General Questions About Belief

[crackerboy]

Pad, your religion and idol is science.




[video=youtube;JFmxnoJJfUA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFmxnoJJfUA&feature=related[/video]

 

[crackerboy]

[video=youtube;kJNi7KXb6WQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJNi7KXb6WQ&feature=related[/video]

 

[mindphuk]

This is what real Christianity is. Please watch the whole thing to see how God views religion. Mark Driscoll does a great Job explaining the true gospel.

How strange. Criticizing religion as something that isn't good while claiming HIS interpretation of religion is the right one. No one is fooled by his claim that 'redemption' is somehow not religion. He certainly plays fast and loose with definitions, something I can already foresee he will do in the video below about science.

 

[crackerboy]

How strange. Criticizing religion as something that isn't good while claiming HIS interpretation of religion is the right one. No one is fooled by his claim that 'redemption' is somehow not religion. He certainly plays fast and loose with definitions, something I can already foresee he will do in the video below about science.

Something you can foresee he will do about science? What are you talking about? He is explaining the difference between Christ and religion. How is his interpretation of religion any different than all of the arguments posted here on this thread? What is it that you disagree with. Redemption is not a religion it is a concept that he in other sermons explains in great detail. I see that you have no real argument so as usual you just try to criticize him. What specific error did he make in his interpretation of religion?

 

[guy incognito]

pad-

maybe it's time to let it go. with so many more important matters to deal with in this world, maybe we should stop trying to tear down one of the few things that gives the hopeless something to look forward to. maybe we should admit that we are not so enlightened as we wish we were and that many of us need some crutch to help us carry the load.

Not all of us need a delusional crutch though. I personally don't think it's worth the cost it imposes either.

of course belief is a choice. the ultimate rewards and punishments inherent in most religious philosophy are merely a goad to convince the faithful of the benefits of righteous living. the torments of hell, originally vague and only later more clearly defined by the vicious designs of the church, are merely a means of swaying the populace away from their baser desires and toward an existence that is more beneficial to society. what better way to convince the amoral masses to give up their heathen and often violent ways than to invent an all-seeing presence, judging them on their conduct and powerful enough to both create and destroy everything they hold dear? what better way to grab hold of the attention of the ignorant masses than to play on their emotions and their fears? though reason may often fail, our emotional selves are always ready to take control. religion has done its job well, it has shaped law in every corner of the world and tamed the beast of our most primitive desires.

Sounds like terrorism to me. If you base your beliefs solely on fear and not on evidence then I feel sorry for you and anyone that has to interact with you. Religion has done a terrible job at shaping our laws. Absolutely terrible. I repeat, absolutely fucking TERRIBLE. There is NOTHING that religion brings to the table that could not have been shaped in the absence of religion. The good laws and rules that religion has brought us are good for entirely different reasons than stated in religion. If you just started with those good reasons, and attributed them to the actual beneficial reasons for having them instead of religion we would be better off.

To base your moral behavior on religious principals and NOT on the underlying fundamental reasons (such as not killing because its wrong. I don't need any religious book or institution to tell me it's a "sin", I won't murder regardless of gods existence or his view on the morality of it because it is wrong in my eyes) is retarded and the ends do not justify the means.

your vendetta against christianity and the other abrahamic creeds, an attitude that is shared by many who cling to science for their unanswered questions, seems almost counterproductive. unlike eastern religions with their tendency toward denial of self, these western religions actually promote individual achievement. of course they try to channel our industry into productive and socially beneficial avenues, but this is the same purpose for which our secular laws were invented. of course religion has been used by the powerful toward their own ends, but so too are our secular laws often perverted for the enrichment of the few. aside from the obviously childish nature of believing in invisible men, i see nothing too terribly detrimental in the belief systems surrounding these mythologies. you may claim that they are brainwashing our children into this fantasy world, but it is no more hazardous than the indoctrination that goes on every day in the name of a variety of secular ideologies. men go to war every day over such petty differences as language, origin or affiliation. how much different is that than warring over who's invisible man in the sky is better?

What about teaching children in public school alternatives to evolution? That is an absolute travesty. It does all of mankind a disservice to allow that horse shit to continue or even support it as you seem to.

religions have shaped the cultures of this world and they will continue to do so. society has shaped our concepts of religion and this will continue as well. no matter how advanced our science or how extensive our understanding of the universe, there will always be unanswered questions and there will always be those who seek divine guidance to provide the answers. you have claimed that our morality can be shaped entirely through scientific means, but that science is merely defining what religion has done through more primitive and natural means. i have often said that science is a fantastic at telling us how things come about, but lacks the insight to explain why things are. for folks like me there is no necessity such grand reasons, but i find no insult or harm in others seeking a grand design in these fantasies. realize that the mindset of even the most ardent atheist has been shaped by thousands of years of religious change and be humbled by the fact that such fantasies have survived every onslaught to become a viable force even in the most scientific and logic oriented of ages.

I don't understand. Your logic is that science often fails to answer the WHY of things, therefore making shit up serves as an acceptable alternative? If you don't find harm in people making up and believing bullshit with no good reasons, then trying to shape the laws or education system to retroactively fit their crazy unfounded beliefs then I think you are as culpable as them.

 

[mindphuk]

Something you can foresee he will do about science? What are you talking about? He is explaining the difference between Christ and religion. How is his interpretation of religion any different than all of the arguments posted here on this thread? What is it that you disagree with. Redemption is not a religion it is a concept that he in other sermons explains in great detail. I see that you have no real argument so as usual you just try to criticize him. What specific error did he make in his interpretation of religion?

He criticizes religion as if it's a bad thing while at the same time he is promoting religion. He is the pastor of a church and yet he appears to act as if he is immune from the criticism he spouts about religion. You are correct, redemption is not a religion yet he talks about it as if it was somehow an alternative to the religion he is criticizing. I'm not saying he made an error in his interpretation of religion, I'm saying he is claiming his interpretation of Xtianity is not religion but something else and basically insults anyone that has a different view on the teachings in the bible. Ironic that so many believers defend each other against us evil atheists yet have such widely disparate views that are wholly incompatible with one another.

His views on idolatry are just that, his views and opinions. Equating sports arenas and Starbucks HQ with idol worship may have some parallels but the analogy falls apart in the details. I sort of agree with him about the way some people idolize celebrities and MJ was a good example but just because some brain-dead people in this country act this way doesn't mean that a vast number of other people are actually able to have balance in their life without all of that. I like sports but am not a fanatic. I like music and go see bands frequently but don't worship them. I go to work and like to make money so I can afford a certain standard of living but don't worship the dollar. I see skepticism, reason and science as a way that helps me distinguish reality from cons and bunk belief systems but I don't pray to Einstein or Darwin.

He never demonstrates the truth of his premise of his syllogism that people must worship something and if it is not god then it will be something else. Of course his argument also rests on the idea that his god is real which again he will never be able to demonstrate. He is a quite engaging speaker. If I believed in the divinity of Jesus, I can see how I would be enamored by his rhetoric.

BTW, why do you continue to try to throw in personal attacks whenever someone disagrees with you? Yes, I criticize him but how do you claim I have no argument? Isn't the criticism an argument by itself? Please define what a 'real' argument should be. Maybe you don't like your hero to be criticized so you attack me for doing so? That sounds a lot like idol worship.

 

[DaLeftHandMan]

1. Do you believe it's a choice to believe in God? Why/why not?

2. With the alternative option being (whatever general idea of) Hell, is it then a choice to love God? ie. choose to love God and go to Heaven or choose not to love God and go to Hell.

3. Does free will exist in Heaven? Are we free to do as we please?

4. Does God interfere in our reality in any way?

Thanks guys.

1. Well, its not so much a choice, i believe, as it is a necessity. For 99% of humanity, (ill leave at little wiggle room for the more jaded reader) we struggle with creation, we ALL want to know where we originated from..its the oldest of all questions.So we search for answers, and set our minds to believe that there IS a higher power..something or someone good, who protects us and watches over us..every civilization has dieties that create a starting point.It is a point of faith and hope that all share...some dont believe in such things, others believe in science, still others think theres nothing out there further then the nose on our faces..pacification comes with comfort and security.

2.If you believe in God you must then in turn believe in his counterpart. life flows across lines of energy and the balances of life..light and dark, good and evil. its not hard to develop personifications of that struggle and balance. i think that Hell is a place of lost-ness..when the spirit has fallen from its intended path.its your choice about said path you take.

3. I think the complexities of heaven and or your interprutations are leaning towards some sort of example of devine marxism? lol seems a bit loaded. If there IS a creator that formed all things and existance as was seen fit..what free will would you need? or, what could you DO...to oppose such an entity? tho i feel, as is stated, that we were formed in his likeness, our ability to have a choice makes us, greater then those who came before us.i dont believe what you "want" in this plane, will mean anything in the next..

4. I heard a great saying once before. "When you do things the right way, people arent sure youve done anything at all.."

 

[The Ruiner]

1. Do you believe it's a choice to believe in God? Why/why not?

2. With the alternative option being (whatever general idea of) Hell, is it then a choice to love God? ie. choose to love God and go to Heaven or choose not to love God and go to Hell.

3. Does free will exist in Heaven? Are we free to do as we please?

4. Does God interfere in our reality in any way?

Thanks guys.

1. For me my belief was not a choice, I was fortunate enough to have had some truly inexplicable experiences that have convinced me there is a lot more than meets the eye.

2. I don't believe in hell, but I don't believe that every sentient being continues their journey through life and this universe.

3. You will have to experience your own afterlife to ever find a good enough answer, your own.

4. God may or may not...I am at a point where I believe that humans cannot comprehend god, and therefore cannot say whether god is truly an active part of their life. I do believe however that there are other conscious beings interacting with our world and our lives at every level, but very few are aware of the exact nature of their interference.

I didnt read the other pages of replies, I just wanted to answer the original questions.

 

[crackerboy]

He criticizes religion as if it's a bad thing while at the same time he is promoting religion. He is the pastor of a church and yet he appears to act as if he is immune from the criticism he spouts about religion. You are correct, redemption is not a religion yet he talks about it as if it was somehow an alternative to the religion he is criticizing. I'm not saying he made an error in his interpretation of religion, I'm saying he is claiming his interpretation of Xtianity is not religion but something else and basically insults anyone that has a different view on the teachings in the bible. Ironic that so many believers defend each other against us evil atheists yet have such widely disparate views that are wholly incompatible with one another.

Yes! that's correct the redemption of Christ is an alternative to religion. That is exactly what Jesus was saying to the people about the Pharisees.

His views on idolatry are just that, his views and opinions. Equating sports arenas and Starbucks HQ with idol worship may have some parallels but the analogy falls apart in the details. I sort of agree with him about the way some people idolize celebrities and MJ was a good example but just because some brain-dead people in this country act this way doesn't mean that a vast number of other people are actually able to have balance in their life without all of that. I like sports but am not a fanatic. I like music and go see bands frequently but don't worship them. I go to work and like to make money so I can afford a certain standard of living but don't worship the dollar. I see skepticism, reason and science as a way that helps me distinguish reality from cons and bunk belief systems but I don't pray to Einstein or Darwin.

His basic point was that we are designed to be worshipers. And everyone worships something. People model their lives after their Idols. In the secular psychiatric world this would be called the mirror affect. So if people are going to idolize something and mimic it than it should be someone like Jesus not MJ. same goes for the next one below

He never demonstrates the truth of his premise of his syllogism that people must worship something and if it is not god then it will be something else. Of course his argument also rests on the idea that his god is real which again he will never be able to demonstrate. He is a quite engaging speaker. If I believed in the divinity of Jesus, I can see how I would be enamored by his rhetoric.

BTW, why do you continue to try to throw in personal attacks whenever someone disagrees with you? Yes, I criticize him but how do you claim I have no argument? Isn't the criticism an argument by itself? Please define what a 'real' argument should be. Maybe you don't like your hero to be criticized so you attack me for doing so? That sounds a lot like idol worship.

My hero? how many other peoples video's have I posted. They are not all my hero's. They are people who I feel made very compelling arguments. Yes I think that this guy is very theologically sound but he is not the only authority that I look to. I did not throw any personal attacks. I was just baffled at your response and how you attempted to throw out some speculation about science that he never even hinted at.

 

[mindphuk]

My hero? how many other peoples video's have I posted. They are not all my hero's. They are people who I feel made very compelling arguments. Yes I think that this guy is very theologically sound but he is not the only authority that I look to. I did not throw any personal attacks. I was just baffled at your response and how you attempted to throw out some speculation about science that he never even hinted at.

"I see that you have no real argument so as usual you just try to criticize him."
Yes, that is a personal attack. It is subtle but it implies that I typically don't have anything of substance or argument to present and am critical for no reason.
I'm sorry, I did make an assumption about what was going to be in the video based on the remark you made to Pad about science being his idol.

The idea of redemption through Jesus is certainly a religious concept. I don't know how you can say it's an alternative. The attempt to separate your belief from religion is ludicrous as it is clearly a religion. It is ironic when theists attempt to call things like science a religion on one hand and deny the religiosity of their faith on the other. Are you claiming that being a "true" Xtian somehow you aren't part of a religion? Sorry, I really am not understanding this concept. The problem as I understand the NT has with the Pharisees was tradition and adherence without question to the traditions and law of man and ignoring god. Jesus never claimed that religion somehow was bad or the cause of it. However, many scholars believe that the stories in the NT about the Pharisees were gross characterizations and give doubt to their authenticity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharisees

Some historians, however, have noted that Jesus' actions are actually similar to and consistent with Jewish beliefs and practices of the time, as recorded by the Rabbis, that commonly associate illness with sin and healing with forgiveness.[29]. Jews reject the New Testament suggestion that the healing would have been critical of, or criticized by, the Pharisees as no surviving Rabbinic source questions or criticizes this practice.[29]
Another argument along the same lines is that according to the New Testament, Pharisees wanted to punish Jesus for healing a man's withered hand on the Sabbath. No Rabbinic rule has been found according to which Jesus would have violated the Sabbath.[30]
Although the New Testament presents the Pharisees as obsessed with avoiding impurity, Rabbinic texts reveal that the Pharisees were concerned merely with offering means for removing impurities, so that a person could again participate in the community. According to the New Testament the Pharisees objected to Jesus's mission to outcast groups such as beggars and tax-collectors, but Rabbinic texts actually emphasize the availability of forgiveness to all. Indeed, much of Jesus' teaching, for example the Sermon on the Mount, is consistent with that of the Pharisees and later Rabbinic thought.
Some scholars believe that those passages of the New Testament that are most hostile to the Pharisees were written sometime after the destruction of Herod's Temple in 70 CE.[31][32] Only Christianity and Phariseeism survived the destruction of the Temple, and the two competed for a short time until the Pharisees emerged as the dominant form of Judaism. Once it had become clear that most Jews did not consider Jesus to be the messiah (see also Rejection of Jesus) Christians sought most new converts from among the gentiles. Christians had to explain why converts should listen to them rather than the Jews, concerning the Hebrew Bible, and also had to dissociate themselves with the rebellious Jews who so often rejected Roman authority. They thus would have presented a story of Jesus that was more sympathetic to Romans than to Jews.

His basic point was that we are designed to be worshipers. And everyone worships something. People model their lives after their Idols. In the secular psychiatric world this would be called the mirror affect. So if people are going to idolize something and mimic it than it should be someone like Jesus not MJ. same goes for the next one below

Like I said, his opinion is not fact. His BELIEF that we are designed to worship is just that, a belief. I don't think we were designed at all and think that worship is something that is best left to our superstitious ancestors that did not understand nature. There are certainly people today that continue to worship people and things and agree that it is probably unhealthy behavior. However, that does not mean that we have to worship something and pointing to a corporation that puts their corporate logo on the top of their building or the size of large sports stadiums or people that go to work everyday to earn a living all as the equivalent of worship is stretching an analogy to the breaking point.

 

[crackerboy]

The idea of redemption through Jesus is certainly a religious concept. I don't know how you can say it's an alternative. The attempt to separate your belief from religion is ludicrous as it is clearly a religion. It is ironic when theists attempt to call things like science a religion on one hand and deny the religiosity of their faith on the other. Are you claiming that being a "true" Xtian somehow you aren't part of a religion? Sorry, I really am not understanding this concept. The problem as I understand the NT has with the Pharisees was tradition and adherence without question to the traditions and law of man and ignoring god. Jesus never claimed that religion somehow was bad or the cause of it. However, many scholars believe that the stories in the NT about the Pharisees were gross characterizations and give doubt to their authenticity.

Its things like denominations that make religion. It is exactly as you stated above. The traditions are one of the major problems with religion. The Pharisees continually focused on the traditions and not on God. They felt that the act was what was important and where full of pride. They where the ones that persecuted others for not following those traditions. Religion is based on man made rules. Christianity is based on living like Jesus. Only traditional Jews doubt the authenticity because they feel it has negative implications towards them and their religious history.

Like I said, his opinion is not fact. His BELIEF that we are designed to worship is just that, a belief. I don't think we were designed at all and think that worship is something that is best left to our superstitious ancestors that did not understand nature. There are certainly people today that continue to worship people and things and agree that it is probably unhealthy behavior. However, that does not mean that we have to worship something and pointing to a corporation that puts their corporate logo on the top of their building or the size of large sports stadiums or people that go to work everyday to earn a living all as the equivalent of worship is stretching an analogy to the breaking point.[/QUOTE]

Ezek 14:3,4 talks about setting up idols in your heart. Over and over again the Old and New Testament both describe what it means to have Idols and what coveting is all about. I think he understands what the Bible says as it is very clear. Yes they are his opinions based on Excepted Biblical truths. This is not a new concept in theology that he just made up. He is just better at articulating it than others.
So yes

 

[Jer La Mota]

To me, believing in god is like following a religion ..
Its either because they think its adds balance to their lives, they were born into the "theory" and believe in it, or it simply makes them feel better about themselves ..
I don't believe in God or in following a religion .. the bible might be an interesting story, though some ppl take it way too seriously.
To me It adds a fake balance to an obvious flaw in someone's self being .. though I am nitpicking ..
Some ppl around me are real religious, they cheat, rip ppl off (business), selfishness, and the list goes on ..

And honestly, if someone asked me if I were to go to heaven or hell, Id ask if If he rather had a dream or a nightmare.
Life is what you make of it, your outcome will always depend on what situations you put yourself into.. good or bad.

 

[rhino1111]

Believing in god is like how kids believe in the boogieman. It's just a story to keep people in check and give them a conscious. The universe is too Massive and random to have been "created" by any higher power. If I was a higher power I'd have many many better and more enjoyable and fulfilling things to do with my time than watch over pond scum.... Just my opinion.

man oh man, open your eyes buddy.

where do you think all conciousness came from? let me guess it just popped into our bodies randomly?

and the "higher power" can easily watch over everything, as everything is the higher power. kinda hard to explain. I HAVE NO RELIGION, other then Universal Law.

but in many relgiion texts if you read with a knowledge of the universe, therre are many important quotes in biblical writing. such as this one clearly stating we all derive from this source of conciousness known as "god"

"I said, 'You are "gods"; you are all sons of the Most High.' 7 But you will die like mere men; you will fall like every other ruler."
--Psalm 82:6,7, NIV

 

[guy incognito]

where do you think god came from? let me guess it just popped into existence randomly?

 

[mindphuk]

man oh man, open your eyes buddy.

where do you think all conciousness came from? let me guess it just popped into our bodies randomly?

and the "higher power" can easily watch over everything, as everything is the higher power. kinda hard to explain. I HAVE NO RELIGION, other then Universal Law.

but in many relgiion texts if you read with a knowledge of the universe, therre are many important quotes in biblical writing. such as this one clearly stating we all derive from this source of conciousness known as "god"

"I said, 'You are "gods"; you are all sons of the Most High.' 7 But you will die like mere men; you will fall like every other ruler."
--Psalm 82:6,7, NIV

Please first define your use of the word consciousness. Do you not think lower animals are conscious beings? Or do you mean self-awareness? Why is it so hard to fathom how it is an additional step of intelligence due to increasing brain size? Apes and monkeys are able to think at deeper levels than dogs and rats. Whales communication is extremely complex with multiple levels of hierarchical information but we can't interpret therefore don't understand their songs. Minke whales also have a well-developed neo-cortex, the area responsible for intelligence. We have a bias because we have the ability to manipulate the environment and use tools due to anatomical adaptations that cetaceans are lacking. Are you sure they are not self-aware as we are?

You are making a simple argument from ignorance, you don't understand how we gained the ability to perceive the world as we do so you invent an answer rather than just admit you don't know.

 

[six8]

my lack of belief came down to the fact of having no faith. then i questioned whether or not i would believe if i was ever bought to church. i was raised baptist, went to catholic school and a religious based summer camp. my mind just could not embrace religion. i do believe in a greater power however and my wife attends church. i have no problem with what anyone believes or doesn't and have no problem attending church with my wife on occasion, going to weddings, or funerals, etc...but i just can't wrap my mind around religion. sometimes i say to myself i believe in god, but not religion. however the determining factor came to me while in school and learning how the church whole heartedly rejecting Copernicus because he further stated/pushed the notion of all the planets revolving around the sun and not the earth. i can go deeper into this but i don't think it's really necessary

 

[mindphuk]

where do you think god came from? let me guess it just popped into existence randomly?

I wonder where rhino1111 went? I guess he didn't like his beliefs challenged.

 

[Heisenberg]

pad-

maybe it's time to let it go. with so many more important matters to deal with in this world, maybe we should stop trying to tear down one of the few things that gives the hopeless something to look forward to. maybe we should admit that we are not so enlightened as we wish we were and that many of us need some crutch to help us carry the load.

You are arguing that we should perpetuate ignorance. An ignorance many exploit to deceive, manipulate and relieve people of their money. Also, I don't think any of us have a problem admitting that we wish we were more 'enlightened' than we currently are. In fact, that desire drives the very heart of science.

 

[Tym]

1. Do you believe it's a choice to believe in God? Why/why not?

2. With the alternative option being (whatever general idea of) Hell, is it then a choice to love God? ie. choose to love God and go to Heaven or choose not to love God and go to Hell.

3. Does free will exist in Heaven? Are we free to do as we please?

4. Does God interfere in our reality in any way?

Thanks guys.

1. No you cannot choose to believe something.. You can choose to educate yourself, evaluate evidence (if there even is any to evaluate) and be rational and honest with yourself. Drop any preconceived notions and look at the the evidence from a neutral perspective. This is the hardest thing for most people to do.

2. This is just pascals wager (believe in god: if you're right, go to heaven, if you're wrong nothing bad happens. Don't believe in god: if you're right nothing happens, if you're wrong, you go to hell).
a. This is absurd! You can't choose to believe something, at best you can pretend to believe. If there is a god, it would know the difference.
b. What god? Can you be sure you didn't choose the wrong one? Most religions have a version of hell or some form of punishment for not believing. You would have to believe in them all to play it safe.
c. Your beliefs actually DO influence your actions, if you think believing something that is false has no bad consequences you are in for a big surprise. The best way to live your life is to strive to be %100 accurate in all of your actions. The closer you get to %100, the better your life (and the life of people around you) will be.

3. If there is a heaven (or Valhalla or any other number of equivalent religious rewards, they can't all be true) there couldn't be free will. If there were, it wouldn't be heaven.

4. If a god were to interfere in reality in any way, it would be demonstrable. You would be able to test for it, there would be no need for faith. The fact that there is no way to falsify the hypothesis of god, shows that there is no way to test the claims of it's existence. God is indistinguishable from an invisible pink unicorn, The flying spaghetti monster, an orbiting teapot, or any number of mythological figures.

In closing: There are a ton of different religions, they all have the same amount of evidence for existence.. None.. They can't all be right, but they can all be wrong. Extraordinary claims, require extraordinary evidence. If you go around believing everything without evidence, you will find yourself believing a lot of stupid, unfounded, irrational and harmful stuff. Make no exceptions for truth, strive for accuracy, use your brain.

 

[mindphuk]

You get an A+ young man!