Jump to content


**Official Religious Debate Thread**


Recommended Posts

I'm not going to read through this entire cluster of religious babble, but here is my two cents worth.

 

I believe there is a God, but not in the sense of how religion describes God. I do not believe there is a man who floats above the universe picking and choosing what he wants to do. Believing in a God like that is, in my mind, similar to believing there is a real Santa Clause with magic reindeer. I do not believe God has a plan for people nor do I believe praying helps you. If praying helped you, then 6 year olds wouldn't die of cancer. If praying helped you, your favorite sports team would win every game.

 

Instead, I believe "God" is more or less some entity of sorts. Now I don't know if he is some ectoplasmic entity or maybe something a human has never seen before, but I do believe there is something out there that is responsible for why we are here.

 

In a sense, I believe in an entity that is responsible for us being here, but I do not believe he has direct control over anything nor that he influences us in anyway. Science has come a long way since the early years of humanity. Clinging to the ideological writings of the Bible and believing them word for word is useless, in my eyes. The Bible is just one big exaggeration put in place to tell stories and teach lessons. While I still believe that reading the Bible is something everyone should do, despite their beliefs in God, I don't believe it is meant to be taken literally.

Good start. Now, why do you believe in the ectoplasmic entity/something humanity has never seen god?

Because to me, any other form of God doesn't make any sense. Why would he be something a human can relate to, when the chance that we are the only living thing in the universe is extremely small.

 

I don't know exactly what God is, but something that is unexplainable by mankind seems the most logical in my eyes.

 

No, I don't understand how all other forms of god or gods don't make sense, so therefore the ectoplasm god we can't understand does make sense. To me this looks like a false dichotomy: because no god claim presented to you in sensible, God must be a kind of deistic entity. You're still making a positive claim, and so you need positive reasoning or evidence of this god claim. An atheist would tell you that they're with you on the 'other gods don't make sense' part, but that they just went one god further and included your ectoplasm god.

Link to comment

 

44 " 'Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.--Leviticus 25:44-46

 

Again, this is codification of existing practice not establishment of a new one. I am disapointed that there is no condemnation of slavery but I am not suprised given the pratices of the day which continued well after Constantine's boys choose the books to be cantonized.

 

You'll have to help me here, because I see a number of issues with this.

 

First, the verse I quoted above is from Leviticus, which the legend goes was the laws and rituals that were supposed to fashion the nation of Israel as Yahweh's chosen and special people. They were to be set apart from other nations around them. And God, who is said to be the same yesterday, today, and forever, set up a checklist. No other gods––check. No working on the sabbath––check. No using my name in vain––check. Don't draw anything––check. But when it came to slavery, God was willing to say, "Oooh, better not push it. They'll figure this one out in oh, say––"

 

About four thousand years, during which time an ocean of blood was spilled in various ages and empires because the basic worth of the individual didn't get recognized until the Enlightenment. You're disappointed? Spartacus is disappointed. Frederick Douglass is disappointed. We're all disappointed, because this is one of those times where the unlimited power of a deity vast beyond imagining would have come in really handy. But instead what we get is, "Well, the Philistines have slaves. The Amalekites have slaves. The Egyptians have (well, had) slaves. Best go along to get along."

 

I guess the question a theist has to ask him or herself is, does God still consider slavery moral?

Link to comment

I'm not going to read through this entire cluster of religious babble, but here is my two cents worth.

 

I believe there is a God, but not in the sense of how religion describes God. I do not believe there is a man who floats above the universe picking and choosing what he wants to do. Believing in a God like that is, in my mind, similar to believing there is a real Santa Clause with magic reindeer. I do not believe God has a plan for people nor do I believe praying helps you. If praying helped you, then 6 year olds wouldn't die of cancer. If praying helped you, your favorite sports team would win every game.

 

Instead, I believe "God" is more or less some entity of sorts. Now I don't know if he is some ectoplasmic entity or maybe something a human has never seen before, but I do believe there is something out there that is responsible for why we are here.

 

In a sense, I believe in an entity that is responsible for us being here, but I do not believe he has direct control over anything nor that he influences us in anyway. Science has come a long way since the early years of humanity. Clinging to the ideological writings of the Bible and believing them word for word is useless, in my eyes. The Bible is just one big exaggeration put in place to tell stories and teach lessons. While I still believe that reading the Bible is something everyone should do, despite their beliefs in God, I don't believe it is meant to be taken literally.

Good start. Now, why do you believe in the ectoplasmic entity/something humanity has never seen god?

Because to me, any other form of God doesn't make any sense. Why would he be something a human can relate to, when the chance that we are the only living thing in the universe is extremely small.

 

I don't know exactly what God is, but something that is unexplainable by mankind seems the most logical in my eyes.

 

No, I don't understand how all other forms of god or gods don't make sense, so therefore the ectoplasm god we can't understand does make sense. To me this looks like a false dichotomy: because no god claim presented to you in sensible, God must be a kind of deistic entity. You're still making a positive claim, and so you need positive reasoning or evidence of this god claim. An atheist would tell you that they're with you on the 'other gods don't make sense' part, but that they just went one god further and included your ectoplasm god.

But don't we then hit the wall of trying to prove something that nobody has been able to prove with conviction? As it is a belief, I don't have a reason for believing it. It's just what I think.

Link to comment

I'm not going to read through this entire cluster of religious babble, but here is my two cents worth.

 

I believe there is a God, but not in the sense of how religion describes God. I do not believe there is a man who floats above the universe picking and choosing what he wants to do. Believing in a God like that is, in my mind, similar to believing there is a real Santa Clause with magic reindeer. I do not believe God has a plan for people nor do I believe praying helps you. If praying helped you, then 6 year olds wouldn't die of cancer. If praying helped you, your favorite sports team would win every game.

 

Instead, I believe "God" is more or less some entity of sorts. Now I don't know if he is some ectoplasmic entity or maybe something a human has never seen before, but I do believe there is something out there that is responsible for why we are here.

 

In a sense, I believe in an entity that is responsible for us being here, but I do not believe he has direct control over anything nor that he influences us in anyway. Science has come a long way since the early years of humanity. Clinging to the ideological writings of the Bible and believing them word for word is useless, in my eyes. The Bible is just one big exaggeration put in place to tell stories and teach lessons. While I still believe that reading the Bible is something everyone should do, despite their beliefs in God, I don't believe it is meant to be taken literally.

Good start. Now, why do you believe in the ectoplasmic entity/something humanity has never seen god?

Because to me, any other form of God doesn't make any sense. Why would he be something a human can relate to, when the chance that we are the only living thing in the universe is extremely small.

 

I don't know exactly what God is, but something that is unexplainable by mankind seems the most logical in my eyes.

 

No, I don't understand how all other forms of god or gods don't make sense, so therefore the ectoplasm god we can't understand does make sense. To me this looks like a false dichotomy: because no god claim presented to you in sensible, God must be a kind of deistic entity. You're still making a positive claim, and so you need positive reasoning or evidence of this god claim. An atheist would tell you that they're with you on the 'other gods don't make sense' part, but that they just went one god further and included your ectoplasm god.

But don't we then hit the wall of trying to prove something that nobody has been able to prove with conviction? As it is a belief, I don't have a reason for believing it. It's just what I think.

 

Well that's the million dollar question, isn't it? How can we prove the unprovable?

 

If you scroll back through some of the thread, I've made the case several times that evidence could theoretically be gathered for the belief in a theistic god (Yahweh, Allah, Elohim of the Mormons). And I have no reason to think theists would disagree with this; after all, they claim in most cases that their God did or does intervene in the lives of people. And though it's true that even if we had a credible miracle on record somewhere, it wouldn't necessarily mean a god did it, it's still evidence, and the beginnings of rational belief in a divine theory.

 

I'd ask you, if you don't have a reason for believing something, why believe it? Particularly with deism, if your god doesn't do anything, doesn't have any use for the creatures he supposedly created, what practical difference does the belief make in your life, and why would you advance the position without any evidence for it?

Link to comment

I prefer to think that God is still testing us to this day. I believe that he showed himself through Jesus, Mohammed, Buddah, and major figures of the other religions. I believe the day that we put aside our differences and "combine" the religions to focus on the one thing that matters (faith in God) is the day that he reveals himself again. I choose to live my life that way, to be kind to everyone and just focus on the idea that there is a God, no matter how one chooses to believe he has shown himself on earth or what he wants. I think of myself as a "Compromise Christian" Christian only by birth and baptism but believing in all paths to God.

Link to comment

I prefer to think that God is still testing us to this day. I believe that he showed himself through Jesus, Mohammed, Buddah, and major figures of the other religions.

 

Why are those people examples of God and not just ordinary people who happened to be nice, benevolent human beings (if they at all existed). Why are they more important than Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr, Mother Theresa, etc.? Couldn't these people just as easily, years ago, have had followers who believed they descended from deity power?

Link to comment

I prefer to think that God is still testing us to this day. I believe that he showed himself through Jesus, Mohammed, Buddah, and major figures of the other religions. I believe the day that we put aside our differences and "combine" the religions to focus on the one thing that matters (faith in God) is the day that he reveals himself again. I choose to live my life that way, to be kind to everyone and just focus on the idea that there is a God, no matter how one chooses to believe he has shown himself on earth or what he wants. I think of myself as a "Compromise Christian" Christian only by birth and baptism but believing in all paths to God.

 

So how do you handle the exclusivity claims for most the major world religions? I can tell you one thing, Jesus––if he existed even partially as he's said to in the gospels––would have smacked you upside the head for your belief. Islam is even worse. If the god-figures claim that they are the only way to God or Paradise, how do you accept them all?

Link to comment

I prefer to think that God is still testing us to this day. I believe that he showed himself through Jesus, Mohammed, Buddah, and major figures of the other religions. I believe the day that we put aside our differences and "combine" the religions to focus on the one thing that matters (faith in God) is the day that he reveals himself again. I choose to live my life that way, to be kind to everyone and just focus on the idea that there is a God, no matter how one chooses to believe he has shown himself on earth or what he wants. I think of myself as a "Compromise Christian" Christian only by birth and baptism but believing in all paths to God.

 

So how do you handle the exclusivity claims for most the major world religions? I can tell you one thing, Jesus––if he existed even partially as he's said to in the gospels––would have smacked you upside the head for your belief. Islam is even worse. If the god-figures claim that they are the only way to God or Paradise, how do you accept them all?

It is generally accepted that the God that Christianity, Judaism, and Islam all worship is the same God. They are all also Abrahamic religions. If you look closely at their readings, they share a lot of the same ideas for how one should live their life which makes me believe that they are all correct in their own ways. Each one fills the others' holes IMO.

Link to comment

I prefer to think that God is still testing us to this day. I believe that he showed himself through Jesus, Mohammed, Buddah, and major figures of the other religions. I believe the day that we put aside our differences and "combine" the religions to focus on the one thing that matters (faith in God) is the day that he reveals himself again. I choose to live my life that way, to be kind to everyone and just focus on the idea that there is a God, no matter how one chooses to believe he has shown himself on earth or what he wants. I think of myself as a "Compromise Christian" Christian only by birth and baptism but believing in all paths to God.

 

So how do you handle the exclusivity claims for most the major world religions? I can tell you one thing, Jesus––if he existed even partially as he's said to in the gospels––would have smacked you upside the head for your belief. Islam is even worse. If the god-figures claim that they are the only way to God or Paradise, how do you accept them all?

It is generally accepted that the God that Christianity, Judaism, and Islam all worship is the same God. They are all also Abrahamic religions. If you look closely at their readings, they share a lot of the same ideas for how one should live their life which makes me believe that they are all correct in their own ways. Each one fills the others' holes IMO.

 

I don't think this answers the question. For one, it is anything but 'generally accepted' that Allah and the God of the Bible are the same. Just ask the adherents of the particular religion. I wouldn't argue there is no historical similarity of desert cultures and monotheism, but to pretend as if the world views them as the same God puts you in a position where you have to ignore the source material/sacred texts. The one thing they do have in common is that each claims you must believe this book, worship this God and/or hold these set of beliefs or principles to see paradise. Any derivation of any kind could result in annihilation or eternal damnation. A Muslim would tell you that you can't worship Christ as the living God and be a Muslim who should expect Muslim afterlife perks. A Christian would say the same about Mohammed. If you're ignoring the holy books, you might be able to get by with this position, but it would be your own new religion completely divorced from traditional biblical or Koran-based religions.

Link to comment
44 " 'Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.--Leviticus 25:44-46

 

Again, this is codification of existing practice not establishment of a new one. I am disapointed that there is no condemnation of slavery but I am not suprised given the pratices of the day which continued well after Constantine's boys choose the books to be cantonized.

 

You'll have to help me here, because I see a number of issues with this.

 

First, the verse I quoted above is from Leviticus, which the legend goes was the laws and rituals that were supposed to fashion the nation of Israel as Yahweh's chosen and special people. They were to be set apart from other nations around them. And God, who is said to be the same yesterday, today, and forever, set up a checklist. No other gods––check. No working on the sabbath––check. No using my name in vain––check. Don't draw anything––check. But when it came to slavery, God was willing to say, "Oooh, better not push it. They'll figure this one out in oh, say––"

 

About four thousand years, during which time an ocean of blood was spilled in various ages and empires because the basic worth of the individual didn't get recognized until the Enlightenment. You're disappointed? Spartacus is disappointed. Frederick Douglass is disappointed. We're all disappointed, because this is one of those times where the unlimited power of a deity vast beyond imagining would have come in really handy. But instead what we get is, "Well, the Philistines have slaves. The Amalekites have slaves. The Egyptians have (well, had) slaves. Best go along to get along."

 

I guess the question a theist has to ask him or herself is, does God still consider slavery moral?

 

You make excellent points and I agree with much of what your saying. Leviticus, however, does not carry the same weight as the 10 commandments as they were perportedly written by the finger of God himself and thus are inviolatable. Leviticus was however allegedly God breathed (a chistian equivalant of "that's what God told me to write) so it should be morally consistent with the commandments and, I agree it doesn't seem to be so. This book clearly deals with day to day funtions of life in post exodus times for the Hebrew people, so I would expect that it should regulate the common practices of the day. This is a case wherein the Isralites certainly failed to set themselves apart from other nations but can we assume the by God's silence on the matter that he endores slavery, further, can we be assured that surving books of the day are neccessarily complete and acurate.

 

Lastly, I beleive we started this whole disscusion based on a letter from Paul, which I asserted was written to advise early christians on personal behavior not as an endorsement of societal institutions of the day. I stand by that. (BTW, yes, I see the correlation between Leviticus and Paul's letter now that I'm thinking about it).

Link to comment

To say all religions worship the same God is inconsistant with most religious teachings. That said the Abrahamic religions do all core from the same source. The jewish prophets, books and traditions are included and recognized by christianity. The Muslims recognize the jewish prophets and Christ as well, they just don't see him as living deity. After all, Christ's (son of David) ministry was largely based on correcting misunderstandings about the scriptures and the primary reason Muhammed gave for the need of the Koran was that people weren't listening to the prophets and obeying God.

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...