100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Are Atheists Open for a Chat? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Practicing atheist? I just wonder what kind of practice that is.  Atheism is a practice of none belief in a God. A non belief nevertheless is a belief. You BELIEVE there is not God. There is no way to have absolutely no belief less you've never heard of God or any form of existence. When you state you do not believe in God, right there is stating a belief. A belief in the none existence of God. I believe there is no unicorns, no Santa, no easter bunny, no tooth fairy, etc. etc. etc. But I don't go to the meetings or practice it. Exactly. How about Zeus, Thor, and Krishna? Christians, Muslims, and religious Jews are all Atheists-with-respect-to-those-three-gods. Does that make all Jews, Christians, and Muslims involved in 'the practice of the non-belief in Thor' ? As a weak atheist, am I practicing the non-belief in billions of entities. I also lack beleif in the spaghetti monster, I lack belief in the Jedi and the Sith, in Harry Potter, in Superman, in... ---- This hints at the ridiculous ongoing effort by Christians to equate atheism to religion - which is is just stupid and tiresome. You can draw some correlations between gnostic theism and gnostic, strong atheism, and you can draw a correlation between Christianity and atheist forms of Buddhism or Humanism or atheist forms of Unitarianism, etc. But even 'strong atheism' is no more 'a religion' than 'theism' is. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exactly.
In fact from the solipsistic point of view I would be a non-believer in everything except my own existence. This reality, and all that appears to be in it is just a figment of my imagination and exists only in my mind. And I must say, I did a very convincing job creating it.  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well this thread is reaching the end times, and when on the 50th page it is locked. It's creator has disappeared into cyberspace. I won't be creating another one so I will bid you all good by, or until next time --all believers and unbelievers, its been nice chatting.
 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
here's a question for the religious to ponder, and it will prove why God doesn't exist beyond their mind Really? You really think you have proof of that?  THE QUESTION: do you "believe" that you exist? ....or do you "know" that you exist? I know I exist. I know God exists. 'cause I am God.   JennieBean...supposedly only the creator is God...are you supposedly the creator? Consider this funches. You acknowledge that you know that you exist. How do you? You know because you experience existence. Therefore, if you know that you exist, then you must also know that you're experiences exist. Even if only in your own mind. Now you either believe that you are the only one who exists and that all of the people you 'experience' are figments of your imagination. Or you believe that everyone is probably in the same boat as you and that everyone you meet probably experiences life too and therefore they probably exist as well in their own right. Well, take that very same philosophy and apply it to Jeannie. She either believes that she is the sole entity that exists and everything is a figment of her very own creation. In that sense she would indeed believe that she is the "sole creator" of everything. However, she probably looks around and figures that everyone is probably in the same boat that she's in. So in that sense she recognizes that everyone is a facet of "God", and to be a facet of God is to be "God". You don't need to get all totalitarian and fascist about this concept to recognize that this is probably true for everyone. We are all co-creators with God, but since God creates through us, we are indeed creators. So in that sense we are "God". JennieBean ...first you said that you were the creator and when I asked you to create some evidence then you claim that you weren't the creator and now you claiming that you are the co-creator and bumped it up to again claiming to be The creator.....I know it's a woman" prerogative to change her mind ...but jeez |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mylifetoday wrote: Agnostic - I have a sister that says she is agnostic and for all intents and purposes she is a practicing atheist. From what I can gather agnostic to mean is you are willing to talk about the nature of God if someone can show you evidence that God could exist. But without evidence to show He exists, rather than taking a wait and see approach it is usually hostile to someone that does believe. She is totally unwilling to talk about faith or religion or God at all. Talking about it just gets her angry. Otherwise, she uses Missouri's slogan. "Show Me." She loves science and philosophy but if you can't show a clear logical progression to your thought, she dismisses it as musings of a madman. What would you say agnostic means to you? I don't know about your sister, but it sounds to me that she may possibly feel the same way I do. I consider myself to be "agnostic" about the spiritual essence of reality. I don't know what the truth of reality is. However, when it comes to the Abrahamic religions and Christianity I'm totally a very convinced atheist. Those religions are clearly lies. I make no apology at all for making this statement. It's is my sincere believe and understanding that Christianity cannot possibly be true. Period. As far as I'm concerned I have a myriad of proofs (proofs that I'm totally convinced of myself) of why Christianity cannot be true as held out by orthodox Christianity. So it's totally unworthy of faith. Just to back up my position I'll offer you one very simple proof, which I'm sure that you will remain in denial of and try to find excuses for. Because you are apparently more interested in defending these myths rather than considering that they are indeed false. Here's a very simple proof of why this religion is false as held out by orthodox Christianity. ~~~~~~ 1. This God is supposedly be 'righteous' and 'all-wise'. 2. This God hates and condemns everyone who refuses to believe in him even if their reasons for doing so are honest, sincere and well-intentioned. ~~~~~~~~~ Well, #2 is a blatant contradiction to #1. Thus this religion is already an obvious falsehood before we even bother to discuss it further. ~~~~~ How do you argue against this proof? You can either try to argue against #2 by claiming that "God hates no one" and that people condemn themselves by their own free will choice to "not believe" in this God. But that doesn't solve the problem or address the issue at all. On the contrary that is a totally ignorant response in and of itself that simply refuses to allow this God to be responsible for the conditions that he supposedly created. So the second, and more popular approach, that most Christians use when confronted with this is to avoid #2 altogether and instead try to attack #1 by claiming that my concepts of "righteousness" and "wisdom" may not be the same as God's idea of these concepts. Well, fine. If that's the case then it's utterly meaningless to speak of this God as being "all-righteous" and "all-wise" since his idea of what those concepts mean have absolutely no relationship to our human understanding of these concepts. In other words, this second approach amounts to nothing more than utterly meaningless mumbo jumbo just to avoid having to confess that these stories are indeed a blatant contradiction in terms. ~~~~~ The bottom line for me is that this proof stands as solid as a rock and no Christian has ever convinced me otherwise. These fables are necessarily false. They must be the made up lies of men because they simply are neither "righteous" nor "wise", as far as I'm concerned. So whilst I may be "agnostic" in terms of a spiritual essence to reality, I am not "agnostic" toward Christianity. As far as I'm concerned it's already been proven to be nothing more than "Hebrew Mythology", just as the fables of Zeus are accepted even by the Christians to be "Greek Mythology". ~~~~~ IMHO, Christianity has indeed been proven to be false without a shadow of a doubt. Personally, I think both are wrong. # 1 is based on our limited understanding of an unknowable power in the universe. # 2 Look at God as a parent. The parent loves their child they help them grow to mature adults. They hope and pray their child will come back to them with love and respect. They have no way to ensure that will happen. That is Free Will. But that said, even this pales in comparison to the Power that is God. I would say no one on earth understands what God wants or feels for us. We have our limited understanding. Then we argue about whether or not He exists based on this. It is akin to taking a grain of sand and looking at it under a microscope and trying to describe a beach scene with all the people, water, fish and trees you see based on the examination of the one grain of sand. We just can't do it. No one can answer your questions with any certainty. It is a guess based on what we know to be true based on our limited understanding. I will be the first to say that what I know and believe to be true cannot be proven to anyone. But that doesn't negate what I know and believe. There is a possibility that I am wrong and I will freely admit that. There is also the possibility that there are others that are correct at the same time even though we would say they are contradictions therefore cannot be. The Power of God is insurmountable. There is nothing He cannot do. To me, that means there are a lot of mysteries that I just cannot fathom how they work or even see evidence that they cannot work but by God, they do work. Just because we can see a contradiction does not mean that it is beyond God's ability. But I believe what I believe based on my past experiences and knowledge, just as everyone else here. No one will change anyone else belief today. Just won't happen. So, let's be respectful of each other and try to understand what the other person's point is and beliefs are. We don't have to agree. But that doesn't give anyone the right to belittle anyone else. As far as I am concerned for my personal beliefs, there is no proof, only knowledge. Example: we all have our TV and cell phones. Unless you are an engineer that actually designed one of these, none of us would be able to adequately describe exactly how the electricity generates these pictures. I am talking down to an atomic level. A lot of us have a basic concept of it but don't know the details. That doesn't mean the TV doesn't work or the cell phone doesn't exist. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Abracadabra
on
Wed 04/20/11 09:35 PM
|
|
mylifetoday wrote: So, let's be respectful of each other and try to understand what the other person's point is and beliefs are. We don't have to agree. But that doesn't give anyone the right to belittle anyone else. I would love to. In fact, I believe that I am. Why is it considered to be "disrespectful for me to suggest that I believe that the ancient Hebrews claims about "god" appear to be provably false, inconsistent, contradictory, and absurd, IMHO, yet, it's not considered to be "disrespectful" for Christians to flat-out refute all non-Christian religions as being blatantly false? That's a bit one-sided don't you think? I'm a human being. The ancient Hebrew texts are making what I believe to be outrageous claims about the creator they claim to be the creator of all humanity. Well, I'm a human. That gives me the right to comment on their accusations about my supposed creator. They also claim that all men are "sinners" and in dire need of repentance and salvation. Well, I'm a man, so they are apparently making accusations about me. Shouldn't I have the right to rebuttal? They also claim that there is "no excuse" for not believing in their God. Well that again appears to be directed toward all non-believers in their doctrine. So once again they have opened the door wide for the comments of non-believers to offer their 'defense' against these outrageous claims. I speak to the actual doctrine. Not to the "followers" of the doctrine. As an individual I truly don't care what you believe.  But if you're going to argue to support the ancient Hebrew doctrine, then you've chosen to take that side of a debate. You can hardly cry foul when you've chosen to support this doctrine that makes these claims to all of humanity. With this in mind, I'll politely explain why I do not accept your responses: ~~~~~~~~~~~~ You say, "Personally, I think both are wrong." Abra wrote: 1. This God is supposedly be 'righteous' and 'all-wise'. mylifetoday response,... # 1 is based on our limited understanding of an unknowable power in the universe. No. I disagree. #1 is based on what I consider to be 'righteous' and 'all-wise'. I don't need to know anything beyond my current understanding to recognize that it would be unrighteous and unwise for any god to set up a situation where people were required to believe in a truly bizarre religion, lest they be condemned to everlasting punishment. Moreover, my conclusion is based on "All I can know". And thus for any God to expect me to base my conclusions on things that I can't know would just add absurdity on top of absurdity. You're basically trying to say to me, "Hey look with God all things are possible so maybe there's some sort of explanation that we don't understand. Well, fine, but how does that justify a God demanding that people believe in something that they aren't equipped to understand? If the religion makes no sense to me, then there isn't much I can do about it. What would you have me do? Lie to this God and pretend that the religion makes sense to me when in truth it appears to be utterly absurd? In fact, that very reasoning right there is a very powerful argument. TRUTH: This religion appears to be utterly absurd to me, AND it appears to me to be the handiwork of mortal men who wanted to create a religion to use to condemn their enemies and justify their male chauvinism in the name of God. That's the TRUTH. So now I ask myself, would some supposedly divine "god" who supposedly values TRUTH over everything else expect me to LIE about how I see this so-called 'religion'? I'm going to be cast into the pits of hell for simply standing my ground on TRUTH? That can't be right. There's a major flaw in that whole scenario. So as far as I can see, my #1 is based on all that I can know. If there is HIDDEN information that I need to know to make sense of this supposed "god" then how could this "god" condemn me for know taking that UNKNOWN information into consideration? So I disagree with your notion that our "limited understanding" would answer this concern. ~~~~~~ Abra wrote: 2. This God hates and condemns everyone who refuses to believe in him even if their reasons for doing so are honest, sincere and well-intentioned. mylifetoday response,... # 2 Look at God as a parent. The parent loves their child they help them grow to mature adults. They hope and pray their child will come back to them with love and respect. They have no way to ensure that will happen. That is Free Will. I really do not like the "parent analogy" for the biblical God. Did your parent hide from you and make themselves invisible and makes you GUESS whether or not they exist? Did your parents abandon you and have some strangers who's moral values and ethics you highly question write a book that claims to be their instructions to you, and then leave you to have to find, and CHOOSE that book to be a book from your parents? And who mentored you? Would your parents just abandon you and leave to you be mentored by who knows who? Maybe you had "Good parents" but not everyone does. Also what if someone else suggested a far better picture of who your parents might be. So you decide to accept that better picture instead because you see it as a better picture and like to believe that your parents are better than the ancient Hebrews picture. So then when you finally die, the parents who had abandon you, left you without good mentoring and expected you to GUESS who they were finally meet you face-to-face. And like the innocent loving child that you are who hold up the Beautiful picture of God that you had believe to be them. So you're telling me that they are going to become extremly angry with you and slap that picture out of your hand and start screaming at you, "No! We're nowhere near that nice you fool! You're going straight to hell for thinking that we were that nice!"  That's basically the "parent analogy" that you're expecting me to believe in. So your parent analogy holds no meaning for me at all. I would be the child who brings God the picture that is too nice for God to accept. And be cast into hell for thinking that God was nice. But a similar thing could work for an atheist. And atheist could simply say to the parent that had abandon him. "Gee, I thought you were either dead or never existed? You never came around!" Yet I'm suppose to believe that this God is going to cast that atheist into hell for simply not believing in an absentee God? So the Parent analogy simply doesn't work. If human parents behaved the way the biblical God behaves in terms of parenting skills they'd be thrown in jail for child abuse. ~~~~~~~~~~~~ But that said, even this pales in comparison to the Power that is God. I would say no one on earth understands what God wants or feels for us. We have our limited understanding. Then we argue about whether or not He exists based on this. I do not argue with anyone about whether or not any "god" exist based on this kind of thing. I simply argue that the ancient Hebrews wrote an unconvincing story, IMHO. If a "god" exists I imagine it's most likely going to be along the lines of what the Eastern Mystics describe. Even Albert Einstein seems to agree with this line of thinking as well, so I'm not alone by far: "The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend personal God and avoid dogma and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things natural and spiritual as a meaningful unity. Buddhism answers this description. If there is any religion that could cope with modern scientific needs it would be Buddhism.' - Albert Einstein ~~~~ In truth, I never actually make statements about "god". I make statements about the writings of the ancient Hebrews. And then I might suggest why I feel that a supposedly all-wise and all-righteous God would not behave the way they describe. ~~~~~ The argument: "Well with God all things are possible so maybe the Hebrew picture of God is right", simply isn't impressive. Gee whiz, we could use that argument to justify Zeus, or Thor, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JennieBean ...first you said that you were the creator and when I asked you to create some evidence then you claim that you weren't the creator and now you claiming that you are the co-creator and bumped it up to again claiming to be The creator.....I know it's a woman" prerogative to change her mind ...but jeez Funches I have no evidence that you exit. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mylifetoday
I would say no one on earth understands what God wants or feels for us. That's what I keep saying to Christians who keep trying to tell me what God wants and feels for me. We have our limited understanding. Then we argue about whether or not He exists based on this. I don't argue about whether or not "he" exists. I argue with the doctrines of religions and the stories they tell. I exist. I have life. That is all that I am certain of. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mylifetoday wrote: So, let's be respectful of each other and try to understand what the other person's point is and beliefs are. We don't have to agree. But that doesn't give anyone the right to belittle anyone else. I would love to. In fact, I believe that I am. Why is it considered to be "disrespectful for me to suggest that I believe that the ancient Hebrews claims about "god" appear to be provably false, inconsistent, contradictory, and absurd, IMHO, yet, it's not considered to be "disrespectful" for Christians to flat-out refute all non-Christian religions as being blatantly false? That's a bit one-sided don't you think? I'm a human being. The ancient Hebrew texts are making what I believe to be outrageous claims about the creator they claim to be the creator of all humanity. Well, I'm a human. That gives me the right to comment on their accusations about my supposed creator. They also claim that all men are "sinners" and in dire need of repentance and salvation. Well, I'm a man, so they are apparently making accusations about me. Shouldn't I have the right to rebuttal? They also claim that there is "no excuse" for not believing in their God. Well that again appears to be directed toward all non-believers in their doctrine. So once again they have opened the door wide for the comments of non-believers to offer their 'defense' against these outrageous claims. I speak to the actual doctrine. Not to the "followers" of the doctrine. As an individual I truly don't care what you believe. But if you're going to argue to support the ancient Hebrew doctrine, then you've chosen to take that side of a debate. You can hardly cry foul when you've chosen to support this doctrine that makes these claims to all of humanity. With this in mind, I'll politely explain why I do not accept your responses: ~~~~~~~~~~~~ You say, "Personally, I think both are wrong." Abra wrote: 1. This God is supposedly be 'righteous' and 'all-wise'. mylifetoday response,... # 1 is based on our limited understanding of an unknowable power in the universe. No. I disagree. #1 is based on what I consider to be 'righteous' and 'all-wise'. I don't need to know anything beyond my current understanding to recognize that it would be unrighteous and unwise for any god to set up a situation where people were required to believe in a truly bizarre religion, lest they be condemned to everlasting punishment. Moreover, my conclusion is based on "All I can know". And thus for any God to expect me to base my conclusions on things that I can't know would just add absurdity on top of absurdity. You're basically trying to say to me, "Hey look with God all things are possible so maybe there's some sort of explanation that we don't understand. Well, fine, but how does that justify a God demanding that people believe in something that they aren't equipped to understand? If the religion makes no sense to me, then there isn't much I can do about it. What would you have me do? Lie to this God and pretend that the religion makes sense to me when in truth it appears to be utterly absurd? In fact, that very reasoning right there is a very powerful argument. TRUTH: This religion appears to be utterly absurd to me, AND it appears to me to be the handiwork of mortal men who wanted to create a religion to use to condemn their enemies and justify their male chauvinism in the name of God. That's the TRUTH. So now I ask myself, would some supposedly divine "god" who supposedly values TRUTH over everything else expect me to LIE about how I see this so-called 'religion'? I'm going to be cast into the pits of hell for simply standing my ground on TRUTH? That can't be right. There's a major flaw in that whole scenario. So as far as I can see, my #1 is based on all that I can know. If there is HIDDEN information that I need to know to make sense of this supposed "god" then how could this "god" condemn me for know taking that UNKNOWN information into consideration? So I disagree with your notion that our "limited understanding" would answer this concern. ~~~~~~ Abra wrote: 2. This God hates and condemns everyone who refuses to believe in him even if their reasons for doing so are honest, sincere and well-intentioned. mylifetoday response,... # 2 Look at God as a parent. The parent loves their child they help them grow to mature adults. They hope and pray their child will come back to them with love and respect. They have no way to ensure that will happen. That is Free Will. I really do not like the "parent analogy" for the biblical God. Did your parent hide from you and make themselves invisible and makes you GUESS whether or not they exist? Did your parents abandon you and have some strangers who's moral values and ethics you highly question write a book that claims to be their instructions to you, and then leave you to have to find, and CHOOSE that book to be a book from your parents? And who mentored you? Would your parents just abandon you and leave to you be mentored by who knows who? Maybe you had "Good parents" but not everyone does. Also what if someone else suggested a far better picture of who your parents might be. So you decide to accept that better picture instead because you see it as a better picture and like to believe that your parents are better than the ancient Hebrews picture. So then when you finally die, the parents who had abandon you, left you without good mentoring and expected you to GUESS who they were finally meet you face-to-face. And like the innocent loving child that you are who hold up the Beautiful picture of God that you had believe to be them. So you're telling me that they are going to become extremly angry with you and slap that picture out of your hand and start screaming at you, "No! We're nowhere near that nice you fool! You're going straight to hell for thinking that we were that nice!" That's basically the "parent analogy" that you're expecting me to believe in. So your parent analogy holds no meaning for me at all. I would be the child who brings God the picture that is too nice for God to accept. And be cast into hell for thinking that God was nice. But a similar thing could work for an atheist. And atheist could simply say to the parent that had abandon him. "Gee, I thought you were either dead or never existed? You never came around!" Yet I'm suppose to believe that this God is going to cast that atheist into hell for simply not believing in an absentee God? So the Parent analogy simply doesn't work. If human parents behaved the way the biblical God behaves in terms of parenting skills they'd be thrown in jail for child abuse. ~~~~~~~~~~~~ But that said, even this pales in comparison to the Power that is God. I would say no one on earth understands what God wants or feels for us. We have our limited understanding. Then we argue about whether or not He exists based on this. I do not argue with anyone about whether or not any "god" exist based on this kind of thing. I simply argue that the ancient Hebrews wrote an unconvincing story, IMHO. If a "god" exists I imagine it's most likely going to be along the lines of what the Eastern Mystics describe. Even Albert Einstein seems to agree with this line of thinking as well, so I'm not alone by far: "The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend personal God and avoid dogma and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things natural and spiritual as a meaningful unity. Buddhism answers this description. If there is any religion that could cope with modern scientific needs it would be Buddhism.' - Albert Einstein ~~~~ In truth, I never actually make statements about "god". I make statements about the writings of the ancient Hebrews. And then I might suggest why I feel that a supposedly all-wise and all-righteous God would not behave the way they describe. ~~~~~ The argument: "Well with God all things are possible so maybe the Hebrew picture of God is right", simply isn't impressive. Gee whiz, we could use that argument to justify Zeus, or Thor, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, etc. Apparently I didn't state my thoughts very well. First, the parent analogy works because He is our Father. He gave us all the tools we need to believe in Him. It is our choice whether or not we do believe in Him. Just as you can choose to respect your actual father or not. I don't think God will condemn anyone outright. I believe everyone will have a chance to get to Heaven. The way I see it I have explained in other threads. Everyone will have an opportunity to repent of their sins. I believe those that have accepted Jesus and God in their lives will have a much easier time with this. In essence, whether or not you go to Heaven at that point is whether or not you will feel you are worthy of His Forgiveness. It won't be easy for anyone. I don't believe God does condemn anyone outright. But I could be wrong. I never said I was supporting the Ancient Hebrew God either. Everyone's faith is their own and I don't think any two are alike. So, if you don't assume what I believe I won't assume what you believe. Part of my reply was to everyone in general and not to you specifically. Sorry, should have made that clear. I didn't mean to imply you were disrespecting me or my beliefs. Of all the people I have talked with so far, you have been the most respectful. Sorry. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I never said I was supporting the Ancient Hebrew God either. Everyone's faith is their own and I don't think any two are alike. So, if you don't assume what I believe I won't assume what you believe. I think Abra is talking about the God of the Bible, which I think is the God you worship. I could be wrong. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mylifetoday wrote: First, the parent analogy works because He is our Father. He gave us all the tools we need to believe in Him. It is our choice whether or not we do believe in Him. Just as you can choose to respect your actual father or not. The very idea that people keep referring to God as a "He" as are "Father" disgusts me. That very idea comes mainly from the Mediterranean region from the Zeus-like Gods. It's a patriarchal male chauvinistic idea to begin with IMHO. And you say that it's our choice whether or not that we believe in "Him". Him who? Isn't what you're truly suggesting is that it's our choice whether or not to believe in the ancient Hebrew stories of their God? Well, I chose not to believe in that picture, just like I chose not to believe in the Greek picture of Zeus. Are you refusing to believe in "Him" because you refuse to accept the Greek God of Zeus? We're talking about a religion here, not a God. I don't think God will condemn anyone outright. Well, I don't know whether you're a Christian or not, but the Christian gospels have Jesus himself saying that the path is straight and the gate is narrow that leads to life, and few will make it. Well, if only few make it, then clearly the vast majority don't. So that's what these Hebrew doctrines have to say about it. If you don't believe that God will condemn anyone outright then perhaps you don't believe in the Bible and what they have Jesus saying? That's all I know to tell you on that one. I believe everyone will have a chance to get to Heaven. Well, you'd have to take that up with the Hebrews because they have Jesus saying that only few will make it. Maybe everyone has a "chance" but according to Jesus only few will make it (if you believe in the Hebrew writings that claim to speak on behalf of Jesus) The way I see it I have explained in other threads. Everyone will have an opportunity to repent of their sins. I have no problems with sins or repenting from any sins. Unless of course, mere disbelief in he writings of the ancient Hebrews is a "sin". How could I possibly "repent" for that? From my perspective it's a rational intelligent decision to reject those writings as mere fables. How could I ever "repent" for having done nothing more than having made a rational intelligent decision? Any "repentance" couldn't possibly be sincere. I have no regrets, shame, or guilt about rejecting these writings as utterly absurd myths. No more than you probably have for rejecting the myths about the Greek God of Zeus. I'm not worried about "repentance". I've already forgiven myself for all the stupid mistakes that I've made. I've never done anything in my entire life to harm another person, or even take advantage of them. I sincerely and honestly feel that I have never committed a 'sinful' act on purpose, especially not out of malice or a premeditated desire to rebel against any God. The "Greatest Sins" that I would be guilty of would be like masturbation or something like that. And to be perfectly honest about it I have no remorse or guilt feelings about that sort of thing at all anymore. In fact, if I did and some God wanted me to 'repent' for having masturbated my honest and sincere reaction to that would be to sincerely blurt out, "You are kidding right?" I mean seriously, this is nonsense, IMHO. I don't think I would want to have anything at all to do with a God who is that deadly somber and serious about such petty trivial things. Masturbation is a biological release of pent up sexual energy and as far as I'm concerned it's actually a quite healthy thing to do. What kind of a God would expect people to go through life restraining pent up sexual desires? That's just pure insanity. I believe those that have accepted Jesus and God in their lives will have a much easier time with this. In essence, whether or not you go to Heaven at that point is whether or not you will feel you are worthy of His Forgiveness. It won't be easy for anyone. I don't believe God does condemn anyone outright. But I could be wrong. Well, you suggest that it's not going to be easy for anyone to ask Jesus for His Forgiveness, but I don't feel that way at all. Like I say, take away the utterly PETTY things like the healthy release of pent up sexual energy, and what's left to be forgiven for? Utterly stupid and quite innocent mistakes? I would have absolutely no problem at all asking forgiveness for that. I would ask for it, and expect it. And be totally shocked if it wasn't forthcoming. You might view that as somehow being arrogant, but from my point of view I just seriously don't think I've ever done anything so bad in my life that the conversation would even be worth having. I would expect Jesus to greet me upon my arrival and just show me around the place. He would have no reason to "interrogate me" because I'm not a criminal. That's my view. I never said I was supporting the Ancient Hebrew God either. Everyone's faith is their own and I don't think any two are alike. So, if you don't assume what I believe I won't assume what you believe. Well, you're the one who always speaks of God as a "He", and as our "Father" and weren't we just now talking about having a need for Jesus himself to forgive us? I think the mention of Jesus pretty much nails you to the Hebrew God whether you wish it to be so or not. I have no fear of "Jesus", I personally believe that he was either a grossly misunderstood mortal man, or a totally fictitious character. In fact, if he was indeed some sort of incarnation of God, then I still believe that he was grossly misunderstood and probably misquoted. Part of my reply was to everyone in general and not to you specifically. Sorry, should have made that clear. I think that's true for all of us. I wouldn't be the slightest bit interested in arguing or debating religious topics with anyone in a private email. Because I'm seriously not interested in changing your mind, nor am I concerned with defending my own personal position to you personally. I post in public conversions so other people can read the different views on religion that different people have.  I didn't mean to imply you were disrespecting me or my beliefs. Of all the people I have talked with so far, you have been the most respectful. Sorry. Well, I am glad for that on a personal level. And I'm sure that you're a respectable person yourself and I'm also quite certain that you mean well. I have no doubt of that at all. I never get to talk about my various pictures of "God" because the only topics that ever come up are arguments that are mostly between atheists and Christians. My views of "God" are quite different, and they vary. I'm open to various pictures of God, I don't put God in a box. But I'm no longer open to the Hebrew picture of a God anymore than I'm Open to the Greek Picture of Zeus. They are equally fables as far as I'm concerned. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I never said I was supporting the Ancient Hebrew God either. Everyone's faith is their own and I don't think any two are alike. So, if you don't assume what I believe I won't assume what you believe. I think Abra is talking about the God of the Bible, which I think is the God you worship. I could be wrong. Well, he pretty much nailed himself to the Bible when he said: "I believe those that have accepted Jesus and God in their lives will have a much easier time with this." And the "easier time" that he's talking about is asking for "forgiveness". I'm not worried about having to ask for "forgiveness". As far as I'm concerned I'd have to scrap the bottom of the spiritual barrel just to come up with a little bit of extremely petty stuff just so I've have something to even ask to be forgiven for. Some people might think that's an arrogant stance, but I'm serious. I'm not riddled with guilt. I'm not a criminal, and the types of things that I would be guilty of that would even qualify as 'sins' according to the Bible, are IMHO, quite petty. Of course some Christians hold that all sins are equal, so if masturbation and murder are equivalent "sins" then I guess I'll have a lot repenting to do because I've been a "Serial Masturbater" my entire life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I never said I was supporting the Ancient Hebrew God either. Everyone's faith is their own and I don't think any two are alike. So, if you don't assume what I believe I won't assume what you believe. I think Abra is talking about the God of the Bible, which I think is the God you worship. I could be wrong. Well, he pretty much nailed himself to the Bible when he said: "I believe those that have accepted Jesus and God in their lives will have a much easier time with this." And the "easier time" that he's talking about is asking for "forgiveness". I'm not worried about having to ask for "forgiveness". As far as I'm concerned I'd have to scrap the bottom of the spiritual barrel just to come up with a little bit of extremely petty stuff just so I've have something to even ask to be forgiven for. Some people might think that's an arrogant stance, but I'm serious. I'm not riddled with guilt. I'm not a criminal, and the types of things that I would be guilty of that would even qualify as 'sins' according to the Bible, are IMHO, quite petty. Of course some Christians hold that all sins are equal, so if masturbation and murder are equivalent "sins" then I guess I'll have a lot repenting to do because I've been a "Serial Masturbater" my entire life. I believe in the Bible, but I don't believe in the Hebrew God you paint. That is why I said what I did. God is in the Bible and the Hebrews worshiped him. I believe in this God, but don't nail me down to your interpretation of the Hebrew God you see in the Bible. I was trying to say that when I said that I don't think there are any two people on this planet that believe the same way. That doesn't prove anything in any way other than my faith is based on what I read in The Bible and my personal experiences. Just as yours are based on whatever you use. Just because you can't see how logically the Christian faith makes sense doesn't disprove the Christian faith. You can think it's silly just as I can think yours is silly. I am just tired of having to defend the validity of my faith because others don't believe as I do. Then they continually ask questions trying to trip me up to prove I have no faith or am a hypocrite or something of the sort. I have my opinions and you have yours. Lets respect that. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To the original question on page 1 of this forum.
Can people discuss religion with Atheists? One of the things I do realize is that Atheists discuss a great deal about religion. I knew someone that only talked about it on a daily bases that I had to stop him and say look at that beautiful lady over there winking at you. lol Although many atheists disapprove of any spiritual identity or religious text many actually know alot about it. I think serious atheists study alot about religion and interpret it differently then those that believe in it to come to their conclusion. It surely does bring in a great deal of discussion between those that believe and those that don't. Rarely do they come to a understanding and truths though. I have yet to find one conversation to where a atheist will agree with someone who believes in their religion wholeheartingly. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To the original question on page 1 of this forum. Can people discuss religion with Atheists? One of the things I do realize is that Atheists discuss a great deal about religion. I knew someone that only talked about it on a daily bases that I had to stop him and say look at that beautiful lady over there winking at you. lol Although many atheists disapprove of any spiritual identity or religious text many actually know alot about it. I think serious atheists study alot about religion and interpret it differently then those that believe in it to come to their conclusion. It surely does bring in a great deal of discussion between those that believe and those that don't. Rarely do they come to a understanding and truths though. I have yet to find one conversation to where a atheist will agree with someone who believes in their religion wholeheartingly. grownups can discuss anything if they have the maturity and respect and interest to do so, In my opinion I think it is hard to change peoples core beliefs if and when those believes have been 'validated' by their perceptions and experiences in life you cant really tell a stranger over a computer screen 'that experience/that feeling wasnt legitimate or real' my in laws were very respectful of my beliefs and they understood why I believed my way and I understood why they believed theirs, I respected our similar values as did they and our religious beliefs never became the central focus |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I believe in the Bible, but I don't believe in the Hebrew God you paint. That is why I said what I did. God is in the Bible and the Hebrews worshiped him. I believe in this God, but don't nail me down to your interpretation of the Hebrew God you see in the Bible. I was trying to say that when I said that I don't think there are any two people on this planet that believe the same way. That doesn't prove anything in any way other than my faith is based on what I read in The Bible and my personal experiences. Just as yours are based on whatever you use. Just because you can't see how logically the Christian faith makes sense doesn't disprove the Christian faith. You can think it's silly just as I can think yours is silly. I am just tired of having to defend the validity of my faith because others don't believe as I do. Then they continually ask questions trying to trip me up to prove I have no faith or am a hypocrite or something of the sort. I have my opinions and you have yours. Lets respect that. Well, I usually try to do that. But one thing that you need to understand is that Christianity has a history of hardcore proselytizing and evangelizing. That's just automatically comes with the religion that you've "chosen" to believe in. You've said here, "I believe in this God, but don't nail me down to your interpretation of the Hebrew God you see in the Bible." Well this has been a very huge problem with the Christian religion in general, many hardcore fundamentalists have a history of trying to nail people down to their interpretation of the Hebrew God. You're free to interpret the Bible however you like. In fact, I personally think you should! I took Protestantism to the limit and my interpretation today is the following: 1. I reject the entire Old Testament as Zeus-like fables. 2. I believe that the man who sparked the story of Jesus was probably a Jewish Buddhist. 3. I believe that the New Testament is either misguided superstition or outright purposeful religious propaganda. Or most likely a combination of both. That may not sound like "Protestantism" but if we take Protestantism seriously to mean that each individual should take from the Bible what they see it in then my conclusions are indeed in the spirit of Protestantism. Although I confess that the part about Jesus being a Buddhist came from historical information outside of the Bible.  I have no doubt that you have totally different interpretations. However, one thing that you should clearly recognize from all of this is that if my view of the Bible is so drastically different from your view, then clearly you can see that I'm not rejecting the God that you see in the Bible. Thus if that God is 'real' then clearly I'm not rejecting him. What I'm rejecting is a totally false incorrect view of him. And clearly that would not be the same as rejecting the God himself. Thus it would be utterly absurd to believe that this God would not also be able to make this same observation. In other words, when I die and I find myself face-to-face with this God he's only going to say to me, "Wow! I am so glad that you didn't believe what you saw in the Bible because I'm nothing like that at all!" But doesn't this then become a paradox in and of itself? I'm not questioning your faith. I'm just putting questions out there for whatever they are worth. One thing I will say is that providing you don't use the religion to degrade other people, I can't imagine there being anything wrong with your own personal belief in the religion. Surely if you do the things the book says you should be in pretty good shape. Surely any supreme being has got to respect that whether they are like what the bible describes or not. So I don't see how a person can go wrong by believing in the Bible, providing they don't hold it over other people's heads. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Practicing atheist? I just wonder what kind of practice that is. Atheism is a practice of none belief in a God. A non belief nevertheless is a belief. You BELIEVE there is not God. There is no way to have absolutely no belief less you've never heard of God or any form of existence. When you state you do not believe in God, right there is stating a belief. A belief in the none existence of God. yes. an atheist who insists there is no god is relying on faith every bit as much as the faithful who insist god does exist. an agnostic takes nothing on faith understanding that god cannot ever be known to exist or to not exist. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JennieBean ...first you said that you were the creator and when I asked you to create some evidence then you claim that you weren't the creator and now you claiming that you are the co-creator and bumped it up to again claiming to be The creator.....I know it's a woman" prerogative to change her mind ...but jeez Funches I have no evidence that you exit. JennieBean...you are playing the same games that Christians try to do with the trinity either you are the creator or not...if you are ...then create some evidence and stop creating the bull unless of course the bull you keep creating is your evidence |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JennieBean ...first you said that you were the creator and when I asked you to create some evidence then you claim that you weren't the creator and now you claiming that you are the co-creator and bumped it up to again claiming to be The creator.....I know it's a woman" prerogative to change her mind ...but jeez Funches I have no evidence that you exit. JennieBean...you are playing the same games that Christians try to do with the trinity either you are the creator or not...if you are ...then create some evidence and stop creating the bull unless of course the bull you keep creating is your evidence I have no reason to follow orders from a figment of my imagination. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JennieBean ...first you said that you were the creator and when I asked you to create some evidence then you claim that you weren't the creator and now you claiming that you are the co-creator and bumped it up to again claiming to be The creator.....I know it's a woman" prerogative to change her mind ...but jeez Funches I have no evidence that you exit. JennieBean...you are playing the same games that Christians try to do with the trinity either you are the creator or not...if you are ...then create some evidence and stop creating the bull unless of course the bull you keep creating is your evidence I have no reason to follow orders from a figment of my imagination. did the voices tell you that |
|
|
|
|
