I was reading over some arguments, when I saw some things that went against usual Christian logic. Apparently, against popular beliefs, you do not need to be a Christian to go to Christian heaven. This is just one example of ignorance about your own religion. So, I ask, do you theist know everything, or at least the fundamentals, of your religion? If you do not, how can you justify fully devoting yourself to said religion?
And from that we could gather that some force, creature or sentient being was allowing or actively causing these prayers to be answered.
Yes, we would still have to conduct further experiments to find what was causing it to work, which is why I said at the very least.
Even if he did answer every prayer, even to those who don't believe; those you don't believe would still find a reason to not believe
Let's have a good look at this. If the experiment did show prayer working, we would except it a conclusive evidence, wouldn't even have to work all the time for the conclusion. However this was not the results. So what was the theists reaction it this?
First of all, you can't say that God didn't answer the prayer. He didn't always give the result you wanted, but he did answer: no.
So basically your saying the atheists would do something the theists are doing.
I have always miserably failed to understand the violent rejection of God that most atheists preserve. And yet I am constantly repulsed when theists force their respective religion down my throat.
The existence of God doesn't matter. Whether He watches over us and performs holy miracles is irrelevant. Don't His teachings revolve round morality and good? So should not every follower of that same morality be a follower of God, no matter what personal beliefs they hold?
No, morals should be something that a person develops on their own - by thinking about and understanding what is good and helps people/the world/other example and what is bad and hurts them. Morals SHOULD NOT come from religion and be followed because 'teh holey buk seiz sow'.
That's not what I said. I said that what is described in many holy books is basic morality, so by being moral you are essentially following the will of God, not following God and through faith discovering morality.
By the way, if you want to fix that speech impediment of yours I know a good therapist.
Well, I don't agree with you - I believe that basic morality came first. Then somebody thought 'why don't we fit this into our book-of things-we-don't-particularly-understand-so-will-attribute-to-a-non-existent-entity.' I don't believe in any of that 'will of god' stuff. Basic morality came before religion and the idea of gods.
That's not what I said. I said that what is described in many holy books is basic morality, so by being moral you are essentially following the will of God, not following God and through faith discovering morality.
So stoning, burning, and basically murdering people for the will of something that may not exist is moral now?
@numbers I'm assuming he's referring to those teaching specifically on morals and not what turmoil the early Christian church went through.
They are in the Bible on things you should do, witch is close enough to being morals for me. It basically says it is okay, actually promotes it, so it says it is morally correct if you do it right...
One more thing. It gives false morals, such as "Sex is wrong". There is little wrong, in this day and age, with having sex. It was a good lesson when it was dangerous, but now it is safe and has no morals against it. The same applies with everything else Christianity tends to go against, such as abortion, homosexuals, having sex with animals etc.
The old laws in Leviticus were generally erased by the death of Jesus.
Also sex before marriage can lead to un wanted babies, STDs, emotional problems, and other things. Abortion can also lead to emotional problems and is considered a form of murder by those that are and aren't religious. Homosexuality is taught sd wrong but not greater than any other sin (lying, coveting, listing, etc.). Beastiality is simply unhealthy all around.
It was a good lesson when it was dangerous, but now it is safe and has no morals against it. The same applies with everything else Christianity tends to go against, such as abortion, homosexuals, having sex with animals etc.
Um...no just no. For one thing sex is not completely safe, sure it's not as morally damning as before, but some people still hold traditional values. Furthermore having sex with animals is wrong. In fact it's illegal.
Also sex before marriage can lead to un wanted babies, STDs, emotional problems, and other things. Abortion can also lead to emotional problems and is considered a form of murder by those that are and aren't religious. Homosexuality is taught sd wrong but not greater than any other sin (lying, coveting, listing, etc.). Beastiality is simply unhealthy all around.
Can lead, but if abortion was aloud then it wouldn't. If proper preconditions are taken then the risk of STDs are unlikely. Abortion has enemies in Christianity do to verses against it. It is still taught as wrong, and for that matter many of the ten commandments should not be upheld in all cases. For example, if you are in Nazi Germany hiding Jewish people in your cellar, then it would be logical for you to lie when the Gestapo comes up to you and asks "Have you seen any Jews?". Another example, thou shalt not kill. Not only is it disobeyed many times in the Bible, but for self-defense reasons it is some times necessary. In fact it is necessary a good amount of the time.
I'm against abortion for both moral and religious reasons. STDs often cannot be protected from by a condom or other kind of medicine.
The ten commandments are flexible in nature as they can conflict with other laws in other words it's better to say you know nothing than to gossip about someone; the beatitudes also lay out a more focused version of a Christian moral perspective.
Also let's be fair if you're having a one night stand with someone proper protection may not be the first thing on you head, er, mind.
I'm against abortion for both moral and religious reasons. STDs often cannot be protected from by a condom or other kind of medicine.
That is your personal beliefs, I on the other hand believe that abortion is fine, if the parents are against it. If they don't want the child then it is unlikely they would be proper to it. Condom's are medicine now? You may be correct, it may not defend ALL the time, but I am counting "Making sure your partner does not have STDs" as "roper preconditions".
The ten commandments are flexible in nature as they can conflict with other laws in other words it's better to say you know nothing than to gossip about someone; the beatitudes also lay out a more focused version of a Christian moral perspective.
May you say were it says they are flexible? If it does not say, it is positive to assume that they are not. I will also research this, in the case I am incorrect here. And the Christian moral is contradicted in itself...
Also let's be fair if you're having a one night stand with someone proper protection may not be the first thing on you head, er, mind.
True, it is possible, but that does not make it morally wrong.
