So why is it so hard to believe God is.....

[sd'sker]

Regardless of science, or jesus, getting riled up over a book with no discernible author, having no conclusive evidence of how the universe was created, if jesus was some slackester pot smoking hippie, or Ronald Reagan was the devil, is completely batsh*t, branch davidian crazy...

the book also has an incredibly dubious history, as well.

[knapplc]

I think it's fair to say it's a huge leap in logic to believe that disparate particles coalesced into a mechanism that could consume other particles, make energy to survive from that consumption, heal themselves, gained the ability to replicate copies of themselves and figured out ways to defend themselves from the environment and competitors. That's a pretty huge set of tasks to expect from random matter.

 

I can't find it and I don't really care to look for it right now, but as I recall not many years ago a professor back east (MIT, Harvard, somewhere like that) was saying to the press that he had it all figured out and was going to replicate the feat in his lab, and he expected to do it pretty quickly, like in a few months or years. Haven't heard anything about that yet. Go figure.

[walksalone]

Regardless of science, or jesus, getting riled up over a book with no discernible author, having no conclusive evidence of how the universe was created, if jesus was some slackester pot smoking hippie, or Ronald Reagan was the devil, is completely batsh*t, branch davidian crazy...

the book also has an incredibly dubious history, as well.

 

I think dubious may be an understatement...

 

Think about how many people have gotten killed because of it?

[sd'sker]

I think dubious may be an understatement...

 

Think about how many people have gotten killed because of it?

i meant that the book as changed drastically throughout its history, from scholars translating it over and over again from dead languages to kings changing it on a whim.

[walksalone]

I think dubious may be an understatement...

 

Think about how many people have gotten killed because of it?

i meant that the book as changed drastically throughout its history, from scholars translating it over and over again from dead languages to kings changing it on a whim.

 

what, Sanskrit isn't relevant anymore?

[sd'sker]

I think dubious may be an understatement...

 

Think about how many people have gotten killed because of it?

i meant that the book as changed drastically throughout its history, from scholars translating it over and over again from dead languages to kings changing it on a whim.

 

what, Sanskrit isn't relevant anymore?

i believe it was aramaic.

[JJ Husker]

Regardless of science, or jesus, getting riled up over a book with no discernible author, having no conclusive evidence of how the universe was created, if jesus was some slackester pot smoking hippie, or Ronald Reagan was the devil, is completely batsh*t, branch davidian crazy...

the book also has an incredibly dubious history, as well.

 

I think dubious may be an understatement...

 

Think about how many people have gotten killed because of it?

 

So that's the books fault? I guess that's why there are so many unsolved murders. The police are wasting their time looking for people when they should be arresting and interrogating books.

[walksalone]

I think dubious may be an understatement...

 

Think about how many people have gotten killed because of it?

i meant that the book as changed drastically throughout its history, from scholars translating it over and over again from dead languages to kings changing it on a whim.

 

what, Sanskrit isn't relevant anymore?

i believe it was aramaic.

 

Sumerian?

[sd'sker]

Regardless of science, or jesus, getting riled up over a book with no discernible author, having no conclusive evidence of how the universe was created, if jesus was some slackester pot smoking hippie, or Ronald Reagan was the devil, is completely batsh*t, branch davidian crazy...

the book also has an incredibly dubious history, as well.

 

I think dubious may be an understatement...

 

Think about how many people have gotten killed because of it?

 

So that's the books fault? I guess that's why there are so many unsolved murders. The police are wasting their time looking for people when they should be arresting and interrogating books.

'the catcher in the rye' was banned for a lot less.

[walksalone]

Regardless of science, or jesus, getting riled up over a book with no discernible author, having no conclusive evidence of how the universe was created, if jesus was some slackester pot smoking hippie, or Ronald Reagan was the devil, is completely batsh*t, branch davidian crazy...

the book also has an incredibly dubious history, as well.

 

I think dubious may be an understatement...

 

Think about how many people have gotten killed because of it?

 

So that's the books fault? I guess that's why there are so many unsolved murders. The police are wasting their time looking for people when they should be arresting and interrogating books.

 

No, not the books, but the fact that the book can cause some folks to go completely retarded, like the crusades, the spanish inquisition, when religion was forced upon the Nordic and Native American peoples...

[JJ Husker]

Regardless of science, or jesus, getting riled up over a book with no discernible author, having no conclusive evidence of how the universe was created, if jesus was some slackester pot smoking hippie, or Ronald Reagan was the devil, is completely batsh*t, branch davidian crazy...

 

Sorry, some of that about pot smoking hippie and the Reagan devil went over my head but what's up with the no discernable author thing? Because it is a collection of various books from different writers and timespans? The whole inspired word of God thing? Or what? Are you claiming that the authors of the letters to the Ephesians, letters to the Phillipians, the books of the gospel, have no discernable authors?

 

I wouldn't expect the Bible to contain conclusive scientific evidence about creation. Rumor has that God has his best scientists working on that right now. There on to this M theory thing that looks promising.

[Landlord]

JJ, at no time have I ever said your belief was wrong (or if I used those words, I conveyed poorly what I was saying). At no time have I ever told anyone, including my own wife who remains Christian, that they should stop being Christian. I will not do that, because frankly I don't see how it's harming you - in fact, I think it helps a great many people, including my wife.

 

 

"But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain.We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied."

 

First Corinthians, Chapter 15

 

The error in that passage is that, if there is no God, there is no sin. Sin is a concept of religion. Without religion, sin is not sin. Even were we to define the ills Man does as "sin," if there were no God, then sin would separate us from... nothing.

 

That passage presupposes the existence of God. It has no truth without God.

 

 

EDIT - further, let's look at what Christianity teaches you. Christ taught you to love your neighbor as yourself. He taught you to feed the hungry, help the poor, heal the sick. He taught you that to give of yourself to your fellow man is a great thing - not for earning your way into heaven, but as an act in and of itself.

 

So even if Christ was not God, even if God is not real, Christ's teachings still have merit. Living a Christian life, even as an Atheist, is a fine thing. You may have some trouble with the law if you go around making whips from cords and driving out the money-changers, but everyone gets in trouble from time to time anyway, right?

 

 

I'm doing other things so I can't devote a ton of attention to this, but if without God there is no sin, then how can you, as someone who doesn't believe in God, believe in good? Further, you're picking and choosing the things about Christianity that are fine and good. Christ also told us to pick up our cross daily (paraphrased "follow me to the point of torture and death"), to deny ourselves and to let God be our ultimate authority. These things, in certain contexts, don't seem very good for people (especially in countries where it is illegal and punished severely).

 

These sound like amateur arguments but I'm distracted :S

[walksalone]

Sorry, some of that about pot smoking hippie and the Reagan devil went over my head but what's up with the no discernable author thing? Because it is a collection of various books from different writers and timespans? The whole inspired word of God thing? Or what? Are you claiming that the authors of the letters to the Ephesians, letters to the Phillipians, the books of the gospel, have no discernable authors?

 

You have empirical evidence that these "individuals" wrote the stuff in the bible? Even if they did write all this, how are you sure it hasn't been rewritten or completely fabricated because somebody along the way didn't like the way the story read?

[knapplc]

 

I'm doing other things so I can't devote a ton of attention to this, but if without God there is no sin, then how can you, as someone who doesn't believe in God, believe in good? Further, you're picking and choosing the things about Christianity that are fine and good. Christ also told us to pick up our cross daily (paraphrased "follow me to the point of torture and death"), to deny ourselves and to let God be our ultimate authority. These things, in certain contexts, don't seem very good for people (especially in countries where it is illegal and punished severely).

 

These sound like amateur arguments but I'm distracted :S

 

Stop trying to convince me Christianity is bad, Landlord!!!

 

 

Good is not the opposite of sin. I think we can all agree there are universal "good" things and universal "bad" things. Bad =/= Sin, especially in the context of no god. And while nobody is all good or all bad, there are good people out there who are not Christian, and have no real knowledge of Christianity. It's a pretty common thing, actually.

 

Christ told you to pick up your cross. What did he mean by that? He meant to take up your burden, whatever that is, and go about the work you must do. It is not a bad thing to do good in bad countries. It is not a bad thing to be a member of Doctors Without Borders, although providing healthcare in impoverished nations could be a bad, deadly thing. Providing humanitarian aid in a country wracked by civil war is a good thing, and could lead to your harm or death. These are the kinds of "crosses" Christ is telling you to take up, and while pretty much everyone agrees death = bad, doing good that leads to your death is not inherently bad. It could be a very noble thing, which is good.

 

I'm not about to tell you that ALL of Christianity is "good." I'm sure I'm forgetting something that is bad, or would be detrimental, but on the whole, on the average, it's a good thing. My Christian friends are good people, as people go.

[JJ Husker]

Sorry, some of that about pot smoking hippie and the Reagan devil went over my head but what's up with the no discernable author thing? Because it is a collection of various books from different writers and timespans? The whole inspired word of God thing? Or what? Are you claiming that the authors of the letters to the Ephesians, letters to the Phillipians, the books of the gospel, have no discernable authors?

 

You have empirical evidence that these "individuals" wrote the stuff in the bible? Even if they did write all this, how are you sure it hasn't been rewritten or completely fabricated because somebody along the way didn't like the way the story read?

 

Ok. Now I understand what you were getting at. The angle that drunken monks may have mistranslated or purposely changed things. I didn't pop in to defend it, only wanted to understand your point.