Religion's affect outside of religion

[robvalue]

It's tricky because believing fairy tales at face value is the kind of thing you would expect from someone stupid or gullible. However, this is far from the only reason people end up in this position, so the reverse is not always true. Drawing such an inference is a mistake without further evidence. For one thing, most religious people don't believe every fairy story at face value, generally just the one they have been conditioned to believe. That's important to remember.

Similarly, someone who employs critical thinking consistently will likely be an atheist, but it's not the only way there. So again the reverse is not always true.

[Drich]

And don't forget you are a noob atheist who has come to the Christianity portion of the site to discuss this specific religion.

What has that got to do with any of your BS 'arguments'? Who cares if he's new here, you don't know his background before coming here do you? You demonstrate repeated signs that you think the older or more experienced you are actually counts for something. Well it doesn't drippy, 50 years studying a single book and swatting the rest away leads to fuck all.
50 years as a Theologian is 50 years wasted, it climaxes in an individual stating that his personal interpretation is better than anyone elses, the younger ones must learn from me. Bullshit upon bullshit upon bullshit. You are a prime example of the ultimate man made virus. Nothing more, nothing less.

Soo.. In your world, everyone with years/decades of experience in any field of study, is not an asset on that subject but a detriment? Are you aware that outside you world, that when people spend decades in study they are known as masters of or experts in a given field?

[TubbyTubby]

Soo.. In your world, everyone with years/decades of experience in any field of study, is not an asset on that subject but a detriment? Are you aware that outside you world, that when people spend decades in study they are known as masters of or experts in a given field?

In a proper discipline, then yes, that rule usually applies but not in the field of theology, particularly if it's being used for apologetics.

[Drich]

I will return.

I am counting the minutes

Forget it.  I don't mind conceding on the dictionary thing,

but I was going to share my personal experience of god with you
because I was interested in your feedback on it,
but it's rapidly becoming clear to me that would be a mistake.
[/quote]

124.. minutes. (give a take a few/it depends on when you start counting)


Let me guess... (on your experience)

You wanted or needed something, you 'prayed' fervently (really meant it) or maybe even offered to give your life in service of God if only He would do this one thing... and you got silence.

So therefore you conclude their can't be a God because you made a sincere effort and nothing happened. Now you seek meaning in 'science' and call everyone who doesn't stupid. When you get called on your behavior, you pretend to not care what others believe, and quickly adopt a live and let live attitude. (even though you started a thread stating otherwise.) Now you are attempting to use Christian guilt to try and turn the tables of the conversation and put your attacker on his heels, because in truth you've run out of answers that sting...

that's a story that has been played out many many times here on this web site. I believe the vast majority of the atheist members here have a similar experience (praying and getting no response from God despite an earnest or very sincere need) Your angry because God didn't XYZ for you in your time of sincere need. Because you can't poop all over God you poop on those who claim to have what you could not make work.

So the question then becomes if their is a God and I/you earnestly tried to reach out why did I/you get no response?

Short Answer: Because your version of God does not exist, and the God of the bible will not support or block up your version of beliefs about God with answered 'prayers.' Why? I'll answer that by asking you, what if He did answer your prayers and you had a corrupt idea of Him? Would you then out of the blue, change what you believe and manifest a more accurate/biblically based picture of Him? or would you worship your version? The version who answered your prayers? Now what if God did not want you to worship any Other God except Him for some out of the blue reason? Do you truly think He should answer your or anyone most sincere prayer even if they had no idea who He really was?

Despite what you may think Jesus' answer was no to this question. That is what the parable of the wise and foolish builders was all about. (The wise man built his house on the Rock and the foolish man built his house on the sand. when the rains came the foolish man's house fell and the wise man's house stood firm.)

The house we build is our religious beliefs, it is essentially our faith. The parable teaches that two men can build/do identical things in worship all except one builds on who God really is (the rock) and the other builds on who they think God is (the sand) and when the winds and rains come (Trials of life that has one earnestly seeking and praying) The one who built on the rock will stand firm/will see God through His trial, and the foolish man's faith will fall down around him.

The fact that God allows your house to fall down around you is a blessing of sorts IF you are not a prideful person. If your Humble you will see this as an opportunity to rebuild on the rock, rather than on what you originally built your beliefs on. If however it is your belief that God should come to you on your terms and show you that He is all that He says He is... Then if you think about it He wouldn't be All that He says He is.

[TheRocketSurgeon]

I wrote a long response to this, but my computer's CAD program (I was doing work in the other window, and the big calculation apparently was too much alongside Chrome) crashed my computer, so it was lost.

Short version: You make a false assumption when you think we didn't feel all the things you feel about God, when we were Christians. I know that's what they tell you to think about us. That's what they told me to think about ex-Christians, when I was a Christian. But I felt the "presence of the Lord". I never once believed that God answers all prayers as we want Him to, and I know few Christians who think that. I even had a teeshirt that says, "God answers all prayers; sometimes the answer is no." I was moved to tears by worship and prayer, and told people all the things you're now telling us.

I later learned that my experiences were not unique to Christianity, and that religious ecstasy and "sensing a presence" is the norm, rather than the exception, among the deeply devout. I came to realize that I was feeling these feelings internally, not from an external source. Looking back, I am horrified by the cult-like teachings of my religion, which say that thinking for yourself is "pride", which tell you that you must first believe and then reject anything to the contrary, and that "man's knowledge" is to be rejected if it conflicts with doctrine.

---

---

Let me guess... (on your experience)

You wanted or needed something, you 'prayed' fervently (really meant it) or maybe even offered to give your life in service of God if only He would do this one thing... and you got silence.

So therefore you conclude their can't be a God because you made a sincere effort and nothing happened. Now you seek meaning in 'science' and call everyone who doesn't stupid. When you get called on your behavior, you pretend to not care what others believe, and quickly adopt a live and let live attitude. (even though you started a thread stating otherwise.) Now you are attempting to use Christian guilt to try and turn the tables of the conversation and put your attacker on his heels, because in truth you've run out of answers that sting...

that's a story that has been played out many many times here on this web site. I believe the vast majority of the atheist members here have a similar experience (praying and getting no response from God despite an earnest or very sincere need) Your angry because God didn't XYZ for you in your time of sincere need. Because you can't poop all over God you poop on those who claim to have what you could not make work.

So the question then becomes if their is a God and I/you earnestly tried to reach out why did I/you get no response?

Short Answer: Because your version of God does not exist, and the God of the bible will not support or block up your version of beliefs about God with answered 'prayers.' Why? I'll answer that by asking you, what if He did answer your prayers and you had a corrupt idea of Him? Would you then out of the blue, change what you believe and manifest a more accurate/biblically based picture of Him? or would you worship your version? The version who answered your prayers? Now what if God did not want you to worship any Other God except Him for some out of the blue reason? Do you truly think He should answer your or anyone most sincere prayer even if they had no idea who He really was?

Despite what you may think Jesus' answer was no to this question. That is what the parable of the wise and foolish builders was all about. (The wise man built his house on the Rock and the foolish man built his house on the sand. when the rains came the foolish man's house fell and the wise man's house stood firm.)

The house we build is our religious beliefs, it is essentially our faith. The parable teaches that two men can build/do identical things in worship all except one builds on who God really is (the rock) and the other builds on who they think God is (the sand) and when the winds and rains come (Trials of life that has one earnestly seeking and praying) The one who built on the rock will stand firm/will see God through His trial, and the foolish man's faith will fall down around him.

The fact that God allows your house to fall down around you is a blessing of sorts IF you are not a prideful person. If your Humble you will see this as an opportunity to rebuild on the rock, rather than on what you originally built your beliefs on. If however it is your belief that God should come to you on your terms and show you that He is all that He says He is... Then if you think about it He wouldn't be All that He says He is.

---

Edited to quote you so you get a "ping" notification. Sorry I forgot to, in previous entry.

[Drich]

I wrote a long response to this, but my computer's CAD program (I was doing work in the other window, and the big calculation apparently was too much alongside Chrome) crashed my computer, so it was lost.

Short version: You make a false assumption when you think we didn't feel all the things you feel about God, when we were Christians. I know that's what they tell you to think about us. That's what they told me to think about ex-Christians, when I was a Christian. But I felt the "presence of the Lord". I never once believed that God answers all prayers as we want Him to, and I know few Christians who think that. I even had a teeshirt that says, "God answers all prayers; sometimes the answer is no." I was moved to tears by worship and prayer, and told people all the things you're now telling us.

I later learned that my experiences were not unique to Christianity, and that religious ecstasy and "sensing a presence" is the norm, rather than the exception, among the deeply devout. I came to realize that I was feeling these feelings internally, not from an external source. Looking back, I am horrified by the cult-like teachings of my religion, which say that thinking for yourself is "pride", which tell you that you must first believe and then reject anything to the contrary, and that "man's knowledge" is to be rejected if it conflicts with doctrine.

---

---

Let me guess... (on your experience)

You wanted or needed something, you 'prayed' fervently (really meant it) or maybe even offered to give your life in service of God if only He would do this one thing... and you got silence.

So therefore you conclude their can't be a God because you made a sincere effort and nothing happened. Now you seek meaning in 'science' and call everyone who doesn't stupid. When you get called on your behavior, you pretend to not care what others believe, and quickly adopt a live and let live attitude. (even though you started a thread stating otherwise.) Now you are attempting to use Christian guilt to try and turn the tables of the conversation and put your attacker on his heels, because in truth you've run out of answers that sting...

that's a story that has been played out many many times here on this web site. I believe the vast majority of the atheist members here have a similar experience (praying and getting no response from God despite an earnest or very sincere need) Your angry because God didn't XYZ for you in your time of sincere need. Because you can't poop all over God you poop on those who claim to have what you could not make work.

So the question then becomes if their is a God and I/you earnestly tried to reach out why did I/you get no response?

Short Answer: Because your version of God does not exist, and the God of the bible will not support or block up your version of beliefs about God with answered 'prayers.' Why? I'll answer that by asking you, what if He did answer your prayers and you had a corrupt idea of Him? Would you then out of the blue, change what you believe and manifest a more accurate/biblically based picture of Him? or would you worship your version? The version who answered your prayers? Now what if God did not want you to worship any Other God except Him for some out of the blue reason? Do you truly think He should answer your or anyone most sincere prayer even if they had no idea who He really was?

Despite what you may think Jesus' answer was no to this question. That is what the parable of the wise and foolish builders was all about. (The wise man built his house on the Rock and the foolish man built his house on the sand. when the rains came the foolish man's house fell and the wise man's house stood firm.)

The house we build is our religious beliefs, it is essentially our faith. The parable teaches that two men can build/do identical things in worship all except one builds on who God really is (the rock) and the other builds on who they think God is (the sand) and when the winds and rains come (Trials of life that has one earnestly seeking and praying) The one who built on the rock will stand firm/will see God through His trial, and the foolish man's faith will fall down around him.

The fact that God allows your house to fall down around you is a blessing of sorts IF you are not a prideful person. If your Humble you will see this as an opportunity to rebuild on the rock, rather than on what you originally built your beliefs on. If however it is your belief that God should come to you on your terms and show you that He is all that He says He is... Then if you think about it He wouldn't be All that He says He is.

---

Edited to quote you so you get a "ping" notification. Sorry I forgot to, in previous entry.

Maybe, that is why the 'experience' of God is not centered around 'feelings.' But tangible testable experiences and real exchanges. Respectfully, if your whole experience with God was 'feeling' based, maybe that is why it failed when tested by the wind and rain.

[Drich]

Soo.. In your world, everyone with years/decades of experience in any field of study, is not an asset on that subject but a detriment? Are you aware that outside you world, that when people spend decades in study they are known as masters of or experts in a given field?

In a proper discipline, then yes, that rule usually applies but not in the field of theology, particularly if it's being used for apologetics.

Like it or not, commiting 20 years to theology is no different than commiting 20 years to a similar historical discipline.

Their's multiple languages, sociology and study of ancient cultures, secular Historical reseach, I would say that a proper Christian Theologian has to do/learn the same diciplines as anyone else that studies that same time period, but also has to reconcile the word of God.

Anyone who strives to obtain this same level of knowledge, in theology (and has spent years in study) order to share it with others are miles above and beyond the one who thinks he knows everything because he gets all of his info from youtube and anti god websites.

[TheRocketSurgeon]

---

I wrote a long response to this, but my computer's CAD program (I was doing work in the other window, and the big calculation apparently was too much alongside Chrome) crashed my computer, so it was lost.

Short version: You make a false assumption when you think we didn't feel all the things you feel about God, when we were Christians. I know that's what they tell you to think about us. That's what they told me to think about ex-Christians, when I was a Christian. But I felt the "presence of the Lord". I never once believed that God answers all prayers as we want Him to, and I know few Christians who think that. I even had a teeshirt that says, "God answers all prayers; sometimes the answer is no." I was moved to tears by worship and prayer, and told people all the things you're now telling us.

I later learned that my experiences were not unique to Christianity, and that religious ecstasy and "sensing a presence" is the norm, rather than the exception, among the deeply devout. I came to realize that I was feeling these feelings internally, not from an external source. Looking back, I am horrified by the cult-like teachings of my religion, which say that thinking for yourself is "pride", which tell you that you must first believe and then reject anything to the contrary, and that "man's knowledge" is to be rejected if it conflicts with doctrine.

---

---

Edited to quote you so you get a "ping" notification. Sorry I forgot to, in previous entry.

Maybe, that is why the 'experience' of God is not centered around 'feelings.' But tangible testable experiences and real exchanges. Respectfully, if your whole experience with God was 'feeling' based, maybe that is why it failed when tested by the wind and rain.

I don't even know what you mean by this. And it wasn't "tested by the wind and rain", it was tested by comparing it to demonstrable reality.

[Heat]

Drich,

"Proof" is something that you can present to me that I CANNOT argue with.

:Roflol: Maybe if the universe revolved around you, and you got to set the standards of proof... However in the Real world we have a standard or definition for the word proof. Proof according to good old google is:
proof
/pro͞of/
noun
noun: proof; plural noun: proofs
1.evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement.

What you are describing is undeniable proof.

For me to believe in God, God need NOT provide you with undeniable proof. Because again the axis of the cosmos does not center around you, and what you have experienced/believe. All God needed to do is provide me with undeniable proof, for me He has done that.

I might even personally be prepared to believe that you sincerely had a personal experience,
but that STILL does not automatically translate into accepting your claim of an experience,
into my own proof of God's existence.

Even if I want to believe your claim,
if I am to be conscientious and honest with myself,
I am compelled to remain skeptical,
until I am personally provided with INCONTROVERTIBLE PROOF, myself.

Fail. your presumption is that my experiences are only unique to me. Thus requiring your 'belief' in order to validate. when in fact God offers the Same proof for you or anyone else who can Humble Himself before God to experience on their own. Proof of God is not found in a philosophical or scientific argument. Proof of God are a set of instructions (A treasure Map) that tells you how to Find Him. If you want validation of any map, one need only follow it.

Using your mother as an example is redundant,
because, if called upon,
you COULD actually provide proof to others
of your mother's existence,
whereas you cannot, with regard to God's existence.

Again, only if you ASSume that 'proof' was mine to give. When in fact God provides 'proof' for all those who A/S/K for it.

And I'm sorry, Drich...but I have to honestly say that I find it a bit tedious
that I had to explain that very obvious difference to you.

What is tedious is deconstructing the atheist 'proof' argument for like the thousandth time. To explain something as elementary as the true definition of 'proof' to someone who fancies himself a 'thinker.' Verses the 'thinkers' goal post relocation version of proof. It's like you guys were all programed to think one certain way about God. Rarly if ever does one of you have an original thought. You all speak to stereotypes and reference/plagiarize arguments constructed by men who at best have an elementary sunday school understanding of Christianity.

Yet, here I am and have been explaining how your perceptions of God, Christianity and proof fail without complaint. (until prompted.)
Did you really think, you are the first person to raise these concerns on this website? or, better yet did you really think I would not be able to answer your challenge?

Secondly,

You go on to claim that God HAS already given man proof of Himself.

Where is that?

I have seen no such thing.

Maybe because God does not answer to you. Or maybe because you are not the bright and shinny center of the universe you think yourself to obviously be. This means all of creation does not have to check in with you, and things can and do exist without your knoweledge

God did give man 'proof' in the Holy Spirit that was pour out in Acts 2.

what better proof of God is there than God fusing with you in your life? You don't have 'proof' because God does not want to give you any the way you are now. Despite what you may thing God is not in the business of providing undeniable proof. We have been given this life apart from God's known glory (undeniable proof) to show ourselves where our heart lie in relation to God. So at our final judgement we will know that whatever Christ judges for us will be just.

Thirdly,

How do you know that your experience of God is legitimate?

how do you know that you are not delusional,
seeing things no one else sees,

or, let's assume you are perfectly sane,
and that your experience was genuine
....you actually, legitimately experienced interaction with a supernatural being.

How do you know that the entity you observed
was actually who He claimed to be?

I can think of many, many reasons why a demon
might want to masquerade as God and fool humans into worshiping him,
...assuming there IS in fact a spirit realm, and such things as demons exist...

and by what yardstick to you gauge the authenticity of the manifestations and claims of spirits?

This is indeed a legitimate concern. Two whole other religions were started because of 'an angel speaking to a prophet.'

The answer to your senerio is simple. I look to serve the God of the bible. If said experience is not in line with scripture then the experience can easily be identified as not coming from God. Meaning if I'm told to do something or to believe differently.. then that message is not from God of the bible. Which is why we all must know what the bible actually says.

(And remember, as a Theist,
there is far more reason for YOU to be suspicious that you are being conned by a demon,
than there is reason for ME to think so,
since I'm not inclined to believe in demons, at all).

Finally Drich, to dismiss science because of conflicting theories or findings is so absurd that it angers me.

The cache of human knowledge reaped from Science is one where we have STEADILY MADE GAINS,
despite many backslides along the way.

lol
You did not actually read my first post to you did you?
I pointed out, that one who truly knows scripture (what it says and what it does not say) Does not fear 'science.' Those who can reconcile 'science with belief often see science' as man's attempt to explain the natural processes God has put into place.

The claims of Religion have STEADILY LOST GROUND over thousands of years.

Ah, no. the only thing loosing ground is the idea that God has to be magic, or God must keep Himself in line with the dark ages understanding of him. This is the only thing 'science' as done.. To completely dispel the dark ages understanding of God.

There is nothing 'science' can offer that religion can not assimilate, without compromising the intergrity of scripture.

I know it's hard for you not to argue the atheist Christian standard (Atheist smart! because Atheist believe in science, and Christian dumb because Christian believe in magic) but do try and put a little more effort into what you say. do try and meet the topical standard Ive set if for no other reason that not looking foolish infront of your peers by arguing against straw men.

Religion only continues to thrive and grow in numbers
because the majority of humanity chooses solace over facing hard truths,
is intellectually lazy, or ignorant,
or simply wants to win wars and wield power over those who do not agree with them.

Oh, the Irony...

It's truly funny that you can not see past your own set of sterotypes and ignorance toward all things 'religious,' yet you are so quick to identify this trait in a dying system of belief. Well done sir.. Well done. I think Dry Sand has to step down from the role of flag ship Atheist on this site.. Because you obviously fly that flag just a little bit higher than he does.

How about you stop talking about proof and actually show it, but I'm guessing you'll respond like "you are the living proof" or some ridiculous non-logical typical theist response like that, failing to actually answer any questions but continuing to act like we are the blind ones. When you can't justify your life's beliefs with something that everyone can understand and accept as some form of evidence(whether or not they agree/disagree) you have failed to reconcile your faith with credibility. Laughing at people who make legitimate points and always coming back to the same conclusion that we cannot understand god because he's too great you fail miserably to realize that if humans cannot understand him, you fall under the same category and cannot claim to do so. And after all of your excuses, question dodging, and nonsensical answers you will probably still reach the conclusion "God exists because I know it". That's the result of denying logical reason and evidence I guess, because as Sam Harris said "If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" Until you learn to accept logic, reason, and evidence, you will forever be stuck in an endless loop of justifying your beliefs with ridiculous claims that fail to contain any rationality and in turn, fail to answer any of the questions anyone will ask.

[Drich]

Maybe, that is why the 'experience' of God is not centered around 'feelings.' But tangible testable experiences and real exchanges. Respectfully, if your whole experience with God was 'feeling' based, maybe that is why it failed when tested by the wind and rain.

I don't even know what you mean by this. And it wasn't "tested by the wind and rain", it was tested by comparing it to demonstrable reality.

Tested by the wind and rain points back to the parable of the wise and foolish builders Jesus told. In essence to be tested by the wind and rain equates to having one's faith tested by whatever means you need to prove or have your faith/belief fail. Yours failed when you put it through "Demonstrable reality." that was a storm your system of belief could not endure, because (according to Christ) Your's was not a faith/house built on the truth of who God/He really was.