Are you an atheist?

[Alisa]

I wouldn't be so sure. I don't think that the world is in this state because God is in the huff! I don't believe that God is what most people accredit to it. It just is!

However, I can see a link between people no longer being good honest "church go-ers" or "God fearers" and the bad state of the world today! If you are afraid of being smote by the wrath of a God you are probably much more inclined to live a life that will not bear his judgement and, in turn the world goes around much nicer. This was the true reason for the hell fire and brimstone approach used in the dark ages.

At the moment we are in a transitional period where we are confused. Our God has been removed from us (well from most of us) and we are left to trust in our own judgement. Like children we now run riot through the house testing to see how far we can push this thing and get away with it. It's the law of nature. It will settle down. New ways of control will develop and our decentants will look back at us and laugh at how barbaric we were.

You seem to be claiming that people "behave" if they are religious churchgoers and "misbehave" if they are sinners. Am I reading you wrong?

I think you need to examine your basis for that claim. It has been said more than once already, but it bears repeating because it is so true: good people will do good things, and bad people will do bad things, but it takes religion to make good people do bad things.

If you sincerely think that lack of religion makes people misbehave, I would encourage you to look at yourself. On a day (or month or year) when you decide not to go to church, do you suddenly have the urge to commit murder and robbery? Or are you content to continue behaving in a generally moral fashion? (I am assuming of course that you are not actually a murderer or a robber).

Finally, I question your claim that we have lost our basis for judgement by not being religious and going to church. Do you really think that the bible, or whatever holy book you choose, gives us a moral foundation? Because the last time I checked, every single holy book contained murder, ra**, incest, assault, revenge, and child abuse.

 

[Pauldohert]

Its slowly turning into one of Obamas ministers sermons.

 

[Darth Vodka]

every single holy book contained child abuse.

not the Qu'ran though








(oh hold on, wasn't Aisha Mohammed's wife when she was six, consummated when she was nine? )

 

[ShaneMan]

care to reveal the source of your 1730s USA crime statistics?

I was quoting from a book I read by Arnold Dallimore about George Whitfield. Arnold Dallimore is Brit so we know it has to accurate.

 

[ShaneMan]

Thanks for the considered response and for not taking offense where none was intended (you religious nut, you ).

I don't know, but aren't there plenty of examples of times when religion was very prevalent but bad things still happened, or when religion was ignored yet nothing exceptionally bad occurred? I know I've read some things saying that the reason the population of Pompeii was wiped out was that they'd angered God by behaving in a debauched manner, but I find it hard to believe that the worst city of that time, in that regard, just happened to be in the shadow of Vesuvius.

I think a key problem to the practical aspect of religion is the 'if' bit you mention. I see religion very much like Commmunism and trade unions, in that respect. The ideologies are great, but stopping people from abusing the ideas for their own ends appears to be impossible.

I'm sure there would be examples of times being both ways but I do think that the "if" part is the biggest part to factor in. "If" folks truly obeyed what they say they believe in and read in their "good books" then they would not steal, lie, cheat on their spouses, ra**, abuse children and the list goes on. "If" they did obey they would show love, grace, mercy and etc. I don't think the problem is in what the books teach. I think the problem is how the followers read it and mistranslate them to justify what they have done or want to do.

 

[Alc]

I'm sure there would be examples of times being both ways but I do think that the "if" part is the biggest part to factor in. "If" folks truly obeyed what they say they believe in and read in their "good books" then they would not steal, lie, cheat on their spouses, ra**, abuse children and the list goes on. "If" they did obey they would show love, grace, mercy and etc. I don't think the problem is in what the books teach. I think the problem is how the followers read it and mistranslate them to justify what they have done or want to do.

But aren't the books themselves just unrealistic? I'm not refering to the magical parts, just the whole idea of telling everyone to be nice.

Yes, if we all stopped committing murder, murder would end, but human nature just doesn't work like that.

 

[ShaneMan]

But aren't the books themselves just unrealsitic? I'm not refering to the magical parts, just the whole idea of telling everyone to be nice.

Yes, if we all stopped committing murder, murder would end, but human nature just doesn't work like that.

I guess we have the obvious in front of us on that one. Even though there are several good books that teach not to do it, we as humans still make "God like" decisions and treat fellow humans in animal like ways and because we do, we reap what we sow. We get to have the consequences of our actions. Now we come full circle in our conversation. Why blame a god or the God, for "bad things happening to good people" or use it as evidence that there can not be a god or this would not be happening: Is it because he did not interfere and make a bad thing not happen? On the other hand we don't want him to interfere when things are going good cause we want to live how we want to. I guess humans just want it to go both ways.

 

[Alisa]

I guess we have the obvious in front of us on that one. Even though there are several good books that teach not to do it, we as humans still make "God like" decisions and treat fellow humans in animal like ways and because we do, we reap what we sow. We get to have the consequences of our actions. Now we come full circle in our conversation. Why blame a god or the God, for "bad things happening to good people" or use it as evidence that there can not be a god or this would not be happening: Is it because he did not interfere and make a bad thing not happen? On the other hand we don't want him to interfere when things are going good cause we want to live how we want to. I guess humans just want it to go both ways.

If it is obvious that god does not intervene (i.e., does not reward the good people nor punish the bad people), then what is the point of believing in god at all?

 

[ShaneMan]

If it is obvious that god does not intervene (i.e., does not reward the good people nor punish the bad people), then what is the point of believing in god at all?

Hey Alisa, how's your day going? I was referring to this part: "Yes, if we all stopped committing murder, murder would end, but human nature just doesn't work like that." being the obvious, not God intervening being the obvious.

 

[Alisa]

Hey Alisa, how's your day going? I was referring to this part: "Yes, if we all stopped committing murder, murder would end, but human nature just doesn't work like that." being the obvious, not God intervening being the obvious.

Yes I understand. This is what I was trying to say: If we all stopped committing murder, murder would end. I agree with this statement. On the other hand, if god is all powerful, surely human nature is within his control, surely he could make us all stop committing murder if he wanted to, especially murder committed in his name. Yet everyone agrees that "human nature just doesn't work like that". So obviously god has not and will not intervene. So, since god doesn't intervene, then why bother believing in him?

 

[oumahexi]

You seem to be claiming that people "behave" if they are religious churchgoers and "misbehave" if they are sinners. Am I reading you wrong?

Hmm, maybe my hurried response wasn't quite as articulate as I'd have liked.

I think you need to examine your basis for that claim. It has been said more than once already, but it bears repeating because it is so true: good people will do good things, and bad people will do bad things, but it takes religion to make good people do bad things.

I've no doubt they do. But I still think that with the right guidance, which the bibles are supposed to be, bad people are less apt to be bad. I think the point I was trying to make is that there are still a lot of people out there who can benefit from the guidance of a "good book".

If you sincerely think that lack of religion makes people misbehave, I would encourage you to look at yourself. On a day (or month or year) when you decide not to go to church, do you suddenly have the urge to commit murder and robbery? Or are you content to continue behaving in a generally moral fashion? (I am assuming of course that you are not actually a murderer or a robber).

Aye, a day I missed church That's probably why God is so miffed at us, because I missed church one day.

Finally, I question your claim that we have lost our basis for judgement by not being religious and going to church. Do you really think that the bible, or whatever holy book you choose, gives us a moral foundation? Because the last time I checked, every single holy book contained murder, ra**, incest, assault, revenge, and child abuse.

Oh no, I didn't mean that we've lost our judgement, just a whole lot of people never had any in the first place. I think they are the ones that the bibles were supposed to reach. And yes, I do think that most bibles give a moral foundation, but face it, what book is ever going to be read if it doesn't have a certain amount of murder, ra**, incest etc? You gotta get the audience, then you can get the message through Would you question that God wouldn't know that when he sat down to put quill to parchmont?

 

[KenHigg]

Yes I understand. This is what I was trying to say: If we all stopped committing murder, murder would end. I agree with this statement. On the other hand, if god is all powerful, surely human nature is within his control, surely he could make us all stop committing murder if he wanted to, especially murder committed in his name. Yet everyone agrees that "human nature just doesn't work like that". So obviously god has not and will not intervene. So, since god doesn't intervene, then why bother believing in him?

I believe he intervened when the sun came up this morning

 

[Alisa]

Oh no, I didn't mean that we've lost our judgement, just a whole lot of people never had any in the first place. I think they are the ones that the bibles were supposed to reach. And yes, I do think that most bibles give a moral foundation, but face it, what book is ever going to be read if it doesn't have a certain amount of murder, ra**, incest etc? You gotta get the audience, then you can get the message through Would you question that God wouldn't know that when he sat down to put quill to parchmont?

First of all, I have never heard even the most fervent believer claim that god actually wrote the bible. Second of all, how does the bible give a moral foundation? How do you know which parts are there to "juice it up" and which parts are meant to be moral guidance?

 

[Mike375]

If it is obvious that god does not intervene (i.e., does not reward the good people nor punish the bad people), then what is the point of believing in god at all?

You seem to have trouble grasping the fact that for religious people people the rewards or penalities come in the next life. Actually, it is a belief in God that produces the reward, not deeds done on earth. Good deeds without a belief in God produce no reward.

 

[Alisa]

I believe he intervened when the sun came up this morning

So then he also intervened in 1906 when San Francisco was destroyed by fire and earthquake. And last year when a 7 yo child was allowed to starve death in denver. And last week when a cylcone swept over Myanmar and killed 100,000 people. Some god you've got there.

 

[Mike375]

So then he also intervened in 1906 when San Francisco was destroyed by fire and earthquake. And last year when a 7 yo child was allowed to starve death in denver. And last week when a cylcone swept over Myanmar and killed 100,000 people. Some god you've got there.

Alisa,

God intervening in the Sun coming up is God providing the physics.

 

[oumahexi]

First of all, I have never heard even the most fervent believer claim that god actually wrote the bible.

Let me know if you ever do.

[QUOTE}Second of all, how does the bible give a moral foundation? How do you know which parts are there to "juice it up" and which parts are meant to be moral guidance?[/QUOTE]

OK, correct me if I'm wrong but didn't JC say something about loving each other and didn's Moses say that you weren't supposed to kill each other or steal and such things? You're probably spoilt over there in the US, your kids will be getting taught that type of stuff in the schools. Here, everybody is that scared of offending somebody that they rarely get taught anything that could be interpreted as taking away someone's rights. So they won't get taught morals because morally you have the right to be immoral and so on. Parents don't teach it to the kids because most of them are so spaced out they don't really care how the kid grows up as long as they do it without bugging mommy and her partner (I'm generalising now, so don't get on your high horse).

Juicing up the bible. Well, come on, any omnipotent being must have the power to know what people are going to want to read in 2000 years, so, why wouldn't it spice it up a bit to make people read it?

 

[KenHigg]

Sometimes it just doesn't make sense. That's when our faith is put to the test.

 

[Alisa]

You seem to have trouble grasping the fact that for religious people people the rewards or penalities come in the next life. Actually, it is a belief in God that produces the reward, not deeds done on earth. Good deeds without a belief in God produce no reward.

Ah ha. So you can do whatever you want in this life, and deal with the consequences in the afterlife. Sounds like one of those furniture deals on TV, "Buy now and pay nothing until 2009!".

I think that reasoning gives people more incentive to be immoral. Think about it. What would give you a greater incentive to "behave": If someone tells you, you have only one life to give, make the best of it, because once you do something bad you can never take it back. Or, if someone tells you, you are born with sin, you can never be pure. If you commit more sins, just ask for forgiveness and you can still go to heaven. In fact, it doesn't really matter if you do good deeds, all you have to do is believe me when I tell you there is a god, and you will get to go to heaven.

Clearly, the first option leads to a greater sense of personal responsibility, while the second is akin to a permissive parent who in the grocery store lets the kid buy candy in the checkout line even after screaming through the whole store.

And why would god care so much whether we believe in him or not anyway? If he is all powerful, why would it matter to him whether us puny little humans believe in him? And if it WERE so important that we believe in him, then why wouldn't he use his great powers to MAKE us believe in him?

Finally, if you really believe that good people are rewarded in the afterlife, then why do we not celebrate on our deathbeds? If there really is an afterlife, we should celebrate at death, not mourn. And yet, at least in the U.S., death is so feared that we can't even get a decent assisted suicide law passed.

Likewise, if you really believe that bad people are punished in the afterlife, then why do we take it upon ourselves to punish them in this life. Afterall, surely burning in hell is a far better punishment than being locked up in a nice warm cell with running water and 3 square meals a day.

 

[Alisa]

Let me know if you ever do.

um. I think you just did. Twice.

OK, correct me if I'm wrong but didn't JC say something about loving each other and didn's Moses say that you weren't supposed to kill each other or steal and such things? You're probably spoilt over there in the US, your kids will be getting taught that type of stuff in the schools. Here, everybody is that scared of offending somebody that they rarely get taught anything that could be interpreted as taking away someone's rights. So they won't get taught morals because morally you have the right to be immoral and so on. Parents don't teach it to the kids because most of them are so spaced out they don't really care how the kid grows up as long as they do it without bugging mommy and her partner (I'm generalising now, so don't get on your high horse).

Yes, and the bible also said that god sacraficed his own son on the cross. Do you follow that direction too?

My point is not that we don't need morals or moral education. My point is that morals do not come from the bible or any other religious book.