Well, I know about Hinduism. I don't think someone could make up everything in Hinduism in one life time, you cannot learn everything there is to it in one life time. It seems the same for Judaism and others.

Sad.. truly sad.. another fruit cake thinking he can join UM and change what every believes!!! Just because they said so!

BACCA- Dont you just LOVE how people try and twist the words or context around of what was originally said to make it more fitting when theyre trying to prove a point (People take reference to the "Put a Skeptic Kindly In Their Place" topic and see what i mean). Its your blatant ignorance and evidence in the fact that you change another persons original saying to something you want it to be. "Random Cut"? Dont be absurd. Your obviously referring to both my story and also the story mentioned on this topic of a persons experience and claim it was his dream. The cut wasnt random and i bet this persons experience wasnt a dream. I said what i had to say about the cut on my hand and dont try to use my true account here to defend YOURSELF- because i disagree with you to the core.

Yah, well, could be. It was ages since I read the bible, and I have no interest rereading those parts now to find out if you're right. Still, that doesn't change the fact about the power of belief.



I don't think anyone said it was made up in one life time. Hell, even the bible was being rewritten up until "recently"...

I suppose i should have said your interpretation was PROBABLY wrong to tell the absolute truth. Most Christians do take the passage you referred to as an affirmation that we can do anything. In my personal Biblical experience though I've found the interpretation I gave you much more likely.

All the best,

WongFeiHung, I would have to say that I agree with you on this 100%, but religion is a belief since the beginning of time therefore people will continue to believe in it even if it has stemmed from ignorance and control. It's human's nature to do so. I would have to say that it's not exactly bad, some people need it-- some people need to feel a reassurance that there is more to our existence than what we see. It also teaches morales still to this day so it's probably a good thing that the mass believes in it, otherwise I think that society today would be worse off than it already currently is. If religion was looked at as a 'myth' and the threat of going to hell wasn't weighing on people's mind, I think there would be much more crime. Even though I don't believe in god anymore, I was taught it when I was younger and sometimes I still feel as if I am wrong for being a heretic and it bothers me. That's how much religion has control over people, even when you can see things for what they are you sometimes still question it because it's influences are strong. I say live and let live, if people want to believe then let them do so, if it makes them a better person, more power to them.

Mankind is moral for the simple reason that in order to have the basic necessities of life (security, food, shelter), one must cooperate with others. What we call morals are those very things that make this cooperation easy. The fear of being killed by the neighbors would lead to the cultural admonishment of “No Murder Allowed”, the fear of losing one’s possessions would lead to the cultural admonishment of “No Stealing Allowed” and so forth. Have you ever noticed that the vast majority of morals are just the grease that oils the machinery of cooperation? Those few morals that don’t aid cooperation are usually derived from elitist religious dogma and are there only to make a specific group feel special. Incidentally I have known more highly moral Atheists, Agnostics and Free Thinkers than I have Christians.

Then there is the thought – Why would something so far above us even worry about us (do you worry about your stomach micro-organisms)? Without evidence that we are the highest creatures in all of creation, it is sheer vanity that makes us think that the Creator would even consider us any better than his myriad other creatures universe-wide.

Yes, after the advent of Temple-based Judaism (538 BCE), the people in power (in Judea) allowed religion to exist for the purpose of controlling the populace. Christianity and Islam continued the Jewish practice of controlling the populace through religion. Prior to Christianity, the large majority of governments used religion as a control agent very sparingly, the Greeks and Romans used it mainly as an agent to bond the populace and give a cultural identity to them. This is why it was so easy for all but the Jews, Christians and Moslems to accept foreign gods or equate them to their gods. Incidentally North America uses extreme forms of Christianity to control the people through a very conservative right-wing Christian White House. Evolution, while accepted world-wide, has a very hard row to hoe through the lack of knowledge of many of America’s citizens.

I would think that he speaks as a citizen of a nation that has a large or controlling Christian or Moslem population. With than in mind, it is not unusual for him to mention the punishment of hell; since fear of burning eternally in hell is the standard Christian and Moslem control agency.

Surprise, surprise I agree with you for the most part on this statement. I do want to point out that all religions have the same outlook on love and goodness as does Christianity. The difference is only in the minds of the Christians.

Agree with you about the racist remarks and to some extent about wealth determining morality (the most moral people are usually the poorest). However, the person who said that money can’t buy happiness was full of Male Bovine Manure! Extreme wealth is not a guarantee of happiness, but extreme poverty is a guarantee of misery! Enough money to provide the basic necessities of life with a few of the “Nice-to-haves” will do more to provide happiness than anything else. In many ways Marx (I believe it was) was correct in saying that religion was the opiate of the masses. As long as the masses were looking at God, the ruling elite (of which the Christian Church was a part) could do anything with little fear of reaction or rebellion! I personally do not believe in the Illuminati or believe that the Masons are much more than a “good-ole-boy” club, but if they were doing as you intimated, what difference would their actions be from that of the Christian Church of almost 1700 years?

Straw man argument – there is no more evidence of the existence of a deity than there is of the non-existence of one. As a Deist, I personally believe in a deity, but that doesn’t mean that there is and unlike most Christians, I will admit the possibility!

Actually the scriptures were not written until the 6th century BCE, making them a mere 2500 years old. Strange you should mention the dead sea scrolls, but not the fact that two versions of Josiah exist in them….That which is called the long version and that which is called the short version….as well as many small irregularities in most of the documents when compared to the modern versions. This actually says little for the much vaunted process that you described. Even if you were right, this would only prove that a group of people had strived for textual integrity, not that there was any sort of a deity, much less on that aided and abetted their efforts.

How about the Greeks finding fossil remains of things like Mammoths, Mastodons, etc. There are extensive fossil fields on many of the Greek isles and even the mainland, fields that the ancient Greeks were aware of , they even recorded them as ancient battlegrounds of the giants with the bones of the dead showing. If you stand the skeleton of a mammoth on it’s hind legs in the manner of a man and “rehinge” the front legs and place the skull in the manner of a human (this would be what an unlearned person might do), you have an instant Cyclops. I would doubt that their belief in such as Minotaurs, Centaurs, etc would be more than misreading fossil remains or pure mythology, the last being his point.


That is what is called an overactive pineal gland. Stimulation of the pineal gland has been shown to cause such unreal phenomena to the subjects of the experiments. This shows that such supernatural phenomena can and usually does come from a malfunctioning gland.

You can pretty well say the same thing about the Christian book of mythology and their dogma.

I agree with the “doing the sister” part, but ancient man had the same problem with inbreeding (actually a greater problem as the gene pool was much more shallow) as we do. All ancient peoples had restrictions on inbreeding, this is not something that only the Jews had (nor did you say that, I only point it out), it was common sense because with a much smaller breeding population, the vagaries of inbreeding would be more severe and show up sooner.

The same here.

well put mako.

lets extend the "god is fake" concept a bit:

gods are defined without a sample. when we defined what water is, we worked from a sample of water, for example. with gods, people have generated constructs of these beings,entities, energy fields, or whatever. now here is the problem with this: how does anybody know that the construct they created IS what a god IS? the simple answer is it is a god to them (but perhaps not to the next person). so what we have is a scenario where even if (and it is a big if) we found (or it revealed itself to us) a creature that appeared to fulfill one of these constructs we don't know if it is really a "god" or just meets enough of our construct for us to call it a god. lets look at the concept of perfection for example: people have a construct of what perfection is, but application can vary depending on preconceptions. what is an example of perfection to person one is imperfect to person two. the same thing will always be present with god constructs.

hence, no matter what we discover, gods will always be fake because some will choose to see their construct of a god in something, thus conforming it to their ideals while others will see the falilure of these ideals in the discovery. things well beyond the grasp of man (intellectually as well as perceptually) are possible but by that very aspect of them the best we would have is a shallow "shadow" of their true nature, while the rest is created. thus, all human gods are false. IMO, humans have it backwards in their quest for a "higher power" (although i understand why man anthropomorphises so much). The true binding, creating forces are physical forces that exist within everything and they are "equal/necessary" (if you like your universe the way it is now).

as for society and morals: mako covered the morals issue. all human societies need/needed something that bound them together and acted as "stabalizers". gods and theology did this.

Ok I don't believe in a christian any christian god, I don't really care what other people believe in at all. If you choose to follow that then more power to you. But I don't understand the reasoning behind it. If I said that I don't believe in god because I received a sign that he doesn't exist in a dream or something of the like would that seem logical? I had no intention of offending anyone with references that may or may not have been about a previous post. And the point that I was making perhaps in a way that was not understood by some is that there are some people who don't see why anyone would believe in what is essentially nothing but a very old book with nothing to prove that it is anything but fiction. The original post is stating why he doesn't think that there is a god right? well why is it that there are so many people who try to argue the point that there is a god? I don't have a need to argue the point that there isn't really I just would like personally to understand why it is that you believe? With something that makes sense that is.....Something that can not have another explanation to it. And something other then quotes from the exact book that i feel is fiction. If this doesn't make sense to some of you I'm sorry but it is what it is....and that is just my opinion

Bacca Hyper Mako good posts


the morality part. I find interesting is that great problems have arisen because societies seek to change yet morals do not, Religion impedes and stops change,yet change is the nature of life,you can't create a better life by dening life!!!


for whatever reasons the God that has been created is a God with needs, somewhere someone decided God had needs and needs people to behave in a certin way and how to go about doing that, These morals are Human created contructs based on a God with needs, they are false and they aren't working , is my take ,

sheri, the reason the gods have had needs is because man modeled them on what he understood best, himself!

thus the truest line on gods was spoken: "man made the gods in the image of himself".

welcome to the anthropocentric view of the universe! something i think you and i agree is an approach we as a species have to move away from.

Hyper very good point, very good point indeed, There we have it once and for all the bible is a fraud!!!!


I would add that what a human "KNOWS" in its cells about God and what it "BELIEVES" about God are to different things completely. Namaste Sheri

Yes, just because someone says so!

Once again - giving reasons for why something happens does not make it a real event. It would take more than that to convince me, had I been a believer.

You two are so smart I happen to agree with both Sheri and hyper on this one there is something very odd to me about people who so strongly defend those books. Almost as if they are proven wrong there whole worlds would come tumbling down around them. When in all honesty nothing would change except there wouldn't be any reason to worry so much about little things like pre-marital sex and the like. Although that would also take away their free license to try and control other people into doing what they mistakenly think is the right and only path to morality.....

A further point that I had meant to make on this particular point. Society probably would have progressed faster and farther that what we have today had not Christianity come along. The overzealous bishops and monks of the 3rd and 4th centuries burned all of the accumulated philosophy (not a great loss) and science of the preceding civilizations (a great loss, especially that of the Greeks). Had this not have happened it is entirely possible that the Empire would not have fallen as fast as it did and the Greek scholars would have continued their exploration of the sciences (the barbarian invasions resultied in almost no lose of knowledge, they embrace the Greek learning and seldom, if ever, burned books). This might have put us on the moon by the 1400’s, instead of in the Americas!

mako. it is true we lost a great deal of knowledge thanks to the church.

however, i am not so quick as you to play "alternative history" for people tend to idealize the alternatives. man has a history of discovering things before he is ready to comprehend said things. it is also possible we could have destroyed ourselves by the 1500's had history been different.

for society to work, there needs to be that binding ingredient and as much as i would like to see the religions of the past few centuries die off i must also consider what would stand in their place. perhaps man is now ready to have a society without such structures, but if he is it is a new development (i personally think we are going through a social restructuring as we move towards a global society that will see the lifespan of the long-term structures shrink and the lifespan of the short-term structures grow).

I wasn't advocating the death of public religion, just pointing out the damage done by Christianity. Had Christianity not come along, the other religions available would have just as capable of bond society and historically showed much less a preponderance for violence and a greater love of knowledge. I still maintain that we would have (possibily) been on the moon in 1492 althought it is possible that we might have destroyed ourselves by now.

Probably from all the ecosystems that are getting messed up by polution and stuff.

agreed, mako. christianity perfected the model of dominate and decimate.

Bacca good point also.


Hyper , you have made a great point we have done the same with technology we as a conciousness haven't grpwn in our awareness to handle it, what we need is a growth in conciousness , as long as we have those that insist they know everything there is to know about the universe we wil have very little progress and lots more problems, Go ahead keep religions but only keep what is working for the betterment of all get rid of the rest. Namaste sheri

Back in the day, it wasn't all that uncommon to "keep it in the family." What Carlos Mencia said about Adam and Eve having all those kids, sons and daughters...I don't know if you've read Genesis, but I heard of Cain, Abel and Seth. That's it. You need to stop "learning" about religion from the media and Comedy Central. Like I said, people liked to keep the line in the family and it's recorded throughout history.

Someone said that it's funny how all the Christians jumped on Wong for his comment, but I wonder what would happen if I started a thread that said, "Evolution is fake!" Hey, I've done it and I got jumped on and insulted. Just admit that it goes both ways.

You have fruit cake?! Can I have some? I'll give you a dollar! Or a doughnut

and will your church admit sexuality goes both ways?

isn't it rather funny the church claims man is made in god's image, and then proceeds to denounce so much of what man is? is it not in essence denouncing much of what its own god is?

We've all done it before... well, some of us anyway.



A rule of thumb: you can tell when a new member is ticked off when he doesn't respond to any of the replies to his post.

now that is a prime example of a red herring.

is it laughter? i am not using the homophobic nature of suacy's church in the dabate over the "fakeness" of gods. this is merely a side conversation.

yep.
nor does it have anything to do with saucy's post.

sorry laughter, i was using a quote from this thread by saucy in reference to what he said in another thread (birds and bees) but incorrectly recalled as being in this thread.

Insight: It sure is easier to believe God is made up. That way, we don't have any moral responsibility. We can do what ever we want. But really, if God was REALLY made up, then why wouldn't everyone just do whatever they want? Why does an Athiest still abide by a code of moral conduct? If the only thing in life is myself and my own pleasure, then why don't I step on every single toe I possibly can to get it?

Nice try, but no sale. If everyone acted as you say, the world would be an impossible place to live . . . athiests can figure that out, even if you can't. What you are talking about is anarchy, which is dreadful. With known and understood laws and rules, life is much easier, even if you don't agree completely with those laws and rules. One can always work to change the rules disagreed with. I have no belief in God, but I live my life in such a way that if everyone lived that way, it would be a much better and easier world to live in. Simple as that. The existance of a "God" isn't required, and there have been "Godless" societies in history which had similar if not the same laws and rules.

It sounds like a great theory Sheri, and I'd agree with it, except for the matter of perspective. It seems to be nice and simple to say that whatever way works for you, go for it. But we know whenever we see a suicide bomber blow up a building that in practice, this theory just does not work.

Suppose (and I hope I don't offend you with this) I were to rape, torture and kill one or more of your children. I do not repent and indeed say I'd do it again if I had the opportunity. According to your philosophy there is nothing wrong with this - it is simply my chosen path, and should lead directly to God, right?

I apologize for the strong example. All the best,

Nice try, but no sale either. You seem to believe that people will work together if you let them.

So let me ask you a question. If the chief of police announced that tomorrow the police force would be on strike and there'd be no officers to uphold the law, would you leave your house and go to town? No. Why? Because you know as well as I do that human nature being what it is, people will jump on the opportunity to further their own goals with no consequences. Just observe looters during a crisis if you don't believe me.

I believe the point was that rules and regulations do not have to be handed down by a god in order for a society to follow them. I don't think LarryOldTimer would ever suggest that people are all inherently warm and fuzzy inside and would happily live together in harmony.

Insight's comment made the assumption that the only source of morality is a god, and that the exclusion of a god would, by necessity, mean that all people would be amoral. By implication, the notion that a person could adhere to a moral code without the threat of divine retribution was considered ludicrous. I do not believe this to be correct. I have a very well defined moral code of my own, and it does not require any sort of supernatural involvement in order for me to follow it. I do so of my own free will, not because I am inherently a sweet and caring person, but because I believe it both to be in my best social interest, and more importantly, because it makes me feel better inside to do so.

very well put

I personally feel that it is better to be good of your own mind and will then to gain the favor of a god....Although I could be wrong

I am just voicing my belief and giving a logiccal answer as to why I do believe in them. I know that no one will change their belief s based on what I have to say here and jsut as the word of god is preeched, so am I preeching the word of WongFeiHung.

So you like to preach, huh God is not made up, it is made down And we are all part of it, like it or not. The choice is yours become godlike or don't...and watch out for KARMA Next time around you may become what you despise

I can see you are a logical person. But however, I will put it this way: I couldn't care less what you say about my religion. One person's opinion won't change my beliefs.

There I said it, I don't care.

hey im nicole and i understand where your commin from sayin hes fake an everythin but i think your wrong completly and why would you tell people that hes fake its not like theyll bleive you in the first place but look im not trin to get you mad im jsut sayin that pray helps out alot iv asked for money and to win the lottery and i have so many times and stuff like that love and sh** they all came true thanks to god

This world sucks more than half of the time. LIFE sucks, most of the time. Let people believe in something. Who cares if it's a god, nature itself, faeries, cat goddesses, or wtfever. Let people believe. We need it.

End of story.

Personally, as long as the belief doesn't disrespect other beliefs or harm anyone, let it be.

[quote=eveningsky339,Aug 5 2005, 01:29 PM]
[quote]

A rule of thumb: you can tell when a new member is ticked off when he doesn't respond to any of the replies to his post.
[right][snapback]774581[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


I am sorry i didn't reply, I didn't get on until mid day today and this thing is HHHUUUGGGEEE!!!!! I don't know what to respond to because there are like 50 different arguments goig on at once!!! wow this is awesome!!! 8o)

edit: as you can see i don't know how to quote!!!

lol

Physcially He doesn't exist, ideally he's as real as anything can be thought up.

PA what took you so long on this one???The age old why we need religion and How if it wasn't for religoin people would run rampant and things would be worse if that could be possible because I think things are pretty bad as they are In large part because of religion, yes in my opinion it is because of religion now its my turn to apologize PA I was not offeneded by your example , Let me start here, PA those that rape and violate in a sexual ways have been taught that their sexuality is bad its unnatural etc so they express their sexuality in a "Unnatural way, in a way that violates others, the bible teaches sex is wrong and only to be practiced under certain circumstances etc etc etc, Religion is the standard on Moraity they are responsible for the beliefs they teach and the outcome , Make sex a beautiful loving act between two consenting adults make it natural a gift from God because the truth is in its highest expression it is The bodys way of expressing love to another we are the only ones who can enjoy this Its Beautiful, Why teach that it isn't, Anyone who tells the truth will tell you that sex is awesome and even more awesome with someone you love Religion drives it underground says its unclean , unpure and wonder why we have so many messed up sexual predators running around, I'm rambling but this is my answer , Namaste Sheri

Precisely what I was getting at. Moreover, I would bet that at least some of the looters and such would call themselves religious and even be churchgoers. Believing in a supposed god has not kept more than a few people in history from anti-social behavior and crime. As I recall, a good many Mafia members have been regular churchgoers, and even confessed their sins to the priest and afterwards taken communion.

Larry good post, If I was to tell the truth the people that I know who are "religous are the worst they judge others, lie , cheat on husbands, I've seem a so called "good christian steal, and feel okay about it. The kids that are in the most trouble are the religous kids but no one was asking me, I don't lie or cheat on my husband because you wouldn't violate another's gift of love because what you do to one you do to yourself. , I contribute to alot of humantarian projects, I care about the planet i don't take more than I need, I don't judge or get caught up in the drama of others i smile at everyone I forgive when I need to and I'm not religious,I choose to be this way I want to be a good person I'm not religious I don't need the bible to be a good person , that to me is another myth that religion teaches to ensure your needing thier church why would you need the church if you are capable yourself to do what works for the best of all. Namaste Sheri

Irrelevant to the subject. The question was about "non-believers" assaults "believers" when they start up similar threads like this one, but with the intention of proving evolution wrong. What the church thinks about sexuality has nothing to do with that, at all.

I was seeking god for 15 years and never seen, heard, felt a single thing to believe in god.. yet I blindly believed and prayed to something that never affecting my life whatsoever

You know what... I actually still do look for 'god'. I see that god is very unlikely but I am by no means closed minded. I will remain on the side of no god untill there is proof and its that simple. If god comes from the sky and starts talking to the world or something then I will believe. Soon as I was all grown up I could start thinking for myself. I really questioned peoples beliefs and looked into it a lot more. With rational thought I could see the ideology behind religion and what its there for.

Just because im an athiest doesnt mean I have a closed mind at all. I'm just using my brain a bit better these days...

You were able to create big events or stories in the past and get away with it. Now if a big event happens we can see if its true because of our communication and travel capabilities.

I don't think you should let the stress of religion disconnect yourself from the alledged 'God' . And I don't think its a matter of 'looking' for God, but a matter of 'listening' for him. Some people say it takes faith...and it can, its gonna be hard for an Athiest to listen for the alledged 'God' . Thats why there are these 'connection' stories people like to tell that the alledged 'God' talked to them.

Why is it that one side has to be closed minded? If you don't believe in god your closed minded, if you do then you are......Both sides are seeing what they want. But in my opinoin the difference lies in the idea that a belief in an invisible deity is being taken as solid fact. Going on that idea then anything that someone believes in is a fact. And that just isn't right now is it? If I believe that there are gremlins living in my basement, and every night i hear movement, and have found fur and scratch marks does that mean that i have gremlins?

Of course not! The damn things are all in my car.

I think his situation is not a black-white situation, there can always be grey areas...people just don't see them. You might not believe in a God, because there is no evidence to you that there is no God, so you remain Atheist. But you will open your mind to the chance that evidence will come forward. Until then, *if* the day comes, you remain Atheist.


I put them there