Religious Questions from Atheists or Agnostics

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
281

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

I don’t believe being charitable is an arbitrary lifestyle choice. [/quote]

Ever entertained the idea that you’re genetically predisposed to be charitable and religion is merely the vehicle you use to act on it?[/quote]

Interesting question. But why not ask if I am also predisposed to religion in the first place, and that charity is but one vehicle I use to express it? Even more specifically, what if I’m predisposed to the answers Christianity gives? It just so happens to flip all the right switches in my old meat-computer.

“But people end up turning away from religion.”

What if they were predisposed to do so in the first place? Some more readily than others. Some only if X circumstance–or XYZ circumstances together–are experienced? And others, steadfast.

What if I’m way over on the religiosity/Christianity predisposed to scale?

282

[quote]MaazerSmiit wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

God.

[/quote]

I know I didn’t ask you to explain why what your religion gave you was good/necessary in the original question (I’ll edit it), but what benefit does God give your life?

As in - some people are morally right, and some are morally wrong? I think I read earlier in this thread that you weren’t raised religious - did the concepts of right and wrong not mean anything to you until you found religion?

I agree with this - but why is religion necessary to think so?

[quote]From the link up above, maybe better health too. Bonus!
[/quote]

Will check the link out[/quote]

Yeah, there was nothing religious about my parents our my household. Dysfunction, serial marriages and divorces, abandonment and neglect, outright physical abuse, drug use and alcohol abuse. My parents were more concerned about freedom and being individuals than they were about moral obligations.

Right and wrong for me then was more about not getting caught. About taking what risks I was willing to take, etc. But there was a small part of me that, even at that young age, said something was wrong here. My parents weren’t simply living out personal lifestyle choices.

It’s not that I go so far as to say religion is necessary for believing charity is a moral obligation, an actual and real moral good. I argue that it requires faith that moral obligations exist. If you were to tell me that “charity is a moral obligation, a moral good,” and I was a skeptic? Well, I’d ask you to point the telescope to the dumb universe’s list of “moral goods.” I’d ask you to show me the X-number commandments of uncaring nature. It takes faith.

Edit: Sorry, this looked rushed because it is.

283

I see faith as an unavoidable part of life, despite the fact that I can never rid myself of the idea of it being the “denial of observation so that belief can be preserved” (Tim Minchin).

I don’t agree that belief in the existence of moral values requires faith. Moral values exist, we know this, societies have different values sometimes, but they’re observed and accepted as a part of a person’s/population’s culture.

I’ve always assumed that most people get their moral compass from observing others and their upbringing - which of course requires faith in the idea that the person you’re observing/being instructed by is right.
However, I’d say that this faith is then going to be tested by life experiences. Some will find good (or what they know of as good) deeds provide a reward (a good feeling, an actual physical reward - eg helping a member of your family/herd and gaining help in return), and once faith has been tested imo it’s no longer faith, it’s a hypothesis which now has some evidence to support it.

I also know a few people on this site think that there is a genetic component to what morals you’re born with, but not having read any research on that I won’t comment.

284

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

I don’t believe being charitable is an arbitrary lifestyle choice. [/quote]

Ever entertained the idea that you’re genetically predisposed to be charitable and religion is merely the vehicle you use to act on it?[/quote]

Interesting question. But why not ask if I am also predisposed to religion in the first place, and that charity is but one vehicle I use to express it? Even more specifically, what if I’m predisposed to the answers Christianity gives? It just so happens to flip all the right switches in my old meat-computer.

“But people end up turning away from religion.”

What if they were predisposed to do so in the first place? Some more readily than others. Some only if X circumstance–or XYZ circumstances together–are experienced? And others, steadfast.

What if I’m way over on the religiosity/Christianity predisposed to scale?

[/quote]
Our brains are wired for religion. We look for patterns and agents.

285

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]AceRock wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]AceRock wrote:

There is a negative relationship between a country’s religiosity and it’s per capita income. [/quote]

You have links to this?

It is interesting, and I’m curious what other factors were taken into account, and what metrics were used.
[/quote]

Check the section called Issues with Religion.

I did no further research to verify the metrics, and I will be interested if you find some. I’ll check as well.[/quote]

http://redcresearch.ie/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/RED-C-press-release-Religion-and-Atheism-25-7-12.pdf

Looks like this is where it comes from.

My brain is fried today. I don’t have what it takes to plow though this today, lol. [/quote]

Thanks. I checked it out, seems good enough for Wikipedia :wink:

286

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]AceRock wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]AceRock wrote:

There is a negative relationship between a country’s religiosity and it’s per capita income. [/quote]

You have links to this?

It is interesting, and I’m curious what other factors were taken into account, and what metrics were used.
[/quote]

Check the section called Issues with Religion.

I did no further research to verify the metrics, and I will be interested if you find some. I’ll check as well.[/quote]

I found this also in the link. Now, I can say I do it for my mental and physical health, too!

Mayo Clinic researchers examined the association between religious involvement and spirituality, and physical health, mental health, health-related quality of life, and other health outcomes. The authors reported that: “Most studies have shown that religious involvement and spirituality are associated with better health outcomes, including greater longevity, coping skills, and health-related quality of life (even during terminal illness) and less anxiety, depression, and suicide.”[86]

The authors of a subsequent study concluded that the influence of religion on health is “largely beneficial”, based on a review of related literature.[87] According to academic James W. Jones, several studies have discovered “positive correlations between religious belief and practice and mental and physical health and longevity.” [88][/quote]

I’m surprised you were unaware of this phenomenon.

287

[quote]AceRock wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]AceRock wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]AceRock wrote:

There is a negative relationship between a country’s religiosity and it’s per capita income. [/quote]

You have links to this?

It is interesting, and I’m curious what other factors were taken into account, and what metrics were used.
[/quote]

Check the section called Issues with Religion.

I did no further research to verify the metrics, and I will be interested if you find some. I’ll check as well.[/quote]

I found this also in the link. Now, I can say I do it for my mental and physical health, too!

Mayo Clinic researchers examined the association between religious involvement and spirituality, and physical health, mental health, health-related quality of life, and other health outcomes. The authors reported that: “Most studies have shown that religious involvement and spirituality are associated with better health outcomes, including greater longevity, coping skills, and health-related quality of life (even during terminal illness) and less anxiety, depression, and suicide.”[86]

The authors of a subsequent study concluded that the influence of religion on health is “largely beneficial”, based on a review of related literature.[87] According to academic James W. Jones, several studies have discovered “positive correlations between religious belief and practice and mental and physical health and longevity.” [88][/quote]

I’m surprised you were unaware of this phenomenon.[/quote]

Nah, I recall this–or something like it at least–along with charitable giving stats and such. Just being light-hearted.

288

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]AceRock wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]AceRock wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]AceRock wrote:

There is a negative relationship between a country’s religiosity and it’s per capita income. [/quote]

You have links to this?

It is interesting, and I’m curious what other factors were taken into account, and what metrics were used.
[/quote]

Check the section called Issues with Religion.

I did no further research to verify the metrics, and I will be interested if you find some. I’ll check as well.[/quote]

I found this also in the link. Now, I can say I do it for my mental and physical health, too!

Mayo Clinic researchers examined the association between religious involvement and spirituality, and physical health, mental health, health-related quality of life, and other health outcomes. The authors reported that: “Most studies have shown that religious involvement and spirituality are associated with better health outcomes, including greater longevity, coping skills, and health-related quality of life (even during terminal illness) and less anxiety, depression, and suicide.”[86]

The authors of a subsequent study concluded that the influence of religion on health is “largely beneficial”, based on a review of related literature.[87] According to academic James W. Jones, several studies have discovered “positive correlations between religious belief and practice and mental and physical health and longevity.” [88][/quote]

I’m surprised you were unaware of this phenomenon.[/quote]

Nah, I recall this–or something like it at least–along with charitable giving stats and such. Just being light-hearted.
[/quote]

Man, I’m off. Friday night is not PWI time for me, I guess haha. Good stuff.

289

[quote]AceRock wrote:
No, you can’t judge me and decide my souls eternal fate. I’m asking, in your belief system or religion, will your God damn me to Hell for not serving Him? Regardless of my good deeds?

I’ve asked. He didn’t answer.

I want to be a good person and the rules are shared by most of society. They fall closely in line with actual laws and I don’t like jail.

Also, that’s the whole point of this thread. For me to ask the questions that I have of your beliefs.[/quote]

Hey Ace, I’m not sure if this’ll be the most helpful answer, but I hope it’ll mean something.

The basic answer from what I’ve learnt is that good deeds play no part in a person’s salvation. Instead, it’s accepting that you fall short of the perfection that God requires, and thus need to accept Christ’s offer to take your punishment on himself if you are to be saved.

Looking more on the whole business of good deeds, it’s not a matter of balancing good and bad deeds on a scale to decide whether you’re a good or bad person, instead it’s more like a drop of dye changing the colour of a whole bucket of water. An oft cited example is how we would consider people in prison to be “bad people”. Yet in prison there’s a hierachy of sorts, the thieves look at the murderers and say that they’re worse, the murderers look at the pedophiles and say they’re worse and so on.

In the end, all of us are bad people to some degree. And that’s why good deeds, no matter how numerous or great, can lead to salvation.

290

[quote]238 wrote:

[quote]AceRock wrote:
No, you can’t judge me and decide my souls eternal fate. I’m asking, in your belief system or religion, will your God damn me to Hell for not serving Him? Regardless of my good deeds?

I’ve asked. He didn’t answer.

I want to be a good person and the rules are shared by most of society. They fall closely in line with actual laws and I don’t like jail.

Also, that’s the whole point of this thread. For me to ask the questions that I have of your beliefs.[/quote]

Hey Ace, I’m not sure if this’ll be the most helpful answer, but I hope it’ll mean something.

The basic answer from what I’ve learnt is that good deeds play no part in a person’s salvation. Instead, it’s accepting that you fall short of the perfection that God requires, and thus need to accept Christ’s offer to take your punishment on himself if you are to be saved.

Looking more on the whole business of good deeds, it’s not a matter of balancing good and bad deeds on a scale to decide whether you’re a good or bad person, instead it’s more like a drop of dye changing the colour of a whole bucket of water. An oft cited example is how we would consider people in prison to be “bad people”. Yet in prison there’s a hierachy of sorts, the thieves look at the murderers and say that they’re worse, the murderers look at the pedophiles and say they’re worse and so on.

In the end, all of us are bad people to some degree. And that’s why good deeds, no matter how numerous or great, can lead to salvation.[/quote]

Thanks, 238. That’s a well laid-out explanation, at least. I’ve heard it, and I get it, from your side. But I don’t get it from His side.

How egomaniacal is He? Why tell us to be good people at all then? Why not just say, “Believe in me, via my son, and do whatever you want.” That’s really the point, isn’t it? I can do anything I want, as long as I believe in Him.

291

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

Ha! Not mine.[/quote]

Me neither… How should I approach you in prayer? ‘Dear Lord, please help SexMachine…’ lol! I think it’s funny, maybe I am the only one.[/quote]

I always get grief for my screen name. I would be grateful for you to ask The Lord to forgive my sins and not turn his back on me for what I’ve said and done in ignorance in the past. This whole praying thing is new to me. I have just observed the sabbath and re read the book of Esther for Purim. Don’t even know if I did it right - I have no guidance and rabbinical holidays are complex for an amateur. All I can do is my best. Thanks Pat. - You can call me Bill.

292

[quote]AceRock wrote:
Thanks, 238. That’s a well laid-out explanation, at least. I’ve heard it, and I get it, from your side. But I don’t get it from His side.

How egomaniacal is He? Why tell us to be good people at all then? Why not just say, “Believe in me, via my son, and do whatever you want.” That’s really the point, isn’t it? I can do anything I want, as long as I believe in Him.[/quote]

Good questions. I’m not sure this reply answers your question (especially “How egomaniacal is He?”), so I’ve touched on a few areas. Please let me know if I’m misreading or not answering your question.

On the subject of good deeds pleasing Him and why He wants us do to them in the first place, think of it like a father and his children. A good father loves his children (even when they’re being naughty), and wants them to love him back. He also wants them to love their siblings as they are also part of the family. In the same way, God who created us wants us to love Him and each other, hence the desire for us to do good deeds.

The long and short of it for Protestants is that good deeds are a natural result of accepting Him (if you flip back a few pages I think my second reply to H Factor touched on this). If someone has helped you or given you something, you would feel to some extent indebted to them. As such, how much more should you be willing to do things that please Him who has given you eternal life?

On the flip side, if someone says they accept Him but refuse to try and change their lives at all or do good deeds (i.e. believe in Him and do whatever you want) then I would counsel them to ask if they have actually accepted Him in the first place. This can be a murky area though, and I will not judge said person as I cannot read hearts, not all change is instantaneous, and not all sins are as obvious as something like murder.

So… like I said I’m not sure if this answers your question, let me know if there’s anything in particular you’d like clarified.

293

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

Ha! Not mine.[/quote]

Me neither… How should I approach you in prayer? ‘Dear Lord, please help SexMachine…’ lol! I think it’s funny, maybe I am the only one.[/quote]

I always get grief for my screen name. I would be grateful for you to ask The Lord to forgive my sins and not turn his back on me for what I’ve said and done in ignorance in the past. This whole praying thing is new to me. I have just observed the sabbath and re read the book of Esther for Purim. Don’t even know if I did it right - I have no guidance and rabbinical holidays are complex for an amateur. All I can do is my best. Thanks Pat. - You can call me Bill.
[/quote]

If I recall correctly, your handle is a nod to one of the best characters in Dusk Till Dawn?

Also, Pat, that was pretty funny.

294

[quote]238 wrote:

[quote]AceRock wrote:
Thanks, 238. That’s a well laid-out explanation, at least. I’ve heard it, and I get it, from your side. But I don’t get it from His side.

How egomaniacal is He? Why tell us to be good people at all then? Why not just say, “Believe in me, via my son, and do whatever you want.” That’s really the point, isn’t it? I can do anything I want, as long as I believe in Him.[/quote]

Good questions. I’m not sure this reply answers your question (especially “How egomaniacal is He?”), so I’ve touched on a few areas. Please let me know if I’m misreading or not answering your question.

On the subject of good deeds pleasing Him and why He wants us do to them in the first place, think of it like a father and his children. A good father loves his children (even when they’re being naughty), and wants them to love him back. He also wants them to love their siblings as they are also part of the family. In the same way, God who created us wants us to love Him and each other, hence the desire for us to do good deeds.

The long and short of it for Protestants is that good deeds are a natural result of accepting Him (if you flip back a few pages I think my second reply to H Factor touched on this). If someone has helped you or given you something, you would feel to some extent indebted to them. As such, how much more should you be willing to do things that please Him who has given you eternal life?

On the flip side, if someone says they accept Him but refuse to try and change their lives at all or do good deeds (i.e. believe in Him and do whatever you want) then I would counsel them to ask if they have actually accepted Him in the first place. This can be a murky area though, and I will not judge said person as I cannot read hearts, not all change is instantaneous, and not all sins are as obvious as something like murder.

So… like I said I’m not sure if this answers your question, let me know if there’s anything in particular you’d like clarified.[/quote]

Egomaniacal was a little harsh. It is a common critique for me, though, I do not intend any insult. I understand not wanting to deal with that.

As far as the fatherly aspect of it, that makes sense to me, as a father. I don’t require my son’s devotion, however. If he chooses to hate me, worship Satan (sorry but I couldn’t think of anything more contradictory to this theme, though I really don’t care if he does) and still turns out to be a “good” person, more power to him. Conversely, if he rapes and murders, goes to prison for it, I’m still going to visit him and throw some cash in his commissary. I take the concept of unconditional love seriously, so the idea that if I don’t accept Jesus, God will eventually bail on our relationship doesn’t add up to me. I’m sure He’s more patient with it all than I’m giving Him credit for, but I’m just illustrating a point.

With good deeds coming naturally from a desire to return the favor, the golden rule applies, in a cosmic sense, I suppose. If I did think He was responsible for everything my family and I had, that does seem to follow naturally. Reciprocity makes sense to me.

Thank you for the explanation. You are quite clear and simple, without pretense.

I’m headed off for the day, so I’ll leave with this: why the disconnect between the Old and New testaments? Am I the only one that notices a dramatic shift in His personality? Hellfire and brimstone all of a sudden becomes turn the other cheek. I’ve been told the Old is more allegorical, while the New is more actionable, it just seems too apologetic for me. Why be suck a dick for a couple thousand years? Was He having a bad day (time being relative, and all)?

Also, why did He stop contacting us directly? I know He talks to you through prayer, but why not on a mountaintop with some cool iPad tablets that explain everything? I understand that’s been done, and I should simply accept there is no need to repeat it, if I simply believe it occurred in the first place. It just feels like we’re kinda screwed on the receiving end of time, not being around when He was making house calls.

Thanks for your time and patience. It does mean a lot to me. That goes to all in this thread.

295

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

Ha! Not mine.[/quote]

Me neither… How should I approach you in prayer? ‘Dear Lord, please help SexMachine…’ lol! I think it’s funny, maybe I am the only one.[/quote]

I always get grief for my screen name. I would be grateful for you to ask The Lord to forgive my sins and not turn his back on me for what I’ve said and done in ignorance in the past. This whole praying thing is new to me. I have just observed the sabbath and re read the book of Esther for Purim. Don’t even know if I did it right - I have no guidance and rabbinical holidays are complex for an amateur. All I can do is my best. Thanks Pat. - You can call me Bill.
[/quote]

If I recall correctly, your handle is a nod to one of the best characters in Dusk Till Dawn?

Also, Pat, that was pretty funny.[/quote]
I’d post the pic but it doesn’t seem to work at the moment.

296

[quote]AceRock wrote:
Egomaniacal was a little harsh. It is a common critique for me, though, I do not intend any insult. I understand not wanting to deal with that.
[/quote]

My apologies if I wasn’t clear earlier, no insult was taken and I’m quite happy to discuss it.

[quote]AceRock wrote:
As far as the fatherly aspect of it, that makes sense to me, as a father. I don’t require my son’s devotion, however. If he chooses to hate me, worship Satan (sorry but I couldn’t think of anything more contradictory to this theme, though I really don’t care if he does) and still turns out to be a “good” person, more power to him. Conversely, if he rapes and murders, goes to prison for it, I’m still going to visit him and throw some cash in his commissary. I take the concept of unconditional love seriously, so the idea that if I don’t accept Jesus, God will eventually bail on our relationship doesn’t add up to me. I’m sure He’s more patient with it all than I’m giving Him credit for, but I’m just illustrating a point.

With good deeds coming naturally from a desire to return the favor, the golden rule applies, in a cosmic sense, I suppose. If I did think He was responsible for everything my family and I had, that does seem to follow naturally. Reciprocity makes sense to me.
[/quote]

Your viewpoint is quite reasonable, however if I may just put in a couple of thoughts:

You said that you don’t require your son’s devotion, in the same way I’d say that God doesn’t require our devotion as such, but would like to have it in the same way that you’d like to have your son’s love. I would also venture to say that accepting God’s forgiveness and loving Him go hand in hand, there can’t be one without the other since both are essentially changes of the heart.

Regarding God essentially ending our relationship, you’re indirectly touching on one of the great tensions in God’s character, namely how His love and justice can co-exist. To use the analogy of your son going to prison, what if you were the judge/jury who was overseeing his case? He’d still be your son and you’d still love him, but in order to uphold your office you would have to judge and sentence him. In the same way, we’re all being judged by God because He is a just God, and if we refuse His offer of salvation then while He will still love us, justice must also be done.

[quote]AceRock wrote:
I’m headed off for the day, so I’ll leave with this: why the disconnect between the Old and New testaments? Am I the only one that notices a dramatic shift in His personality? Hellfire and brimstone all of a sudden becomes turn the other cheek. I’ve been told the Old is more allegorical, while the New is more actionable, it just seems too apologetic for me. Why be suck a dick for a couple thousand years? Was He having a bad day (time being relative, and all)?
[/quote]

No, you’re not the only one who notices this. This is an area that I personally still wonder about at times. There’re several aspects to my answer.

A closer reading of the NT will show some similar punishments to what might happen in the Old Testament. Examples might include Acts 5:1-5 and 12:21. There would also be the more direct example of Jesus driving out the merchants in the temple, although that one didn’t result in death. The destruction of the temple around 70 AD(?) might also count. In addition, if you look at the timeframe the OT occurs in compared with that of the NT I think the number of all punishments recorded in the Bible averages out reasonably well, especially when you realise that the OT dealt with an entire nation while NT looks at comparatively few people.

On top of that, while in the OT punishment for sin was apparently more immediate, I’m fairly certain that a lot of them were not immediately punished, it’s just that we have records of the more important sins, and thus the ones that merited a more immediate punishment. This purely my own guesswork, but with over half a million Israelites, I’m sure there were a lot more sins than what was recorded in the OT. To that end, whether you take the book of Revelation as more literal or metaphorical, the main point is still fairly clear that there will be a day of judgement where all sins will be accounted for.

So overall, while it looks like there’s quite a big difference in terms of when said punishments occur, I’m not too certain that’s actually the case.

Regarding the difference in commands in OT and NT, the difference (to me at least) comes down to the intended audience. All the OT laws were there to govern a nation, while in the NT it’s more applicable to individual believers who might be anywhere in the world and under the rule of someone else. This is why in the NT you have instructions to follows the laws of whoever rules the land as long as they don’t contravene God’s law.

For a more specific example, in the OT it’s written an “eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth”, the point being that only justice will be done and not personal vengeance. That works quite nicely as a legal system being administered by the appointed judges of the time. In the NT where it’s written to “turn the other cheek”, that is again to stop personal vengeance, but not as a means of justice. Actually, it would work horribly as a judicial system. Instead, the eye for an eye part or another system of justice will be administered by those who rule the land. But in both OT and NT it’s not up to you to administer the punishment, it’s up to the judge, mortal or divine.

[quote]AceRock wrote:
Also, why did He stop contacting us directly? I know He talks to you through prayer, but why not on a mountaintop with some cool iPad tablets that explain everything? I understand that’s been done, and I should simply accept there is no need to repeat it, if I simply believe it occurred in the first place. It just feels like we’re kinda screwed on the receiving end of time, not being around when He was making house calls.
[/quote]

Yeah, I definitely hear you on that point. It would be nice to have a bit more direct contact, but at the same time I’m not sure what difference it would make. Back in Moses’ time the Israelites were led around by a pillar of cloud or fire, saw the Red Sea part and had food drop from the sky for them. Yet somehow they still managed to make a golden calf and say that it led them out of Egypt and generally grumble against the Lord. Even after the expected results they managed to repeat things over and over. Likewise, look at how lost and confused some of Jesus’ disciples were when he was living among them. On the flip side, I have here on my desk (and on my phone) everything I need for my salvation and an outline of God’s overall plan. It’s not as time or person specific as I’d like in certain places, but all the important stuff is there. Maybe I have it better than they did.

[quote]AceRock wrote:
Thank you for the explanation. You are quite clear and simple, without pretense.
…
Thanks for your time and patience. It does mean a lot to me. That goes to all in this thread.
[/quote]

You’re most welcome, you’ve been up front with all your questions and they’ve all been good ones. I suppose I should also thank you for asking them as well, it’s quite useful for me to bring to mind and consider what I’ve learnt over the years.

Edit: Hmm… these answers are getting longer and longer. Let me know if any of them are unclear.

297

[quote]AceRock wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]AceRock wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]kpsnap wrote:

[quote]H factor wrote:
It is also better to believe in something magical up there than to not believe.
[/quote]
Why?

I was loosely raised Baptist. Even though I was baptized via submersion at 13, I always had niggling feelings that none of it made sense for me, even at a young age. The “story” just didn’t ring true. I am now approaching 50 and am at peace without religion. It plays no role in my life and hasn’t since my formative years. My husband and I are raising two teenagers without religious influence. They are excellent students and good people with a strong moral fabric in terms of caring for fellow humans. But none of that is rooted in religious teachings. It would seem disingenuous to me to use religion as a basis for moral teachings when I myself am not a believer.[/quote]

A non-religious life is easy.
[/quote]

Is the goal of religion to make life harder? It seems like there’s lots of ways to make life harder if that’s what you are looking for.
[/quote]

No. The goal of religion is and should be to love God and our neighbors. Sounds so simple, yet we fall so short. Looking at us, you’d think good religious people never heard of such a thing.
We do a lot of things right, but self-righteousness and passing judgement is where the religious fall short the most often. Ego is the most difficult thing to keep in check.[/quote]

That’s an intensely close-minded definition of religion. You might want to replace the word religion with Christianity, if you want to be accurate. There are plenty of religions that would disagree with your definition.[/quote]

Fair enough, please describe the dogma of those religions that disagree and signify what they do infact believe is the main commandment of those faiths.[/quote]

A religion is an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence. Wikipedia.

Pick a religion, and I’ll explain but we don’t have time for 4,000 explanations. Simply put, God isn’t the center of all of them, as you describe.[/quote]

Oh well that definition pushes Atheism squarely smack dab in the middle being a religion. Because one thing Atheism has in common with religion as your own claim that religion is a “…organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence.” Atheism fits this definition, most atheists typically all say the same thing, ‘flying spaghetti monster’, ‘sky fairy’, tea pot floating around Mars.

298

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]AceRock wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]AceRock wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]kpsnap wrote:

[quote]H factor wrote:
It is also better to believe in something magical up there than to not believe.
[/quote]
Why?

I was loosely raised Baptist. Even though I was baptized via submersion at 13, I always had niggling feelings that none of it made sense for me, even at a young age. The “story” just didn’t ring true. I am now approaching 50 and am at peace without religion. It plays no role in my life and hasn’t since my formative years. My husband and I are raising two teenagers without religious influence. They are excellent students and good people with a strong moral fabric in terms of caring for fellow humans. But none of that is rooted in religious teachings. It would seem disingenuous to me to use religion as a basis for moral teachings when I myself am not a believer.[/quote]

A non-religious life is easy.
[/quote]

Is the goal of religion to make life harder? It seems like there’s lots of ways to make life harder if that’s what you are looking for.
[/quote]

No. The goal of religion is and should be to love God and our neighbors. Sounds so simple, yet we fall so short. Looking at us, you’d think good religious people never heard of such a thing.
We do a lot of things right, but self-righteousness and passing judgement is where the religious fall short the most often. Ego is the most difficult thing to keep in check.[/quote]

That’s an intensely close-minded definition of religion. You might want to replace the word religion with Christianity, if you want to be accurate. There are plenty of religions that would disagree with your definition.[/quote]

Fair enough, please describe the dogma of those religions that disagree and signify what they do infact believe is the main commandment of those faiths.[/quote]

A religion is an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence. Wikipedia.

Pick a religion, and I’ll explain but we don’t have time for 4,000 explanations. Simply put, God isn’t the center of all of them, as you describe.[/quote]

Oh well that definition pushes Atheism squarely smack dab in the middle being a religion. Because one thing Atheism has in common with religion as your own claim that religion is a “…organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence.” Atheism fits this definition, most atheists typically all say the same thing, ‘flying spaghetti monster’, ‘sky fairy’, tea pot floating around Mars. [/quote]

That’s Wikipedia’s definition, as I mentioned. I also think that atheism is the lack of those things. It is the general refusal of the beliefs and world views relating to existence that have been posited. I don’t speak for all atheists, nor would they want me to.

Either way, if we call atheism a religion, you proved my point: God is not the central theme to all religions.

299

[quote]238 wrote:
My apologies if I wasn’t clear earlier, no insult was taken and I’m quite happy to discuss it.
[/quote]

I’m good, just making sure I wasn’t being too rude.

[quote]238 wrote:

Your viewpoint is quite reasonable, however if I may just put in a couple of thoughts:

You said that you don’t require your son’s devotion, in the same way I’d say that God doesn’t require our devotion as such, but would like to have it in the same way that you’d like to have your son’s love. I would also venture to say that accepting God’s forgiveness and loving Him go hand in hand, there can’t be one without the other since both are essentially changes of the heart.

Regarding God essentially ending our relationship, you’re indirectly touching on one of the great tensions in God’s character, namely how His love and justice can co-exist. To use the analogy of your son going to prison, what if you were the judge/jury who was overseeing his case? He’d still be your son and you’d still love him, but in order to uphold your office you would have to judge and sentence him. In the same way, we’re all being judged by God because He is a just God, and if we refuse His offer of salvation then while He will still love us, justice must also be done.
[/quote]

He requires it in the sense that He will punish me with eternal damnation if I do not comply. Fairly strict punishment.

I would simply refusing to adjudicate my son’s case; conflict of interests. I understand the analogy, and obviously there isn’t (in your religion) another God to which He could defer, so it does make perfect sense.

I don’t like the idea of an arbitrator, if you will. Not that my likes define reality, of course, but I have to follow my beliefs as you do yours. It just seems that “judge not” should apply up and down.

[quote]AceRock wrote:
I’m headed off for the day, so I’ll leave with this: why the disconnect between the Old and New testaments?
[/quote]

[quote]238 wrote:
No, you’re not the only one who notices this. This is an area that I personally still wonder about at times. There’re several aspects to my answer.

A closer reading of the NT will show some similar punishments to what might happen in the Old Testament. Examples might include Acts 5:1-5 and 12:21. There would also be the more direct example of Jesus driving out the merchants in the temple, although that one didn’t result in death. The destruction of the temple around 70 AD(?) might also count. In addition, if you look at the timeframe the OT occurs in compared with that of the NT I think the number of all punishments recorded in the Bible averages out reasonably well, especially when you realise that the OT dealt with an entire nation while NT looks at comparatively few people.

On top of that, while in the OT punishment for sin was apparently more immediate, I’m fairly certain that a lot of them were not immediately punished, it’s just that we have records of the more important sins, and thus the ones that merited a more immediate punishment. This purely my own guesswork, but with over half a million Israelites, I’m sure there were a lot more sins than what was recorded in the OT. To that end, whether you take the book of Revelation as more literal or metaphorical, the main point is still fairly clear that there will be a day of judgement where all sins will be accounted for.

So overall, while it looks like there’s quite a big difference in terms of when said punishments occur, I’m not too certain that’s actually the case.

Regarding the difference in commands in OT and NT, the difference (to me at least) comes down to the intended audience. All the OT laws were there to govern a nation, while in the NT it’s more applicable to individual believers who might be anywhere in the world and under the rule of someone else. This is why in the NT you have instructions to follows the laws of whoever rules the land as long as they don’t contravene God’s law.

For a more specific example, in the OT it’s written an “eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth”, the point being that only justice will be done and not personal vengeance. That works quite nicely as a legal system being administered by the appointed judges of the time. In the NT where it’s written to “turn the other cheek”, that is again to stop personal vengeance, but not as a means of justice. Actually, it would work horribly as a judicial system. Instead, the eye for an eye part or another system of justice will be administered by those who rule the land. But in both OT and NT it’s not up to you to administer the punishment, it’s up to the judge, mortal or divine.
[/quote]

This is a superb explanation.

I follow the time frames, and the volume of people involved, and I guess I haven’t tallied them up and compared them side by side. It’s much more of a feeling, if I’m being truthful with you. Not much to debate there. Just seems like He became a “kinder, gentler” God after Jesus showed up.

[quote]AceRock wrote:
Also, why did He stop contacting us directly? I know He talks to you through prayer, but why not on a mountaintop with some cool iPad tablets that explain everything? I understand that’s been done, and I should simply accept there is no need to repeat it, if I simply believe it occurred in the first place. It just feels like we’re kinda screwed on the receiving end of time, not being around when He was making house calls.
[/quote]

[quote]238 wrote:
Yeah, I definitely hear you on that point. It would be nice to have a bit more direct contact, but at the same time I’m not sure what difference it would make. Back in Moses’ time the Israelites were led around by a pillar of cloud or fire, saw the Red Sea part and had food drop from the sky for them. Yet somehow they still managed to make a golden calf and say that it led them out of Egypt and generally grumble against the Lord. Even after the expected results they managed to repeat things over and over. Likewise, look at how lost and confused some of Jesus’ disciples were when he was living among them. On the flip side, I have here on my desk (and on my phone) everything I need for my salvation and an outline of God’s overall plan. It’s not as time or person specific as I’d like in certain places, but all the important stuff is there. Maybe I have it better than they did.
[/quote]

Well, people are dumb no what era in which we look. I’m a perfect example haha. It’s all there in the good book, I get that.

Even though they didn’t receive it perfectly, at least they were given the chance back in the day. What do we get, the prophets of Moroni? L. Ron Hubbard? We’re screwed! (I have Mormon family, it’s cool :wink:

[quote]AceRock wrote:
Thank you for the explanation. You are quite clear and simple, without pretense.
…
Thanks for your time and patience. It does mean a lot to me. That goes to all in this thread.
[/quote]

[quote]238 wrote:
You’re most welcome, you’ve been up front with all your questions and they’ve all been good ones. I suppose I should also thank you for asking them as well, it’s quite useful for me to bring to mind and consider what I’ve learnt over the years.

Edit: Hmm… these answers are getting longer and longer. Let me know if any of them are unclear.[/quote]

I appreciate the lengthy answers, it’s much more than I’ve been getting elsewhere. This stuff feels important, too important for one-liners. I’ll see if I have anything else, but I’m fairly content at the moment. It’s a good feeling. Thanks.

300

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

Ha! Not mine.[/quote]

Me neither… How should I approach you in prayer? ‘Dear Lord, please help SexMachine…’ lol! I think it’s funny, maybe I am the only one.[/quote]

I always get grief for my screen name. I would be grateful for you to ask The Lord to forgive my sins and not turn his back on me for what I’ve said and done in ignorance in the past. This whole praying thing is new to me. I have just observed the sabbath and re read the book of Esther for Purim. Don’t even know if I did it right - I have no guidance and rabbinical holidays are complex for an amateur. All I can do is my best. Thanks Pat. - You can call me Bill.
[/quote]

I love your screen name. It’s great because it exposes preconceived notions and then quashes them when you express your views.
I think doing your best is all you need to do. I can tell you from personal experience God will not turn his back on you. Don’t fall into the trap that makes you feel that you have made yourself somehow so unworthy, that you don’t deserve God’s love or help. I know I have fallen into that trap myself recently too. It’s not about screwing up, it’s what you do about it. Mainly keeping that trust in God. It’s between you and Him.
Like I said, I know what it’s like to live like a part cripple, to be in constant pain, to have hopeless prognosises. It’s in this humble state, the state of complete vulnerability and dependence on something you cannot see, hear, touch, taste of feel. But it always works, always. I have hope for the future and you do too.
We all have our crosses, we also have our choices. We can be angry and bitter, or we can lean on God. Really, where can we go to? Ourselves? We’d make terrible little gods. Others? I have been betrayed more than once in my life.
In someway we are in it together, I am no stranger to suffering.