A question to all non-Christians

But what happens if you don't go to heaven? you just go to hell and then what? do you strive for perfection there?

 

Actually there is the middle grounds of purgatory, so if you don't make it to heaven but don't deserve to go to Hell then you go to purgatory. If you mange to get yourself in hell you pretty much trapped I'm afraid, but theres only one way to get to hell anyway so as long as you don't blatantly object to God's teachings your fine.

 

First off, I think everyone needs to keep it civil. There is no point in flying off the rails at anyone just because they've voiced an opinion. I swear that this thread is WAY to close to being locked or deleted right about now.
Now, prepare for a long read. I can understand that some of you won't be bothered to read the whole thing, but I congratulate those who can put in the effort. To all of those who don't read it, just be prepared that some of the thing you are talking about may have been covered or already asked in here.

People who steal and commit other crimes that are against the law all have a chance at getting away with it. On the other hand, religious people who sin have no chance of getting away with it because their god is supposed to be omniscient. Also, if you would actually read posts, I said that I do not hate religion, I just find the religious people ignorant. I actually like the concept of religion in that it portrays good morals and values. I am not making excuses to attack religion, I am trying to logic it out. The only problem with that is that people here say that you can't logic out religion, which, in all actuality, is probably even more true than they realize. Also, the religious people set their own standards. If they themselves have chosen to follow those sets of beliefs, then they should follow them to the word.

Creatures do not 'mutate' to for a new specie. New species are slowly formed through genetic variation and natural selection. Time for an example. The pea plant can come in two colors, green and yellow. Now I'm not positive which is actually the dominant trait, but for this let's just say that the dominant trait is green. Let's also say that there is a herbivore that only eats green plants. As more and more of the green plants are eaten, a greater percentage of the remaining plants becomes yellow, and because yellow is the recessive trait all of the yellow pea plants have to be homozygous meaning that no more of its offspring will be green. After some time there will only be yellow plants left. Now, I am not by any means saying that this is a new specie, but after this happens over and over and over and over, the creature or plant will eventually be classified as a new specie. Remember that the different colored plants are not mutations, just like how human skin color isn't a mutation. In short, evolution only occurs due to genetic variation and not mutations. There may be a few exceptions to this, but a specie does not need to mutate to become a new specie.

First of all, the Earth was never proven to be flat. It was believed to be flat. There is a big different between something that's proven and something that's believed. Also, how can you say that no-one questions science? How else would new theories and laws be made if no-one ever questions what was thought to be 'known'. In Chemistry recently I learnt that protons and neutrons were not the smallest particle of matter. These are actually made up of sub-atomic particles. The only sub-atomic particle I can remember from that was a quark, but how else would this have been found if scientists didn't question that protons and neutrons were the smallest particle of matter? It wouldn't have. Scientists always have to question science to make sure they've gotten it right. If they can't prove it but it's probable then they call it a theory, however if they are able to prove it, without any doubt what-so-ever, then it becomes a law.

Somewhat surprisingly, you may actually be correct here. He would have said that the Earth was flat. He never proved that it was flat, he just said that is was.

Are you any different? If you think that others are plain stupid for defending science but attacking religion, then you must be just as stupid as they for taking the opposite stand.

Maybe an even better idea would be, instead of doing some research before you hate god, do some research before you believe in god. As you said, don't voice an opinion ignorantly. Seeing as there is no proof he exists, I'd say that you're being just as ignorant.

That applies to you as well, not just to Atheists. I don't know why you would even bring a quote like that into a conversation like this.

That has got to be one of the most airy-fairy lines I've ever heard.

 

Something about Dark Templar's post
"To me, religion is just a big lie. "God bless America" okay... why not god bless japan? or god bless antarctica."
Ever noticed how it's only said in America? Maybe they just don't care about Japan? Or they want God to protect them?
Assuming you were beliving in some god and were attacked by someone, would you pray 'god save us all', or rather 'save me' ?

"Speaking of this, answer: Who created god? Dont tell me he created himself because that can't be possible unless he was already in existance which can't be because he would have to be created first."
Ok, so who created us then? Or better yet, who created Universe? Don't tell me it created itself because that can't be possible unless it was already in existance which can't be because it would have to be created first. So how about He was created in your Big Bang, or whatever you believe in? Or maybe He caused Big Bang? There had to be something first for everything else to come to existance, for Christians it was God.

"Another Question: Has god been a good god? "
You do realize God haven't interfered with mankind for about 2000 years already? And he will not until the judgment day.

"If he's all loving, he would just kill all the suicide bombers before they suicieded."
I hope you reread this sentence and realize it doesn't make sense. If his all loving why would he kill them?

"God doesn't do anything about global warming... wow...."
People have free will. They are fully responsible for global warming and it should be up to them to fix it. Besides read above, for whatever reason, God doesn't interfere so he wouldn't do anything anyway.

 

Oh the irony, that is either a stab in the dark or a failing assumption. You don't think I have done my research? Do you think I am making all this stuff up? Goodness what a funny statement to make. The last sentence is the part that gets me the most, the irony the irony, ok so you say there is no proof that God exists? Well then right back at you there is no proof that he doesn't. In fact why don't you prove that he doesn't... you can't can you? You want to know why? Its because in order to prove something doesn't exist you would have to prove that it does exist. Don't crap out now after reading this far, just try to rap your mind around this and think. To disprove a tangible theory you have to have evidence against it and since you can't find anything to say against it you can't disprove it. So in order to prove a nonexistent being you would have to have some type of tangible anything of its existence. If you don't get it fine but you still can't prove he doesn't exist so it doesn't matter.

I never said it didn't apply to me, and it was mostly in response to people who don't do their research first anyway.

That is an excellent retort I bet your in some sort of debate class or whatnot. But seriously this is a quote again dating back to the time of the early Roman Catholic Church. I'm just bringing it into light because I like it.

 

So you've supposedly done all of this research about the existence of god, have you? And what did you find? Nothing. That is the proof I go by to show that god does not exist. If god hasn't proven his existence, then why believe that god is real? Try it with something else, say, vampires. There is no proof that vampires exist, so do you believe in them as well? Of course you don't, because, well why would you? There isn't anything to base it on.

Do you even know what airy fairy means? It means insubstantial. It has nothing behind it. It is not a strong, yet alone a real, argument at all.

 

Guys be careful with this topic I would rather not lock or delete it.

_________________________________________________

Here is my question what difference does it make? Whether or not religion exists we won't know until we can't prove it to anyone so what difference does it make? Also why if someone was all poweful with an infinite amount of compassion would that being care whether or not an average believed in it as long as the human does the moral thing according to the being? Also what is the value of belief? Is someone who has raped, pillaged and murdered, but believes in an all powerful being better than someone who lives a life like that of someone who is perfectly devout but doesn't believe?

Also don_bocci since you seem to like Pascal's wager and believe the logic in it, what about the atheists wager? They both adhere to the same logic and rules and yet.... think about it.....

I personally don't believe in any deity, but I do believe, whether or not someones believes in an all powerful being is irrelevant its what that person does that makes all of the difference.

So what is the point of this debate nothing can be proven or disproven because people can always slightly modify their assumptions, there is no science here, there is no facts that can be proven without a doupt, so why argue? This thread is all opinions.

Anyways thats my 2 cents.    

 

What difference does it make?

It makes a lot of difference. Millions of peoples' lives are being influenced by religion everyday. Just take a look at the Middle East. Hardly a week goes by without some violence in Israel or Palestine or the like, and if you take a lot of the conflicts they all have some root in religion. All through history wars and massacres happened because of religion. For example millions of Jews were killed all throughout history because they were Jewish. It's just like race; it's similar to how the black slaves in America were forced to work on plantations because of their skin color. In this respect religion's caused a lot more harm than good, although that is just opinion.

And yes, I agree with your points. A person who murdered even in the the name of God is still a criminal, and they have no more worth than common killers, even if they were indeed devout. It's kind of ridiculous to say that even if someone's killed dozens of people and raped just as many they're pardoned just because they believe in something which no one really knows to be true. It really is as Kerwyn said the actions the persons make that makes the difference.

Also on a side note, I seriously hate it when people think atheists are bad and amoral. I'm an atheist and it always makes me angry when some people go "Atheists are useless, they have no morals and all they care for is themselves, they're not worth as much as religious people, they have no meaning in their lives..." Why would anyone even think that? Since when has being religious been the benchmark for how good of a person you are. I know a lot of other atheists that have helped others selflessly and led meaningful lives - more meaningful than some intensely religious people. Anyways, that's my opinion.

 

I should tell you that I have in fact a fairly large amount of proof of God's existence, I just don't mention it because you wouldn't care and wouldn't count it as a viable resource. But since you decide to attack my belief then I will tell you that I get my proof from the bible, which aside from being a Holy Book, it is also a great historical reference.

Let me say this outright. I have no problem with Atheists, in fact I have a lot of friends who are Atheists and I respect the right to believe whatever it is you do.

My other proofs come from the many canonized Miracles and such Holy events of healing that have been happening since the creation of the Catholic church. I know you wouldn't count that as reasonable proof either, but thats ok because its proof enough for me you can believe what you like but my belief stays in God.

 

I never attacked your religion. It was you who accused me of a pointless/contradictory argument, which I hadn't, so I defended it.
I do believe that certain parts of the Bible are true. I believe that Jesus could have existed, but he wasn't a god or demigod, and he never came back to life. I've heard that a lot of the plagues could have actually happened as well. The rivers running red was possible from siltation or something, which also explains the death of the fish and the plague of frogs. The lice or mites could have also triggered the boils. I don't know the other plagues, except for the death of the first born. Anyone know the rest?
I also saw an interesting thing about prophets turning their staves into snakes once. I remember it as once you've charmed the snake, then it'll become placid and can be wrapped around a stick with the head folded over the top of the stick, much like a headpiece. For one reason or another the snake won't move or can be persuaded not to move while it's like this, then once it's thrown down onto the ground, it'll become more active and wander off. I forget where I saw it, but it was quite interesting.
Anyway, I went off on a tangent. Certain parts of the Bible may be true, but that doesn't prove Christianity. There are religion texts for other religions as well. Christians have the Bible just like Islamic people have the Qur'an and Scientology has Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health. If you're going to take the Bible's word, what stops you taking the Qur'an's word, etc.?

 

Who created God?

You need to think that God was here before time existed, meaning he just as well might be there for eternity, but its very difficult for a human mind to understand, as our actions are constantly influenced by time.
_________________________________________________

 

I'm pretty sure if you're an Athiest, your part of the Athiesm religion, this religion consists of no GOD, no beliefs and no supernatural beings... other then scientific animals...

 

Just to make some clarifications, according to Christianity Jesus wasn't a god, as that would defy the rule of God being the one all powerful entity, but Jesus is God. Actually he is technically a third of God. As we believe in the trinity which is three beings in one. God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost.

And thats the missing link isn't it? Why don't I take the word of other such religions and whatnot? The answer is simple I don't believe in them. My outlook on pretty much everything is that I will take the opinion of that which is the most convincing or that which I find the most believable. And for religion it just happens to be Catholicism.

 

In six days God made the universe.
On the seventh day he rested.
On the eighth day, He made Blizzard


On a more serious note, though I am Christian, I believe that people get into heaven not by their religion, but by how they live their live on earth. God gave us the right to choose how to live their life, so as long as they live their life being kindly to others, they are worthy of getting into heaven.

 

So if you've done this study that you said you've done, what is it in particular about the Qu'ram that makes you not believe it's true? What makes the Bible more believable than the Qu'ram?
Just out of curiosity, were your parents Catholic as well? Also, did they give you a religious upbringing (make you go to scripture and church, get you baptized, etc.)?

 

p.s. i think i know how long a godly day is, if he exists,
it is exactly one turn-around of the universe, yes the universe goes in circles, yust like the galaxy

 

As far as the Qu'ran is concerned I just finds its explanations to be rather lacking, the history described in it is rather lacking compared to the bible. I'll tell you now that I have not word for word read it myself but I have read enough of it to know that it can't capture me in a believable sense.

I admit I was a cradle Catholic, I was baptized as a baby and I went to a Catholic school from second grade all the way to 8th grade. But I will tell you that after 8th grade I became a bit rebellious against Catholicism. luckily my parents never forced me to go to church after I started my freshman year of high school so I just stopped going to church and stopped believing in general. Freshman and Sophomore year were pretty rough I was Pretty much Atheist through most of Fesh year during the end of it to nearly the end of Soph year. Then I began to whole soul searching thing and yada yada. During that time is when I looked over the major religions and all the various little branches and such until I finally ended up with Catholicism. Thats pretty much the short version but yes I was a cradle Catholic to start but then I got lost and found myself again.

Satisfactory to your curiosity?

 

Yes, but it leads to my next question. Seeing as you were baptized, went to a Catholic school, etc, don't you think that the reason why Catholicism seemed to make the most sense was because you knew the most about it? If a Muslim was raised in a similar situation, then, as you did, felt they needed to do some soul searching to find the 'correct' religion, chances are that they would return to Islam, just as you returned to Christianity.
On another note, the Ancient Egyptians, Greeks and Romans (although the Romans stole their ideas from the Greeks) all believed in a polytheistic religion. Back then they were positive that their religion was the 'correct' one. Now, however, no-one believes it. Everyone 'knows' that they were all wrong. It was never proven wrong, it just ended when Christianity spread, just as even older beliefs ended when polytheism spread. Who's to say than in another 1, 000 years or so, people won't look back and say 'jeez, I can't believe that they believed in that!'. This also happens with religions that still exist now-a-days, notably Scientology. A lot of people believe that this is a joke of a religion because it was written by a failed science fiction writer (I don't know his name. Anyone?). However there are still thousands of people who believe in it as strongly as you believe in Christianity. There are always people who believe that your religion is just as false as you think polytheism, Scientology and other religions are. Now, before you say 'well that applies to you as well!', think about it. The only way that Atheism (and Agnosticism) can either be proved wrong or just fizzle out, is if one specific religion is proved to be correct.

 

let's just make a small history of religion

egyptians-intolerant polytheïsm
the religion of aton-first monotheism
than at the end of the egyptian era till the start of the official christian roman state there was a whole period where people believed there was no correct religion, but instead believed in all of the gods of every people

later-monotheism

 

I can understand what your saying but there is a flaw with your first question. If I had turned to the religion I new most about at the time I would be either a Jew or a Muslim right now. You see I never did pay much attention to the Catholic faith until my Junior year so I knew less about it then I did about most of the other faiths I studied. Ironically one of my favorite set of religions and beliefs to study was the Greeks and their polytheistic religion. I still poke around at their mythologies even now. And your right it is a faith that used to be believed in but now has died out but you have to admit that their faiths have a lot more holes in it them than most of the current day religions.

Really though I can understand what your saying but I don't see any logical reason as to how or why Christianity would die out in the next Million years even. And its true Atheists will almost always exist as long as they can't be proven wrong, but then again so will Christianity and every other religion in existence.

Which basically means this conversion has really gotten us nowhere. Which is fine cause it was still fun.