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.
@iPC I know there are many other factors and don't believe it is right for a second. Like I said individual differences between the people tested is the most likely reason for the disparity, just and odd fluke.
Icons are small paintings of saints and holy figures, typically of hte virgin MAry holding a baby Jesus.
it's wrong to jump to a conclusion like that
as I said it was a Cambridge study an dmost certainly not my conclusions or beliefs. I jsut thought it was relevant, just a tiny little bit. I should ahve been more specific.
If your goal is to hoard money in an existence where life is short and money goes to waste after you die anyway, sure you can have a higher income. Besides, there's always a chance to move up, and if the Christian is willing to live in Christ's example, I consider the future brighter for them than the atheist.
Your life, is short, the life in which you 'hoard money'. But the life of an American would be over. We work hard to keep us a Nation. And we are the youngest... and the most powerfull. We didn't get there by a miraculous *poof*. We worked our a$$es off. And that made us the country we are today. And if there where no christians, there still would be atheists. Just everyone would be one.
And the bid ordeal, can be broken down into something real simple! It's called theory. Both Atheism And Christianity are theories.
I'm an atheist. I'm this type of cold thinking scientists that won't believe until they see.I have only one question:why christianity?I see people debate on the existence of god but why would our religion be absolute?If you're a believer then you're willing to admit that there's forces of higher domain that created us.Following this why would it be our God?And not Amon-Ra or Jupiter (Zeus).I'd believe religion if it was universal.But the simple fact that people debate on the subject just show that religion is an invention.If not why would all culture have a different one?So many things have been proven wrong in the bible and are in contradiction with scientific facts.Did you knew it's church who initiated the belief of the earth being flat?Only because it worked perfectly with the world as described in the bible...It's completely illogic and just show how religion is a tool to control people...Agnosticism is a more decent way of seing things,but even so I'm not a follower of the indecisive...I won't believe some omnipotent guy created the universe...it's ridiculous. Also you're getting a little off track guys.
I believe on authority that there is a god, but that humanity as a whole has the wrong idea. This "god" could simply be a natural force at work or a mathematical constant that drives occurrences by extrapolation. What I believe in is a "scientific god," if you will, meaning that this god could be some sort of force of nature or incredibly advanced civilization, not some robe-wearing, virgin-impregnating omniscient human. The problems with the Christian belief is that the god they speak of and destroy indigenous African cultures to spread word of is supposedly all-powerful, yet is bound to the same human cerebral constraints such as emotion and the will to harm others. A god who is praised for being loving and kind and logical and infinitely intelligent has the immaturity to destroy all of the creations except for two of each in a small tantrum after working 7 days to create them? That's about as crazy as it gets. Also, radiocarbon dating is much more accurate of a way to tell the age of the Earth than the badly translated Sanskrit scrabblings of a bunch of primitive bearded men in caves, if you ask me. However, the idea of atheism is also inherently flawed. While logic and mathematical algorithms drive chemical reactions and the novae of stars and birth of stars and travel of galaxies and all of those types of things, but it does not drive sentient biological life or it's actions. God definitely exists, but it is more likely that we are looking at the concept absolutely wrong. God is most likely a being that is technologically advanced or a natural force, not a being that can create a universe in 7 days, yet has to borrow a rib to sculpt a woman.
That's how it is,but in my quality of atheist what you describe's not a god for me because its somehow a little more logical.I'm talking about the pristine conception of christianity and of this foolish belief of universe creation in a week of labor for an omnipotent,omniscient dude that came out of the blue saying:''I'm the one,bow down....whoops better create something so it can bow down...'' Then again your theory of an advanced life form kind of bug me....but an overwhelming force of nature seems more plausible (wait can I say plausible in english)...seems more logic to me than anything christianity ever said.It's just to say that from my point of view such a thing wouldn't be called a ''god''.Just a ''Phenomenon''.
sorry for the double-post, but evolution is also true. It is simply the modification of DNA over periods of millions of years. You have no grounds to dispute a fact unless you understand it, and I haven't seen the intellect or will in any of the Christians here to understand it. Evolution is not a religion that a person chooses to believe on authority, it is a proven biological and botanic occurrence that requires a modicum of intellect and biological knowledge to understand. The same principle goes for atoms and molecules, radiocarbon science, and pretty much anything that is true in the scientific world. Christianity as a whole simply exists for people that want a pillar of strength and have no ability to delude themselves solitarily, as well as a refuge for people that were born too stupid or raised by stupid enough people to not be able to accept complexity of any kind. All of that said, I don't feel a resentment to any zealous Christian, just those that dispute science when the Bible doesn't whisper a falsehood into their ever-willing ear.
sorry for me saying that I double-posted, I didn't notice fallensky posting. Anyway, on to the post. What I meant by that is that a "god" could simply be a phenomenon. What I think is one of the main problems is that most atheists over-think the concept, most Christians under-think the concept, and all agnostics refuse to think about it at all. Also, it is almost absolutely impossible that other sentient life does not exist, because there are billions of galaxies with millions of stars and hundreds of thousands of solar systems a galaxy, and the chances of a planet having the ability to carry some sort of life is higher than most think. Even bacterial life is monumental, because it has the ability to slowly evolve into a sentient life form.
isn't it ironic that some of the people who most rigorously preach Christianity follow the untrue credos like the world only being 6000 years old, yet don't follow the worthwhile values that Jesus most likely cared about, like altruism and love and philanthropy?
I am not an atheist per se, I simply reject the idea of god as the human psychology as a whole sees it. i do not reject the idea of god, I simply see it in a way so extremely different than what most see it that I am labeled as such. I see "god" not as a god, but a natural force that could be seen as a god if it was a life form and not a natural force. reread my earlier posts and perhaps you will understand the gist of my outlook on the idea of god.
this "god" most likely has some sort of consciousness, but humanity is so limited both physically and mentally that we can never even begin exactly what this natural force is.
