Here's me preaching.

[Curt Sibling]

Humans who abuse their power (not religions or other such airy concepts) are the creators of the greatest woes in history...

 

I am an arch-cynic. I see no gods, no spirits. Just matter and energy.

 

 

 

Carry on.

[Pikeman85]

Well for example, whereas all Creationists generally argue that Noah's flood must have happened due to their book saying so, the word used for Earth in it can also be translated as plain, land, Earth or even dirt I think.

 

Ismah (I think that's how it's spelled) refers to a young woman, however it can be used to refer to a virgin (because young women are generally virgins) this is why people try to use Isaiah to argue that the virgin birth was a prophecy, despite the fact that the context clearly states that it is Isaiah's own child he is refering to.

 

Also in Isaiah 47 I THINK it is, I'd have to check, been a few years since I've read the Old Testament, God himself, or possibly Isaiah refers to God (either way, supposedly it's sanctioned by God) as the creator of evil. In many additions this is translated as destruction or something similar, but the word is used throughout the Old Testament for moral evil.

 

There are more, but it's been a long time, and I'd have to look it all up.

[Akrid]

I am an arch-cynic. I see no gods, no spirits. Just matter and energy.

 

Hey I think thats pretty much what I am as well. I think everything is made of energy so no god could exist unless it was energy and thus could be destroyed and is not really a god.

 

I had to edit because no one is posting and I posted last, I guess I did the right thing, but I sure didn't want to :P

 

Anyway I found this book, I intend to read it. I only readthe intro and it seems to be a very good resourse. I thought I should post it go here

[Curt Sibling]

Thank you for that link, sir!

 

I will be checking this out too, I think religion in general just does not stand up to the harsh light of facts.

 

All religionists seem to do is take their argument beyond the realms of reason or just get aggressively immature and stubborn.

 

Both outcomes hand victory to the determined atheist.

[Akrid]

I read somthing on this thread about reading the greek bible...... uh no. Would it make any sense that everyone in the world is held to find the greek bible and learn greek and read it in order to find god or burn in hell? I will never read the greek bible and I strongly disagree I deserve to burn in hell. Why would I be inclined to belive such non-sense? Just because the answers arn't clear to mankind dosn't mean it must be a god, I would say the answers we are looking for (creation of everything) have little to do with the nature of man, thus all information on that topic is man-made not given to us by higher beings.

[Curt Sibling]

I always offer religionists the same deal.

 

Show me rock-solid proof of this heaven, hell and god.

And then I will accept I am a sinner and welcome their viewpoint.

 

Right now I just see humans fabricating deities to control each other and garner fear and sheepishness.

 

Various personality types seem to always need an authority to look up to.

 

I wish there was a way to counteract this.

[Akrid]

Also people say religion is important, it hold morals and hope for people who need it. I say FIND SOMTHING REAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I mean religion is only important because we let it grow and root itself into society and our lives. We think religion stands for morals, I am not religious, but I am moral (or could be, ok bad exsample, but others could vouch) Anyway religion does not hold anything together worth staying together. If God gives you hope after somthing terrible happend, your falling into a delusional mind state, dependent on a lie. Fall apart I say, your supposed to when you feel that bad. To say "well the good lord gives me hope, it was his plan" after your spouse just got his/her head blown off is just not healthy. Religion does no good, only bad in the long run. I hope people can find a way out of it, because far to many people believe in such non-sense.

[Curt Sibling]

@Acrid:

 

Your words are evidence of a sharp perception and a healthy awareness.

 

Well put!

 

I think more people should learn to tackle problems with their own strengths.

Instead of turning to unbackable fantasies.

[Darnoc]

Well, I've read most of your posts and think you've got some real interesting arguments here. So, I thought it's time for me to write something in here. First of all, I personally am a christian, but not because of tradition, it's because I do believe and it was my own decision and not the decision of my parents or anyone else. But I am also a philosopher and so I am forced to question everything, even my own believes and the believes of other people.

 

I can only tell, why I believe what I believe, but I can't and I don't want to force anyone to believe it. And I also don't like people who try to force people or who act as if their believe is the last wisdom and the whole truth. With this I do not only mean religious people, I mean also Ideologists, Atheists, Evolutionists, that means that I mean every person who believes in something (also to believe in nothing is a believe).

 

The question is: Why do we need religion? Simple answer: When it's no true, we don't, but when we it is true, we do. So the question is more: "Is there something which is true?" Also a simple answer: We don't know. And I don't mean just religions, I mean every believe in this world. Fact is, we can't know anything at all, only that we don't know anything and that everything is an assumption, a believe.

 

So we must reformulate our question: Why do we need to believe something? The answer to this question is much simpler: It's just not possible not to believe. Even someone who sais "I don't believe anything" does believe something: He believes that he doesn't believe anything and that nothing is true.

 

OK, this sounds very logical, but do we need to believe in a religion? Anyone who asks this question assumes that religions are an assumption and possibly not true and that what he does believe at the moment is possibly true (e.g. an Atheist, Materialist or a Marxist). Then I must ask: Why do you know that what you believe is true? Couldn't it be just the other way round and you must ask: Why do we need ideologies? This would be a very religious person who does believe in a religion but not in an ideologie. So there is probably no way to ask this question in the right way. The right way to ask this question would be in a neutral position, which of course no one can ever reach.

 

But we can try. So, I will formulate the question this way: Is there any believe which is more believable than others? (because, as stated above, it isn't possible to believe nothing). Now we can beginn the right way and look at the different believes. But I must state from the beginning that there isn't and there won't be any prove for any believe existing (even when some people, like atheists or materialsts, believe that they can prove their believe; which is, as stated above, impossible). But there is perhaps a believe who is better than others. Is it Communism, Materialism, Christianity, Islam, Buddism, Esoteric or what ever?

 

An addition to all those atheists out here (a lot of you are, as I have seen from you'r posts). When you can't prove something it doesn't mean that it is not true. So when you can't prove the existence of god, it doesn't include that god doesn't exist. Keep this in mind, when you discuss this further. I don't want to say, that god does exist. Perhaps he doesn't, perhaps he does. But don't assume, something is not true when you can't prove its existence. I personally believe that god does exist, but it is a believe and I can't prove it. I could ask also the other way around: Can you prove that he doesn't exist? The answer is "no", so his existence is still possible. That means, also your believe is not necessarily true. As said, you can only discuss this matter from the most neutral position possible and not when you already assume that something is true or not true. So start discussing again and assume that nothing is proven and nothing is necessarily true or not true. In fact you can assume that nothing can be ever proven. (If anyone wants discuss the problem of cognition, I'll be happy to join; but I must state it is mostly an accepted fact in philosophy that you can't prove anything)

 

So now that we have created a fundament for the discussion, I will try to bring together criterias why a belief is better than another and then we can compare different beliefs and so find the best belief. Feel free to add or change criterias.

 

1. A belief is better than another when he respects the life of everyone

 

2. A belief is better when he doesn't create classes (everyone is equal)

 

3. A belief is better when he doesn't include hostile actions and wars

 

4. A belief is better when he gives a meaning to our lifes

 

At the moment I can't find any other criterias. Please, add more to the list. Perhaps I will edit my post later on.

[Akrid]

We don't know. And I don't mean just religions, I mean every believe in this world. Fact is, we can't know anything at all, only that we don't know anything and that everything is an assumption, a believe.

 

Yes we don't know, if we did we wouldn't be discussing this.

 

But we can try. So, I will formulate the question this way: Is there any believe which is more believable than others?

 

That's the argument.

 

Can you prove that he doesn't exist? The answer is "no", so his existence is still possible. That means, also your believe is not necessarily true.

 

Oh no. Ok I believe somone made a simular analogy before. If I say there is a spirit blue donkey in the sky that will one day kill all of us and he made us and is the one true god, and we will all be donkey's one day, you can't proof it's not true, so anything that conflicts with my donkey theory can never be proven untill my donkey theory is unproven, witch is unprovable or provable. Now my donkey religion is un-likely but the only thing it has going for it is it can't be dis-proven. My pont of veiw is religion is the same.

 

The moral is, Just because somthing can't be dis-proven dosn't make it true, there must be facts to support it. Probalbility is the only thing we have to go on when discussing god, because faith is the ony thing beleivers really have and faith is not proof. (theres that anoying word again)