Hello, i am a real Christian

[bozo]

Hello all,

I have browsed a bit through these forums, and i have noticed that the view of theists as a whole is terribly arbitrary. Some of the atheists here say that they are called by religious people "immoral", or even "sinful" and "evil".

But most atheists have the exact same kind of description of theists, considering them as stupid, uneducated, and feeling superior to everyone else. That is simply not accurate.

Here is my set of beliefs. This set of beliefs is shared by the vast majority of Christians. You will see that we are not as crazy as you seem to believe:

I believe that the vast majority of the Old Testament is non-factual. I believe fully in evolution, even though i think God intended our evolution from apes, in such a way as to do it according to the rules of nature. I do believe for example in Moses and the flee from Egypt, as a historical event and not with the magic bread, crossing of the red sea or the cloud of ash that showed them the way. However Noah's Ark, Adam and Eve, the man who lived 3 days inside of a whale, are all stories that could be compared with mythologies like the Greek one.

But i am a real christian in that i believe, according to the tales of the Gospels, that Jesus is the Son of God, performed miracles, and was resurrected. He had a message of peace and understanding for all of mankind, and unlike the tales of the Old Testament, in the teachings of Jesus no one is beyond redemption.

I do not condemn non-believers or believers in other religions to an eternity in Hell, i just think they havnt had the luck i had, which is to see the beautiful message of the Christ.

I see atheists as people who are disillusioned view of religion and who do not know what or who to believe, so they just reject God altogether. I can understand easily how people can be disgusted by religion. Terrorism, discrimination, pedophilia. But all of those wrongs that religion has done...are not exclusive to religion, far from it. Most of the time, "religious" genocides have for goal to find a scapegoat to appease the population, nothing more.

What's more religion has undeniably done some good in the world. It has united nations, given people a set of moral values that are good for the well-being of society. For hundreds of years most of the education and medicine was practiced by the Church. Finally most organizations that help the poor sick or homeless are originally Christian.

I am not here to convert you all, just to remind you that religion is not as harmful as you seem to think.

TC, I 've reverted to your initial post.
You clearly won't convert anyone here with your posts thus far.
You have also failed to convince that religion is not harmful.
Religion can be viewed as harmful, or simply superstition.
I don't know where you go from here!

[Shinylight]

Does anyone think the name of this thread should be changed to 'Hello, i am a really bad, cherry picking, in denial theist'?

I just hope he is humble and reasonable enough to admit that his argument was flawed and unsubstantiated.

Well I would really have respect for him he did that.

[Edwardo Piet]

You misinterpreted what i said: i dont mean that because a lot of people believe in it for a long time it is true. I mean that the fact that the Church has lasted 2000 years shows its godly origins.

Well then that IS what you're saying isn't it? Because you can't have godLY origins without God. If God doesn't exist then there is nothing 'godly' - the fact such 'origins' have existed means fuck-all because it isn't 'godly' at all it's just religious bullshit.

Beliefs in Osiris, Buddhism and Judaism are not organizations. They are religions/philosophies. There is a difference: there has been a Pope for 2000 years without interruptions. The "headquarters" (Vatican) have stayed the same.
Organizations =/= Religions

Catholism is a religion too though.

And so fucking what to the above? The fact such an "organization" has existed so long has got absolutely nothing to do with the existence of God. Who cares?

And why are Judaism and Buddhism discounted on your little magic fallacious bullshit argument that makes no sense? They are religions/philosophies so they 'don't count'? Well either way it's not evidence and I have no idea how the fuck you cherry pick it so your bullshit argument that makes no sense applies to only the things you want it to! Compartmentalization much methinks.

However Darwinian i admit that that school you talked about has existed for longer than the Church. That's ONE

But the Church has existed and flourished for 2000 years, and doesnt seem to be losing too many adepts.

You're seriously commiting the NTS fallacy there. It doesn't count because the Church has flourished so much? So you are narrowing the definition of an organization that would apply to your bullshit argument some more are you? You asked for an organization, you got one, and it doesn't even matter anyway because the following is not evidence. You say:

To me this shows that there is some kind of divinity to the Church.

No it doesn't that's retarded. A Church existing for 2000 years and flourishing as it has=divinity? You're mad. If it had instead been a Flying Spaghetti Monster Church that had survived 2000 years and "flourished" would you count THAT as evidence of the divinity of the Flying Spaghetti Monster? If not then you're just narrowing your bullshit definitions down some more. Be clear please.

That does not follow logically at all in any way. No divinity can be given, nor can anything be given as evidence to the existence of God, merely because something is popular, widespread, long lasting, and has "flourished".

In 2000 years time if McDonald's is still popular will you declare Ronald McDonald (well, one of his descendants of course lol) as another pope? The Pope of the Big Mac?

EvF

[True Christian]

---

You misinterpreted what i said: i dont mean that because a lot of people believe in it for a long time it is true. I mean that the fact that the Church has lasted 2000 years shows its godly origins.

Well then that IS what you're saying isn't it? Because you can't have godLY origins without God. If God doesn't exist then there is nothing 'godly' - the fact such 'origins' have existed means fuck-all because it isn't 'godly' at all it's just religious bullshit.

Beliefs in Osiris, Buddhism and Judaism are not organizations. They are religions/philosophies. There is a difference: there has been a Pope for 2000 years without interruptions. The "headquarters" (Vatican) have stayed the same.
Organizations =/= Religions

Catholism is a religion too though.

And so fucking what to the above? The fact such an "organization" has existed so long has got absolutely nothing to do with the existence of God. Who cares?

And why are Judaism and Buddhism discounted on your little magic fallacious bullshit argument that makes no sense? They are religions/philosophies so they 'don't count'? Well either way it's not evidence and I have no idea how the fuck you cherry pick it so your bullshit argument that makes no sense applies to only the things you want it to! Compartmentalization much methinks.

However Darwinian i admit that that school you talked about has existed for longer than the Church. That's ONE

But the Church has existed and flourished for 2000 years, and doesnt seem to be losing too many adepts.

You're seriously commiting the NTS fallacy there. It doesn't count because the Church has flourished so much? So you are narrowing the definition of an organization that would apply to your bullshit argument some more are you? You asked for an organization, you got one, and it doesn't even matter anyway because the following is not evidence. You say:

To me this shows that there is some kind of divinity to the Church.

No it doesn't that's retarded. A Church existing for 2000 years and flourishing as it has=divinity? You're mad. If it had instead been a Flying Spaghetti Monster Church that had survived 2000 years and "flourished" would you count THAT as evidence of the divinity of the Flying Spaghetti Monster? If not then you're just narrowing your bullshit definitions down some more. Be clear please.

That does not follow logically at all in any way. No divinity can be given, nor can anything be given as evidence to the existence of God, merely because something is popular, widespread, long lasting, and has "flourished".

In 2000 years time if McDonald's is still popular will you declare Ronald McDonald (well, one of his descendants of course lol) as another pope? The Pope of the Big Mac?

EvF

---

The fact is that outside of the Church, not a single religious organization, out of the thousands of religions, has lasted 2000 years. Why would Chrisianity be that different ? To me it is because it is the "true" religion.

[Darwinian]

Statistics: Out of all the religious organisations that there are, one of them has to be the oldest. The fact (and that can be disputed) that christianity is the oldest organised religion, simply means that christianity is the oldest organised religion, and nothing else.

Psychology: Because you believe that your religion is the true religion then it is only natural for you to latch onto a fact like this and try to use it as some sort of demonstration for the validity of your belief.

Reality: But of course, christianity is certainly not the oldest religion in the world, regardless of the fact that yours has a single headquarters, and people of older faiths can make exactly the same claim as you as I'm sure that, for example, the Jews would claim that they are pretty well organised and have been around long since the idea of christianity.

[Shinylight]

To me it is because it is the "true" religion.

No, it is because you believe what you are told to believe so you believe your religion is the true one.

The Buddhist council is older than the Catholic church, the first council was convened in 543 BCE and the most recent was in 1954 CE.

[Edwardo Piet]

The fact is that outside of the Church, not a single religious organization, out of the thousands of religions, has lasted 2000 years. Why would Chrisianity be that different ? To me it is because it is the "true" religion.

Why do you think that follows? It doesn't. Because popularity and long lasting, and flourishing is not evidence of divinity. Otherwise that could apply to the FSM or McDonalds 2000 years in the future just as easily, as I said above. That's the Ad Populum fallacy.

What makes you think there IS a true religion? Why do you presuppose that? And even if there were one, why would a religion's success evidence it's divinity? That doesn't follow, that's a fallacy as I said.

A long lasting flourishing religion is just that: a long lasting flourishing religion. How the hell is that evidence for the existence of God in any way?

Best to go with the burden of proof and be logical and parsimonious I say, stick with the blank slate to begin with - change your mind if evidence comes in. Better to start with the blank slate and believe in a 'true' religion, or any religion for that matter - if evidence actually comes along.

EvF

[Darwinian]

The basic premise here seem to be that if enough people hold to a proposition and hold to it for long enough then it somehow follows that this proposition becomes true.

Screwy logic to me that is.... (Did you like my Yoda impression?)

[Edwardo Piet]

The truth cannot be voted on.

Learn this, True Christian.

EvF

[True Christian]

The truth cannot be voted on.

Learn this, True Christian.

EvF

I guess ill try one last time, because it seems you only read what you want to read. The Church does not have a divine status because lots of people believe in it. It does because it is the oldest religious organization we ever known, out of thousand of religions. I know that i am repeating myself but i cant seem to get that element across.

I know i will be called as generalizing by saying that, but i have observed that in this thread: don't you think that sometimes, just sometimes, you jump on certain keywords and ignore the rest of the text ? Some see "religion has done good things" and instantly attack me as saying that religion hasn't done bad things, something i never claimed, without ever thinking about whether or not religion has actually done some good. Some see "Church" and "divine" together and immediately attack me for saying that what everyone believes is the truth, something i never claimed.