part of the ego. You should just say you dont know - or even saying you dont care is more relevant!

Why do you care - another one of those social anthropologists hey. Facsinated in why people go to church? Take up golf!

My irony meter is off the charts on this one.

 

[VYBerlinaV8]

I find it very interesting that this thread has gone on so long. If people don't really care what others believe, why the determinination to pull it down?