General questions about the Christian idea of God and love

[Silver]

Please take that to the cry baby thread

The one titled Frodo's crybaby thread? If only I could find it......Oh, here it is. It keeps moving on me.

[Tonus]

Please give an example of religious failing that isn't actually human failing.

I agree with the point that any "religious" failing is really a human failing. Humans created religion, so if they do horrible things in the name of religion, it's a human problem. As with any other human failing, the way to overcome it is to recognize that it is a human failing, and therefore must be resolved by humans. God is the ethnic hero of the racist, the patriotic hero of the nationalist, and the athletic hero of the sports fanatic.

[fr0d0]

Check mate I believe

[Silver]

You have a very misconceived notion of what checkmate means.

[genkaus]

Those facts blamed on religious bigotry are much more likely best attempts at explaining weak scientific knowledge, if there is such a thing, because as we know, all scientific knowledge is subject to revision.

In other words - not facts.

Flat earth, for example...

During the early Church period, with some exceptions, most held a spherical view, for instance, Augustine, Jerome, and Ambrose to name a few.

Relevance?

And then there's the abuse of religion by those wanting to assert control to get power. Those things are people acting as people do. Not people acting upon religious direction.

Even the religious bigotry you cite is not a result of religious teaching but of human failing.

If they use explicit religious direction as a justification for their grab for power or bigotry, then it is a religious failing.

[Esquilax]

You say every religion ever, then you also say a variety of imaginary religions? By imaginary religions are you talking about things like the flying noodle monster made up to try and make fun of god?

Not just those. Every possible variation on every possible scenario that could ever happen could be sufficient to get you punished with hell and, if you're going to believe just in case and not because of evidence, you have no rational justification for ignoring any of them in favor of christianity. There could be a god that punishes you for not eating ice cream on the third Wednesday in June; do you believe in that god just in case that hell is real?

That's the problem with the line of reasoning you're espousing when you say that it's better to believe than face the consequences: there's no reason to discount any belief, then.

I'm a member of the religion my grandparents are a member of. A member of the religion my parents are.

Which would have absolutely nothing to do with whether or not it's true.

Although they did not go to church a lot when I was younger I was still brought up with those values, and that was the one I was raised around. I believe in my heart (feel it in my soul) that this is the right religion. Always have. I do not follow other religions, because I know (feel it) that they are not right.

So why on earth would you bring up this terrible scare tactic of "I'd rather believe than face the consequences!" if that's not actually why you believe?

Oh, and also, feeling something is not knowing it. Knowledge is demonstrated.

If it were do you not think I know that god would not know?

And if I claimed belief just to avoid the consequences, do you think god wouldn't know that too? Or does the sincerity of your belief not actually matter, so long as you shut up and don't rock the boat?

You're right it was a problem with me. People make things work one way or the other. That does not mean they will last.

What a nasty, mean spirited thing to say to a person for no reason. Very christian of you.

Yet if you foster that relationship with that in it, you are relying on a crutch. You're building your relationship on that. What after 10 years with that you took it away? Where would it be then? Like I said above. People make things work. How would it work without it if that is the basis you built your relationship on?

Alternately, you could live in a world of human subtlety, where everything isn't this massive swing of "not present at all" or "the entire focus of being" with nothing in between. Porn can just be an occasional spice. The basis of my relationship is mutual trust, companionship and creative admiration for each other. I also occasionally watch a dirty movie with her. Those two things aren't in contradiction.

I wasn't saying sex was the only thing about being gay. Everyone wants love, and to be loved. They are sexually immoral though.

Hey, I can only respond to what you write. When you ventured into the topic of problems with homosexuality, all you did was list problems with anal sex. That's not something I made you do.

But how can exactly the same kind of relationships that men and women have suddenly become immoral when there's two dudes or two chicks involved? I warn you, if you say "because god," then you'd better have all your ducks in a row and be prepared to demonstrate that that's true, and also to justify the immediately obvious cherry picking that ensues from that.

Serious human failing there

I really don't feel like playing definitional games with you. To me, the execution of an idea that only exists because of religion ("Faith can do things!") and wouldn't be an issue without it is a religious failing. It's also a human failing, given that humans are involved and humans invented religion, but I have literally zero interest in jumping through semantic hoops in service of arguing a position you'll never even consider.

[genkaus]

Please give an example of religious failing that isn't actually human failing.

That's a loaded question - given that most atheists here consider religion itself to be a human failing. Which means we'd regard all religious failings as human failings.

However, going to the spirit of the question rather than its poor formulation, I guess what you are asking is which religious failings can be attributed solely to religion and not to any other social or economic factors. For example, religion was used to justify slavery, but it was also an economically beneficial system for slave-owners - so you can't call it just a religious failing.

Let's get the biggies out of the way:
1. The Inquisition
2. Witch hunts
3. Human sacrifices across different religions
4. Anti-semitism and multiple examples of associated violence
5. Persecution of blasphemy and other things considered against your religion of choice.
6. Persecution of of LGBT personnel.
7. Refusing medical treatment based on religious beliefs.

The list goes on.

[fr0d0]

You have a very misconceived notion of what checkmate means.

Meet sarcasm. It's a form of wit. Apparently.

---

If they use explicit religious direction as a justification for their grab for power or bigotry, then it is a religious failing.

No, they misuse the direction so badly as to oppose it. It's how far you'll go to oppose the truth.

---

I really don't feel like playing definitional games with you. To me, the execution of an idea that only exists because of religion ("Faith can do things!") and wouldn't be an issue without it is a religious failing. It's also a human failing, given that humans are involved and humans invented religion, but I have literally zero interest in jumping through semantic hoops in service of arguing a position you'll never even consider.

A result being the opposite of the direction in your mind can still be the cause of the direction. Murder is the result of the state outlawing murder. Yeah, semantics

[Hellfire1014]

Not just those. Every possible variation on every possible scenario that could ever happen could be sufficient to get you punished with hell and, if you're going to believe just in case and not because of evidence, you have no rational justification for ignoring any of them in favor of christianity. There could be a god that punishes you for not eating ice cream on the third Wednesday in June; do you believe in that god just in case that hell is real? If you want evidence the only evidence I can offer is prophecy's in the bible. Not that any of my evidence will change your mind. Other than god, or an angel appearing before you in person. If that were to happen it would probably be the devil/demon. My evidence. The re-establishing of Israel. The temple that will be built in Israel. The Talking idol. The world will turn against Israel. The return of the jews to their homeland. IF you want evidence it is all on the web for you in the form of Christian bible prophecy. Lots have came true. I will say this. After the rapture happens there's still time to turn to god. Although it will be VERY HARD.

That's the problem with the line of reasoning you're espousing when you say that it's better to believe than face the consequences: there's no reason to discount any belief, then. That's not my reasoning. I'm just saying even if you don't believe it would be better to try to believe. It would be better to forsake your wordly ways and seek out god. I've always believed, and I thank god for not hardening my heart. I thank god for turning me around.


Which would have absolutely nothing to do with whether or not it's true.
I was just stating why I am the religion I am. Naturally if I was born into a islamic family I would probably be islamic. If I were born into a jewish family I would probably be jewish. Must I go on with different religions?

So why on earth would you bring up this terrible scare tactic of "I'd rather believe than face the consequences!" if that's not actually why you believe? Sorry I've misinformed you. How can I believe in god, yet only "believe" in god to not face consequences? I have faith and hope. I turned back to god to not face the consequences. I knew if I died while doing what I was doing I would of went to hell. Although I put it out of my mind I was tired of not having control over my life. Over my sexual immorality. Which I will touch on again on one of your questions down below. If I said "I'd rather believe than face the consequences" I was referring to those who do not believe btw. Although that is not possible, because for them to believe in the consequences they would have to believe.

Oh, and also, feeling something is not knowing it. Knowledge is demonstrated. You're right. Which is why religion has also been called faith. You must have faith, then god will put knowledge on you to reaffirm your faith.

Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me. -Revelation 3:20

And if I claimed belief just to avoid the consequences, do you think god wouldn't know that too? Or does the sincerity of your belief not actually matter, so long as you shut up and don't rock the boat? See my above two corrections. I am truly sorry for misleading you, and not using the right words.

You're right it was a problem with me. People make things work one way or the other. That does not mean they will last.

What a nasty, mean spirited thing to say to a person for no reason. Very christian of you.
I am sorry. I did not mean to be offensive. I was again stating what I believed. Let me reword that. It will not last in that form. Everything grows old. I'm just going from my personal experience. Which I should probably not do. I will start over, any more post's I make after this one I will only deliver the word of god, and not my own word.

Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. Proverbs 3:5

Alternately, you could live in a world of human subtlety, where everything isn't this massive swing of "not present at all" or "the entire focus of being" with nothing in between. Porn can just be an occasional spice. The basis of my relationship is mutual trust, companionship and creative admiration for each other. I also occasionally watch a dirty movie with her. Those two things aren't in contradiction. You are right. I was speaking of a very narrow situation. Only from the point of view to which I saw from. Thank you for enlightening me. However everyone has their own way, and I would not want to try to add these things as a supplement. I'm not saying everyone's way is right though. Man since the beginning of time has tried to make his own way to which he believed was best. Just human nature I suppose.

Hey, I can only respond to what you write. When you ventured into the topic of problems with homosexuality, all you did was list problems with anal sex. That's not something I made you do.

But how can exactly the same kind of relationships that men and women have suddenly become immoral when there's two dudes or two chicks involved? I warn you, if you say "because god," then you'd better have all your ducks in a row and be prepared to demonstrate that that's true, and also to justify the immediately obvious cherry picking that ensues from that. I'm not going to only say "because god." How can I not bring god into this when that's what this whole debate, and forum subsection is about? It's 5:00 in the morning, so the only answer I will give right now is because god command's it. It goes against his design. Two men can't have a baby. The only way two women can have a baby is by injecting another man's semen into her egg. Which is god's design. [/u]

[Fidel_Castronaut]

I could not get the quote thing down, so I'll just bold the stuff.

Nobody will burn in hell because hell doesn't exist. It's a fantasy.

I'd rather not take the chance to find out otherwise.

Quotations can be fiddly but you'll pick it up in time

Anyway, you're taking just a big a chance as me:

---

---

I don't think (your) version of god exists so I don't think 'it' sees anything.

I think it's good a little bit that you at least think some version of god exist's. Not all doubting. I only hope my version of god exist's, because it's the faith I'm following.

I'm an agnostic atheist. I review god claims as they're submitted to me in light of the evidence. The abrahamic god I rejected a long time ago as claims for it are self-defeating and evidence has not been presented. It's impossible for me to reject all god claims as I don't know what they all are (nor could I ever know), though I think the idea of a 'god' character orchestrating everything highly unlikely.

Using threats of eternal punishment derived entirely from your imagination isn't scary and neither is it threatening. It's just, well, weird.

I'm not using threats. Only quoting what I believe. I suppose I am kind of a weird person though. Not for my religion though.

But they are threats, aren't they? Whenever a theist cites hell they do so as a reason why people should believe what they do. "If you don't believe in Jesus this is where you'll end up." It's the definition of a threat. Even your handle is Hellfire. What the hell man?

You sound like a confused individual. MY recommendation would be to ditch the bible crap and go seek some real advice from real people. Entirely your choice, naturally, but there's nothing wrong with porn, masturbating, following some religious woo like Chakras or indeed being gay. You've been told there is a problem with these things by people who espouse a philosophy derived from a supposed celestial entity. It's a nonsense. You've been told not take responsibility for anything; if it's 'bad' is the devil, if it's 'good' then it's all god's work. It's netiehr, it's entirely you and the circumstances around you. Get an A on a test? God did fuck all. You did it. Fail that test? That's entirely on you. buddy.

Why do I sound confused? My problem's with these things?

You sound confused because you indicated you had thoughts (sexual I presume) about people of the same sex and you decided to pray the gay away instead (that's how I read it). That's impossible. You can't pray away who you are, only live in denial and do yourself further damage in the long run. I've got no idea your sexual preference, but it's apart of you, Jesus or no Jesus.

If I look at porn I'm satisfied with that, and do not seek out a relationship. If I look at porn in a relationship then I would not be fair to my wife.

Horses for courses. I look at porn, and I have a fiancé. Never been a conflict or a problem. There's nothing wrong with it at all.

Problem with masturbating? Lack of self control? Build's self control. Although I have control with other things in my life this only builds more by abstaining.

Well I'm not sure what you mean by 'self-control' but if you mean the urge not to sex everyone you see then I have that too, and I masturbate and watch porn. Go figure.

It might of been torture the first few days, but that subsides. Nothing wrong with the chakra stuff? Well how can people believe in some energy locations on the body, but not believe in god? The chakra stuff? I'd rather not even get into it. I've read horror stories. Kundalini awakening all that. It can mess up your body due to being part of your nervous system.

Hey, don't get me wrong, I don't go for the whole woo aspect myself. Each to their own. I just don't see it as any more harmful than any aspect of christian or abrahmic theology. Indeed arguable the latter could indeed be worse in some cases.

In my religion it would be opening the door to demons, and maybe a seat for them to reside.

No such thing.

Lots of problems with being gay. Stretched anus, diseases, anal fissures, hemeroids, what else? You're right most of the bad stuff is from the circumstance around you. The big corporations polluting, your neighbor who does not hold to the word of god so they're naturally a bad person, environment, people are assholes.

:|

Gay =/= anal sex. Straight people have anal sex, gay women don't have naturally occuring cocks in which to penetrate someone's anus. Some gay people don't have penetrative sex just like some straight people don't.

STD's are not unique to homosexuals, neither are haemorrhoids, and neither are 'anal fissures' (I presume you mean prolapses here?). You strike me as the kind of person who automatically defaults to 'gay = immoral!' when really you have no position or authority to make that claim.

Also what is it with you guys and the complete and utter misunderstanding of positions you're criticising? Also, how the hell does someone not holding the word of (your) god make them a bad person? What ever happened to judge not lest you be judged?

Think for yourself and you'll be happier for it.
I am thinking for myself. Just because I follow god does not make me a robot. I too had that fear. Would I not be the same person I was? I am still the same person. Just happier for it. I can feel the change in my life this way. I was much less happier before. You'll probably say "whatever works for you" To my above statement, and you're right. Whatever works for you. I can't change other people. God gave them choice.

Indeed, whatever does work for you. Each to their own. But I object to the repeated and constant inference of 'god' giving people a choice. There's no evidence for this god and certainly no evidence that anything has done anything. It's really frustrating when people take their deities as given and just presume it as such through a conversation.

There is no such thing as sin, and as such, I am not a 'sinner'. I'm a human being. Well if you don't believe it then I suppose there is no such thing as sin. We shape our own realities, but what happens after that is the big picture.

Nobody knows what happens when we die.

I/we don't need help for an imaginary being to live a good and fulfilling life. Indeed, compare your life and my life, and it'd probably come out roughly the same regarding happiness and sadness, or rewards and disappointments. That's life. Sorry that you can't see this. Good luck.
You're right. There's lots of rich people who don't believe in god. I do see that. Like your religious view states though. I'm not striving to yield. I could not care if god makes me rich. I'll live this life poor. What is it going to bother me an already poor person? I'm looking to seek, not to yield.

Being rich has nothing to do with it. I mean being satisfied in life, in general. Some people want money, some want love, some what to be loved and so on. Nobody should need a god or a religion for any of that, as evidenced by me.