Discussion #1 in Off Topic

Page: 1 2
ID:114930
 
Jun 24 2011, 10:22 am
I would appreciate it if this topic was left up to be viewed by everyone, since I am looking for opinions, not an arguement.


I'm not going to go into the long history of christianity or anything. I just want to know why, those of you who are non-religious/athiest, aren't religious. I don't want to argue or fight or try to prove you wrong or anything. It's simply a question I have pondered for a bit.

I would also appreciate it if, those of you who are religious, not comment here. Again, this is for the sake of not argueing or fighting over religion.
#1 Jun 24 2011, 11:31 am
I guess I am technically aethiest. I haven't found any religion that makes sense to me and isn't hypocritic, so I don't believe in one. My family is Christian, but it really doesn't make much sense to me. So I just sit back and enjoy my life while I can. Whenever I get forced to go to church, I "participate" out of respect, but I don't really get into it.
#2 Jun 24 2011, 12:37 pm
I dont believe in a god because there is no proof for one. Its that simple.
#3 Jun 24 2011, 1:22 pm
Religion just doesn't float my boat, there are a few neat ideas and I'll borrow those, but I don't think I need to subscribe to the whole deal.
#4 Jun 24 2011, 1:48 pm
Alright.
#5 Jun 24 2011, 3:06 pm
I don't believe in them for a number of reasons, starting with that I don't believe that they could possibly be real for a wide variety of historical reasons (there are a wide variety of different religions, none are older than 5000 years old (Hinduism is the oldest I believe), and every religion has changed over time (Judaism was originally polytheistic, but only devoted to one god, Christianity was a loose cult with varying beliefs until about 324 CE, when Roman Catholicism was born, and so on). Secondly, it conflicts with science, and thirdly, I think it ultimately ends up being hypocritical and makes people act morally for the wrong reasons.
#6 Jun 24 2011, 3:12 pm
I respect your opinion. Thank you for taking time to say that.


It seems to me that it's not the age of the beliefs that matter, but what they preach, correct? Take it as you wish, but maybe science isn't always right/true? Even if it provides reason and facts for many things, aren't there mysteries and happenings that illude "reason"?
#7 Jun 24 2011, 3:18 pm
While you are correct, because science is a trial-and-error, develop-a-hypothesis art, it has its faults and is not always correct. However, religion has no proof of itself either, so in reality religion seems to be people making an unproven, and most likely unprovable, hypothesis on mysterious things.
#8 Jun 24 2011, 3:21 pm
Masterdarwin88 wrote:
I respect your opinion. Thank you for taking time to say that.


It seems to me that it's not the age of the beliefs that matter, but what they preach, correct? Take it as you wish, but maybe science isn't always right/true? Even if it provides reason and facts for many things, aren't there mysteries and happenings that illude "reason"?

Part of my point with the whole age thing is that the whole lack of Judaism for nearly 100,000 years of human history makes absolutely no sense in the context of the religion considering its origin story (and that goes for most other religions, as well). Also, science isn't always correct, but its correct enough to point out that a burning, talking bush couldn't exist and that water can't be turned into wine like magic. And there are many things that elude reason, hence why people didn't actually learn too much about the world, physics, etc. until about 300 years ago. However, even if something eludes reason, there is ultimately some sort of practical solution (unless by happenings and mysteries you meant things like Saint Mary of Guadalupe and the likes, which elude both reason and reality).
#9 Jun 24 2011, 3:31 pm
Thanks. I appreciate the explanation.
#10 Jun 24 2011, 6:00 pm
I think the distinction is science is happy to say "I cannot explain this yet" and "I don't know". It is a subject that moves, grows and changes, as our understanding of the universe we are in changes.

It is not diametrically opposed by design to any religion, nor can it be particularly worshiped. It is simply our common explanation of things we see and perceive, that's all.

If we're to say science has a belief, it's the belief that what I see with my base senses has some truth to it, and if you see it too, then it has some more truth, and so on and so on. Science is a collection of theories, most of which you could say it would be unreasonable or impractical to consider incorrect. However that is not an unbending law, it is still a theory, and may, although very improbable, be incorrect in some way.

Religion typically relies on belief, first and foremost, irrespective of first hand evidence. Is this bad? No, not particularly. However it is worth accepting it as such, as a belief.

The same way I believe most people are good and decent people. Others may believe something different, and that's fine, it's a choice.
#11 Jun 24 2011, 6:54 pm
Albro1 wrote:
I guess I am technically aethiest. I haven't found any religion that makes sense to me and isn't hypocritic,

The problem is that it's safe to say that 99% of the people who claim they're "Christians" or "Ministers" don't take the bible seriously. To be honest, the preachers you see on television are in the same boat you are according to the bible. They're all liars and they manipulate the bible to earn a profit.

Tithing is a great example. You may not even care enough to do this, but if your Christian family pays "tithes", let them know that the law was given to the twelve tribes of Israel ( Jews ). No gentile nation ( whites, blacks, hispanics etc. ) was ever commanded to pay tithes, neither did Jesus and his apostles tell their followers to pay tithes, so whenever you hear a pastor say "the Lord wants you to pay tithes", you know they're lying through their teeth.

There are next to no true followers of the bible. This is why it's bad to base your impression of the book on everything you see as opposed to what you actually read and understand for yourself in the bible. These people aren't pastors, they're clowns claiming to be chosen by God when no such thing has ever happened. If they followed the bible correctly, they'd be the greatest people you would have ever met in your life, but they don't. The Crusades wasn't of God and neither is most of the religious non-sense done today, but if you talk to most atheists, they'll speak negatively about God and the bible solely based on the people who have done bad things.

Base your opinion of God and the bible on someone who was actually righteous, like Jesus. Mao Zedong, an atheist, was one of the most ruthless mass murderers in history, but I doubt you want the world judging you and every other atheist based on his behavior.
#12 Jun 24 2011, 7:04 pm
My family isn't that dedicated, honestly.
Also, I did grow up in a Christian family, so I was introduced to the Bible somewhat.
I'm not saying I'm preacher material or anything, but I know a bit.
I acknowledge that Jesus existed, however I do not believe in his "miracles". I do not believe he could turn water into wine, and I do not believe he could split a sea.
I also do not quite understand why people always say "Our Father" when referring to Jesus, yet the Bible says that God calls us his children, that we are created in his image, and Jesus is also his son. That would make us siblings with Jesus, so calling him "Father" is incorrect.
#13 Jun 24 2011, 7:17 pm
Albro1 wrote:
I also do not quite understand why people always say "Our Father" when referring to Jesus, yet the Bible says that God calls us his children, that we are created in his image, and Jesus is also his son. That would make us siblings with Jesus, so calling him "Father" is incorrect.

That's because Christianity = "Jesus is God", which is a lie. There are several scriptures in the bible that seem like they're declaring that the two are the same, but if you pay attention, Jesus never once calls himself God, but several times he refers to himself as the "son", he stops people from worshiping him, he says he came FROM God, he says he can't do miracles unless God enables him to do them, and none of his disciples ever calls him God. As a matter of fact, when Jesus asked Peter who he was, Peter replied that he was the son of God ( not God himself ), and Jesus confirmed that his answer was correct.

Again, you probably don't even care to hear all this, but it's just another example of "pastors" not taking the bible seriously. They couldn't care less about the book, they just know they can use it to scam thousands of people into "giving up their money to God".
#14 Jun 24 2011, 7:30 pm
Empire. This isn't a place to argue. Or debate.


I enjoyed your opinion, and your references to the bible, but there is no need to be calling priest "fakes" and talking of tithes being scams.
#15 Jun 24 2011, 7:33 pm
Darwin, you asked for opinions, and he gave his. We merely exchanged opinions. I respect his, and he appears to respect mine.
#16 Jun 24 2011, 7:46 pm
I wouldn't put too much into what Empirez says. He's a very elaborate and consistent troll, and I commend him for the amount of effort he puts into it.
#17 Jun 24 2011, 7:48 pm
I apologize. I was just slightly offended by what he said. Slightly. Lol.


Anyways, I do respect both your opinions. No matter how harsh or rational/irrational they may be.
#18 Jun 24 2011, 8:05 pm
I just said all that to say don't call the bible a bad book based on what you see people doing "in the name of God". These people in no way represent God or the bible. They just claim to. It would be the equivalent of, as I said, me judging Albro and the rest of the atheists in the world based on the mass murders Mao Zedong committed. Just because he was an atheist doesn't make it rational to automatically assume every atheist is a demented murderer, and neither is the bible or God evil just because many people, "in the name of God" murder, lie, steal, and enslave people. The bible is a good book - people have just taken it to pursue evil ambitions which is why it makes those of us who aren't bad look bad anyway because we're automatically associated with these people.

I don't care to change Albro's stance on anything - I've been debating for years now and I know for a fact that 9 times out of 10, people won't change their beliefs so I'd be wasting my time. It just sounded like one of the reasons Albro was an atheist was because he doesn't approve of what religious people do because it's hypocritical, and I agree even though I do believe in God, but I just wanted to make sure people know that almost all ministers are false prophets meaning they weren't chosen by God, they lie to their members and steal their money. Therefore, they should not be looked upon as prophets of God because that would mean God approves of what they're doing, but the bible clearly states he doesn't.
#19 Jun 25 2011, 7:50 am
Well, thank you, Empire. You cleared some of my confusion. Thanks for the well-thought post :c
Page: 1 2