I am a christian, i and i strongly belive in my lord jesus christ, and i also belive that if you belive in him and except him as your savior, u will go to heaven. and i also believe that he created the world, not the big bang, or that we came from stupid apes.
I believe they were invented thousands of years ago, so that leaders could control their uneducated civilians. Thats also why they killed non-believers, because they didn't fear their gods.
I don't think that was the way religion started; humans have always believed in supernatural things as soon as they asked themselves where they came from and how the world they live in works. Later on of course, leading persons took advantage of that and still do. But they did not invent religion.
It is where our ancestors birthed a deity. We worshipped the sun, because it gave life to the planet. Hence we have a sun god. Then we have the thousands of spin-offs from the sun god, like Jesus, for example.
I myself am a catholic-christian and altough im a very strong believer in god. I believe in letting people believe what they may, they are free to their beliefs and as the bible says we must "love our neighbors and our enemies". Atheism might sometimes be over exagerated but it is a belief/ religion in its own way, thus making it unorthodox to try and change people for your own beliefs. Just like the Spanish conquistadors failed to change the Indians to christianism.
Atheism might sometimes be over exagerated but it is a belief/ religion in its own way,
No its not. I know what you are saying but it doesnt work like that.
If atheism is like a religion and a belief then you could say that believing vitamin pills make you healthier is like a religion. Believing you can come first in a race could then be a kind of religion. Its not the beliving that makes it a religion, its the faith in a god/gods that make it a religion.
My view on things is that people can have their own beliefs, as long as they don't overly express them. For instance, if a Christian goes into the middle of public place and holds up a sign saying "believe or you will go to hell" that is totally inappropriate, however, if an atheist goes to a public spot also and holds up a sign that says "there is no god we all evolved from apes!" that is also thoroughly offensive. If people can stick to their personal beliefs and don't express them to an extreme, they can be completely likable people, no matter what your beliefs are. I am personally an atheist, but I dont express it too much.
That said, what did the agnostic, dyslexic, insomniac do?
He stayed up at night wondering if their was a dog.
Religious banter and jokes can be funny, if you are not around extremists. My view is that the only bad people are extremists, no matter what their beliefs.
If you show up after you die and are like "Oh sh*t God exists" and believe in him, then you're safe. Sure is a tough, unfair religion.
If this is the case then there is no point in the religion or holding to such a belief in this world at all. In this world we have no proof of this deity. If as you say is true then why not just wait and see before believing?
I do not believe there really is a god, I believe they were invented thousands of years ago, so that leaders could control their uneducated civilians.
While it has been used in such a fashion I suspect the actual development in the concept of gods was far less sinister.
We can anthropomorphize pretty much anything. Now take something like a heavy thunder storm or volcano. These are things we once didn't understand and would have likely seemed all powerful. To comfort ourselves we would have likely tried to put a familiar face on them (our own). Thus we read into and anthropomorphized these natural disasters, turning them into all powerful being. Over time the stories and myths built up around these "beings" and gods and religion was born.
This of course is just speculation based on educated guessing.
I believe in letting people believe what they may, they are free to their beliefs and as the bible says we must "love our neighbors and our enemies". Atheism might sometimes be over exagerated but it is a belief/ religion in its own way, thus making it unorthodox to try and change people for your own beliefs.
"It's as much a religion as not collecting stamps is a hobby"- NonStampCollector
But your point still stands giving freedom to believe what we wish also should give freedom to not buy into any of it. However much of religion is built around converting others.
My view on things is that people can have their own beliefs, as long as they don't overly express them. For instance, if a Christian goes into the middle of public place and holds up a sign saying "believe or you will go to hell" that is totally inappropriate, however, if an atheist goes to a public spot also and holds up a sign that says "there is no god we all evolved from apes!" that is also thoroughly offensive.
I wouldn't care if a person held up a sign and said they believed in X and that I was going to hell. So long as I have the freedom to also speak my mind about their message. It's when they try and use that message to restrict others in some way that it becomes an issue. Such as making laws or changing texts books just because their holy text says so.
Religious banter and jokes can be funny, if you are not around extremists. My view is that the only bad people are extremists, no matter what their beliefs.
The only problem I see with the average religious person in masses is that it can create an envelopment where the extremists can thrive.
It really comes down to the person's personality and behavior rather than what they believe.
You can have both christian and atheist assholes. It doesn't matter whether or not you believe you are right, but how you confront people with a different view as you. You can tell them how stupid they are, or you can act like a civilized person and treat them as such.
The only problem I see with the average religious person in masses is that it can create an envelopment where the extremists can thrive.
Not necessarily Mage. If the extremist arised, the community has the choice to accept this guy as a legitimate follower, or think he is over the top. If the community rejects such extremists, then the extremists population declines.
I just wonder - is there any proof that there is no god?
The lack of proof that there is a God can't be used as proof? The material used as "roof" that goes exists being debunked as something less can't be used as proof?
I don't care if you believe in God, but don't ever say "you can't prove he's not real." If that's your argument, unicorns and giant flying toenail wizards must exist as well. You can't really prove that they don't exist.
I don't care if you believe in God, but don't ever say "you can't prove he's not real." If that's your argument, unicorns and giant flying toenail wizards must exist as well. You can't really prove that they don't exist.
If that's the case, you can't use prove he's real as an argument. Or else you have to prove unicorns and flying toenail wizards are real.
Genrally i believe in something more than i disbelieve in it unless there is proof against it. If i didnt do that then i wouldnt understand "inocent until proven guilty", which i interpret as true until proven false. I know that is not a very valid argument, but i am not taking any sides. An undeniable good thing that religion has done is provide debatable material, which entertains me...
If that's the case, you can't use prove he's real as an argument. Or else you have to prove unicorns and flying toenail wizards are real.
Of course!
Genrally i believe in something more than i disbelieve in it unless there is proof against it. If i didnt do that then i wouldnt understand "inocent until proven guilty", which i interpret as true until proven false.
Actually you have it completely backwards. You're innocent until the accusations against you are proven true.
Not necessarily Mage. If the extremist arised, the community has the choice to accept this guy as a legitimate follower, or think he is over the top. If the community rejects such extremists, then the extremists population declines.
Yes I know it's not always the case, that's why I said it can rather then it will.
However even if the average person sees them as going to far they still will back certain decisions based on the common ground of that particular holy text.
The gay marriage thing is a pretty good example. Most would consider Westboro baptist church to be far to extremist in there beliefs but when it came down to deciding if it's okay for homosexuals to be married they sided with them, saying it's not okay.
If that's the case, you can't use prove he's real as an argument. Or else you have to prove unicorns and flying toenail wizards are real.
No you can offer proof that something is real, because you can find and show the evidence for it. You can't however offer proof that something is not real, because there will be no evidence to be found since it doesn't exist.
If i didnt do that then i wouldnt understand "inocent until proven guilty", which i interpret as true until proven false.
Actually it's the other way around. Say your accused of stealing. you are regarded as innocent (you didn't steal i.e. it's false) until proven otherwise.
So really innocent until proven guilty is an example of false until proven true.
