Christianity

It appears as though stflook just found something that everybody has a viewpoint on. This is what AntiOnline is all about: the exchange of ideas in an organized enviroment. I personally don't follow the Chritian religion for the following reasons:

1.) Blind Faith- You can't see me, yet you must worship me without question. Hmmmm... sounds like a divine dictatorship to me. I have never been too keen on following something that bases its whole structure on something that cannot be seen (in this case, the religion).
2.) Money- I hate giving money to something that doesn't pay taxes on anything. God seems to always need money, even though he supposedly created the universe. Interesting. A divine creature needs something earthly...
3.) Parts of it are scaaaary- One of the many reasons I refuse to follow Christianity (as well as other religions) is the fact that many parts of it scare me as far as the extremity of some of their practices and beliefs are (ie scientology: If you become ill (for example, you develop cancer) under the belief of the Church of Scientology, you cannot be treated by modern methods... if God wants you to live, then he will allow you to recover from your illness... also, when I first heard about scientology, it sounded interesting because I thought it had something to do with the implimentation of scientific achievement with theological beliefs... obviously not. A suggestion: find a new name, so that someone can set up a true scientology, where Christianity and Science intertwine!)

Cooments, suggestions welcome.
Declarations of my damnation are not.

Greetz.
First, let me say this is not the proving thread I've been promising; I'm working on that. That thread will be more like a little research paper, and probably won't be up until next Friday (as I'm going out of town this morning). And, following suit, this will be my 'quote everyone' thread, starting with most recent and working back. And it probably won't be too terribly long, as my laptop batter is dying rapidly. Well, here goes:

psychosquee said:

Quote:

---

1.) Blind Faith- You can't see me, yet you must worship me without question. Hmmmm... sounds like a divine dictatorship to me. I have never been too keen on following something that bases its whole structure on something that cannot be seen (in this case, the religion).

---

You might not see God, but can you see the wind? You see the effects of the wind, so you know it must be there. I can feel God whenever He is near and moving. Even if you can't feel Him, you can see the effect that He has on things. Personal story time: I was at a youth retreat a few years ago, and we were doing our evening worship service. It was kind of stormy that night, and all the lights in the chapel went out. We lost all the lights, sound, video, etc. But we kept on singing. And honestly, I don't think a single person that was there (even a few of my skeptical friends) did not know for a fact that God was there that night, and that He was very delighted to see that we loved Him enough to continue worshipping Him, even though it wasn't easy. We were placed on this planet for the sole purpose of worshipping the Lord. And also, God gave us free will. We don't HAVE to do what he says. We have the option to live how we want to live, but the punishment is eternal damnation in Hell. Or, if we do as He wants and worship Him, we spend eternity with Him in Heaven.

Quote:

---

2.) Money- I hate giving money to something that doesn't pay taxes on anything. God seems to always need money, even though he supposedly created the universe. Interesting. A divine creature needs something earthly...

---

The reason that the offering plate is passed around at church is not to give it to God. It is used for furthering the glory of His name. That money goes to pay the staff of the church. It covers the electic, gas, water, and all other bills for the church. It pays to send missionaries. It pays for the children to go on retreats. Without this offering, that church would not last.

Quote:

---

If you become ill (for example, you develop cancer) under the belief of the Church of Scientology, you cannot be treated by modern methods... if God wants you to live, then he will allow you to recover from your illness...

---

One thing: the Church of Scientology is not the (or even a) Christian church. And they are most likely the ones that you've been stereotyping with your post. Mostly, movie stars are really involved in Scientology (mainly because they have a lot of money, and the Scientologists have meetings you must attend if you want to be saved... and these cost up to fifty THOUSAND dollars to attend...). Also, they believe that you can do whatever you want, because you are, in short, the controller of god. Or at least that's my understanding of it, though it wouldn't surprise me if I was wrong.

And Negative said:

Quote:

---

And about morals coming from the Bible... what about people who never read the Bible? They don't have morals then? Strange... really strange...

---

Every positive moral that exists today has biblical basis. The Ten Commandments are the most obvious ones. Have you ever seen a book of law that said it was okay to kill, steal, adulterate, or lie? Most people, even those who have never heard of God or the Bible, know the difference between right and wrong. Why? Because of the conscience that God gave each of us. We might chose to ignore it, but it's there (constantly nagging...). And what set of morals is this conscience based on? Those found in the Bible.

Quote:

---

PhirePhreak, I'm waiting for your stuff

---

I'm working on it... it'll be a while, but it will be good. I hope you'll have a good time breaking it apart :)

chsh said:

Quote:

---

Only if you assume that a creator does indeed exist, and as I said, we have no evidence of that.

---

I assume you have a better idea. Maybe it was all an accident? Somehow, I'd rather believe that Godzilla really exists than believe that. This world, I know, is not perfect (if it was, everyone would agree with me ;) ), but seriously, what are the odds that a few random elements could mix together to form, well, this? We all know (well, most of us know...) that you cannot take something nonliving and turn it into something living. You cannot take a rock, and turn it into a tree (might be kinda fun to watch you try, tho). You cannot take water (H2O) and turn it into a man-eating sea creature. It just won't happen.

chsh also stated:

Quote:

---

Our best bet is evolution, which we know in essence works, because it's happened to mankind measurably over the last 1000 years.

---

While I'm working on my small paper proving (using facts and basic logic) the Truth behind Christianity, I have a task for you. Prove to me that evolution IS true. I look at me, and I look at an amoeba. For some strange reason, I don't see much resemblence. Or farther up the "evolution chain": I look at me, and I look at a whale. I have mouth, whale has a mouth. I have eyes, whale has eyes. But that's about the extent of it. Care to provide some hard evidence for evolution for me?

Quote:

---

Ahh, but see, there's the sticky part. Religion isn't fact, it's fiction, so to speak. It is entirely philosophical, therefore there is are no true or false religions.

---

I'm going to let you people in on a little secret. The reason that so many have been saying that religion is fiction is that they already assume that. Before even considering the evidence FOR Christianity, they throw it into the general wastebasket labeled "Religion/Fiction". (Not a personal attack on chsh, so don't take it as such. Simply the first example I came to through my reverse journey through the thread.)

GoldEagle:

Quote:

---

How about showing everyone WHY your faith is so good. So, live it and show it, then talk it.

---

Thank you for this challenge :) Ever since this thread started, I've been trying to live up to my Faith. Your post was very encouraging in that respect.

SarinMage:

Quote:

---

there is no one creator, it was all created in an instant, when existence began.

---

But what was there before the universe that caused the universe to be created? And what was before that causing it to be created? And so on and so on... And how did it all come together to form the universe?

Well, I have 10% battery left, so I will call it a nite. I will talk to all of you when I get back from New Orleans on Sunday nite.

God bless,
--PhirePhreak

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Uraloony
What I said AND MEANT what that if I present my proof that is not from the Bible, but rather is from archeology findings or science tests, you will label my stuff as garbage. I find that many so called "open-minded" people are not open minded at all. Heh, they won't accept any facts as true unless presented from their own "side".
Negative, the Bible is not impossible to disprove. Here are two quick reasons:
1. Archeology supports the Bible.
2. Jewish historical records support Jesus coming.

---

Dear Uraloony, I haven't said A WORD about the Bible not being true (that is, the general story as told in the Bible).
Here's a quote from my first post, just to remind you...

Quote:

---

Although I believe in the principles of christianity (and there probably WAS someone named Jesus who practised those principles some 2000 years ago)

---

Another remark: I'm open-minded, and I'm willing to accept "facts" (facts are things that are in se true, I don't see why I should doubt facts...), but if your proof for, let's say, the creation of man vs. the evolution of man, is coming from the Bible, I'm gonna stop being open-minded.

My point was, and still is, that there is NO WAY you or anyway else can prove the existence of God (read Alcatraz' post, he said it very well).

Quote:

---

You are criticizing me for supposedly trying to prove the unprovable. Well the Bible has been proven again and again in many different manners and ways.

---

Again, I NEVER doubted the existence of/the general story of the Bible. But if you say the God-part of the Bible has been proven again and again in many different manners and ways... I'd have to say that I'm eagerly waiting for some of that proof... (I'm not making assumptions here, Ura... mind the "if"-word). I've studied the two best-known "God-proofs" (Thomas of Aquino & Rene Descartes - wasted two months of University on that stuff), and those two theories are not proving anything... just making a lot of assumptions ;)

---------------------Sidenote part, off-topic--------------------------------

Quote:

---

sidenote here: Again Negative, making assumptions...

---

I ripped your original statement apart, following the rules of modern (although it ain't that modern...) logic. Off-topic, but it was fun anyways...

Quote:

---

If you won't accept any of my proof and expect me to beleive that man just evolved, then I can't debate with you any further.

---

A simple "if...then"-construction... (If A and B, then C)... Now, let's rip that thing apart...

1. If you won't accept any of my proof, then I can't debate with you any further.
2. If you expect me to believe that man just evolved, then I can't debate with you any further.

Let's concentrate on 1.
I rephrased that as "Hmmmm... so you're asking me to to accept your "proof" (if I don't do that, you won't debate with me anymore), but you don't want to listen to what I have to say?"... Now you tell me what the difference between your and my statement is...

-----------------------End sidenote part -----------------------------

Quote:

---

Originally posted by PhirePhreak
And also, God gave us free will. We don't HAVE to do what he says. We have the option to live how we want to live, but the punishment is eternal damnation in Hell. Or, if we do as He wants and worship Him, we spend eternity with Him in Heaven

---

Now THAT's creepy.... I almost feel sorry for you guys :p
BTW: what about Buddhists? Most true Buddhist live a respectable life, no? But all of them will end up in Hell, because they don't worship YOUR God... Sad, really sad...

Quote:

---

Every positive moral that exists today has biblical basis. The Ten Commandments are the most obvious ones. Have you ever seen a book of law that said it was okay to kill, steal, adulterate, or lie? Most people, even those who have never heard of God or the Bible, know the difference between right and wrong. Why? Because of the conscience that God gave each of us. We might chose to ignore it, but it's there (constantly nagging...). And what set of morals is this conscience based on? Those found in the Bible.

---

I agree with you when you say that most of my morals indeed are described in the Bible... they also are described in the Koran, fyi...
What I don't agree with, is the connection you're making between the Bible and God... You believe that the Ten Commandments were given to us by God (even that he's the one 'responsible' for having given us a conscience), and that's what I have a problem with.

And something else about those Ten Commandments... You're making it sound like this is a 'christianity-exclusive' thing... Sorry to disappoint you, but EVERY religion has got something basically the same as your Ten Commandments (and most of those religions are older than christianity...).


And I'm sure I'll have a GREAT time breaking apart your "proving thread" (Hmm... I have the last two weeks of March off :p ) ;)

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by PhirePhreak
Every positive moral that exists today has biblical basis. The Ten Commandments are the most obvious ones. Have you ever seen a book of law that said it was okay to kill, steal, adulterate, or lie? Most people, even those who have never heard of God or the Bible, know the difference between right and wrong. Why? Because of the conscience that God gave each of us. We might chose to ignore it, but it's there (constantly nagging...). And what set of morals is this conscience based on? Those found in the Bible.

---

Phirephreak, those ethics and morals don't come from the bible, you're contradicting yourself. They come from within, and maybe the better ones have been described by the bible. It should also be noted that the Ten Commandments are not a Christian thing, rather, it was something that Christianity stole from Judaism. The Ten Commandments are the rules a non-jew would follow to be saved by god. The Jews have 637 or so rules they have to follow, many of which are simply common sense.

Quote:

---

I assume you have a better idea. Maybe it was all an accident? Somehow, I'd rather believe that Godzilla really exists than believe that. This world, I know, is not perfect (if it was, everyone would agree with me ;) ), but seriously, what are the odds that a few random elements could mix together to form, well, this?

---

Why can't it be an "accident"? The odds are pretty good when you have that MANY chemicals mixing together.

Quote:

---

We all know (well, most of us know...) that you cannot take something nonliving and turn it into something living.

---

Actually, we don't know, your statement is completely false.

Quote:

---

You cannot take a rock, and turn it into a tree (might be kinda fun to watch you try, tho). You cannot take water (H2O) and turn it into a man-eating sea creature. It just won't happen.

---

Nobody has said any of this, what they've said is that chemicals *do* and *can* form RNA, which is a close relative of DNA, which in turn can spawn life.

Quote:

---

While I'm working on my small paper proving (using facts and basic logic) the Truth behind Christianity, I have a task for you. Prove to me that evolution IS true. I look at me, and I look at an amoeba. For some strange reason, I don't see much resemblence. Or farther up the "evolution chain": I look at me, and I look at a whale. I have mouth, whale has a mouth. I have eyes, whale has eyes. But that's about the extent of it. Care to provide some hard evidence for evolution for me?

---

1) you can't compare a completely unrelated creature. Try apes, after all, they bare the closest resemblance to us internally.
2) there are loads of evidence to support evolution. A quick search at google yields:
http://www.mala.bc.ca/~johnstoi/essays/courtenay1.htm
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html
http://library.thinkquest.org/C004367/ph5.shtml
http://www.wi.mit.edu/nap/pdfs/Director's%20Report/dir_bartel.pdf

I think your understanding of evolution is completely lacking, and perhaps you should research something you're trying to debate. It's more fun that way, rather than having you present views with rather absurd and unfounded statements that only serve to make you look foolish.

Quote:

---

I'm going to let you people in on a little secret. The reason that so many have been saying that religion is fiction is that they already assume that. Before even considering the evidence FOR Christianity, they throw it into the general wastebasket labeled "Religion/Fiction". (Not a personal attack on chsh, so don't take it as such. Simply the first example I came to through my reverse journey through the thread.)

---

Actually, that's rather untrue in at least my case. My grandfather is an Anglican priest, and I spent most of my childhood believing the same teachings he did, and then I began to ask why people thought certain things, and if there was any evidence of it. I didn't find that the church offered any satisfactory evidence, so I decided to take a look at other Christian churches, and they too believed the same core things that were unexplainable. I considered both the evidence FOR and AGAINST Christianity, and the AGAINST outweighed it for me. Christianity seems to be to be nothing more than a vehicle for political power.
Even recently, the Vatican was trying to get the UN to give it the equivalent power of a billion or so people because that's how many Catholics are in the world, and any baptised Catholic is a resident of Vatican City, whether they're really living there or not. It's all about power. This is why I said and continue to say that religion is a personal thing. When people are organized into groups they get stupid and become like sheep.
Churches as I'm able to see them, are nothing more than political. That said, I have seen some rather good things done in churches on a day to day basis, and also some rather bad things.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Uraloony:
Wrong. What I said AND MEANT what that if I present my proof that is not from the Bible, but rather is from archeology findings or science tests, you will label my stuff as garbage. I find that many so called "open-minded" people are not open minded at all. Heh, they won't accept any facts as true unless presented from their own "side".

---

That's an awfully large assumption about what Negative will do. BTW, it's not wrong, you wrote what you wrote, that's not debatable at this point. You can argue the meaning of it, but I took it the exact same way Negative did.

Quote:

---

Negative, the Bible is not impossible to disprove. Here are two quick reasons:
1. Archeology supports the Bible.
2. Jewish historical records support Jesus coming.

---

I think you meant to say "the Bible is not impossible to prove."
1. Archaelogy supports very tiny pieces of the Bible.
2. Right, but to them he was the Messiah, the Messenger, not the son of god.
Personally, I think you're arguing the wrong thing. Regardless of whether or not Jesus existed, the message he was trying to send (if accurately recorded in the Bible, which I highly doubt) is a noble one.

Quote:

---

sidenote here: Again Negative, making assumptions...
You are criticizing me for supposedly trying to prove the unprovable. Well the Bible has been proven again and again in many different manners and ways.

---

Ura, instead of making those blanket statements like "Well the Bible has been proven again and again..." etc., why not try and come up with examples. I am truly interested in how it's been proven. What I'm looking for proof of is one of the following:
1) If it is historically accurate (probably the easiest to prove).
2) If the information contained within comes from God (impossible to prove).
3) Evidence to support various events.

Quote:

---

Now, if you are interested , and will listen to my facts with an open, non-biased mind, I will go and search up some more proof. However, if you will label the things I bring as lies and scams, I will not waste my time.

---

You are making the assumptions here Uraloony, you are presuming that Negative is going to do any such thing, and you haven't even given him the chance, have you? This debate is not a place for people to get up on the soapbox and just TELL people how it is, it's a debate about the various things in Christianity. If you feel you are unable to do so in a calm, rational, manner then I would agree with you that you shouldn't 'waste your time'.

At the risk of being flamed, I'll make a few brief points. The discussion is taking on a new shape and ppl are putting forth ideas in a more descriptive fashion as opposed to "I'm right, you're wrong" which does not really contribute to the discussion. Or debate as chsh says it is.

Maybe it is now a debate.

I submit that in conversational exchange there are several levels -

Discussion - two or more ideas being passed between ppl :)

Debate - two or more postions being passed between ppl for the purpose of establishing the more dominant one, or agreeing to disagree. Examples are given and approved authorities quoted to support the positions. Opportunity is given in an equal fashion to all parties in the exchange and equal respect of position is assumed. ;)

Arguement - Two or more opposing positions that do not regard the other as having merit. Often tactics as putdowns and casting doubt upon validity and worth is used. :(

Fight - All parties have decided they themselves only are right and any means to "win" are used. :mad:

Let's all ensure we stay out of the arguing and fighting arenas so an intelligent conversation can continue.

:)

PhirePhreak - You're welcome. Also, since I don't know you maybe you are doing this now. Personally I think if one is going to promote something - anything at all, a religion, a distro of lx, a car brand whatever, one is more believeable if that person demonstrates why it is so good.
Waiting on your new and improved proof post ;)

Well Gold Eagle, some people have warned us for themes such as religion...
I still do believe we are having an interesting, intelligent debate here (may I remind you btw that 'discussion' comes from Latin 'discutere', meaning 'to fight'...).

Forum-discussions are something completely different from real-life, face-to-face discussions.

People who post on these forums have got plenty of time to think before they post. This is rarely the case in real-life discussions.

People who post on these forums have got every news-/information source they can think off at their disposal.

That is the reason why 'discussions' on these forums are taking on a new shape. Everybody 'figths' with the same weapons here. Unlike in real-life discussions, everybody has got the same opportunities to vent ideas... If you want to start a 15-pages monologue, you are allowed to do so. If someone else wants to reply with a 20-pages monologue, that person is allowed to do so... If someone else decides not to read that 15-page monologue, he is allowed to do so...

In the end, all those posts are just monologues...

BTW: how about we start calling this "discussion" a "debussion"?

Um. Well this won't be a monologue but, ah, discutere does not mean to fight. Latin root word means to disperse, to wit "dis" apart + "quatere" to shake. Besides, the modern usage in English is more to what my post says in any case.
We can call it a debussion, but you should get the credit for that word. :)
Yes - you are quite correct about the religion theme being what it is. It is simply my hope that this debussion remains at a higher level than others have been. I was the captain of my debating team in school....

These posts are getting way too long for me to read. I do not have nearly a good enough attention span. So I'm going to start off on a new train of thought.

There are a lot of types of believers out there, and none of them have all the information. For example, I'd class PhirePhreak and chsh on the more extreme ends of belief and disbelief. And religions are quite a bit different too, and they make comparisons extremely hard. You can't compare Orthodox Judaism to Fundamentalist Islam, or Scientology to Christianity. It just don't work that way. So really, stereotypes are useless and insulting.

And a lot of these sterotypes stem from the strictest and worst examples of religion. And you have to keep in mind that not everything about religion should be taken literally. Does anyone REALLY believe that God created the world in a mere several days? I don't. I think God created the world and then set evolution rolling. So IMO, both views are right.

Now, PhirePhreak has addressed these questions but I have some different ways to answer 'em.

Quote:

---

1.) Blind Faith- You can't see me, yet you must worship me without question. Hmmmm... sounds like a divine dictatorship to me. I have never been too keen on following something that bases its whole structure on something that cannot be seen (in this case, the religion).

---

You don't have to worship without question. I don't think Jesus ever said anything was wrong in doing that. Really, you have to worship through faith. And faith means basing it on something that can't be seen. If you knew the existence of something was a fact then you wouldn't have to question it. Without doubts, there is no faith.

Quote:

---

2.) Money- I hate giving money to something that doesn't pay taxes on anything. God seems to always need money, even though he supposedly created the universe. Interesting. A divine creature needs something earthly...

---

From a religious standpoint, God gave you everything. Is it so bad to give back 10% of that?

And now, on to some more stuff.

Quote:

---

Ten Commandments are not a Christian thing, rather, it was something that Christianity stole from Judaism. The Ten Commandments are the rules a non-jew would follow to be saved by god. The Jews have 637 or so rules they have to follow, many of which are simply common sense.

---

Actually, Christianity didn't steal anything. The Old Testament is accepted by Christianity, Islan, and Judaism. And it wasn't for non-jews, it was for everyone. And the 637 other rules! Damn! I didn't know they had that many! And that's crazy, people start following rules instead of following God, which is not His purpose.

Christianity,.... hmmm.... Have you ever noticed how familiar and similar it is to Judism and Islam? Have you noticed that they all came from the same line of deciples (not as in sexually)? Hmm, interesting. So your telling me that all three are monotheistic, both came from around the same area (Middle East - Including Israel), and all beleive in each others prohpets. Just something to ponder on for a while...

Quote:

---

Now there's a concept we might want to discuss--sin. If we don't believe in God and we don't believe that Christ died for our sins, how do we deal with the guilt we feel? Do we deny it? Does that make it go away? I don't think so. It just digs itself deeper and deeper into our soul. How do we get forgiveness if we don't believe in God?

---

So your telling me sin was created as a vent for your guilt? Come on mate, gimmie a break. If I died, would you praise me to calm the angry waters of guilt errupting within you? I wouldn't think so,...if I told you I was the 'son of Jesus'... and had books and proof to back it up, would you still do it? I doubt it - why? Because science takes a role in everything. Yes, even in religion, there is always science to contradict or backup religion - usually it contradicts, since myths are merely a figment of human imagination stretching for something to grasp at - God. Science, I beleive, is the whole controversy over this thread, even though it has been shifted into 'high-gear' plenty of times and people have no clue what the hell their posting and/or why. Ignorance isn't bliss in this case, I think - I think the guilt within us is vented through knowledge. If you shoot an unarmed person to save your own, I don't see any reason to have guilt in the first place, but if you do, knowledge on who the person was and what his intent was shall calm you; I know this, for it's happened to me before in a similar case (no people getting killed though, which is good).
As for me, venting to an 'Unknown' isn't quite my idea of calming down and bringing peace. I ask for forgivness, and how am I responded? By some guy in a box ordering me what to do for the next few weeks. Not Catholic? Then you don't get any response, besides the fact that you think you "know" that you were forgivin, for ...why wouldn't he forgive? This Almighty All-Powerful God of the Heaven's and Earth shall forgive in the most dire circumstances if your "saved"...

Quote:

---

In one of the earlier posts someone was questioning why God would require the death of his Son in order to forgive our sins. Good question. Because God is just and he cannot leave sin unpunished. For God to be true to himself he cannot be unjust. He cannot fail to punish sin. God would not be acting in accordance with his own nature. So he comes to earth and lives with us and then he gives his life on a cross for us.

---

I've underlined some key points in your argument,...and I find that pathetically easy to pass off. I've been pondering this for quite a while now, and I find no reason to send your own son to die. If God was so mighty why couldn't he send us a few more tablets on which all this is written, as before, then sending his own son. I'm dubious that he was trying to go for dramatical effect on this one. Although it is intereesting, how you say "Because God is just and he cannot leave sin unpunished." Why, then, did he make it. Don't tell me this mumbo-jumbo about people giving us a 'choice',...for if that were the case, Heaven and Paradise would be a hell-hole. Which I doubt it will be. You also say that "he cannot be unjust. He cannot fail to punish sin" - which I understand fully, but if you found your son with the source code to Sub7, would you punish or let him learn to program a bit better? And besides,...I don't think I've been punished (besides for my parents) yet. And lets not forget "Gives his life on a cross for us", ...now, if my memory serves me right, then Jesus was the one on the cross, not Yahweh (Jehovah). Also, literally hundreds of thousands of people died on the cross, what makes it so special? If he died on a rock would everybody have little rocks to praise at in churches?

...Christianity, talk about controversial mate.