The proof of hell (or god) would be?

Oh wait I know. God wrote the bible (through others of course) and the bible says god exists.

Also if god was real why doesn't he just prove his existance to me so I can join in the celebration? I am a good person (take it on faith lol) but you think I should burn in hell because I can't force myself to believe in your god?

If you can form an argument that doesn't include faith I will consider your point.

Not believing god doesn't mean that there is a belief that we will be ok after death. It means that we believe death is it. Nothing else comes afterwards.

Casting doubt on the existence of hell undermines the entire psychological construction of the American South. No wonder he was fired!

Hell is DEFINITELY real. I've been to New Jersey.

It's time to take a serious look at "Rascal's wager":

"It is cheaper and a hell of a lot more fun to bet there is no hell."

Trevor-1973 is right when he says..."God wrote the bible (through others of course) and the bible says god exists" - Even Microsoft Excel can tell you that circlular arguments like that are impossibly flawed. : )

Seriously...it's 2011. When can we put these 2000 year old myths to bed and move on with real issues. Religion is toxic in general across the board and serves to do nothing but draw circles around groups that can then fight over whether one imaginary creature exists vs. whether a slightly different one does.

I could not have said it better myself!

Ok, I'll take the bait......

By your argument we should equally "believe" or "not believe" in unicorns, fairies, etc etc because we can't absolutely prove or disprove their existance.

You know as well as I do this is nonsense.

Unbelief in a God and all that goes with it is not a belief. For example, there are people on this planet who have never heard of your God. Therefore they do not remotely know of God's existance. How then can they believe or disbelieve?

As for me, my disbelief in an afterlife encourages me to live a fulfilling life here and now. I am good to my fellow human beings because it's the right thing to do, not because I will be given a reward at the end.

Everyone has faith and believes in something they can't prove.

For instance, in you NOT beleiving in God you BELIEVE that you will be OK after death WITHOUT following Jesus.

As pointed out above, if you don't believe in god, you generally feel that death is the end, and that is definitely NOT ok.

Even believing in nothing is faith in nothing.

A bizarre twist of logic that falls on it's face when examined critically. I do not believe in god, that does NOT mean I have faith that no god exists (though I can agree with you regarding the militant atheists, who insist there is no god, that goes beyond facts, and advances a conclusion/belief). I mean I have yet to see sufficient proof that god exists, therefore I CANNOT believe in him. Does my failure to believe in 3 Green Interstellar Monkeys mean that I have FAITH that those monkeys don't exist? A fine distinction perhaps, but legitimate.

I'll believe it, when whatever power that MAY be, is revealed to me in some manner (i.e. burning bush, 3 Green Monkey-vision, etc). I just haven't seen anything that can inspire such a belief as yet, not even close. I don't know if god exists or not, but the evidence is scant, and that's being generous.

Wow, Shalom2U, you really bought into everything the Catholic Church churns out. I feel for you.

Mr. Rogers -

"You proved my point. You "believe" death is the final stop. You don't know... you can't prove it... you believe something you can't prove, that is essentially faith."

That is not necessarily faith. That is the end of the logical chain therefore anything beyond is mere speculation. It doesn't require 'belief' to say 'I dont know what happens after death, but I see no evidence that anything does." all that requires is a sound commitment to follow fact and logic and make no assumptions when those can't provide you choices that can be exprienced or tested.

What you choose in saying that you believe in an afterlife for which you have zero evidence is no different than me saying that I believe I turn into Puff the Magic Dragon when I die. Do you have any more basis/proof for believing in your afterlife vs the person who believes in the Puffy Dragon afterlife? Nope.

Show me the Ten Commandments as written by the hand of God? You can't. Show me the Holy Grail? You can't. Show me what you think is Noah's ark and with simple math, I will show you it is impossible to fit that many animals on an over sized canoe.

Some people are ok with not knowing. Myself being one of them. Just because I am non-religious does NOT mean that I 'believe' any particular sort of afterlife. It means I don't know, because NOBODY KNOWS, and if you say you know you are lying to yourself.

I frankly find this obsession with answers sans real evidence, as being the a sickness within religion, it opens you up to abuse by those who seek to exploit your ignorance..

I'ts sad that over 33% believe in hell. A better question would be: What's your take on the Laws of Thermodynamics? Do you believe they exist?

If you don't support Hell as a Church leader than how can you guarantee those parishoners will pay their monthly membership fees?

And, then what about your tax status?

Fossil Fuel -

It's sad that over 33% believe in hell

If you run into one of those people instead of fighting with them about it whether a magic badland really exists you can just quote from Family Guy. In one episode Brian argues with Peter about something and finally exhausted because Peter can't get it just says..."Sometimes it's just easier to call you stupid."

Shalom

I won't argue the "proofs" you state, I do not know much about them... But in Number 8: The "Tilma de Juan Diego". There are many curious things about this "Miraculous apparition"

1.- Virgin Mary appearing (even if not proven) would have an immediate reaction of the Church, the first document about the apparition was almost 100 years AFTER the supposed appearing (Curious, isn't it?)

2.- The famous "Tilma" is not that of a poor aztec as the "history" states, it is woven in cotton, thus manufactured in Europe, if it dates from the first half of the 16th century, or it is mexican but from, probably, the 17th century (the weaving technique was not practiced in Mexico until the early 1600's)...

3.- Research the evolution of the image and you will see that it has been repainted several times along these almost 500 years; some examples, the Stars in the Virgin's robes do not exist in any replica prior to the 1800, the right hand in the early replicas is in a blessing position, not in a praying position, and what is the most hilarious, How come the wings in the cherubs supporting the image are Green, White and Red (i.e. the colors of the Mexican flag adopted since 1821)?, No earlier replica or depiction have this and apparently this coloring was done on the late 1800's.

A miracle has to be completely incontestable and, mainly, must NOT have any other possible explanation than divine intervention. At least, the Tilma is not a miracle, it is an utter fraud.

Trevor 1973 - I guess the proof would be in whether or not you believe you have a soul or that your heart is more than a muscle. No one can convince you of God and no one can convince me He doesn’t exist. I believe you are a good person and no, I do not believe you will burn in hell for not believing in my God. My God doesn’t operate that way. I respect your choice not to believe and ask that you respect my choice to believe.

This totally creeped me out as I said "It's a distraction...."

Results of 11,623 votes with 666 comments

34.9% Yes, there's a hell....
16.4% It's a metaphor....
26.9% It's a distraction....
21.8% No God....

65% of MY all-knowing, all-powerful God's creations (man) destined for eternal suffering (based on strict teachings) doesn't seem logical to me.

It has been my belief that there is one God and he accepts sincere love from all. I believe he gave us the ten commandments as a guide, because we have a tendency to be selfish, self centered and self absorbed and only do what is satisfying to ourselves; rather than thinking about how our actions impact the lives of others.

I do not think people who devote their lives to helping others and making the world a better place will burn in hell, because they don't go to my church.

All organized religion is the work of the so called Lucifer. I have thousands of years of world history that proves it, over and over again.

The Bible sits on my shelf alongside Andersons Fairy Tales. I have equal faith in both.

Roy-933464

34.9% Yes, there's a hell...

Read some of the comments by those who voted "yes", a lot of those votes were out of cynicism. These on-line polls (with comments) are a perfect example of why polls are inaccurate.

Roy-933464 Logic is not a strong point of religion

Commonly Christians believe hell to be permanant - you never get out and it (hell) will always exist. To those who believe the Bible is accurate:

Will those in hell ever get out? (Rev 20:13)

Will hell ever be destroyed? (Rev 20:14 compare 'death' in Rev 20:13 & Rev 21:4)

The Bible says the wages of sin is death, not eternal torment.

Bell errs in a conception of a loving God that leaves out the divine attributes of justice and holiness.

If we all receive justice we will all be in Hell. Our only hope is the grace of god and the faith that Christ had paid for our sins on the cross.

I'll only speak for myself as a non-believer.

1st - I do not believe GOD does NOT exist, I simply have concluded based on my own ability to conduct logic...that its highly improbable.

2nd - The description of Jesus and all of his "magic tricks" make me wonder if Criss Angel or David Blaine could have created the newest "faith" based on their MIRACLES that they can perform. Unlucky for them, they were born during an era when no one would have believed them like they readily believed Jesus was the son of GOD. I watched criss angel get chewed up by a woodchipper, and voila...there he was, safe and sound. I watched him disappear off of a roller coaster, walk on water in a swimming pool, and i've seen david blaine float in the air...are they the son of GOD?

3rd - I actually like the teachings of Jesus (mostly) but...the bipolar nature of GOD really makes me question whats so great about him.

4th - in 3rd grade I was told point blank in bible study "STOP ASKING QUESTIONS, YOU JUST HAVE TO BELIEVE"...im like, really? I mean, im not asking difficult questions...just clarification on the inconsistencies here.

5th - I dont know what happens after death, but I hope its NOTHING.

6th - I think life on EARTH sucks because most people dont care to make it better, because a perfect heaven awaits them. Why would you roll up your sleeves and do the hard work here, if all you have to do is believe in GOD, call Jesus your saviour and repent for all your sins - and VOILA, you're in heaven?

How can so many people be condemned to Hell, for eternity no doubt, simply for not even being born in a place that even recognizes Jesus to begin with?? Does that mean that a selfish, cold-hearted "Christian", so long as they proclaim Jesus as their savior, will go to Heaven when a good, honest Buddhist/Hindu/Muslim/Taoist/etc. will NOT get into Heaven simply because they follow the teachings of another spiritual leader?? That argument should not even exist on the basis of simple logical fallacy to begin with.

Roy-933464 Logic is not a strong point of religion

A lonely life I lead indeed. All I did was venture away from surroundings of childhood to see the world and get an education. So by the time you can comprehend the "knowledge of the forbidden fruit" thing (critical thinking), it's too late? I still choose to believe on some level, but don't practice the futility of seeking to bring my...intellect in line with those beliefs. It's a personal journey. My uncertainty about where it leads is an unfortunate fact of life.

Pastorized "God gives us choice of walking with Him here now and later for eternity, and He gives the choice to separate ourselves from Him now and forever."

well, assuming you've heard of GOD, right? perhaps you can tell me what the bible says about those who have never heard of god. It seems unfair to send them to hell, but also unfair to grant them access to heaven...are they the ones who become ghosts and wander earth forever?

"If you don't believe in God, heaven or hell, or Jesus, or you think it is all a bunch of idiocy so be it. Do one thing though - keep your eye on Israel."

ah yes, the chosen people who NEVER bring about their own troubles. *face palm.

"What is happening right now with this world: more and more natural disasters, nations falling apart, people rising up against their leaders, unbelievable turmoil and uncertainty - it was described thousands of years ago and reiterated by Jesus."

and has happened, over and over and over again throught history. perhaps, its the way the world turns? perhaps people will always hate each other, or be greedy, or choose to divide rather than unite?

"The New Testament, of which many call fables, describes both human behavior and what will happen just before the world is destroyed and then recreated. Keep your eyes on Israel, it is proof of what God says is true, now matter how good or bad we as humans are at understanding it."

I wont deny that the world shakes the flea's off and restarts often, im just disagreeing that its GODS WORK. I'll chalk it up to Mother Earth's work...before christianity, judais, and islam...people worshipped the sun god, the moon god, the rain god, the earthshaking god...and so on. and they WHOLE HEARTEDLY BELIEVED that a drought was from an angry god, and plentiful rains from a happy god.

were they right too?

Has anyone even bothered to mention that "Belief" and "Faith" are synonyms? Any argument against that is actually an argument about the definition of the two words.

RamFla post 1.21:

1.- Virgin Mary appearing (even if not proven) would have an immediate reaction of the Church, the first document about the apparition was almost 100 years AFTER the supposed appearing (Curious, isn't it?)

Read http://www.ewtn.com/library/MARY/LADYGUAD.HTM

2.- The famous "Tilma" is not that of a poor aztec as the "history" states, it is woven in cotton, thus manufactured in Europe, if it dates from the first half of the 16th century, or it is mexican but from, probably, the 17th century (the weaving technique was not practiced in Mexico until the early 1600's)...

Please provide your source that the tilma is made of cotton. Almost all sources say it is made of cactus fibers that normally decay in 30 or 40 years. Cotton or cactus, why has this Tilma not decayed in almost 500 years? http://wnyreligion.net/guadalupe.html

3.- Research the evolution of the image and you will see that it has been repainted several times along these almost 500 years;

Please provide your source that it has been repainted.

some examples, the Stars in the Virgin's robes do not exist in any replica prior to the 1800, the right hand in the early replicas is in a blessing position, not in a praying position, and what is the most hilarious, How come the wings in the cherubs supporting the image are Green, White and Red (i.e. the colors of the Mexican flag adopted since 1821)?, No earlier replica or depiction have this and apparently this coloring was done on the late 1800's.

I claim that the original tilma, not replicas or depictions, have NEVER been repainted. Please provide evidence that the original tilma has been repainted.

Why was Shalom's comment collapsed? He didn't say anything wrong. I think there are just a lot of fundies on here who don't like Catholics.

Indy Patriot,

Love your post!!!!

I hope you enjoyed your lunch. :-)

Read some of the comments by those who voted "yes", a lot of those votes were out of cynicism. These on-line polls (with comments) are a perfect example of why polls are inaccurate.

Which would be why this isn't a scientific poll, and should only be used for entertainment purposes...which, looking at the number and content of comments, is being used for exactly that.

Sounds to me as if this pastor is well rid of this church.

Indy:

Well, first of all, IF you are an ATHEIST, please do NOT post on here that you do not believe in God, that you think everyone who does is a sheep (or worse), or that religious people are dumb. If you are an atheist, then this thread does not pertain to you, and your blatant disregard for the faiths of others is pointless.

I am an atheist, and I am posting because this thread does pertain to me. You're basically telling me that because I don't believe in God, I can't comment on those that do? I don't believe in Hell, just like this pastor. So he and I share something in common. Sure, our reasoning is different, but our conclusion in the same.

I don't have disregard for those that have faith or those that follow a religion. I was raised Catholic, and I explored many other religions before coming to reject them all. I looked into the Episcopalian church, the Baptist church, the Protestant church, Wicca, Hinduism and Buddhism. But none of them worked out for me (although Buddhism suited me the most). So I have no problem with people who follow a religion. The only time I have a problem with someone's religion is when they use it as an excuse to hurt someone else.

It would be like myself shoving my religious-based views into a thread about scientific matters. The two are diametrically opposed, and ne'er the 'twain shall meet!

So you're not even up for debate on the topic? One of my closest friends is a devout Baptist, and she is a Creationist, and she and I have had several discussions on creationism versus evolution. You're right, the two are in conflict with each other most of the time, but refusing to discuss it doesn't make you right.

You're accusing atheists of being closed minded (not in so many words), but yet you're not even willing to have an open discussion with us, and you think we should be excluded from this.

Everyone can have an opinion on the subject of religion, whether one follows a religion or not. It's all about being civil when presenting your point of view.

The point is, a church can't have one of it's pastors teaching beliefs contrary to those of the church, regardless of the church or the belief. The issue here isn't about whether there is or isn't a hell, but about a pastor undermining the professed beliefs of the church he is pastoring. If he has doubts he should have kept them to himself. But to undermine the church's beliefs via Facebook was wrong. The church was justified in letting him go. He would be better off finding a church that embraces his views.

It amazes me to hear people supporting the notion that their god is responsible for EVERYTHING that happens to man. Earthquakes, volcanoes, tsunamis, etc... Yet they then turn around and "pray" for God to help these people (the Japan situation for example). If god did this to these people why waste your time praying for him to help them? Kinda like asking the schoolyard bully for a band-aid for the busted lip he just gave you...

We are all atheists, I just believe in one less god than you. If you think about why you don't believe in the others (Allah, Shiva, Buddah, Jehova, Yaweah, etc...) then you should easily understand why I don't believe in yours...

Roy 933464-

First of all, I understand your predicament. I, too, have walked a personal journey to discover my own spirituality, and it has both enlightened me, as well as confused me at times. It seems the more spiritual I become, the less religious I am. That doesn't so much bother me, since I've always felt that religion is nothing more than the cultural representation of spirituality, not spirituality itself! What bothers me is when I finally seem to have an understanding of my own faith, something always comes up to challenge it. This is why I view Christianity, and religion in general, very liberally and without absolutes.

BTW, since you re-posted part of my post, I want to make sure you know that my comments were made in general, and not directly at anyone in particular! Just checkin'! God Bless!

I have no problem with the notion of God, it's his fan club that worries me...

Fred, why does knowing there's no afterlife make me "militant?" Am I also a militant heliocentrist because I know that the planets orbit the sun?

There is plenty of evidence showing that human consciousness, experience, feelings, memory, etc is all completely a product of the physical human brain. The effects of drugs, anesthesia, trauma all produce a mountain of evidence which makes this every bit as obvious as the nonexistence of santa claus or leprechauns.

Is it possible that everything is a giant put-up job to trick us? Sure. But why is it reasonable to say we are so much more uncertain about ONLY "life after death" and not any of the other things that could be a trick. Why is it militant to apply the same reasoning and standard of evidence to this question as every other question?

My knowledge does not make me "militant." This is just a sneaky ad hominem (so sneaky that you aren't aware you're using it) which produces (for you and everyone else) the illusion that "militant" atheists have reduced credibility.

In the past 2000 years we have proved many things. We have proof that dinosaurs existed well before God's man yet the belief is God created everything. We can create life from the cellular level. We see and discover stars, planets and other objects in space regularly. We witness what this planet is capable of when the plates shift and the devastation it causes.

All of that and so much more because of the evolution of man. If man was created by God why was he created with such limited knowledge? What language did he speak? What color was he? How was he able to then create so many races and languages. If there truly is one god and creator wouldn't he prefer that we could all communicate with each other? Don't let all the little misinterpreted fables ruin your personal thinking. In fact, wouldn't you think with all the technology we have today the Bible should have a volume II? That book does not cover a fraction of what modern man has and does today.

Why are people worshiping through a faith (Catholicism) when they still thought the sun revolved around the earth less than 400 years ago. They also thought the earth was flat. Wouldn't God have clued them in on the bigger picture like maybe back when his manual was written?

There are vague references and religious teachings (fables) about the Tower of Babel which is the reason we have several languages but it doesn't explain the races and how different we all are. Why don't we flat out look the same? Shouldn't all the men on earth look like Adam if one man was created and everyone else in existence is a descendant of that one man?

Back to the dinosaur references. We can find fossils millions of years old but can't find a pretty large boat that had two of everything on it. We can't find ten rules that were burned in stone. Shouldn't there be a lot of chariots and weapons at the bottom of the Red Sea? Not a few if you believe the story of Moses, there should be a treasure trove where the Sea was parted and then collapse upon the pursuers. I think they were just smoking some mighty fine something.

There is a very easy way to create a more peaceful earth and that is if God would just post something on Facebook or send a message on Twitter while being interviewed on Good Morning America. Quit with the other fables about free will. Why after Jesus was all this put in place? Sodom and Gomorrah, the last punishment God would handle on his own because he is leaving it to us to fend for ourselves and to believe in a book that we are sure who wrote, what there mental state was, why they were chosen and that it was never altered in any way since. Instead of everyone loving one another we have war.

Man I could go on forever. For those that want to state that the people claiming deaths finality is a belief, it is the only fact we know. Every living thing on this planet dies eventually but us pompous humans have a soul and remain in some other realm for eternity. Not that cow you had for dinner last night or all the fish you eat on Friday, just the humans because we are infinitely more intelligent. There is a funny thing about that intelligence. I believe my dog is much smarter than I am because I am the one that goes to work for 8-9 hours a day. I have to drive myself, feed myself, wash myself etc....The dog has to eat the food I put out for him and go to the bathroom on my lawn. Other than that he sleeps and plays, who is the smarter creature in my house? Yet he doesn't have a soul?

Time to stop because there is no point writing a post this long when anyone that believes isn't going to read it all the way through or comprehend what I am saying because they have already been brainwashed to the point they can't think for themselves.

Religion is a virus just like a computer virus. It gets embedded in your mind and you believe everything without wavering. The freakishly religious can't even give science credit even though it proves and disproves down to the microscopic level. When your PC is clean and working properly it is easy to use. When a virus is planted on it it becomes part of your PC and changes the way it works. It even tries to make the user believe what it is doing is good.

Miracles don't happen because of prayer, a reaction happens because of the power of positive energy. The energy we are surrounded with is not Gods creation it is what makes all of us work and if you pray as a group you are only creating mass positive energy and good things happen, sometimes. If something happens that we can't yet explain, it isn't a miracle it is just something new. Just like when we find a rare artifact, there is only one but it isn't a miracle.

Life on earth exists because this planet is the perfect distance from the Sun. What we need to do is understand this and understand good from evil and right from wrong and stop preaching about a God that is just as imaginary as Santa or the Easter Bunny.

We are one race which is the human race and if everyone would treat others the way they want to be treated we could save ourselves from the imminent destruction we are creating for ourselves. Too many wars that have been fought over religious beliefs. Why isn't that telling us something? My God can beat up your God. That's it in a nutshell yet so many religions talk of Love. If Love is the primary component of religion why is there so much hate? Because there is too much religion.

Do what is best and maybe living on earth won't seem like hell. Nobody remembers what you accumulate they remember who you were----- the person. You can't take it with you but yet we have so many that have so much and others that can't even find food. What God allows that to happen to their creation?

Jumping off my hell bound soapbox.

I posted this in the "Do you believe in Heaven" forum, and I have to post it here because it is too relevant.

There are no better recruiters for the cause of Satan than the followers of God.

Think for a minute. Would there even BE a church of Satan if not for followers of God espousing belief in the devil? Would people even rationally consider following The Opposer if not for worshipers of God commiting acts of evil in God's name and then claiming (and believing) that what they do is good and is His will?

Having once been a bible thumping fundie earlier in my life, I was ignorant at the time to the fact that I, and people like me, weren't scaring people towards God, but away from Him and into the sympathetic arms of fallen angels. Now that I have humbled myself and actually paid attention to the things that I have said and done and the actual effects that my actions have had on people, I question everything; including religion itself.

Also, if we define the soul as the mind, which is to say the part of us that thinks, feels, observes, remembers, reasons, and has experiences, then there is plenty of physiological, neurological, and biochemical evidence to suggest that the mind is generated by the brain and that when the brain dies, so does the mind. Now, if someone can demonstrate in a mathematically quantifiable and scientifically measureable way that a person's mind is capable of existing outside their brain and body then it raises all kinds of interesting questions. If the mind can exist without the body naturally then how is it that a lobotomy or brain damage can impair cognitive function? If the mind can exist without the body naturally then how is it that physical molecules called hormones can affect a person's emotional and mental state?

I could go on, but the point is I actually want answers to these questions. I'm not satisfied with being handed a Bible (which has been edited and meddled with all to hell and back again by church officials trying to control people) and being told, "there you go. All your answers are in there." NO! The bible doesn't answer any of the questions I just posted above! Sorry, but I'm too curious to accept being spoon fed incomplete answers like a baby, and then be expected to just accept that this is the way things are! I want to know how and why. If there is a god I want to understand It for what It is, and not just be told "It is" or rather "I am". I don't want to just pray to It and then left not knowing why my prayers went unanswered, and then be expected to just accept that it may not be part of "HIS plan", but not be told what "HIS plan" is, whatever that may be. By the same token if it's not REAL then I want to know that too without a shadow of a doubt, and I don't want to hear this crap about "you can't prove God doesn't exist"! If you can prove that the human mind (the soul) ceases to exist when you die then NO religion anywhere is valid, let alone a God or group of gods. But if you can demonstrate, detect, and record a core of human brainwave activity existing outside of a brain or body, then yes sentient existance after death ("life" after death) would then be scientifically plausible. THEN you can ask about what God is and how to assay Its existance.

"Religion is a virus just like a computer virus."

Yep! It is a replicator which manipulates its environment (humans) in order to make copies of itself. The manipulations take advantage of errors in the way we process information to form a picture of the world, much like optical illusions, but they are cognitive illusions.

The reason hell is not mildly unpleasant or slightly inconvenient, and heaven isn't just kinda nice, is because extreme emotions induced by visions of absolute horror or absolute paradise produce the illusion that they are true. It's just like our skewed perception of how likely we are to be in a plane crash or win the lottery.

The reason prayer is included is because submission, voluntary or forced, produces an illusion that the thing you are submitting to is real. And you're not allowed to "pray" to anything else because that would cause the same illusion of truth for that other thing, and let you see that prayer is just a trick.

Every copy of christianity that you encounter today has a family tree which traces back to a common ancestor. You can even construct a phylogeny of the various sects and their ancestry. The variations that are unsuccessful in getting their host to copy them, well, they go extinct. Every copy of christianity that you encounter has been successful in replicating itself and infecting a new host at least once. That is why christianity and any other religion which exists today necessarily includes "copy me" (preach/proselytize/convert others) instructions.

Here is what I don't understand; those of us who believe are automatically grouped in with the fanatics and Bible thumpers; however, most of us aren't quoting scripture to state our opinions. Yet our religion is being compared to a virus and we are nothing more than sheeple who are spoon fed ideas and concepts b/c we aren't bright enough to discover for ourselves. Every person of faith has questioned their faith and religion at one time or another. We just came up with different answers. The bottom line, we will all find out the real story when we die.

My point is that people, everyone believes in things they can't possibly know for sure. My belief in God is based on many logical elements, and some, perhaps you have probably not considered.

The problem I have with SOME atheists and agnostics, is that they assume everyone who believes in God is an idiot, and that it is exactly like believing in "unicorns". If you and I had a good hour to sit down, I promise you, you would at least have a better respect for why I believe in a God, while I would respect why you do not.

Anyone who says for certain they know there is no God is simply acting on emotion. We know less than 2-3% of all there is to know about the universe. To make absolute statements about what is and isn't in that other 98% is foolish. The number one reason most atheists do not believe in God is because He does not make since to them. The presumes a superior intelligence level to man that I simply don't see. If there was a God, the way people believe in Him, He would be far suprior to us and it is likely he would make as much since to us as a physicist does to a 3 year old.

Finally, my belief in God is based on MANY factors that combine personal experience with an understanding of history, biology, and more. It is complex, but I can assure you, you have not one single argument against God that I have not considered and settled with myself.

So if you walk around considering yourself to be far superior to everyone who believes in God, then I ask who is judging who?

JessicaR

Every person of faith has questioned their faith and religion at one time or another. We just came up with different answers.

How can you come up with a different answer when there are no facts to base an answer on?!

That is like saying that "Every person has questioned the existence of unicorns. We just came up with different answers."

There is no more proof or reason to believe in God than there is to believe in unicorns, dragons, and elves, so how could you possibly believe in one and not the others? Are telling me that you hold some imaginary creatures to a more stringent level of proof than others?

I take the Bible for what is says, both exist and the almighty God gives us choice of walking with Him here now and later for eternity, and He gives the choice to separate ourselves from Him now and forever.

If you want to believe a literal interpretation of a book written by a more primitive, violent culture, by all means go ahead. Just stop quoting it in front of me to justify your mis-guided worldview. Also, stop using it to try influencing public policy.

Do one thing though - keep your eye on Israel. What is happening right now with this world: more and more natural disasters, nations falling apart, people rising up against their leaders, unbelievable turmoil and uncertainty - it was described thousands of years ago and reiterated by Jesus.

Name one point in the history of recorded civilization where there wasn't turmoil or natural disasters? The only reason it seems excessive today is because the media makes those stories much more accessible to the public. Back in the time of the prophets, how on earth would they know if a Tsunami hit South America? Think about it. For each "God-inspired" natural disaster that they wrote about, there were probably many others that happened around the world that they DIDN'T write about because they had no way of knowing.

A basic law of physics is that energy can not be created or destroyed merely transformed. We are electrochemical beings, therefore, something happens.

I don't believe there are any quotes from Jesus about the exisitance of Hell. The whole concept is Roman/pagen. The concept of heaven comes from the cult of Demeter/Ceres (Elysian Fields) as did the practice of baptism.

If I'm wrong about Jesus and hell, please supply the appropriate scripture with his views.

How can you come up with a different answer when there are no facts to base an answer on?!

So you questioned God and based on all the facts you have in your complete understanding of the universe your conclusion is the only valid one right?

You sound a bit "religious" to me...

StMiller - Faith is a belief; therefore, I don't have facts to back up my belief. My belief is based on my personal experience. I am not forcing my religion or my beliefs down your throat so why do you feel the need to be condesending. I don't believe in mythical creatures and I don't believe God is a mythical creature. There is no proof or reason to believe in God...FOR YOU...not for me.

"Yet our religion is being compared to a virus and we are nothing more than sheeple who are spoon fed ideas and concepts b/c we aren't bright enough to discover for ourselves."

The comparison to a virus is not some colorful metaphor meant to offend. It's simply the best description. People who are infected by a religious meme are not infected because they are stupid, any more than someone infected by influenza is infected because they are a "weakling."

These memes necessarily must be extremely good at taking advantage of weaknesses and faults in human reasoning and thinking which we all possess. And they must be very good at infecting new hosts, because any variation that is not will cease to exist when its host dies. It's the same reason that predators are good at catching their prey: a predator who sucks at catching prey doesn't have any offspring.

By the way, the idea that some beliefs are sacred and the proper reaction is to be offended is another part of the manipulation. It's a very clever three-pronged attack. Instead of considering what was said on its merits, you are distracted into being defensive and considering what a jerk the other person is, and the other person is bullied into not challenging "sacred" beliefs anymore.

Those of us who have discovered this are not going to let ourselves be bullied anymore by "sacred" ideas. If you allow yourself to be offended instead of considering the validity of the comparison, that is your loss. I don't say these things because I think the religious are stupid, it's because I think they are smart enough to see through an illusion once they are made aware of how the illusion works.

Regardless of whether I believe in Hell personally or not, I think being a pastor and saying there isn't a Hell is like working at Disney World and telling the kids that all of their favorite characters are really people in costumes. Both things will get you canned. I think any really intelligent, thoughtful, spiritual person could only be made stronger by a crisis of faith. I must admit I have a lot of respect for people who question their faith, and come out on the other side still choosing to believe. More power to them.

Chuck 2601317 - I suppose I would be a weakling if I was easily persuaded.

You non believers are cracking me up. You all try and sound like you are so smart by chosing not to believe for whatever reason. And while that is your choice based on your own opinion - is it the right one. Make sure you know that you know that you know. Because if you are wrong, and there really is a Hell........YOU chose to go there. While God weeps!!!! Think about it!

Mr. Rogers -

So you questioned God and based on all the facts you have in your complete understanding of the universe your conclusion is the only valid one right?

My conclusion is based on the facts. There are no facts that support the existence of God. Why would anyone come to a different conclusion? Follow the chain of logic...No facts point to a reason to suppose that there are unicorns...no facts point to a reason to suppose there are gods...Anything that you do beyond that to contrive a 'belief' in either is just an attempt to make your wants fit. You are twisting the facts or lack thereof to meet what you want...a god figure of some sort.

An atheist says there is no god. I am not claiming to know that certainly. I am just saying that no one can present evidence, logic, reason, plausible theory, testable hypothesis, etc to indicate any reason to suppose that there is a god. Prove me wrong. I'm always happy to admit when I am wrong. But I guarantee that you 'evidence' will qualify as anecdote, assumptive in some way, or just flat out unsupportable. How is this any different than unicorn belief?

Individuals in here can push all of the anecdotal evidence that they want, but personal experience is not fact.

Check our Marcus Borg, Dominic Crossan, Karen Armstrong, etc, for a rational discussion on religion and Christianity in particular. I have been a practicing minister for over 25 years. Is there a God? Does Hell exists? I don't know. KNOW ONE KNOWS. People can quote scriptures all day long. That proves nothing.

However, we limited human beings do have the possibility of sharing and discussing spiritual wisdom collected throughout history about the human condition and life experience. That could have a great benefit for all. It would be inclusive instead of exclusive. It could be compassion centered rather than judgment centered. think of Lennon's "Imagine" and you get the possibilities here!

As long as there are people who behold their faith books as idols (i.e. equal to God), then all discussion and rational thinking goes out the window.

I believe we are all capable of living out of our intuitive core existence as good creations of the universe. Science is helping us understand the remarkable on-going evolution of existence. Nothing can hold us back except our fears, both learned and natural. Fear based religion is no longer helpful in a shrinking world (not that it ever was helpful, but that's another topic). I believe we all need to grow up as creatures of earth and start respecting ALL peoples and all of nature. THAT is our only hope. Peace...

John-755418 I know you don't believe me because you don't believe my foundation for truth. The OT says that the earth will wear out like a garment.
I never call disasters God inspired, God is not that petty. Natural disasters are a result of the world deteriorating. God did not cause humans to build huge cities on faultlines, on rivers or oceans, humans did that. When bad things happen, it is a part of our world.
What is happening now is different than in the past. We are just at the beginning of the trumoil that is to come. When all nations finally come against Israel that is a sign the the last great battle will happen on earth. Evil has not revealed itself like it will in the near future.
The futility of human governments to solve our problems will finally lead to the one person that humans will come to trust to solve all of their problems. What is happening now is just the setting of the stage. What I say about Israel has nothing whatsoever to do with public policy, nothing. It has to do with God's chosen people being persecuted. In the end, God will have the final say, not you or me.

"As for me, my disbelief in an afterlife encourages me to live a fulfilling life here and now. I am good to my fellow human beings because it's the right thing to do, not because I will be given a reward at the end."

Of all the things that non-believers say about me, THAT one is the most puzzling. Why do you think I'm NOT living a fulfilling life? What do you think I do all day? I'm not a Nun; I'm married, have a family, work a job, have friends, hobbies and interests, hopes and dreams, etc. I don't feel the least bit deprived, I freely choose to attend Church and study the Bible (along with the historical times it was written in). My religious belief gives me both hope and a sense of peace - why do you think it doesn't? Life IS a gift from God, of course I treasure it - why do you think I don't? I just don't understand you, and clearly you don't understand me, either. Perhaps you shouldn't speak out on those matters which you so seriously mis-understand.

Chuck said:

"Those of us who have discovered this are not going to let ourselves be bullied anymore by "sacred" ideas. If you allow yourself to be offended instead of considering the validity of the comparison, that is your loss. I don't say these things because I think the religious are stupid, it's because I think they are smart enough to see through an illusion once they are made aware of how the illusion works."

Chuck, I've considered your ideas, and I reject them. I don't believe this is merely an illusion; I believe this is REAL. Just because YOU don't believe doesn't mean you are correct.

There are no facts that support the existence of God

Simply untrue... facts are facts and two people can interpret the same fact differently. Facts and truth are different things entirely. Something can be true and never be fact where something can be fact, and have nothing to do with truth.

In any event, their is some very good information coming out of microbiology these days. The belief at one time was that cells were very simple lifeforms and that the closer we looked the more simple we would find life to be.

Microbiology has shows this to be false. In fact, our latest understanding of cells shows them to be amazing micro factories with thousands of moving parts and components. These factories in all their complexity appear to have been designed, by a designer. Now whether you believe that to be God, or a superior alien life form, the fact is that DNA is information, and information does not create itself nor is there any REAL valid THEORY (beyond hypotheses) about how information such as that in DNA could form by chance or on its own.

Anyhow, that is just one tiny example of dozens that IMO point to design and designer.

I know you don't believe me because you don't believe my foundation for truth

Pastorized, your entire argument after this statement is moot. If I don't share your "foundation for truth", why do you then go on to explain current events through your own worldview? You know I'm going to call BS on it. Every hardline christian does this. I never quite understood that.

It's like me telling you that you can't understand my worldview of a one-eyed spaghetti monster who is master of the universe because you don't agree with it. Immediately after, I then go on to explain how the one-eyed spaghetti monster causes earthquakes when he sqeezes the earth with his great tentacles. Strange, no?

n atheist says there is no god. I am not claiming to know that certainly. I am just saying that no one can present evidence, logic, reason, plausible theory, testable hypothesis, etc to indicate any reason to suppose that there is a god.

You act as if God could be proven by science. Science is not absolute and is rather limited. Science is for studying the NATURAL world. If God is who we believe Him to be, that is SUPERNATURAL, then science will never be able to prove God.

But I don't need science to do this because I recognize the limitations of science in human existence.

Anyhow, just for fun, I'll have you know that even Atheists believe in the supernatural. If you believe in the big bang, then you subscribe to the theory that a singularity is responsible for existence. A singularity, is in fact the scientific word for supernatural event, or event outside the normal laws and behaviors of the universe as we know it.

T Bourlon:

Of all the things that non-believers say about me, THAT one is the most puzzling. Why do you think I'm NOT living a fulfilling life?

I didn't read that interpretation in the post, but you bring up a valid point. As an atheist, I do my best to live a good life here on Earth, because in my mind, there is no afterlife.

But that's not to say that all of those that are religious are wasting their lives away. There are those that live in fear of their religion, and their zealousness restricts them from doing good things in this life, fearful that if they do, the afterlife will be hell.

As an atheist, I don't have to live in fear of a vindictive God if I do the wrong thing, even if I mean well. Humans make mistakes, and I will live with the consequences here of those mistakes, without the fear of having those mistakes curse me to eternal damnation. Again, that's not to say that all religious people live in that fear, but as an atheist, I most certainly don't have them.

One of the reasons I came to believe that there is no God, is that I couldn't believe that our 70+ years on Earth could possibly determine where our souls end up for the rest of eternity, and that one mistake, even if made by an otherwise good person, could condemn people like that.

Again, no one is saying that religious people waste their lives, but there are some that live in fear of their religion. Atheists don't, and I think that was the point.

Mr. Rogers -

Simply untrue... facts are facts and two people can interpret the same fact differently. Facts and truth are different things entirely.

You are now slicing symantics. Fact is permanent and objective when experienced or tested. Truth can be more subjective according to the viewer. Therein lies the issue. I never mentioned truth. I said that facts are facts and not open to an individuals interpretation. Hence the objective nature of fact.

And you suggesting that any serious microbiologist would believe that cells contain design by a designer is just silliness and not even worth refuting. That you would believe in intelligent design is clear proof that you are injecting your beliefs into your reading of the facts.

You are making the same mistake over and over again which is that you don't stop when your understanding ends. Instead you make the mistake of automatically contriving the next step. For instance, you don't know what happens after death so you make an assumption...afterlife. You don't understand what mechanisms in evolution led to the complexity of cells so you make an assumption...design. Why is not yet knowing good enough for you? Why do you have to have that answer? Can't you just wait until the facts are discovered, tested, retested, etc until the next unknown is discovered and the process begun again?

It's amazing that the "open" atheists who would be against religion censoring them, are perfectly fine collapsing comments that are well thought out, and contain no religious texts, just for the purpose of silencing them.

Many atheist, by my experience have more in common with religious zealots than not.

Mr. Rogers:

Thank you for a textbook example of sophistry.

Indeed there are NO facts that support the existence of a god or gods. In the context of all known facts, the existence of a god or gods remains pure conjecture.

Your reference to microbiology is pure nonsense. Yes, a cell is incredibly complex, a source of wonder and awe. That this is so does not in any way, shape, or form point to design or a designer.

Information? That is a wonderful way to view DNA. However, DNA does not inform atoms on how they are to assemble themselves. DNA is a cause and effect mechanism. There is no reason behind it.

Take a lesson from Genesis - the fable of the Garden of Eden specifically. One sperm, out of a virtually infinite number, met with one ovum, out of a virtually infinite number. Presto, change-o, here you are. The odds of your existence are incalculable, yet here you are - and writing BS, by the way.

Isn't it enough to marvel at your existence and to walk in the current Eden? NOOOOOO, not for you. You are going to create a God from your own pathetic senses and in your own image. Hello hubris. Perhaps you'll recall that is precisely what got Adam and Eve in trouble.

You are now slicing symantics. Fact is permanent and objective when experienced or tested. Truth can be more subjective according to the viewer. Therein lies the issue. I never mentioned truth. I said that facts are facts and not open to an individuals interpretation. Hence the objective nature of fact.

Facts can be interpreted differently in the conclusions they point to. Even scientist dispute what certain facts mean or point to at any given time in a number of fields.

And you suggesting that any serious microbiologist would believe that cells contain design by a designer is just silliness and not even worth refuting. That you would believe in intelligent design is clear proof that you are injecting your beliefs into your reading of the facts.

I am suggesting that at the cellular level, cells are as complex as a General Motors factory. You can make your own conclusions from that, but for me, a General Motors factory has to be designed and built. It cannot spring up by chance regardless of how much time you give it.

And yes there are in fact legitimate microbiologist who have written papers on this exact topic. Feel free to research on your own.

DoubleDogs

The Bible sits on my shelf alongside Andersons Fairy Tales. I have equal faith in both.

----------------------------------------------

It's quite apparent, and too bad, that you've chosen to read only one of those books. If God doesn't exist, explain how we came into existence. Big Bang Theory? Nice sitcom, but where did those two 'things' that collided to create the supposed 'bang' come from?

I genuinely feel sorry for people who don't believe in God or an afterlife. If there is no afterlife, no "eternity", then what's the purpose of you even existing?

Thank you for a textbook example of sophistry.

Indeed there are NO facts that support the existence of a god or gods. In the context of all known facts, the existence of a god or gods remains pure conjecture.

You are jumping in to the middle of my discussion. I never said God is a FACT. God is taken and believed on in faith. My points are that people have their own reasons for believing in God and they can be quite complex. The fact that you don't understand, does not make you absolute, and believers fools (at least outside of your opinion).

Your reference to microbiology is pure nonsense. Yes, a cell is incredibly complex, a source of wonder and awe. That this is so does not in any way, shape, or form point to design or a designer.

I beleiveit does.... but perhaps you are just more intelligent than I.... I am sure that you beleive yourself to be just that.

Information? That is a wonderful way to view DNA. However, DNA does not inform atoms on how they are to assemble themselves. DNA is a cause and effect mechanism. There is no reason behind it.

DNA is in essence the program or design for which our bodies are built. DNA is the genetic instruction set from which we are built. It is in fact information. I suppose you believe this information just appeared or was built over time.

Take a lesson from Genesis - the fable of the Garden of Eden specifically. One sperm, out of a virtually infinite number, met with one ovum, out of a virtually infinite number. Presto, change-o, here you are. The odds of your existence are incalculable, yet here you are - and writing BS, by the way.

Thank you for acknowledging the mathematics problems with life from nothing... by the way, do they have a new hypothesis beyond the crystallization idea on how proteins formed into the first lifeforms?

I find it AMAZING how critical the LOGICAL atheists are on those who believe in God, when there is not one single solid THEORY (beyond hypothesis stage) on how life first formed on earth. It is FAR more logical to assume life was seeded on earth, by say asteroids, which are relatively common, but even then, that life formed from somewhere.... right?

Isn't it enough to marvel at your existence and to walk in the current Eden? NOOOOOO, not for you. You are going to create a God from your own pathetic senses and in your own image. Hello hubris. Perhaps you'll recall that is precisely what got Adam and Eve in trouble.

Well, if I was only as wise and intelligent as you, maybe I wouldn't be so pathetic...

So let's get the facts straight:

- There is not one testable theory on how inorganic material formed into organiclife, yet everyone who believes in such a thing is believing in facts and evidence....

Jessica wrote:

4th - in 3rd grade I was told point blank in bible study "STOP ASKING QUESTIONS, YOU JUST HAVE TO BELIEVE"...im like, really? I mean, im not asking difficult questions...just clarification on the inconsistencies here.

How DARE you use critical thinking skills in Bible study? :)

Another story. I was a Lutheran attending a Catholic High School and one of the ways the diocese tried to keep "other religions" out was to force non-Catholics to take Cathoilic doctrine studies for two years. Now, being the person I was and still am, I had a lot of fun absolutely flummoxing the nuns or priests with my different interpretations of things. They were the same way...just take it like it is and without questioning. My response, nope, God gave me the brains and ability to question what is around me. If He didn't want me to ask questions, He wouldn't have given me the ability to do so. OK, so I got a note sent home and a call about respect, even though I wasn't nasty about how I said it. Parents agreed with me though :)

The looks of sheer shock and outrage really was entertaining :)

Hey Pastorized, do you have any idea how many "believers" throughout the last 2,000 years (including Apostle Paul in his early letters) thought Jesus was going to return??? You are merely one of them. Nothing more. And like the rest, you will be wrong. You add NOTHING to the discussion of belief and religion, except your parroting of classic literalism. I feel sad for you. You are believing in something that does not exists, including your total misuse of book of Revelations. Unfortunately, people like you (and there are many of you) cannot be reasoned with. You leave no room for rationality and true seeking. You strike me as a present day Pharisee. Check our what Jesus had to say about those guys. Have fun.

Mr. Rogers -

Facts can be interpreted differently in the conclusions they point to. Even scientist dispute what certain facts mean or point to at any given time in a number of fields.

You are confusing the two again. Facts are objective. Truths are the subjective interpretation of facts. What a fact tells you is what is open to interpretation, but the fact is writ. The point of the issue of god is that there are not even any facts to be interpreted in the discussion to even be used for someone to contrive a truth from. That argument goes the same for imaginary creatures.

John wrote:

It's like me telling you that you can't understand my worldview of a one-eyed spaghetti monster who is master of the universe because you don't agree with it. Immediately after, I then go on to explain how the one-eyed spaghetti monster causes earthquakes when he sqeezes the earth with his great tentacles. Strange, no?

All depends....is he wearing a layer of parmesan? That extra protein in the cheese adds strength :)

All depends....is he wearing a layer of parmesan? That extra protein in the cheese adds strength :)

Doh! It was "flying" spaghetti monster - not "one-eyed" spaghetti monster. Maybe they're brothers. In fact, maybe there's an "oily" spirit and, together, they form a trinity. Then again, maybe not. ;-)

not "one-eyed" spaghetti monster

Curses! Freud wins again.

Besides, we all know the flying spaghetti monster exists. It is created by every two year old who decides the spaghetti would look better sticking to the wall. :)

not "one-eyed" spaghetti monster

Curses! Freud wins again.

Comment of the day! : )

"Chuck 2601317 - I suppose I would be a weakling if I was easily persuaded."

Jessica, you are continuing to make this about your ego instead of considering whether or not religions are replicators which manipulate human beings into copying them. Do you see it? That, the appeal to ego, is the manipulation which is being used against you. You have the opportunity to either overcome it now, or choose to be concerned only with your pride/ego in the short term and go back into autopilot and be an obedient host.

--------------------------

"Chuck, I've considered your ideas, and I reject them. I don't believe this is merely an illusion; I believe this is REAL. Just because YOU don't believe doesn't mean you are correct."

I am not the one with the burden of proof. Those who claim a god exists, just like anyone who claims an invisible teapot is in orbit between Earth and Mars, are the ones who need to back it up with something of substance.

Illusions and reality are not determined by simply believing or disbelieving them or rejecting them out of hand. They are determined by testing them. For example you can test whether or not prayer produces the same result no matter who or what you sincerely and solemnly surrender and pray to, whether it is jesus, krishna, count chocula, or lucky the leprechaun. To reject this claim as false without having tested it is being intellectually dishonest to at least yourself, if not others.

I did not reject religion completely until I had enough evidence to build a coherent worldview which shows exactly how and why religions are false. I don't expect anyone to reject religion because I told them it's false. But I hope to give other people the opportunity to see for themselves why it is false. Those who value evidence and reasoning over their own ego and self-importance will be the most likely to follow through and discover the same thing for themselves. But one of the biggest hooks used by christianity in particular is ego: the universe was created for and is all about you, you are so important you will live forever, you are so important someone was tortured for you, you get to spend forever in paradise while others are tortured for being different from you, etc etc.

DoubleDogs:

I don't know where this stuff came from, nor do you. I do however enjoy hearing about the latest theories and ideas on the subject. I am certainly not going to retreat to a fallback position that says, "God did it."

Why do you insist there is a purpose to all this? What makes you think there is a purpose?

Mr. Rogers:

Really now. Facts are facts - they are based on objective reality. They do not change. That is one of the reasons science is ALWAYS testing. They can observe facts, they cannot observe truth. Truth? Well, that's another story. That is subjective in nature.

DNA is not a program, nor is it a design. It is a string of atoms/molecules; no less and no more.

Don't you dare tell me I'm acknowledging the mathematics of something from nothing. Indeed there is a probability of us being here. For Pete's sake, we're here, but that in no way addresses, nor can it address the notion of something from nothing. To date, no one knows how that happens.

No, I do not have a theory on how proteins exist, or how they came into existence. However, given the virtually infinite permutations, the presence of electrical charge, and a soup of incredible diversity, it seems likely that life erupted spontaneously, albeit over a long period of time. I would not state that with certainty.

That said, nothing discovered by the scientific community rules out the existence of a god or gods. As I have pointed out repeatedly, no self-respecting atheist can state with certainty there is no god or gods. The notion of a god seems childish to me, but that does not mean there is no god.

Merely because you are unable to grasp a virtually infinite number of permutations on Earth is hardly a reason to say "logic" would suggest that life was seeded and/or created. Ridiculous!

"That said, nothing discovered by the scientific community rules out the existence of a god or gods. As I have pointed out repeatedly, no self-respecting atheist can state with certainty there is no god or gods. The notion of a god seems childish to me, but that does not mean there is no god."

Any self-respecting athiest or scientist should apply the same standard of evidence based reasoning to any proposal, and not make special exceptions for one particular god. I see a whole lot of this, where otherwise scientifically minded people seem to think the christian god in particular is a special exception that is reasonable to believe in with complete disregard for evidence.

I haven't seen your past statements so I don't know what you mean by "certain," but as a self-respecting athiest I am just as certain of the nonexistence of any proposed gods as I am of any other mythical or fictional creatures such as leprechauns, dragons, klingons, santa, the easter bunny, etc. I think it is a fair statement to say it is unreasonable to believe in leprechauns without evidence.

Do you apply the same standard to god as anything else, and say that it also doesn't mean that there is no tooth fairy, Thor, etc? Do you think that because of this it is then reasonable to believe that there really is a tooth fairy? Just curious where you stand. :)

BTW about life, it does not need to be the first step and knowing this vastly reduces the initial complexity and initial improbability of life starting. Replicators (such as self-replicating proteins or RNA) would have existed first and then invented "life" (cells, etc) as an adaptation.

And beside that, it is absurd as an explanation for the origin of life to say something astronomically more complex, which can create our entire universe knowing the result beforehand, listen to billions of prayers, and care about your sex life, spontaneously appeared. The point being that using a deity as the explanation of life creates an even bigger problem than the one is is supposed to solve.

Trevor - the Bible does not even try to prove that God exists - it is an assumption. It also warns that "we only see things as through a dark glass".

David

Although we can attain great knowledge - we are still finite in what we can learn and grasp. With such limitation, how can we determine a criteria to prove the existence or non-existence of something that physically we cannot see? And even if we can see, how would we know for certain what we saw was or wasn't really "God"?

We barely can understand our existence even to middle age, and after middle age often begin to lose what understanding we obtained to that point. And we think one or a few persons can determine if there is a god or not?

OK Shalom (post 1.37) you want sources here they are:

1.- The first image of Guadalupe (BTW it was not a "Mexican" image but one from Extremadura in Spain, where most of the Army on the Conquest of Mexico came from, and which name in ARABIC means River of Wolves) was painted by a Tlaxcallan indian named Marcos Zipactli who copied the image carried by Cortés and removed the 12 stars that surrounded the head and left only a crown.

2.- Juan de Zumárraga, Bishop of Mexico and who supposedly testified to the miracle, was not in Mexico, as stated in ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS in the "Indian Archives" in Cartagena, abd Seville Spain, he was called back to Spain by mid 1531 and stayed in Spain until 1534. By no way he could testify to something that he did not witnessed.

3.- The Tilma was supposedly painted by the WILD roses carried by Juan Diego. There were no WILD roses in Mexico /the plant comes from Europe and we are talking less than 10 years after the fall of Tenochtitlan). Moreover, the climate in Tepeyac (the place where the supposed miracle happened) is semiarid and by no means could support WILD roses that need large amounts of water.

3.- In Tepeyac there was a temple dedicated to Tonantzin, the mother of the gods, in an avocation called Coatlilchupe, or mother with the serpent skirt. Curious similarity of names (this is called syncretism and has happened in every place catholics or christians have conquered by force).

4.- As stated also in Original Documents in the Indian Archives, several priests condemned the adoration of this Guadalupe as Idolatry, among them;Bartolomé de las Casas and Francisco de Bustamante, the later stated that "we are trying to wean the indians from their idolatry, why make them prostrate before the image painted recently by the indian Marcos?"

5.- Juan de Torquemada, general inquisitor, in his book "Indian Monarchy" (Chapter 10) states "Our priests once and for the first time at Tepeyac built a church devoted to the mother of god, as she appeared in Spain, the Virgin of Christopher Columbus and Hernan Cortés: The Virgin of Guadalupe". This book was writen in 1612 and it would be completely absurd to believe that Torquemada was not aware of a miracle that has happened nearly 90 years before.

6.- It was in 1648 when a priest named Miguel Sánchez wrote the bases of what later was known as the "Nican Mopohua", this is the document in which all the alleged Miracle is based. Among the many problems and contradictions in it we find these two: Juan Diego in 1531 was travelling to the church in Tlaltelolco, the first church in Tlalteloco was built in 1572!, Juan de Zumárraga testified, as seen Juan de Zumárraga was not in Mexico then,

7.-There are NO DOCUMENTS dated between 1531 and 1648 in which the "Miracle"appears. As an example of the circular logic of this miracle, the document in which everything is allegedly written by the original natives, the "Nican Mopohua" was published in 1649 by Lasso de la Vega. The Nican is a translation to the nahuatl of the book written by Sánchez, the Nican is an alleged proof of the veracity of Sánchez, and the Book by Sánchez is alleged as proof of the Nican. As seen both are one singe book.

8.-In 1751, the then archbishop Rubio of Mexico commissioned a famous painter called Miguel Cabrera to repair the damaged painting of Marcos Zipactli. This would be an inconceivable disrespect for a "Miraculous" image. Cabrera and Rubio stated that it was through a Miracle that the image was repaired, a second painter called José Ignacio Bartolache analyzed the painting in 1787 and stated that it was "completely retouched and full with paint stains and was undoubtedly the work of many painters throughout the centuries"

9.- many other analyses were carried during the late 18th and though the 19th centuries all with the same conclusion.

10.- The current image was commissioned in 1895 by the priest Antonio Plancarte (as stated in the Newspaper "El Universal" on December 3, 1895) but the painter forgot, nothing more, THE CROWN that Marcos Zipactli painted. This was also said to be a Miracle (few years before Mexico has beaten the french army that supported Maximilian as Emperor of Mexico, a Crown was not well perceived at the time for obvious reasons)

11.- No need to go throughout the 20th century discrediting this fraud, but maybe the most important is the statement by Fr. Guillermo Schullemburg, at the time when he was the abbott of the "Basilica de Guadalupe" who said that he did not believe that Juan Diego even existed nor that the Tilma was true or even that the Virgin has appeared. Kind of tough for the abbott to say that. Needless to say that pope John Paul immediately kicked Schullemburg out (John Paul needed the catholic masses to keep the economy of the church going, on a time when Europe has become more rational)

Hopefully these are enough for you... There a literally thosands more, but I believe that it is enough with these HISTORICAL FACTS.

Good for you to believe in god and Jesus, but a rational faith is the only way in which believers can confront and demonstrate their truths to non believers.

Also, your references are all contemporary and based only on religious enterprises, sorry, but I do not buy them.

I love these threads. Absolute best thing on the internet. I have to get my popcorn! The think the Spiritualist are winning!

Chuck 2601317 - This isn’t about my ego. At this point there is nothing I can say that would satisfy you. No one is manipulating me and I am not an obedient host. I have the ability to think for myself. Just because I believe in God does not make me a weak individual or simple-minded. God and religion are two separate things. I am not trying to convert you to my belief system. I don’t understand why you can’t be respectful of my choice and leave it at that.

"Chuck, I've considered your ideas, and I reject them. I don't believe this is merely an illusion; I believe this is REAL. Just because YOU don't believe doesn't mean you are correct."

Chuck said:

"I am not the one with the burden of proof. Those who claim a god exists, just like anyone who claims an invisible teapot is in orbit between Earth and Mars, are the ones who need to back it up with something of substance.

Illusions and reality are not determined by simply believing or disbelieving them or rejecting them out of hand. They are determined by testing them. For example you can test whether or not prayer produces the same result no matter who or what you sincerely and solemnly surrender and pray to, whether it is jesus, krishna, count chocula, or lucky the leprechaun. To reject this claim as false without having tested it is being intellectually dishonest to at least yourself, if not others."

Oh, you're WRONG, belief is EVERYTHING! People believe what they WANT to believe, and no amount of so-called "evidence" will change that. You seem to beleive that if I ran the same so-called "experiments" you did, I'd eventually come to the same conclusion that you came to. Why would I believe that prayer would get the same results every time? Assuming that a prayer is asking for something, there are always two possible outcomes: yes or no. And although I haven't kept a talley I HAVE asked for things in prayer, and have gotten both yes and no answers, so what does that mean? I'd say that means GOD exists but won't always give me what I ask for, whereas you would likely say "that's just a coincidence." And BOTH of us would base that conclusion on what we already believe.

Further, if I followed your example to the logical conclusion, then I'd never believe ANYTHING unless I could see it and test it myself. Did we actually land on the moon? I've got no proof of that, just someone's word for it and some pictures; and since I didn't take those pictures THEY could be fakes. (No, I really do think we landed on the moon, this is just an example of the fallacy of your position). I study history, knowing that some of it is inevitably wrong - but I put my FAITH in the people writing it. What else can I do, I wasn't there! This idea that I MUST have evidence on everything, I MUST be able to test something before I can believe it, that I must NEVER put my faith in anything or trust my instincts is not only ridiculous but no way to live. Sorry Chuck, but I reject that premise.

whut the...

So you're laughing at people who you believe are going to burn in hell for eternity? Now that doesn't sound like something Jesus would do. Are you sure you are a CHRIST-ian?

Everyone has an opinion. Just because we have an opinion about hell not existing it does not mean it don't exist. If I didn't believe in the Law of gravity and I dropped my pencil would it fall? We need to line up with Laws that are unchangable and the Word of God is unchangable. I am happy that the pastor is no longer able to mininister within that organization. He driffted away from teaching God's Laws. We are always looking for ways to get rid of God's law. Do you know why? If we can explain it away then we would not have to admit that we are sinners and we are in need of a savior.

He driffted away from teaching God's Laws. We are always looking for ways to get rid of God's law. Do you know why?

Because there is no evidence for a god? Let alone one that exists in a Christian context? Let's face it. The First Council of Nicaea decided which of "gods laws" we should follow and which ones we shouldn't. Mere men nonetheless.

He driffted away from teaching God's Laws. We are always looking for ways to get rid of God's law. Do you know why?

Because laws like "stoning a child to death for disrespecting its parents" is stupid and immoral? That would be my guess.

God's Word decides what laws we should follow not the Council of Nicaea. That council decided to preserve the writtings that were written by the apostles that walked with Jesus. God's Word is written by men inspired by the Holy Spirit.

The Bible says that God has put eternity in all of our hearts. It takes more faith to believe that God dosn't exist than to believe that He does.

Tim, give me the verse in the Bible that you are refering to. I don't think it is worded exactly like that. Jesus also summed up the Old Testament Law into two commandments. Thou shall love the Lord thy God with all your heart and all your soul and all your strength. and the second command is thou shall love thy neighbor as thyself. All the commandment hang on those two commandments.

@Canobie, that same council of Nicaea who decided to "preserve" gods word also decided who did & who didnt write gods word by rejecting those "gospels" that didnt conform to their view of their creed, who appointed these people as gods reps? any writing by man will always be open for debate, criticism and even ridicule, someones belief in the validity of a certain text does not necesarily make it so, especially when a lot of people use tracts from the same text as proof of its existence.

Keith You are right when you say we can debate on that and get no where.A Lot of the books that you are talking about were not written by the apostles or Jesus Bothers James and Jude. They needed to preserve the writings at the time because after the apostles died off in 96 Ad. There were many writings that were popping up that the author would either use the apostles name or the book would take away the Divinity of Christ. Meaning Jesus was 100%man and 100% God at the same time. They decided what was in our Bible to protect it from corrupt teachings that were creeping in that would make the church spiritually sick.(almost like what people are doing today!) It wasn't the creed that they wrote that they were trying to make the books fit in to. There were a series of questions that they would ask. Such as was the the book written by an apostle or a Relative of Jesus,was the person writing the book an eye witness of Jesus, Was the writing in common circulation with the people. There were books in the Bible that was in question at that council and almost didn't Get in the Bible. Such as 1&2 Peter "The style of writing doesn't match Peter's education level", James (works and faith), Hebrews (authorship), Revelation (because of a group teaching falsely about end time events)

Sorry about my spelling mistakes!

I still think that the criteria used for inclusion or exclusion was very subjective, there is nothing to suggest that the writings of the apostles was any more "holy" than any of the other writings at the time, as far as I am aware none of the "accepted" gospels were written down at the actual time of your saviours life, ah well, this is one of those endless debate issues and all comes down to faith, if you believe the writings of men are the divinely inspired you have faith, if you take a more critical view then you dont, neither view is, definitively, provable.

By the way, your spelling mistakes dont detract from your thought out response, dont worry about them.

Keith your are correct it does boil down to Faith. Human reasoning definitely gets in the way of faith. The longest trip that anyone can ever take is 18 inches. From our heads to our heart. The Bible is a spiritual Book and Paul the apostle said that it needs to be spiritually discerned. We really cannot discern a Spiritual Book without the Holy Spirit guiding us. If we lean on our interlect only, we will argue the whole book away and question everything! That is one reason why one of the rules were it had to be written by an apostle. They were eye witnesses seeing the miracles and hearing Jesus words. What is a miracle? A miracle is an event that goes beyond the natural laws of things. Even at that council they struggled with what should be in the book. It was not easy for them to decide what was and what wasn't.

The unfortunate thing is that eye witnesses make the most unreliable witnesses to any event, a supporter will see something that reinforces that support whereas an enemy will see something entirely the opposite. If you are OK with taking something on faith alone, then good for you, I wish I could, but its not in my makeup, it is also not my wish to denigrate or belittle anyones religious beliefs, a person of faith will never be convinced by a solely logical argument and a sceptic would expect nothing else than a logical argument, the two sides are irreconcilable, I wish you the best.

Human reasoning definitely gets in the way of faith

Think about what you just wrote.

John I thought about it and what is your point?

I respect your comments Keith I wish you the best also.

John I thought about it and what is your point?

I figured I'd have to explain it although it's apparent to me. The nature of "reasoning", even by a human, typically involves careful analysis of a question or situation. Logical or sensible outcomes are the result. So what you stated earlier would suggest that logical and sensible outcomes are counterproductive to faith. Get it now?

"I don't believe there are any quotes from Jesus about the exisitance of Hell."

Chuck, I hear statements like this from time to time. It makes me curious why people don't just don't a quick word search. Jesus speaks specifically on hell through out the new testament books of Mathew (Chapter 5 and others) , Mark, and Luke. There are other refernces through the old and new testament. Rather than my breaking it down for your, I hope you will check it out so that you get His perspective in the proper context. You may not come away convinced of it's existence, but you will have the knowledge of what Jesus actually taught on the subject.

What would Jesus say? I tell you exactly what Jesus would say: "no one comes to the Father if not through me" John 14:6. Or maybe this: "Everyone who lives in me and believes in me will never ever die" John 11:26.

So yeah that IS exactly what the Bible says. JESUS said this, these are HIS words. Not anyone elses. It is not judging others, none of us are qualified to judge who does and does not go to heaven. All of us are sinful, nobody deserves heaven. That is where Grace comes in. According to the Bible though if Ghandi did not believe in Christ and accept his Grace then he would not be entered into heaven with the Lord. ONLY God knows a mans heart so thankfully Ghandis location right now is up to him not I.

"That which you seek, is the one who is seeking" St Francis of Assisi

Gouranga:

So ... basic academic question: What about the millions (Billions? Trillions?) of people who have died without having the -- ahem -- luxury of being intoduced to the concept of Jesus Christ?

Are they all in Hell? If "yes", then why? If "no", then why?

These aren't the droids you're looking for.--Obi-Wan Kenobi

What would Jesus say? He wouldn't say anything. He's dead.

Contrary to popular belief, Christianity is a relatively new religion. There is tens of thousands of years of human history sans Christianity. What about those folks?

Oh, and for the people that say Jesus said 'only through him' can you go to heaven... don't many faiths believe that Jesus and God are two parts of the same entity (3rd part being the Holy Spirit ie Holy Trinity)? So, in a sense, he could have just meant "only through God" may you enter Heaven yadayada. And then ofc, that would depend on your interpretation of God - because the explanations of who/what God is in The Bible are widely varied.

Ghandi is in hell? BTW. Jesus was born and died a Jew, does that mean that he too is in Hell? He must be, he never accepted himself as the "living saviour.

Gouranga, you seem to fancy yourself as a believer in the bible, so tell us, who did Cain marry? If you supply an answer, it better come straight outta the King James bible, the only one worth reading.

I always wondered if Jesus was saying the important thing is to actually apply and live as he taught, not accept him and be done with it.

Personally, i got turned off from christianity a long time ago, too many people who want to prove they're a better christian than you and try to use their faith as a bludgeon. That don't really give a damn about what Jesus was trying to teach them, they're only there for the social aspect.

But It's like my great grandmother used to say, you can go to church on Sunday and still go to Hell on Monday.

Ghandi has lots of company according to some from Grand Rapids - Jews, Muslims, Catholics, some other Protestants. Its one of the reasons I left the place, otherwise a great city. For many, it was all about appearances.

I can guarantee you those words were not spoken by Jesus, because he didn't speak english.

youjustsaidwhat:

That is exactly what I was thinking. What about all the ppl who have never heard of Jesus, but live well and are good ppl. They go straight to hell? That just seems wrong

mike430

Ghandi in is hell? Seriously? Is that how arrogant some christians have become? I mean, what would Jesus say?

"I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your Christ."

-Mohandas Gandhi

Gouranga, Ghandi was a believer, even though he was of the Hindu faith. The only difference is, they do not use the term Christ.

I completely agree with YouJustSaidWhat. In fact, that is the exact reason I stopped going to Church, because NO ONE could answer that question.

Modern Christianity is full of contradictions, and salvation is dependent on two factors: Luck and Someone else.

1) Luck - Current Christianity maintains that salvation is only acquired through accepting Christ as your savior. This begs the question, what of those who never heard of Christ? God is all-knowing, and loves all his children (humans) . . . so that means that God knowingly put billions of people on the earth, in regions that Christianity had not reached (ex: Native Americans before discovery). Current belief states that although God supposedly "loves" his children, he knowingly put them on the earth in a time and place that Christianity had not reached. In essence, he doomed them from the very beginning, knowing they would NEVER hear of Christ and thus had absolutely ZERO chance of ever being saved. Would a "loving God" do this? So your eternal salvation comes down to luck . . . were you LUCKY enough to be born in a time and place that Christianity had reached? Or were you unlucky and born in a time and place that Christianity will not reach? I was lucky . . . those put on the earth thousands of years ago, when Christianity was only in Europe, were unlucky.

2) Someone else - Modern Christianity also believes that it is the job of a Christian to "spread the word". So, if someone is born in a region of the world that has not heard of Christianity, it is our job to get the message to them. Basically, the eternal salvation of other people is completely dependent on the ability of someone else to reach them with the message. They are not even responsible for their own salvation, the success or failure of Christians to reach them with the message will determine their afterlife. How can a "loving God" put the salvation of his children in the hands of SOMEONE ELSE? I believe this belief demonstrates the arrogance of Christians more than the truth of God.

To summarize: Current belief states that a Christian who judges others, spreads hatred, and commits crimes can still get into heaven because he/she accepts Christ. However, someone who has led a good life and helped others, but was unlucky to be born in a region that Christianity had not reached, will not be saved. This does not represent a "good and loving God".

Don't forget the logical fallacy which believes that God was a vengeful God who cast every sinners to hell, before Jesus dies on the cross. But after Jesus dies, God transformed into a loving God. Remember that time does not exist in the realm of God, so there is no before and after, there just always "is". So how can a God be one way before, then change after, if there is no before and after. If time does not exist in heaven, as Christians believe, then logically there can be no time line for a vengeful to loving God.

After researching the REAL history behind Christianity, I know that MAN has warped the original message that Jesus spread. The pastor in this article is on the right path. A loving God does not doom souls to hell because they are "unlucky" or "someone else failed to reach them". Original Christianity focused on worshiping the life of Jesus, and using him as an example. Jesus said that through him is the path to salvation . . . that can be interpreted as living a life like him (love) will lead to salvation. Modern Christians prefer to believe a different interpretation that dooms billions of unlucky souls to hell. I have a hard time believing that a "loving God" would knowingly doom billions of his children to hell.

Ghandi in is hell? Seriously?

Yes. And so are billions of other asians, all agnostics and atheists, all Jews, all Muslims, all homosexuals, and every undiscovered tribe in Africa. And because they were not able to consciously accept Jesus as their savior, so are all aborted babies (and their mothers) and newborns that did not make it through childbirth, as well as all toddlers that passed away too soon. Heaven is only for the good, God fearing, queer hating Christians, and the creeps that found Jesus while they were on death row. Let's see here, doing the math ..... hell appears to be about 100,000 times more populated that heaven. That is one big @!$%#ing party! I'm so there.

Mike430...Not all Christians are judgemental, but it is human nature to compare and criticize. Gay marriage, abortion, the idea that there is no Hell - pick a hot topic & you'll find someone ready to raise a raucous in the name of Jesus Christ. I don't understand that rationale since the Holy Bible teaches that God is love and peace and forgiveness. Whatever your religious or spiritual beliefs, they are yours - for no one to judge or condemn. I believe anyone with a conscience who strives to be their best will find their Heaven.

Please...we're all debating how high up is!

The religious position states that God is a spirit, a being on another plane of existence that we cannot enter while alive (except for a VERY chosen few).

Thus NO ONE can KNOW anything about what is or is not about this claim.

Those who wish to can believe it but they can't prove it in any scientific manner.

Those who don't believe it just don't get the faith thing.

Those who claim absolute knowledge either for or against a delusional!

In the gospel of Thomas, what Jesus taught is somewhat differnce than Orthodox.

Heaven and Hell are both right here around us but we don't see it. Basically it is just karma. You live a good moral life and blessing soon will come and vice versus.

Ghandi is in hell? BTW. Jesus was born and died a Jew, does that mean that he too is in Hell? He must be, he never accepted himself as the "living saviour.

Yes, Jesus could say "Been there, done that." 3 Days he spent there, then rose again to eternal life with his Father, which is where we can all go, if we just believe in Christ.

My bible doesn't have the "Gospel of Thomas" in it..... I've owned probably 20 bibles, and none of them has it either....

Hi five Future History.

In the final analysis, whether we acknowledge or deny something's existence has no relevance as to whether it actually exists or not. God either exists or he doesn't. My belief (or disbelief) in God does not change whether he does or does not exist. The same is true of Christ's teaching that "I am the way, the truth, and the life... No one comes to the father except through me." If it's true, then Christ is the ONE way to heaven. If it's not true, then he was wrong and there either is no heaven or there are many ways to get there. Again, whether I believe it is true has no bearing on whether or not it actually IS true.

Christ's words and teachings are well documented by multiple sources. He clearly believed and taught that he was the Messiah, and represented the one channel by which people could be reconciled to God for their sins. Whether you believe him or not is the question you have to answer for yourself. But this IS what he taught. When you get right down to it, Jesus was either (a) who he said he is (the son of God and the Messiah) or he was (b) A delusional Jew who tried to get people to believe he was the messiah. There is no middle ground because he taught that he was the messiah.

Yea as I recall it was always men told me the bible was god's words or something god inspired.

Bruce -

You are correct that the teachings of Christ (Jesus) was well documented. In fact, there were dozens of gospels written about Jesus, primarily by those closest to him. Unfortunately only a select few were "chosen" by self-appointed leaders of Christianity to be included in the Bible.

Why were the other gospels ignored? Why are the documented actions and life of Jesus, as presented from other sources, not taught in Christianity?

Many scholars who have studied the other gospels point to the fact that most of them portray Mary Magdalene as the favored disciple. Apparently a woman being "favored" did not sit well with the leaders of Christianity. In addition, some of the other gospels do not represent Jesus the same way the ones in the Bible do.

Unfortunately, the fact that the majority of these gospels are NOT taught means that we do not have the full story. We simply have the parts that the leaders of Christianity wanted us to know. I would prefer to hear the whole story, but that's just me.

There is a c) Jesus is the Messiah but the bible or more precisely the four gospels aren't really what Jesus's real teaching.

Why were the other gospels ignored? Why are the documented actions and life of Jesus, as presented from other sources, not taught in Christianity?

Good question. Stephen Lynch has a song about one of the lesser known gospels - the story of Jesus's brother Craig.

http://www.sing365.com/music/lyric.nsf/Craig-lyrics-Stephen-Lynch/ADACB3E1DAE55483482570990028786A

Everyone knows Jesus
The guy who healed the lame.
Well, I am Jesus' brother,
Craig is my name.

Jesus is the Prince of Peace.
Jesus is the Lamb.
Jesus is the Son of God,
But Craig don't give a damn.

Because when Craig's in sight,
We'll party all damn night.
I don't turn water into wine,
But into cold Coors Light.
I'm not my brother, I know,
Don't walk on H2O,
But I got hydroponic @!$%#
That me and Judas grow.

I'm @!$%#in Craig.
I'm @!$%#in Craig.
I'm @!$%#in Craig.
Craig Christ.

I hang out with lepers,
Barabas and Salome.
Jesus' friends are called Apostles -
Those dudes are totally gay.
Jesus performs miracles,
From Galilee to Rome.
But it would be a miracle,
If he brought a @!$%#in lady home.

Because while Jesus is prayin,
@!$%#in Craig is layin,
Every lady in the Testament,
You know what I'm sayin'?
I won't die for your sin,
Like my famous kin.
But if you've got a little sister,
Then there's room at this inn.

I'm @!$%#in Craig.
I'm @!$%#in Craig.
I'm @!$%#in Craig.
Craig Christ.

Jesus was our mothers fave,
All her love to him she gave.
But there's no sibling rivalry,
When he's nailed to that tree.

And now the question for you,
Is not "What Would Jesus Do?"
But where will you be
When the Craig Machine comes partyin' through?
And if the Lord will allow,
You got to ask yourself how,
And who and why and when and where
Is your messiah now?

It's @!$%#in Craig.
@!$%#in Craig.
@!$%#in Craig.
I'm @!$%#ing Craig.
Craig Christ.
Craig Christ.
Craig Christ.
I'm @!$%#in Craig.

I'm currently writing a book inspired by Alex Johnson, a local hotdog vendor. Since he was my inspiration, it is truly the Word of Alex Johnson.

But.... he might not agree.

Why would an all knowing and all loving God send someone to hell?

I'm currently writing a book inspired by Alex Johnson, a local hotdog vendor. Since he was my inspiration, it is truly the Word of Alex Johnson.

But.... he might not agree.

Yes but you have to wait at least 75 years after Alex's death in order to write your book about him.

My grandad was a Methodist minister doing missionary work in India, building churches, schools and sanitation systems. He met Gandhi, and he told me that Gandhi was the most Christian man he had ever met. I think if Gandhi is not in Heaven, then he is in Nirvana... where the food is spicier.

John Mack

Gouranga, you seem to fancy yourself as a believer in the bible, so tell us, who did Cain marry? If you supply an answer, it better come straight outta the King James bible, the only one worth reading.

------------------------------------------------

The ESV Bible is a far more accurate translation of the original texts than the KJV.

David - that will continue to be a debate. In the late 1800's Scholars took a turn from the past practice of being not only mindful of the age of discovered writings, but also fully aware of the corruptions that took place in different regions. They went to souly the oldest most complete text found.

I occaisionally am privileged to here a native macedonian who is also missionary. He does not pick one translation as "most" accurate because any one being most accurate isn't as good as understanding the original lanquage. He seems to refer mostly to the NIV and KJV. What the one has wrong, the other usually has it correct.

It's not that the Greek or Hebrew has changed - it's that the opinions of how it used has changed.

Take Genesis 1:1 In the beginning was the heaven and the earth, and the earth became void is becoming understood to be the correct translation. This totally shattering to many's biblical theories on creation. Ice records show a lot of cycles of 13,500 - 15,500 years in length where the earth has an ice age, and then slowly warms up, to end with a new ice age. With that correction on one word, we now know that science didn't disprove the Bible, but rather showed that our understanding of it needs to improve!

Thoughts from Cali wrote:

Modern Christianity is full of contradictions, and salvation is dependent on two factors: Luck and Someone else ... what of those who never heard of Christ? ... Basically, the eternal salvation of other people is completely dependent on the ability of someone else to reach them with the message.

Jesus said there was to be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous. The Bible says the wages of sin are death. Those that have died without the opportunity to follow Jesus (or who were born before His time on earth) willbe resurrected and given that opportunity. "Hell" will first be emptied and then destroyed in the Lake of Fire. (Rev 20:13, 14 for the curious) Those that died have paid for their sins, yet lovingly God still gives them the opportunity to gain eternal life. Those that reject that final opportunity will perish - permanently.

if hell does exist? then heaven is run by a friggin serial killer and the son of god is just a dead man on a stick. my mother and father are my religion and my god...they teaches me right from wrong and how to be a decent human being without having to learn from some silly dead man on a stick or an invisable god. like evolution, i believe in proven facts and not from a fairytale told by a bunch of pathetic stupid weakminded slaves. I would only allow god to lick the dog sh!t from my feet because that's all it good for.......if it does exist.

mockers, scoffers and unbelievers,.......which in itself is part of the prophecy of the last days on earth as we know it. Jesus is soon, very soon to return to the earth...are you willing to bet your eternal soul on unbelief?? This "weak-minded" Christian will pray for you....

Jesus is soon, very soon to return to the earth

I'm sure that's the same thing your father says, and your grandfather, and your greatgrandfather, and your great great grandfather, and your ......

Get a clue dude - it's not gonna happen.

Not sure about all better than here Rich. While agree this is cruel and brutal at times, I would not count seeing my children born, my wedding, and many other moments as being insignificant.

I do however agree with your definition of heaven. It is Biblically supported.

The father figure people attach to god needs to be removed. God being all merciful and loving contradicts the existence of hell.

I am glad I don't parent my children like god apparently parents the human population. Using the recent earthquakes as an example:

I'm not about to walk into my kid's bedroom smash it up and dump two tonnes of concrete on him and claim that I love and cherish him.

I can't reconcile the god concept of eternal love with hell and what happens to us on Earth. Its made an Atheist out of me. Amen ;)

Some people do make sense when it comes to "hell". They define hell as the absence of God. See, according to doctrine God gives you freedom of choice, you can choose to believe in him or not. If god is eternal love, and you choose to deny his existence, hell is the place where you feel no love, until you choose to accept it.

Even though I am an agnostic, and I think organized religion is nothing but a power grab; I still can see the logic in that reasoning. According to that logic however, many religious and self proclaimed righteous people will never see "heaven"; as they are filled with hate and they don't seem to notice.

Krestov stated: "God being all merciful and loving contradicts the existence of hell."

To a degree, you are correct. Hell is what we create in our everyday lives, the same with Heaven, the good and bad choices we make each and everyday. They are both just terms we use.

"I am glad I don't parent my children like god apparently parents the human population."

If you only knew.

"Using the recent earthquakes as an example:"

So the Earth re-balancing itself is a bad thing?

"I'm not about to walk into my kid's bedroom smash it up and dump two tonnes of concrete on him and claim that I love and cherish him."

I don`t believe anyone would want to do that.

"I can't reconcile the god concept of eternal love with hell and what happens to us on Earth. Its made an Atheist out of me. Amen ;)"

Isn`t that free will thing pretty nice?

@Only in America-2604171

Thanks for the great reply, its nice to bump into someone on here who knows the concept of debate which does not include a barrage of insults! I like to explore the answers for the points I made so I hope I don't offend in the process!

The nuts and bolts of the problem here, for me I might add. How is it possible to be all merciful and loving and yet let the bad stuff just happen. I am sure if I was all powerful with a ton of unconditional love to spare I would do something.

The Earth is neither good nor bad, what is bad is People being killed and injured. I would have though all merciful and loving would have fitted nicely into god's in-box "Urgent attention required"

As you said no one would want to do that to their child, but why does god?

Free will well that is another entire debate we should not get into.

"How is it possible to be all merciful and loving and yet let the bad stuff just happen. I am sure if I was all powerful with a ton of unconditional love to spare I would do something."

This is where free will comes into play. We are here to learn. And what is the greatest teacher we could have? Learning by doing both right and wrong. It's like the old story of the child who is told not to touch the hot stove. You can tell anyone not to do something that may hurt them, but, that doesn't mean they will listen, "until they do the wrong thing, or bad thing", in this case, by touching the stove. All you and I can do, is hope the child will listen to us, and that is not always the case. The child takes the "bad road", and learned a lesson by taking the "bad road(not listening)". How are we, as the human race going to learn anything, if "God" steps in every time we are about to do something stupid? It's kind of like the child, wouldn't you say? We can tell the child a thousand times, the stove will burn them and hurt them, but the child will not learn that until it touches the stove.

i agree with you. i also believe satan pretty much rules the world right now and that is the reason for bad things happening, because of this we have to lean on god to help us through the bad things. we are all being taught lessons. god will take care of satan in his time not ours.

for the unbelievers, wouldn't you rather be safe than sorry?

why is everybody talking about ghandi? don't you have better things to do? you don't know where ghandi is. my guess he is enjoying the view and the peace and quiet.

i have alot of questions too but i just trust the lord and take things as they come.

i'm not asking you to believe anything, but you will find this day a lot easier if you simply accept what is, instead of trying to fit it into your preconcieved notions!!!!!!

have a blessed day------

Taking the FEAR of God away is too overdue! We were asked to come here, and endure all of life's crap. Stuff people throw at us, stuff the earth throws at us, and what we smear on ourselves. How we deal with it is our test. He gave the earth to us, to nuture and take part in its changing. That also mean all of the natural devistation that happens.

He is a parent just like me. I have to let my children fall down, make mistakes, use their free will (within reason), hoping that they can grow from each of those experiences and if the experience was good, repeat it; if the experience was bad, don't do it again. Simple. If they do these things, then they can become amazing adults. Same with God. Except, he adds a little more yummy after the dinner. We can live in His house forever, and enjoy the love He so desperatly wants to give, FOREVER!!!

If you don't have the chance to know Him here, and follow the teachings of His son Jesus, then you will still have an opportunity after death (up until final judgement). He wants us to grow. He wants us to learn. It doesn't stop after death, we just don't have to put up with Satan and the mega crap he can sling. We will still have to deal with each other, but without Satan, I am fine with that! There is opposition in all things, and if there is good, there is evil. Just remember Satan only has dominion over this world, not the next.

Just keep trucking, Just keep swimming, just keep loving one another to the best of YOUR ability.

Peace, Love and Oreo cookies and milk :)

But clearly no generalization on your part.

The born again, bible thumpers are the meanest, coldest, most intolerant, smug and judgemental people on the planet. I once asked a BT what heaven was like and she said it was full of streets paved with gold. What will we do there? I asked. We'll sing and praise Jesus. What else? I asked. Nothing, she replied. For all eternity? I asked. Yup, she said, isn't it wonderful? What about my dog? I asked. Nope, no dogs. What about sex, drugs, rock n roll? I asked. Nope. That's when I knew she was crazy.

If it was truly heaven, then sins of the flesh would have no repercussions and you could misbehave up the wazoo. I think that hell would be an eternal church service.

When I was 6 years old a nun told me my jewish best friend would not go to heaven. That's when I stopped even trying to believe.

Ghandi in hell????? Who wrote the Bible ...a bunch of crazy men who wanted to control the populace.

And what better way to control the populace than tell them they will burn in hell for all eternity if they don't believe them. Oh, and don't forget to give us your 10%. How many people realize the craziness of it all, but still cling to it because they are afraid of the consequences of not believing? Why take the chance, right?

I believe that establishing a personal relationship with Jesus is more important than establishing a relationship with "organized religion". The church (collectively) has become, as stated above, mean, and intolerant to the very ones they should be evangelizing. It's like they've come up with the attitude, "I'm not going to share MY Jesus and MY heaven with no one else."

God knew me (and all the sins I would ever commit) before He created me. He forgave all my sins by the sacrifice of His Son before He created me. All I've got to do for salvation is sincerely believe those two sentences. I can't buy it or earn it and it doesn't come with a subscription fee to keep it. The Bible clearly states that there is but one unpardonable sin and that is the sin of rejecting God (blaspheming the Holy Spirit).

A real Christian doesn't have to brag and boast about what great Christian they are, it shows in how they display Christ's love in their daily lives. Not just on Sunday when they gather together and tell everyone who doesn't believe and act similarly they aren't welcomed here.

And clearly no generalizations or ad hominem attacks in your post either.

joy stated: "The born again, bible thumpers are the meanest, coldest, most intolerant, smug and judgemental people on the planet."

Yet you judge them. Must be without sin then, huh?

Bob -not to be pedantic but your version of salvation directly contradicts James 2:20:

“But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?”

Rationalize in 3...2....1....

ivanho75 -

"But wilt though know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?"

Bob said,

...it shows in how they display Christ's love in their daily lives.

Christ behaved the way we should all strive to behave. He loved the sinners, talked with them, forgave them, he was kind and charitable and wonderful. If we are Christians in the true sense of what it means, then we will strive to behave more like Christ. Bob said that - he said that a person who is Christian will not boast about how great they are, about their good deeds, but will allow Christ to shine in their life by displaying his love for everyone. That would be the 'works' you sought.

I didn't know there were quotation marks around "works" in the Bible. I guess you were given that esoteric knowledge while deep in prayer huh? Bob says belief is all you need which, sorry, is clearly contradicted by that passage.

I would love to see an anonymous Christian. You should spread that philosophy. I seem to remember the Pharisees being chastised for contorting themselves while in prayer and Jebus saying something about doing it anonymously (for lack of the correct passage). I think the rest of us would love that. It would show to God are truly a Christian for the right reasons and not to display your faith so others can see how wonderful you are.

Doing something good while eschewing all recognition should be the true Christian way. No public worshiping, no tv evangelicals, no missionary work. God can really trust your devotion then. No other agendas. Get on that.

God gives us a choice - believe in Him or not. Those who do not will not enjoy the heavenly things God has prepared for us and will burn in Hell for the rest of time. Rob Bell got exactly what he wanted when he wrote this book -- more publicity and more money in his pockets. He's like L. Ron Hubbard, who founded Scientology. Both of these men have beliefs that fall into the "cult" category. They're both man-made and both are leading many people down the wrong path. Prayers will go up for both of them. There IS a God and there IS a living, burning hell. The Bible is the Word of God and it tells us this.

The Bible is at best a history book, mostly delineating heredity. It was written by MEN and translated and retranslated by MEN, mostly with their own agendas and the main agenda is the gaining of temporal power over their fellow men. Over 4/5ths of the ENTIRE set of books was Not Included, especially a lot of what Christ actually said and did, because it went strongly against the grain of the Old Testamenters in it's talking about reincarnation, psychic phenomena and the REAL workings of the Universe. The only hell is a construct made of fear built by the soul that has been told that he is wrong so many times that he believes it.

Sadly, Most Evangelists and the extreme Cult Christians of today seem to think that GOD, the Ultimate Creator, is some kind of 3rd grade jackass, like the ones who will not let anyone else into their club because they are different or a girl. That does NOT sound like the God Is Love that the REAL Christ taught, now does it??

Luckily, we are on the verge of a MAJOR, Spiritual Awakening now, and I am afraid that these Bible Thumping bigots are going to find that they have been doing the work of the Dark Ones instead. Anyone spreading Fear, Hate, Intolerance, Division and Inequality are NOT doing the work set forth by God OR Christ.

I would have to agree that we are in the midst of a major spiritual awakening as well. Just don't agree that it's the Spirit of God. The Bible clearly states that their will be an increase in the number of false teachers, phophets and deceivers in the last days. It's also pretty clear in stating that the anti-christ will use the deceived masses to gain his power and authority.

Whether you choose to attend a church or not, i strongly encourage you to repent and confess your sins to the Lord God on high. If you don't beleive...what do you have to lose?

backwoodsgal.

How appropriate a nickname. Let me let you in on a little secret - Christianity is also man made. All religions are man made. Every single one of them. How about that? I guess you didn't see that coming, huh?

"Only the good die young!"

Child molesters are also, "No God here." and "No Hell to worry about." thinkers.

To compare child molesters to atheists is wrong.

Child molesters do not deserve a second chance at God's grace or salvation. They should be shot and killed for their horrible crimes.

... I have a lot to work on as a Christian, I know...

Funny. I always thought the child molesters were working for the Catholic Church "Imagine."

Imagine - assuming Hell is real, you just sent yourself there.

To Imagine-Goodness.

If you are correct, then why is pedophilia more common among clergy than in the general population? You may want to ask your local Catholic; they suffer especially, although I'm not sure if pedophilia is any more common among them than other denominations.

Perhaps you meant to say:

Child molesters are also, "God is here." and "God will look the other way today." thinkers.

Right?

Jeff that concept will be one of the questions I ask about when I get to the Lord. Cause you are right, it does not seem fair. However, that being said, Dahmer will still be held accountable for his sins on earth whether he was a Christian when he died or not. What that means, I do not know. However, there is a final judgement we all will face.

Salvation is all about who you know not just about being good. If we earn our way to heaven then the focus is on us. We think we deserve to be with God. This is what the Bible says. Romans 3:10. "No one is righteous, no not one." BUT God has made a way out of this mess by knowing Jesus. Romans 10:9-10 declare 'Jesus is Lord" of your life and believe in you heart... you will be saved. This is fundamental Christianity.

GOD is final judge of all.

My suggestion is that we do not worry about those who are gone and what their judgement will be. Worry about your own judgement and those who are with us. I prefer to keep my eye on the prize and strive to do my best to get to the prize.

Ghandi in hell and Dahmer sitting at the right hand of God.......and the strict bible constructionists wonder how there can be atheists or agnostics!

Last ditch effort. Hey, better late to the party for Dahmer then being a no show. You know, if you can't beat them, or eat them, join them!

Dahmer was afraid the snacks at the party in Hell would be burnt! Sweeter meat in heaven.

Chefaz,

Love others as you love yourself is one of he tenants of Christianity. How can you, in good conscience, say 'don't worry about those who are gone'? How just is your God, your faith, to condemn those that knew nothing of it? How callous of you to dismiss their fate, since they and all mankind are supposed to be your brothers.

WOW Dean - I have neither condemned nor have I dismissed anyone. If you would please tell me what I can do about anyone who has passed, I'd appreciate it very much. To what gain is there for anyone to concern themselves for those who are already departed except to hope that they have known GOD and that we will see them again someday???

If you are referring to purgatory, I'm sorry but I've never been shown any Biblical evidence of this.

GOD is Just, my Faith very strong and as I said in my opening statement, GOD is final judge of all. Since it is HE and HE alone who judges rightly, how do you suppose HE will judge those who did not know HIM through no fault of their own??? I would think with HIS mercy. I do not Pray to the dead or for the dead but I do Pray for those who are alive - those that I know and those that I do not know.

You have judged me quite harshly. I hope that I've managed to clarify any misunderstanding.

Hugh Mongous-

Ummm, dude? Romans was written by Paul, not Jesus. Paul kinda screwed the pooch when he decided to inform everyone that the only way to Heaven was "through" Jesus, hence to worship Him, not by learning His teachings and acting upon them. Jesus never wanted people to worship Him!! There are no statements (correct me if you can) by Jesus that alluded to any request to actually worship Him, either in this world or the afterlife. And think about it! With what we know about Jesus' life and teachings, does this man (or Son of God if you must) really sound like someone who would be so conceited and narcissistic that He needed the mortal masses to worship at His feet for eternity?? I don't believe so......but that is the basis for faith, and you are entitled to believe as you may......God Bless!

"If you would please tell me what I can do about anyone who has passed, I'd appreciate it very much."

chefaz, ummm, how about saying a prayer or two for them?

"Hand em a Bible so he can study up for the final" - (Doctor to nurse regarding dying patient)]

Chevaz nailed it - It's all about this shiny bauble that is so intoxicating, (everlasting life), while simultaneously threatening eternal punishment. It creates a psychological dissonance that is so great people willfully and gladly abdicate all intellectual reason just on the "what if?" premise.

Amusing and sad at the same time. The pathos around it is so profound it reminds me of the japanese saying "Mono no aware" - loosely translated as "the underlying sadness of all things."

Actually ivanhoe...it's not only about eternal life at the end. Not even close. It is most certainly about the Spiritual journey while here on earth. A journey and experience well worth much more than all the shiny, intoxicating baubles that anyone could amass. I don't expect you to understand it but I wish that you could. The "what if" questions along with many other questions answered for me many years ago during my search as an agnostic teetering on atheism. And no sadness...only Joy.

Best argument of the day, Jeff

Isn't it amazing how many people on death row find God? My htoght here is, they have so many people saying they need to repent and show remorse, and their defense attorney says, if you want a chance at staying alive you better listen to them, they conveniently find "God" about a year before their scheduled execution date. (No I don't know for sure but it usually isn't too far ahead of the schedule). Now, they get the religious folks up in arms to "save" this poor, misguided soul's miserable slimy life and then near riot when the execution actually takes place. "They murdered a man of great faith...he was remorseful, he had found the light..."...my response....my foot.

On the Dahmer "converson," just because one has belief doesn't mean one is going to be, please excuse the religious wording here, not sure how else to put it, rewarded in Heaven. Dahmer's actions were human atrocities and if the concept of hell is true, he is not "resting in peace."

Good question Jeff, but really, it is not for us to answer. If Dahmer gave his heart to God and allowed God to enter his heart..... Remember the thief on the cross? He acknowledged Jesus as the Messiah in his last hours of life. Jesus assured Him that Hw would accept him and that he would be with Him in Paradise. That is the thing about God, His ways are not our ways.

I think you're confusing faith with physics.

Matter can not be destroyed. But it can certainly be transformed.

We've all experienced that firsthand. Examples caterpillar to butterfly, babies born from tiny little cells, trash composting into rich soil. No one needs faith to believe in those things. That is the earth taking care of itself.

So sure, Dahmer can be transformed. So can I. So can Mohammad. But evil can be transformed too. Even the devil can change his spots to attract others.

One can call out to Jesus anytime. One can pray to God for unholy things.

One can just pray. Or not.

Truly, God does not lie. However, man does. Do you personally know the morality of King James? How about the morality of the translators? There are many different bible interpretations and each needs to be at least 20% different in order to be printed as a bible. That alone makes it difficult to have faith in any bible. Jesus, however, was a great dude and his words and teachings are very simple. "The kingdom of Heaven is within", "God dwelleth in Heaven". So by using simple logic, God dwells within. "That which you seek, is the One who is seeking". -St Francis of Assisi

Garbage! Clearly you just read and assimilated the verses that make you feel warm and fuzzy and neglected the rest of the Bible. God judges sin! The price of sin is death (spiritual and physical). But the gift of God is eternal life through whom? Jesus Christ! It's just that simple!

Even a child can grasp that (and they often do), regardless of who translated it! Jesus, this 'great dude' you speak of said, 'Repent, and be born again'. I suggest you do so.

How come god can't handle money? He's always begging for more money.

Arch,

Most people of faith will admit they haven't read the bible if pressed. For all these people who believe the Bible is perfect let me remind you of one of the rules...

"Six days may work be done; but in the seventh [is] the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth [any] work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death."

Can you imagine if Christians actually took the Bible literally?

Actually, I think if you read enough of the bible, Jesus himself worked on the sabbath. His work was teaching and sometimes healing and he never turned his back on that. He did take days when he went to pray in private, but I am not sure about the set day of the week being set aside for that. If people genuinly try to live their lives as Jesus did, they will have their plate full and won't have time to worry about much else.

Can you imagine if Christians actually took the Bible literally?

They only do that for the parts that are convenient.

They only do that for the parts that are convenient.

I actually had a christian admit that to me.

I'v read the Communist Manifesto. Twice. Can I still be a republican?

Wake up,

What you said actually doesn't make sense as a reply to lebbano.

The fact that you picked up the Communist Manifesto makes you ineligible to be a Republican... that is the definition of heresy!

Which parts make it hard to be a Christian exactly? A true understanding of who God is and what the Bible says as a whole make it much easier for me to be a Christian. I care not whether one labels me "intelligent" or "unintelligent" for that.

The ultimate paradox to me is to claim there is no God and yet to claim morality. If God does not exist, then we're all just part of a systematic process, and personal pleasure is the only pursuit worth a damn. Spending oneself on pursuing illusory morality would be useless and, well, stupid (See Neitzche or CS Lewis for philosophical specifics). After studying many viewpoints, it is only by a belief in God and the Bible that I have made sense of the world (as chaotic as we've made it).

I'm sorry, Jordan205, but I don't need a God to be moral. I have the higher functions of the mind to conclude that hurting others without purpose is wrong and helping others when I can is right. How do I know? Well, I do believe in an ethic that your faith is suposed to. 'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.' Remember that one? Please don't try to tell me that only God can make us moral when He ordered Joshua to go invade a foreign country, kill every man, woman, child, ox, and ass that lived, and bring back all of their treasures to His priests. These days we call that genocide and it's a war crime. I know, I know, the Jews were the 'chosen people', but is that really an excuse?

"Spending oneself on pursuing illusory morality would be useless and, well, stupid"

This is simply not true. Our species would have never gotten this far if we did not have some innate understanding of what was right and what was wrong.

In fact, billions of non-Christians behave perfectly well toward each other based on the fundamental understanding life is better when you behave civil toward one another.

Where's the paradox in that?

Dean, morality is an expression of Godliness that even atheists attempt, morality is defined by God. If I had no fear of God, no law could stop me from doing whatever it was that I would chose to do. To aspire to live a 'moral' life is an attempt to live a Godly life, even if you do not acknowledge that it's God

who taught man to live morally. The observations I've read today are interesting, the concept of hell, and the possibility of an eternity there, and of course the ongoing debate of why would a loving God create or allow such, along with the fact that no one alive can prove or disprove the existence of hell. It's interesting in that I think asking these questions provokes interest, and hopefully some introspective thought by the readers of the responses. Religion does have a purpose, even if the practitioners of a particular religion seem un-Christian in their actions, hey they're just people being people, imperfect in most every way. Religion at the very least reminds us that we're not alone and that other people's needs are often greater than our own. I will make just one more observation, although hell is only mentioned a dozen or so times in the Bible, what it's like and what goes on there is much more accutely described than what transpires in heaven, why do you think that is?

If I had no fear of God, no law could stop me from doing whatever it was that I would chose to do.

Leftfield: you are gonna be one scary dude if you ever figure out that God doesn't exist if that's the only thing keeping you moral!

It sure is an easy argument to say morality is Godly and those that act morally whether they know it or not are acting Godly. That just about covers it all for you, right? You never need to question anything, because you've already got your answer.

although hell is only mentioned a dozen or so times in the Bible, what it's like and what goes on there is much more accutely described than what transpires in heaven, why do you think that is?

Because fear is a better tool to control large groups of people than love is, sadly.

Leftfield - your conclusions come from left field. What you have stated is pure conjecture made up by you, unverifiable by anyone else, thus circular, unfalseafiable, and, ergo, completely pointless to this discussion. But nice try!

What you fail to grasp is that "morality" is the end result of evolution. Many people don't understand the biological underpinnings to how humans interact. Co-operation is superior to tit for tat models as proven by basic game theory. There are also interesting studies done where people across different cultures, ages, genders, etc are given complex moral scenarios and then asked to make decisions about what is more moral. Not suprisingly people almost universally chose the same things even if they couldn't articulate exactly why one scenario was more moral than anther.

Eg: There are 100 old people and 2 babies stuck on a train track and you only have time to save one group. Who do you save? People invariably save the babies regardless of religious belief etc. A lot of the scenarios people can't explain why, they just "feel" one is more moral than the other. This is a pretty good indicator that we have an innate hardwired "morality". We simply put labels on it.

Ironically, your argument, which is often used, only reveals what YOU would do without fear of supernatural reprisal. THINK about it. I mean, really, really THINK about it. All you are saying is YOU would fornicate with sheep and molest goats and whatnot. Most people making this argument don't even see the irony though.

Wake up, you sound like a christian and most christians are republicans - republicans really believe that it is ok to take from the poor, give to the rich. Regan really believed that if you were homeless and living on the streets, it is because you wanted to. In republican eyes global warming is just a liberal plot or many christians don't worry about it as god will take care of it. I have heard many christians say that animals were put here for human use. I could go on an on about their lack of respect for life of all living things. The only social concerns christians have now are abortion and gay marriage and to hell with over population, global warming etc.

PamH - what a bunch of dribble.

mo·ral·i·ty

[muh-ral-i-tee, maw-]

–noun, plural -ties for 4–6.
1.
conformity to the rules of right conduct; moral or virtuous conduct.

2.
moral quality or character.

3.
virtue in sexual matters; chastity.

In the 3 definitions of morality, I do not see it as defined by God or listed as an expression of godliness. Morality is not a religious concept.

I'v read the Communist Manifesto. Twice. Can I still be a republican?

Actually, a better analogy would be, if you've read the Republican platform twice, can you still be a Republican? It is so appalling, I don't see how.

Signed,

A (recovering) Republican

Having faith is something is now ignorance and fairy tales?

You can't prove them wrong, so you're right? I find it difficult to undertand the fact that you are calling them ignorant, but have no data or scientific evidence to prove them incorrect in their beliefs.

Your bigotry amazes me.

Honestly Wake up can you prove to me that you exist.

Wake up, show Me some objective proof that what you believe is true and I'll give it serious consideration. Historical records do NOT support the belief system you espouse so you take it on faith. Faith is wonderful, but don't try to force it on me.

Wake up it's never been proven that a god, ANY god existed. It can't be proven unless one actually comes down here and declares themself. Also to the technologically ignorant people of the biblical period any superior technology would have looked like godly magic so for all any one knows IF there were any miracles it could have been aliens or humans from the far future or anything else. That's just as good a story as the one about a god, neither can be proven one way or the other.

I didn't state my beliefs anywhere in my post. Please show me where I stated that.

So Dean, considering you have no idea what I believe or don't believe, maybe you're ignorant?? Not trying to force anything on anyone. Part of the definition of bigotry is showing animosity towards others because of their beliefs.

George's wise-ass "Are you smarter than a 5th grader?" Comment displays animosity towards others because they believe something differently than he does.

Nora-I never said there was proof of existence. All I said was there isn't any proof to the contrary.

But I am glad everyone drew their own conclusions that I'm some wild holler roller because George is a bigot. I was never trying to prove or force anything. Simply saying you can't disprove it so the negative remarks are bigoted.

Wake-up - If being unable to disprove a negative is the standard for belief then you must believe in:

Santa, elves, unicorns, the Easter Bunny, the colour zorg, extraterrestials, the Tooth Fairy, Fairies in general, invisble pink elephants, an invisible teapot impervious to scientific instruments revolving around the sun between Earth and Mars that I say is there but you can't prove isn't,....etc,...etc

For your edifice:

Argument from ignorance, also known as argumentum ad ignorantiam or appeal to ignorance, is an informal logical fallacy. It asserts that a proposition is necessarily true because it has not been proven false (or vice versa). This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes a third option, which is: there is insufficient investigation and therefore insufficient information to "prove" the proposition to be either true or false. Nor does it allow the admission that the choices may in fact not be two (true or false), but may be as many as four; with (3) being unknown between true or false; and (4) being unknowable (among the first three). And finally, any action taken, based upon such a pseudo "proof" is fallaciously valid, that is, it is being asserted to be valid based upon a fallacy.^[1] In debates, appeals to ignorance are sometimes used to shift the burden of proof.

Nora the last I knew there was no proof that God did not exist. But then again if it is proven God does exist and he shows up it is going to be way to late for most people.

Nora the last I knew there was no proof that God did not exist.

As Ivanho pointed out, we can't prove that the Tooth Fairy and invisible pink elephants don't exist, either. But, the burden is not on us to prove that God, the Tooth Fairy and invisible pink elephants don't exist. The burden of proof is on those who claim that such creatures exist. Even our system of justice is based on proving that something happened and that a particular person is responsible, not that something DID NOT happen.

Barry-NJ your argument holds no merit; burden of proof is not a one wayendeavor. We all know the tooth ferry, pink elephants, Santa and the Easter Bunny do not exist so there is nothing to prove. For those who choose to believe in God and for those who do not it is a belief and that is what makes the christian unique and if you choose not to believe that is your choice; but my duty to prove God's existence is no greater than a non-believer's duty to prove he does not. Your agrument places the non-believer in the role of defense attorney whose duty is to prove something did not happen.

Your agrument places the non-believer in the role of defense attorney whose duty is to prove something did not happen.

No, a defense attorney doesn't have to prove that something did not happen.

You claim that "we all know" that the creatures that I named don't exist? Oh, really? We can say the same thing about God. The only proof that we have is your belief, which isn't proof at all.

Now, if you want to believe in mythical creatures, that's fine with me. But, the rest of us are tired of your unproven mythologies being used to run our lives and our tax money being drained in the form of tax-deductible contributions to institutions which have the single purpose of worshipping a mythological being.

I'd say Wake Up has been permanently pawned by the overflow of logic. Logic is intimidating to those not used to applying it. Perhaps he/she went back to sleep.

To Boomer57

Food for thought:

Suppose my friend Tim claims: "There are pink elephants flying around in the kitchen", but his wife Katie states: "No, there are no pink elephants flying in the kitchen." Which of them should carry the burden of proof, Tim or Katie? Well, the problem is this: If Tim is correct; there should be evidence to support his claim. However, if Katie is correct, there will be no evidence at all. It is therefore impossible to expect her to find what does not exist. For that reason, the burden of proof becomes Tim's responsibility.

Suppose Tim now claimed: "God exists," while his wife Katie stated: "God does not exist." Based on the aforementioned, the burden of proof is unequivocally on Tim and not Katie.

Alternatively, Katie can always say: "Well, I have looked and cannot find any evidence for god. Therefore, God does not exist. Case closed." Will you accept that conclusion? If not, you better get cracking trying to find some evidence, because noone else has.

How about John 14:6 "No one comes to the Father except through me."? Those are Jesus' words. I cannot claim to be any type of Biblical scholar but the Bible is clear on good works not being enough to make it. Whether i save a busload of orphans from death, I am STILL a sinner. Whether I am a Christian or not I am still a sinner. There are no degrees of bad to God. All sin is toxic to him. The ONLY reason we get to have is Grace and forgiveness provided by Jesus' death on the cross.

Now can I claim to know the details? When we die do we go to line A, Line B, etc? Nope. From the Bible I know we will awaken in the next life when we close out eyes here and we will face a final judgement.

In this case, there is explicit guidance directly from Jesus' mouth on the matter. ONLY through him do we get to heaven.

"How about John 14:6 "No one comes to the Father except through me."? Those are Jesus' words. I cannot claim to be any type of Biblical scholar but the Bible is clear on good works not being enough to make it."

Talk about ensuring job security. The Church was way ahead of its time :)

That's the problem I have with the way we've been taught to study literature: What is your interpretation of the book? As long as you can support that interpretation with examples from the writings or other sources, then your understanding of it is valid and right.

Almost all books, art, movies, etc. are not open to interpretation. Authors pen those words and painters stroke their canvas with a specific message in mind. A university class could be in complete agreement that one item in a particular Dickens' novel is a symbol of ambition, but if it's not what the author meant it to be, then he'd be screaming from his grave, "You're all wrong!"

The Bible is definitely not open to interpretation. Otherwise, with different books within it being written by so many different people from so many different backgrounds spread across so many years, we would see them drastically contradicting each other. Instead, they all point to one message: our fall from God through sin, our inability to redeem ourselves creating the need for a Savior, which was fulfilled by Jesus with his death on the cross, and only through Him may we be reconciled with God again.

Yes, there are some parts of the Bible that are symbolic, and some parts seem downright odd to us because they were written so long ago within a culture that was so different from ours. It may seem abstract to you, but I assure you that if you really dig into it, you'll find it to be more and more cohesive and real.

Think about this. You get a ticket going 55 in a 35, and you go before the judge to tell him that your "interpretation" of that speed limit sign allowed you to go 55, and to top it off, other people were going faster than you. Do you think he's going to forget the fine and give you special rights because of your interpretation or because you weren't breaking the law as much as some other people?

The Bible was written by men -- not by God & not by Jesus. Human authors were quite capable of using literary license for all too human reasons influenced by their own times, cultures, & beliefs. The literal Bible is impossible for me to believe.

As I said, personal interpretation.

Through me could be that same interpretation...through me or "like" me....again, what I simplified down to humanitarianism rather than get into the wider philosophical circle :) What can never be forgotten is that the Bible has been translated who knows ho wmany times from an extremely archaic language. No one will ever convince me that what we see today is the absolute correct interpretation of the original text. If it were, all Bibles would say the exact same thing but passages can be slightly different and a simple change in the position of punctuation can change the entire meaning of the passage.

I see a difference between "good works" and a "good life." Good works might be seen as helping the homeless, charitable contributions etc. Good life is good works plus living in a way that does not harm others. So true, good works are not enough to "make it."

A further example, take one of the most recent horrendous acts..let's go with that 11-yr old that was gang raped. Let's say for example sake that one of those "people" (if I use the word I want I''ll get booted), gave some homeless person $50.00 before they then participated in the rape. That "good work" certainly isn't going to negate the horrendous act later committed.

Let me go to atheism since atheists are not believers. They live a good life, don't hurt children, contribute to society, kind to others, help out. Basically, live their lives as humans without overly harming anyone else (again, going on my previous list of nasty acts). Do they make mistakes the religious sect would see as sin, sure, we all do. Should they be denied the final peace of, again for lack of a better term, the afterlife only because they choose not to believe in a higher power? I say no.

gouranga.....'no one comes to the father but by me....'.....ok, let's assume for arguments sake that this is true.....how do we know that 'by me' is not done in some other way, that jesus takes what people do know, what they do, what they believe, and as his mediator role, accepts that and presents to the father this person. that this scenario allows for people to 'get in' without their having 'explicitly' uttered or consciously used jesus as the vehicle but the morality, the philosophy, is judged sufficient. in romans 1....²⁰ Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse; ²¹ for although they knew God they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking and their senseless minds were darkened.

here there is no mention of jesus, but 'god'......

another point that is hard for the evangelicals to answer is .... in the jericho account, god orders/commands the israelites (and this is against a people who had done absolutely nothing to them! but that is a separate point) to kill every last living thing in the town of jericho....every cat, every dog, every old person, young person, mother, father, child, nursing mother....but here is the kicker......don't you think, logically, that there were pregnant women there too....in other words......god ordered the unborn to be killed!

so, if you believe this is truly from god, you then have to believe in an unadulterated form of genocide......if you can reach that far, then anything less is easy to get you to believe.

Let me use another passage although I am not going to quote directly. Revelations has a passage that says, I believe, "And the dead shall rise again" referring to the second coming of Christ.

Two possible meanings and three of my past pastors agree with me on the second point...(not to ssay my past pastors or I are correct..we just interpreted the same way).

1. people will get up out of graves and start to breathe again

2. the souls of the damned will rise to Heaven (or a person's interpretation of what Heaven means).

Lynn - I like your personal interpretation!

The Bible was written by man using God's words. Man has been known to change things to suit himself. The message is clear: LOVE and PEACE but the rest man had a hand in writing.

Sally,,, Please keep things in perspective. Most people with any logic reject the concept of Revelation, & that's a fact, even Christians do.

Secondly, imagine that "Mathew" or "John" you speak of being nothing more than a politician, at that time They would have been one. Does that help you understand things a bit better?

Sorry, Sally, all you're quotations were written (and re-written - remember King James?) by man. You can talk about divinely inspired all you want, but they are man's words.

Even if the words quoted here are divinely inspired it does not explain how anyone who has never heard of Jesus, or lived prior to His existence on earth can possibly "enter" into heaven. The problem with absolutes is they have to exist as an absolute without exceptions. Here you have an exception already so the statement itself can not be absolute.

I really have never quite understood those who believe that Christ's resurrection guaranteed free pass into heaven. It would seem to me that would be an eternal get out of free pass that would equate the good with the evil. Jesus told his apostles in 20:34 2007)
If you forgive anyones sins, they are forgiven. If you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven."

This written after his resurrection not before by the apostle John. If his resurrection guaranteed a free pass for his believers why then was this written?

Who enters heaven is up to God and only God. To suggest otherwise is blasphemist.

Sally,,, Please keep things in perspective. Most people with any logic reject the concept of Revelation, & that's a fact, even Christians do.

Any basis for this opinion? Even textual critics that deny biblical divinity generally accept the authenticity of the text of Revelation. Though they may believe the account pertains to the AD 60-70 persecution of the church and the impending destruction of Jeruslaem - not any future apocalypse.

David1159,

Yes, it is a get out of hell free pass. Ain't it great!?

That's because God paid for it Himself. Just as He provided a substitute ram for Abraham on Mount Moriah based on Abraham's faith, He Himself paid for our transgressions on the cross at Golgotha (Mount Mariah) and thus, bought us with His own blood, the blood of His Son, Jesus.

Sally: the Lake of Fire is notable in Revelations because Rev 20:14 shows that hell gets cast into the Lake of Fire, showing that hell isn't the Lake of Fire, but rather hell gets destroyed in/by it. Note that in Rev 20:14 "death" is also cast in the Lake along with "hell." Just a few verses later, at Rev 21:4 it reads that "death is no more." Does it make sense for hell and death to be tormented in the Lake of Fire? Understanding this gives meaning to Jesus words that the "wages of sin is death," rather than torment. Also to Jesus words at John 3:16 that "that whosoever believeth in him should not perish."

Hell is temporary. The Lake of Fire is a permanent "second death" where ones will "perish." Does any of that sound like torment? Or more like non-existence?

I totally agree with this. I believe many Churches today have misread and misinterpreted the passages that deal with permanent death in the Bible. By saying that you are "tormented" for all Eternity is wrong. Words like "everlasting", "forever" etc, in the Hebrew and Greek do not equal "eternity". That's saying "everyone" has Eternal Life somewhere or other. The idea of the "Immortal Soul" came in with Greek Philosophy and thought and it's against what the Bible teaches. "God is a Consuming Fire!" -Hebrews. God consumes/destroys all evil after the final judgment. Nobody sits toward the wall with a big Dunce Hat on for all Eternity! It's no wonder people are against Christianity when you look at all the lies being taught. Paul said that you must "Put on Immortality"! IOWs, it isn't a given. Everyone is mortal until they put on immortality. It's either Eternal life or Eternal death in the Lake of Fire.

The word "hell" comes from the Hebrew word "Sheol" and the Greek word "Hades". They simply mean the grave. How many of you would be shocked to know that Jesus went to the Bible hell (common grave of mankind?).

The concept of a burning, fiery hell is not Biblical, nor would a loving God put someone there. This concept comes from the mixing of false religion with true - mainly stemming from the Catholic church (surprise, surprise). The Catholics are famous for trying to convert pagans, thus mixing pagan beliefs with true beliefs to lure more into their flocks.

The concept of a burny fiery hell also comes from not understanding the symbolism in the Bible. The word "Gehenna" is also translated in the KJV as "hell", rather inconsistently. Gehenna was the garbage dump outside of the walls of Jerusalem. Trash (and sometimes bodies) was put there - and the fires were kept extremely hot so that all the garbage was incinerated. So when Jesus talks about "Gehenna", he is using it as a symbolic representation of ETERNAL DEATH. No more no less.

You pastors/priests really should stop lying to your congregations. It drives people away from the only true God, until they stop believing in him, as many people here have professed. If these ones knew what the Bible actually said (not man's interpretation), they might be surprised to know what a wonderful Person he is, and that he wants all of you to live in his new world, right here on earth. They would rather scare you into believing so that they can get your money.

The problem with free pass to heaven by accepting Jesus as your savior is that Jesus never seemed to say that. In fact his message seemed to indicate that it would be difficult, not easy, to do. His message that it would be easier for a rich man get through to eye of a needle, and yes I know that doesn't mean sowing needle, than to enter the kingdom of heaven would seem to indicate otherwise. While I know after his crucifixion he went and opened the gates of hell but no where is it indicated that he brought everyone with him.

We are given free will from God and it is our responcibility as to what we are to do with it. The simple act of saying that you accept Jesus as your Savior but not living as if you did might have an effect on entry.

In any case, as I stated before, it is not within my authority to say who entered or not. All I can do is to live the best I can as would like me to do. If all I have do is accept Jesus then I will see you there. If not, well we will see.

Flames and fire I think have always been symbolic of the potential for total destruction. Thinking on it here in a philosophical religious sort of way :), the soul of the damned is thrown into eternal fire. Some see this as eternal torture but, I can see it as another way..maybe a destruction of hope? A destruction of, as I posted earlier, the chance of "living" as in the concept of afterlife, with a feeling of peace rather than despair?

Thoughts?

I didn't say it was easy (you are correct that Jesus did not say that, either), just that it's free! As a Christian, you have to keep pounding on the door of heaven throughout your life like the neighbor who kept pounding on the door for some bread for his family in the parable. But, as a Christian, you know where the door is and, as long as you keep it up, Jesus will not ignore you when the time comes to open up. He is the door and he hears all the pounding going on and is answering you all the time saying, "Wait, I'm coming soon, keep the oil in the lamp and be ready." So don't be discouraged because you don't always hear Jesus behind the door. Like John Bunyon's Pilgrim, Christian, just keep your faith and keep your hope and keep pounding on the door to heaven. He hears you, He knows your tribulation, He suffered it, too.

Lynn3765 - yes, the Biblical "Lake of Fire" means destruction of death, hell, and "the damned" as you put it. The Bible also reports Jesus saying to not fear man who destroys the body, but fear the one that destroys both body and soul.

Destroy means something quite different than torment. The Bible also states that the soul dies, which is contrary to what many Christians believe.

Sally,,, Please keep things in perspective. Most people with any logic reject the concept of Revelation, & that's a fact, even Christians do.

Jim, your fact is highly flawed, I am a Christian and I most certainly believe in the book of Revelations as do most true Christians. It is the book that tells what is to come and is what true belief is based on. Now on the other hand you may find church organizations who do not but then that is religion. Believeing in an religious organization's doctrine does not make you a Christian.

Nature is brutal, uncaring, and unrelenting.

Humanity has somehow made nature look pretty and relaxing by comparison.

Evil exists, no question. But, if you do not believe that even the devil can be saved by God or Jesus then how strong is your faith reallly

Satan is the best friend the church has ever had. He has kept it in business all these years.

Again...is satan a physical being or is satan a concept? Good and evil exist...not sure how anyone can deny that given what humans can do to or for each other. Do they exist as beings proverbially whispering in someone's ear to do good or evil? That is up to individual faith. I doubt they squabble with each other over a poker table :)

For the non-religious folks, the story behind the devil, satan, beelzebub, whatever name people call "him" is that "he" wasn't an evil being to start. satan was actually an angel who resented God's power and felt "he" could do better and revolted along with some of "his" (satan's) followers (sounds eerily familiar to some corporate types out there doesn't it? :) ) The story is that there was a war in Heaven between satan et al and the soldiers of God, with satan being essentially, er, pounded into the proverbial dirt. As a result, "he" and "his" followers were cast out of Heaven; now, there are other versions out there but that is for anyone else to research if they want to read more :) The concept of Hell" as being "down" relates to the idea that satan was cast out and fell down from Heaven.

My classes prior to my confirmation (I am Lutheran) brought out the point that God grants free will to us. Free will is what allows us to "live" as we wish without His interference. That means we may do good, or evil, but it is OUR choice which side of the line we want to walk. Again, not pushing religion, just personal thoughts here.

Jim there, I am going to go out on a limb here and say he is an atheist, yet, I also imagine he has his own set of morals and values. The concept of morals and values is actually based on religion and faith and adherence to the teachings of a deity (I lump all religions throughout time here) even if someone doesn't believe. Are his morals and values different from mine, possibly since we are two different people who grew up in two different households and possibly different types of societies (as in Southern vs Yankee, or East vs West Coast...by the way, I grew up in Connecticut so yes, I am a yankee :) ) The morals and values we have are not any more important by learning them through religion and faith, or from simply living and/or imitating parents or other figures we respect. I won't get into the negative ideas..that is a whole 'nother debate :)

Good and evil do not exist independently from our perceptions of them.. They are human ideas for human actions. The universe isn't good or evil, it merely exists. Good is what we call the kindness and compassion we show each other because it is helpful to us as a species. We like it and call it good because we recognize that if we were the one in that circumstance we would want that kind of thing to happen to us. We should be good to each other, for no other reason than because it is the right thing to do, but don't delude yourself into thinking the universe cares one way or the other.

Russ, I think a lot of people here, like myself, have rejected the dogma of religion. I believe in a higher entity. I believe Jesus was a higher entity. I pray and talk to God, whatever that is. You can have spirituality but leave religion out of it.

I couldn't imagine not having this faith, even though it remains a mystery to me.

And there's the rub...

Russ, 25% don't believe in a god.

I find that refreshing! Only a couple of decades ago, less than 10% would openly profess that. Now we're a quarter of the folks answering this poll. Is the human race getting smarter or simply more truthful?

;>

I don't know if the numbers are true about 25% of the writers here don't but according to poll after poll over 90% of the population do. Those who believe in God has been increasing in numbers not decreasing. What has been decreasing in the belief in organized religions.

Russ seriously 25% read again 66.1% said either it was a metaphor, distracting or Don't believe...

The thing is that this type of story attracts those who don't believe in religion. It allows them a forum to spew their dislike. The thing is that a story like this tends not to attract those that do.

david - I didn't see the forum until after I voted.

PJ RN

You wonder why our Country is Falling apart.... What was our country built on???? Take a look at your money "IN GOD WE TRUST"... You say that it's refreshing that people are turning away from believing in god?? WoW!! No one is making you believe in anything.. The USA was build on the God premise and now its nothing... Then MOVE>>>.

I in no way was indicating that all fall into this group.

Why are all the Believers Afraid of Their God. Aren't they supposed to Love him. How can you love someone that you are Afraid of. And what has God done for the Human Race lately, or ever. Isn't a God's job to protect people? Why did he allow that Earthquake in Japan?

The type of "fear" referred to in the Bible is a deep respect and acknowledgement of power, not a cowering fear. Christianity teaches that God loves everyone and desires everyone to be saved. Unfortunately, not everyone chooses that. Please don't associate nonsensical ideas like Jonathan Edwards' "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" with Biblical Christianity, because they couldn't be much further from what the Bible teaches. God isn't sitting there eager to send people to Hell. Quite the opposite. God wanted us to be saved so much that He sent His Son to die in our place. That's about as far from a God who desires to send people to Hell as you can get. Hell wasn't even created for humans, but unfortunately many will choose to go there.

So God loved us so much that he received a blood sacrifice from himself as a ways of removing our inequities which he decided on as well as designed the only critters that committed them.

God might be love.... but this is just terrible planning and even worse after-the-fact compensation.

A better gift than killing himself to appease himself would have been to keep that raining manna and quail thing going. A whole lot less killing and stealing would have occurred if people weren't starving for most of history. It's a win-win for all. Less sin in the eyes of god and people have a better than 50% chance of living past the age of 10 for almost all of history.

No one is making you believe in anything.. The USA was build on the God premise and now its nothing... Then MOVE>>>.

The question is, who's God is it based on? Even in the early days of the republic, the notion that the country is Christian-based was rejected. Our most basic founding documents say nothing about God, merely mentioning a "creator".

Great to know you are God and have the invitation list. I dont think so! You are not even a minor god and you have no damned idea of who will be anywhere after death. But please keep carrying on your judgments in the name of whatever god you serve. If that god does exist he is most likely going to ask you what gave you the right to name who goes where for him. That alone might decide your own fate....

Paul, God states quite clearly how one can be saved and be in Heaven with Him and also has stated quite cleary that those not there will be in Hell. Simply reiterating what He has already said is not making judgements for Him. That would be like saying CNN makes judgements on Constitutional Law when they report a Supreme Court decision. They aren't making the decision, they're just repeating to you what it was.

There are some evil politicians, doctors and lawyers. We don't throw out politics, medicine and law because people have abused it for their own gain. We also can't throw out Christianity because some have twisted its message for their own purpose.

True and the further you get from the original Latin, Greek, and Aramaic the looser and more self fulling the translation.

The newest translations don't even sound like a Bible. They read like Fundamentalist Dogma or worse---Satan's delight at adulteration.

The "changed over the centuries" argument is ignorant at best. All widely-accepted modern translations were translated from copies only a century or two removed from the original documents. There has been little-to-no "change over the centuries."

By the way, the correct rendering of that passage is "You shall not murder." God commanded Jews to execute capital punishment in a number of situations, including even as the punishment for violating that very command of not murdering. Obviously, God was not opposed to capital punishment and He commanded Jews to go to war on a regular basis. Having said that, He never commanded Christians to kill anyone. Yes, some (primarily Catholics) have abused the church and used it for such, but most Christians will agree with you that such is a violation of God's commands and would condemn such practices. I am among that group.

Besides the issue of translation, there's also the question of which books were included in the Bible. There were many to choose from, but the ones that didn't agree with the prevailing dogma of the day were rejected. Sounds like a lot of human editing to me.

Hitler too?

Then why not just call it 'universal love'? Why qualify it as a god?

@Trevor,

You have to understand what faith really is. Biblical faith is not hope. It is knowing. It is being sure of something you cannot see with your physical eyes, or hear with your physical ears. Faith is the substance of things unseen, while hope has no substance. Put anohre way, Faith is what you see, hear, or feel with the real "you". The real "you" is spirit. The physical eyes, ears, and brain you are used to is inferiour to what your spirit uses to discern things. If your spirit were to leave your body, you could still see, but not with your physical eyes. You could still think as well, but not with your physical brain. I am saying faith is that which you diescern with your spirit. Now, God has revealed Himself to millions of poeple. He revealed Himself to me, and He has given us His Word which is truly incredible. You just have to seek Him with a true heart. He also tells us in John that if we follow His teachings, He will reveal Himself to us. The fact is, you can know Him beyond the shadow of a doubt. As for the Bible...a couple of points:

I have learned it would have been impossible for man to author the Bible based on it's content. The accurate history, predictive prophecy, the science and other concepts far beyond the comprehension of men, and recently using computers we are able to test the research of those that discovered unbelievable patterns in the Bible that would take supercomputers literally thousands of years to generate and check for accuracy. I am suggesting to you there are many fingerprints the Creator left for us to find. These things I have spoke of are physical in nature, and most interesting, but our God is a spirit, and when He reveals Himself to us, it is on a spiritual level which is greater by far, and more reliable than the mechanics of this body as I stated above.

You gotta believe in something! I believe in a God that loves me and since I came to this realization, my life is better, even on a bad day. Paul said that God placed a sense of right and wrong in us. It is an instinct. Everyone seems to know when they do wrong even if they aren't "religious". I think that people should stop fighting it and accept that there is a God, and then start studying rather than thinking. The reason they turn against God is because many things don't make sense to them. They have been taught stuff that doesn't make sense by people who can't give them any meaningful answers. Junk Religion, Entertainment Religion all exist but they aren't "true" Religion. The answers are in the Manuscripts. Translations really suck at times, but the answers are there if you dig. Then things start falling into place as the light goes on.

@Judy,

agreed 100%

gossman Thank you. NO one could have explained it better,only jesus.

Faith is the abrogation of responsibility and freedom, and of handing those over to an imaginary friend and father figure. This mis-firing of the limbic system is one of the primary causes of war, strife, and poverty in the world. It is fear dressed up as virtue.

"Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the occurrence of the improbable.... A man full of faith is simply one who has lost (or never had) the capacity for clear and realistic thought. He is not a mere ass: he is actually ill." ~ H.L. Mencken, New York Times Magazine, 11 September 1955

"Faith is nothing more than the license religious people give themselves to keep believing when reasons fail." ~ Sam Harris

"Faith is like a piece of blank paper whereon you may write as well one miracle as another." ~ Charles Blount (1654-1693)

"Faith is the antithesis of proof." ~ NY State Supreme Court Justice Edward J. Greenfield, 1995

"Faith is believing something you know ain't true." ~ Mark Twain [Samuel Clemens] (1835-1910)

"Faith is an absolutely marvelous tool. With faith there is no question too big for even the smallest mind." ~ Rev. Donald Morgan (b. 1933)

"Faith," said St. Paul, "is the evidence of things not seen." We should elaborate this definition by adding that faith is the assertion of things for which there is not a particle of evidence and of things which are incredible." ~ E. Haldeman-Julius

"Faith is deciding to allow yourself to believe something your intellect would otherwise cause you to reject -- otherwise there's no need for faith." - Unknown

"Faith is a cop-out. It is intellectual bankruptcy. If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits." ~ Dan Barker

"Faith is believing in things when common sense tells you not to." ~ George Seaton

"Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence." ~ Richard Dawkins

"Faith is an intellectual crime." ~ Philosopher AC Grayling

Thanks for the quotes, very nice.

AAAahhhhh...I see gossman the hate mongering hypocrite has crawled out of his hole to post.

Good quotes. Thanks.

AAAahhhhh...I see gossman the hate mongering hypocrite has crawled out of his hole to post.

I don't hate anyone. Do I believe in the Gospel of Jesus? Yes, but I do not hate anyone. I'm not sure what would move you to say that.

"Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the occurrence of the improbable"

Oh, so it's believing in Macroevolution? Except that "improbable" doesn't nearly do justice to the infintismally small probability of that occurance.

Truth does not require your belief in it to exist.

To vbscript2

There are two kinds of belief:

(1) Belief in the absence of evidence. Faith is that kind of a belief.

(2) Belief in the presence of evidence. This belief is also called reason and is the foundation of science.

In religion assertions are believed in the absence of evidence. In science assertions are believed because of evidence. There is an ocean of difference between the two. Belief in Macroevolution is based on logic, reason, and evidence. It is not a religious faith. Creationism, and the belief in spontaneous appearance of fully developed humans, on the other hand, is.

Besides, your allusion to improbabilities indicates you are introducing creationist nonsense that has been debunked for great many decades. Please spare us.