God

[Smithy]

A question to anybody who follows religion on here, as I don't want to single anybody out.

You are obviously aware that there are other religions within the world that people believe. So what makes your religion right, and theres wrong? Or better yet, why did you decide to follow Christianity?

My guess is mainly down to the country you were brought up in. Christianity is the main religion within this country. People are brought up, and introduced to it, and if they choose to believe it, will follow it for the rest of their life. And likewise, if somebody is born in a country which is primarily Hindu, chances are that they will follow Hinduism.

With that in mind, I still question how some people are adament as to the existence of their specific beliefs. If your religous choices are decided by your location as such, the credibility of your belief is somewhat jaded, is it not?

Obviously, this does not apply if people have made a weighted decision on religous beliefs if they are fully aware of what other religions believe, and if they truly believe it.

 

[SaiyanHajime]

I'm not religious, but the answer is usually "personal testimony", Smithy.

It goes back to what I said about experience and knowledge.

Unfortunately, personal experiences cannot be shared. Something just makes some people KNOW that God must be real, etc, and that their belief system is God's true will.

Others, say that at the end of it all, they just want to live their life a way which has a positive impact on the world and they feel their beliefs do that.

Most people, however, judging by the lack of references to other religions - don't have a clue and do just follow because that's what they've been brought up with. Yup.

 

[Anonymous]

I was brought up in a certain way, but, as my dad told me, we seek the truth ourselves. I don't just follow whatever people tell me. Going to Church didn't actually help me to believe - neither did the Scientific approach my Korean friend tried introducing to me.

She lent me a book on God in conjunction to Newton, black holes, evolution, DNA, fossils etc etc etc.

That didn't work for me. It was interesting, and it eliminated a degree of ignorance - but it seemed too easy. If we could really prove the existence of God this way, we would know.

I've taken a different approach. I tried opening up.

I've only just started truly believing and understanding a few months ago. I recieve help when I need it. I feel happier. I now often notice things that can't just be coincidental. It's a whole new vision.

It's hard to explain, like describing a smell the way I smell it. I'm still exploring, but certain experiences in my life strengthen my belief.

As for exploring other religions; my dad tried reading section of the Qur'an after reading a theological essay on Christianity and Islam, but it just made no sense to him. The ideas "were all over the place". One idea led to another, and to another, and then back to the original and BANG.

Some sort of point is made. But, not clearly. It didn't seem to work for him.

I find some of the ideas of the Bible beautiful - and others shocking! I'm still trying to figure it out, but I look for the wisdom. I can now see when people are being arrogant fools. I understand why some people are so modest and quiet. They have the wisdom, but they know that others will have to learn themselves.

I don't know enough about this, but apparently Mohammed was influenced by Christians and took their ideas right out of context? He gave permission to his soldiers to rape women?

This can be endlessly debated either way - using the Qur'an as a reference.

In Islam, they don't have the idea of forgiveness. I enjoy talking to my Muslim friends about God and our beliefs, but their idea of forgiveness is different to ours, and it's something I'm still trying to understand.

(Oh, and did anyone even bother to watch Jesus Camp? You might understand a bit more about how there are some religions that 'brainwash' YOUNG children? And seek power? And so on so forth?)

Anyway, I've got Maths to do.

 

[SaiyanHajime]

I think the issue you're having with the Qur'an is that you're picking things out and not realising they exist in the Bible, too.

Paul describes women's "natural use" to pleasure men. He also says the head of every woman is man and that women should view men as men view Christ. Jesus compared heaven to ten virgins. Sounds like stereotypes of Islam, not Christianity, huh?. The problem is, in the Christian society most of us live in, it's disgustingly bias. Christians who claim that these things are "out of context" or "misunderstood" don't seem to realise that you can apply that to the Qur'an as well! Hypocritical, to say the least!

 

[Anonymous]

No, i dont, if there was a god why is the wold so f*****d up? There are sme people living in real pain and fear but nothing ever happens to make the bad things go away does it? no...

 

[Pokemaniac]

Then again, if it was a God, wouldn't you think that he would make everything so that we would understand him? After all, you don't like to be outsmarted by something you've made, right?

I say, IF He made man, I think he made us so that we never would understand what was going on - just make theories.

Or perhaps God really is the laws of physics? Would make sense, too...

 

[Snoo]

MARTYN LOVES MEN.

QFT.

 

[SaiyanHajime]

but until then, I'm just going to keep on living, and keep on believing.

But why?

What makes the New Testiment have authority in your eyes? What makes you, supposedly, follow it?

 

[Anonymous]

I think the issue you're having with the Qur'an is that you're picking things out and not realising they exist in the Bible, too.

Paul describes women's "natural use" to pleasure men. He also says the head of every woman is man and that women should view men as men view Christ. Jesus compared heaven to ten virgins. Sounds like stereotypes of Islam, not Christianity, huh?. The problem is, in the Christian society most of us live in, it's disgustingly bias. Christians who claim that these things are "out of context" or "misunderstood" don't seem to realise that you can apply that to the Qur'an as well! Hypocritical, to say the least!

I personally don’t know enough about Muhammed or any historical evidence that suggests he was a soldier or whatever. If certain ideas appear in the Bible and the Qur’an, surely that indicates this influence? Either way, it doesn’t matter. Jesus introduced the idea of peace and forgiveness as the backbone of Christian belief. (Not necessarily the actions of extremists and hypocrites.) The Qur’an doesn’t make sense to some Christians because it leaves out this important backbone, even if the ideas are in both the Qur'an and the Bible. That's what I meant by taken out of context.

I respect the beliefs of Muslims and Jews. I’m open to even worship God with them.

What I don’t understand however, is why some Muslims acted so aggressively in response to the Muhammed cartoons. This does not constitute peace and tolerance. What was Muhammed really trying to teach? Maybe it's the unclear way his ideas are stringed together? I don't know WHY some people see greater clarity in the Bible and vice versa!

I do however respect the teachings of Jesus and his sense of peace, tolerance and wisdom.

Take a look at the link.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index ... 340AArzufl

Joey, your interpretation seems to be based on questioning everything and obtaining answers, in a somewhat intolerant way! You have this urge to question everything, and you demand an explanation.

I'm not implying that's a bad thing! :lol: But I agree with the idea that it's beyond our comprehension. You can't take everything for face value. That's why I try so hard not to talk in riddles :lol: That's also why I'm finding it hard to communicate some ideas, so I don't. I don't see this as a debate for Critical Thinking.

You will obviously think otherwise, but is this really the best possible way to get answers?

I don't know. I'm not here to debate - and I'm expecting some typically pissed off response to this! Sorry, but I see this another way.

Oedipus the King is a good play to read, if anyone wants to understand what I mean.

 

[SaiyanHajime]

What I don’t understand however, is why some Muslims acted so aggressively in response to the Muhammed cartoons.

Because in Islam you see very little representation artwork for a reason. It's nearly entirely word art.

Many Muslims, partially Sunni, believe that recreating any of God's work in imagery is wrong because you cannot put a soul in it. That goes for drawing, photos, etc.

Not only that, those cartoons were very... incorrect. If I remember rightly, he was shown wearing a turban? Completely wrong religion! Islam is misunderstood enough, It's easy to see why many were angry about those cartoons.

It's not like in Christianity where we are used to seeing images of Christ. In Islam it's wrong to represent the prophets, be that Jesus or Muhammad. Some say that had cameras been available at the time, It wouldn't be "wrong" others say it is wrong full stop.

My other argument for the Muslims here would be that more Muslims are actually Muslim than Christians are Christian. Christianity, as UC just demonstrated, isn't embraced fully by the average believer. Not saying that's a bad thing, but just that the Muslims by majority take their faith seriously.

Still, any "violence" is unexcusable. I agree there.


As for Jesus and preaching love, he DID preach hate too. No matter which way you slice it. Regardless, do you not find an awkwardness in believing what is appealing? I don't see a lot of logic in just beleiving something because it appeals to your own man-made morals? Maybe you can help me out there, am I missing something?


I do not understand why you have a problem with my questioning. I've already explained the benefit. Helps you see anther's perspective and validate your own.

The same can be said for my belief in God. I don't truly know if God is there or not, but I don't believe I'm meant to know. I believe in God, and that belief gives me hope and solace when I'm feeling down, and excitement when something goes good. I personally see that faith in God as real and lasting, and I can honestly say that I believe in God, and what unanswered questions there are, we are simply not meant to know yet.

Nice.

 

[Bitter]

Just to say that I stumbled upon this rather funny Paul Ince sketch:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdocQHsPCNM[/youtube]

And questioning faith is important so that you can base it on more than just "that feeling in my gut".

 

[Stone Cold]

Joey, to assert evolution as true simply because it instinctively feels correct is utterly, utterly stupid. It's almost the same as saying "that magician must have cut that woman in half because it appears as if he has done so and I know that my eyes are good at seeing".

But then, what do I know, I read books, which are obviously far less credible than the internet with its up to date, (and frankly worthless) opinions, perfect for grabbing those fleeting opinions and passing them off as your own safe in the knowledge that were correct when you read them 10 minutes as no-one had come up with a post to disagree yet!

Speaking of which, this thread has finally found become of some use, anyone who wants to read The God Delusion, but are unable to get to a library (because Joey and Co have burned them down for their heretic "reference works") can just read one of Bitter's posts, which contain nothing more or less than Dawkins' work.

Still, at least you weren't the person who brought up the futile point of religion causing war, when such a statement is so demonstrably false and ludicrous that you wonder why it is still brought up at all.

 

[Bitter]

Well, I like to think I referenced Dan Dennetts "Breaking The Spell" and Sam Harris' "End Of Faith" as well, also good books on the subject. Besides, I'd recommend reading the original texts rather than getting them as distorted through an unintelligible pleb unable to think of these ideas himself. :wink:

The annoying thing is that this subject is riddled with futile points, several of which have already been mentioned, because of the very nature of the subject. Points such as, "God is incomprehensible, so to try and use reason and logic to refute the idea of God is to miss the point entirely.", or any other similar idea; and points along the lines of "Lack of evidence isn't proof against the idea of God", neither of which help further a reasonable discussion on the subject.

 

[Bitter]

It's wasn't directed at you no. It wasn't directed at anyone, I was merely stating what I see as further futile points. Besides I wouldn't called mine and Joey's discussion about evolution a "white fight", it was fairly civilized and intelligent, and we did say many times that we were perhaps straying from the initial topic slightly, but off topic? No, it was all relevant in that we were providing reasons for why we may believe such rather than merely stating "I believe such and such because i do" (again, not directed at you, not directed at anyone, just not what we were doing).

 

[SaiyanHajime]

Was that meant to be sarcasm or something...? I'm a bit lost...

No, sorry. It wasn't. I just didn't know what else to say.

Honestly, it was nice. :lol:

And questioning faith is important so that you can base it on more than just "that feeling in my gut".

Okay, this is a lame example, but it's the only one I have.

A few months back on the way to Alton from Sheffield, I saw an arctic fox on the side of the motorway.

You, everyone else and my skeptic brain goes "you were mistaken, it was probably just a cat or a dog."

But, no. I saw it clearly. It was the same body shape, the same colour, the same fluffiness, the same size and had the same face as an arctic fox.

There is no native British animal, or domesticated creature, that fits what I saw.

Being a skeptic dick, I still say It's more likely that it was something else... Something normal. But a random dog or cat on the side of the motorway isn't normal either.

So what's the point of this example? Because it's quite obvious that a lot of people who believe in God, or anything else for that matter, have more than "that feeling in my gut." They have a personal experience which causes them to have no doubt, but you dismiss because you can't experience it yourself. Fair enough! But don't dismiss their personal experiences as just a gut feeling. Of course, some people are naturally more skeptic than others, etc. But for me it's easy to see that when someone says they have experienced God, I can't dismiss that.

Joey, to assert evolution as true simply because it instinctively feels correct is utterly, utterly stupid.

Until VERY recently, evolution was no more than an observation the same as the ones I gave examples of. It's only recent years, true "scientific" evidence is appearing.

Look, people often say "it's stupid to think of an idea then go out to find evidence of it" because you can twist anything to be in favor of ones argument. You of all people should know that.

And I generally agree with that statement, but when it comes to discovering something like evolution, why the **** else would you then go ahead to try and prove it?

:lol:

Lets make it clear, that the first people to suggest evolution didn't know bugger all about genetics. It was an idea that was proposed, and had barely any "scientific" evidence. It was evidence of general observation, like the examples I gave. And they made MANY wrong assumptions (which still exist today amongst people who "misunderstand" evolution). But the point is, they noticed something about the creatures of our world.

Going back to Hyde asking me what is the difference between Darwinian evolution and evolution in general - It was Darwin who introduced the idea of natural selection, I think. Not the theory in general. Here's some info about pre-Darwin evolution.

Darwin assumed lots of things that we now call ridiculous - for example, he thought that parents passed onto their offspring attributes acquired in their lifetime. Darwin also did not know how traits were passed on from generation to generation.


Also, off-topicing a bit, I didn't realize there was anti-evolution text in the Bible - I stand corrected as I just found this...

Ecclesiastes 3:14

"3:14 I know that, whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever: nothing can be put to it, nor any thing taken from it...."

"3:15 That which hath been is now; and that which is to be hath already been; and God requireth that which is past. "

...but since no Bible follower has EVER pointed this out to me when I ask WHERE in the Bible it denies evolution - I would think they just didn't have a clue it was there. This annoys me.

I hope in my "discovery" of those verses, people will understand the important of these discussions. It's not to change your own opinion so much as understand other peoples.

Although, I understood the opposing side better before I found those verses because I could argue the two are not conflicting. :lol:

I don't think any of this is pointless. If you think it is you can just not get involved, but I think calling it worthless and not beneficial to everyone is ignorant and demonstrates a lack of interest to think for oneself.

 

[SaiyanHajime]

Who's to say God didn't design the world and its creatures to evolve in the first place?

If you're interested, go back a few and see that's EXACLY what I thought!

But that Bible quote to me looks like it's saying nothing changes. My personal interpretation,

Gotta run to catch a train now. I'll read the rest later.

 

[Bitter]

So what's the point of this example? Because it's quite obvious that a lot of people who believe in God, or anything else for that matter, have more than "that feeling in my gut." They have a personal experience which causes them to have no doubt, but you dismiss because you can't experience it yourself. Fair enough! But don't dismiss their personal experiences as just a gut feeling. Of course, some people are naturally more skeptic than others, etc. But for me it's easy to see that when someone says they have experienced God, I can't dismiss that.

I know how much you hate my relentless referencing, but can I just throw in that this is venturing into the area of philosophy of consciousness, and differences between the actual world, and the way in which our senses pick it up and our brain interprets it. You personally cannot KNOW if you saw something correctly, as you will think what your brain tells you you saw. If you don't know what I'm getting at, maybe you should watch THIS talk from one Dan Dennett, it's only 20 mins, and is basically a condensed version of longer talks also available on YouTube. If you do know what I'm trying to say then also watch it to get explanations for it and more food for thought. Though this really is diverging from the topic.

Those are some interesting Bible quotes there Joey. I think one problem I see when religious people accept evolution, and that we've all evolved from single cellular organisms etc, is that they still think that God specifically cares for and about us, the human race, when if you believe in evolution as a random process, and the big bang, just that God "nudged" the Universe into existence, how can you deduce that we are the ones God cares about most, assigning us to heaven and hell after death, what happens to all the other species? It's like saying "Yes, evolution is a random process, but God was still aiming at producing us.", like we're the ultimate species evolution has been "trying" to produce.

I don't think I've worded that very well, and I apologise, rough night last night, but do you see what I'm trying to say?

 

[Ian]

A few months back on the way to Alton from Sheffield, I saw an arctic fox on the side of the motorway.

You, everyone else and my skeptic brain goes "you were mistaken, it was probably just a cat or a dog."

But, no. I saw it clearly. It was the same body shape, the same colour, the same fluffiness, the same size and had the same face as an arctic fox.

There is no native British animal, or domesticated creature, that fits what I saw.

Are you sure it wasn't kitsune? :lol:

I'll be honest and say that I lost interest in this topic long ago - I just skim read it to see if I can make a cheap gag or two.

And so I'm not off topic: God doesn't exist in my world at all, apart from other people believeing that she does.

 

[SaiyanHajime]

Just thought of something that is evidence in the Bible of God changing his mind about the things he's created.

He made plants before he made the Sun. And came up with the concept of light, before he actually made light giving objects.

So, he obviously hadn't decided where light would come from... Or that plants (and all other life) would require it.

Of coruse, that's if you believe in the Genesis story... few seem to.

Evidence of us and our planet meaning more to him? Or at least being his first creation? He made the Sun, before the rest of the stars.

 

[Bitter]

Just thought of something that is evidence in the Bible of God changing his mind about the things he's created.

He made plants before he made the Sun. And came up with the concept of light, before he actually made light giving objects.

So, he obviously hadn't decided where light would come from... Or that plants (and all other life) would require it.

Of coruse, that's if you believe in the Genesis story... few seem to.

Evidence of us and our planet meaning more to him? Or at least being his first creation? He made the Sun, before the rest of the stars.

But that's what I'm saying. If you're religious, but yet accept that the universe was created by the big bang, and so the sun and the Earth most certainly weren't the first "creations", how do you then justify the thought that God specifically cares for us. I'm somewhat expecting an answer along the lines of "God cares for everything", but then logically animals, and all other life scattered across the Universe would go into heaven and hell. I imagine the answer to that is that they all have seperate heavens and hells or something.