Questions ABOUT non-believers

[Mr Spock]

It's called a "tythe" I believe, where you donate 10 percent of your earnings to the church. Any person in any religion can do it. I've known of one couple that did. It's voluntary.

[BlockHead]

TreeHugger

I believe the Mormons are big in Utah. Polygamy anybody.

I believe they are required to donate as much as 30%.

 

Some people don’t distinguish between cults, and legitimate religious sects.

Don’t be duped by these people.

[seahorse]

I think people should just be nice to each other. Do unto others etc.

 

I'm not a believer in God, or in any religion really. Just live your lives, be kind, help out where you can, and save me from Jehovah Witnesses, I've got too much to do to spend time on the doorstep discussing it all. I don't go around knocking on people's doors and telling them not to go to church, so lay off ok?

 

When my kids have been sick, (and luckily for them and me, never seriously), I've just hoped that they'd get better soon. I won't pray, because there's noone to pray to.

 

I suppose I may be half pagan, I can see a real reason to worship the sun, the land, the seasons etc. The sun brings life to everything. With it, the seasons and the land are what grow the food we need to eat.

 

Seahorse

[Moose]

Doesn't anyone remember when Jesus and his disciples where watching people go into Church? The rich were always making a big show of how much money they would drop into the collection. Making sure people where watching and making it a point to make as much noise as possible as if to say, "Check me out, I give a lot more than what I'm suppossed to, and definitley a lot more than what you can!!"

 

Then there was the widow who walked in and dropped in one coin.

 

Jesus told his disciples that the widow gave a lot more than the rich men. Because the rich men were able to give of their abundance, where the widow gave all that she had.

 

As far as giving tithe to the Church, I'm all for the 10% rule. But only if you aren't taking food out of your families mouth. Then it's whatever you can give.

 

Most importantly, it's not how much you give, it's the heart attitude you have when you give.

[Gemini02]

well i'm a non-believer and I celebrate Christmas and Easter, not because they are RELIGIOUS holidays because I see it as time to be with your family and keep on the tradition of giving. Those holidays are not relgious to me and they never were. I'm not celebrating God or Jesus, I'm celebrating time to be with my family and eat turkey and cookies! lol

 

I believe that you don't NEED religion to be a good person. I don't need religion to tell me what is right or wrong. However, I believe a person can be whatever religion that want, as long as they aren't hurting anyone AND that they aren't trying to push their religion on someone else.

 

Just my 2 cents tho

[shortbus74]

Blockhead...have you ever read the Santic bible?..........I have............ santic worshippers do not kill any one............... it teaches self indulgence........... and not to fear the wrath of god............(you may pick up your copy at a bookstore for about $10.00)

 

I believe in God but not the whole Christ thing..........

 

Even though I am Jewish I accept another person's beliefs on religion........

 

 

 

Sheesh.....this seems to go on and on.........

 

Blockhead give it up...... some of us here are not running out to get converted from what you say............ it is good to have another view........but I do feel that sometimes your views are too harsh...........I admire your conviction..........but when a person has their minds made up they refuse to see the other side .........like you..........

 

This is my view.......and only my view..

[dyermaker]

: Don't mistake 'argumentativeness' with 'conviction'.

[Papillon]

Blockhead - as an orthodox christian turned devout atheist, I've never seen or heard any evidence that Jesus existed. You claim it is a historical fact. Would you please be so kind as to provide some links or somesuch?

 

"Know thy enemy..."

[Moose]

Papillon,

 

I wonder why you decided to become an athiest....but anyway, if you're looking for physical proof, there is the cave He was buried in, even a impression so to speak, of His body on the slab of rock He laid on. Of course, there isn't any DNA tests or bones or anything you can touch or feel to prove scientifically that He did in fact walk the earth, or that it was His body that lay there, all we have is the scriptures.

 

We walk by faith, blind faith, which is the best kind in my opinion. Because it's easy to touch and feel a person to believe he's alive and breathing. But to believe without knowing shows how much we trust His word that He is alive.

 

What was it that made you turn athiest? Just curious.....

[dyermaker]

Originally posted by Papillon

Blockhead - as an orthodox christian turned devout atheist, I've never seen or heard any evidence that Jesus existed. You claim it is a historical fact. Would you please be so kind as to provide some links or somesuch?

 

"Know thy enemy..."

: Enemy?

http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a2_275.html

[bye2past]

You know, the funniest thing about Christianity and it's hang up on who does and doesn't go to heaven is that it even says in the bible the 144,000 tribes of Israel are the ones who are going. Israel. That means only Jews, and NO Christians, are going to heaven.

 

And if Jesus were to come back today, guess where he's going to pray? He's not going to any church. He's going to a Jewish temple.

 

I just have a real stick in my backside about any religion that breeds extremism. You know, you don't hear about militant Buddhists going out and killing people in the name of Buddha. You don't hear about militant Jews going out and killing in the name of Yaweh. But you DO hear all the time about militant Christians and Muslims doing that crap.

 

Remember recently that crazy woman in Oklahoma (I think) who stoned her children to death because Jesus told her to???? Can you f'n believe that crap??? Three of her four young children are now DEAD because she was just SO in love with Jesus. I'm sure that's the kind of god we should all pray to, right, tiki? Oh, and that fourth infant child? It's permanently brain damaged. Thanks, Jesus!

 

Religion is separatist and based on historical fiction. They're stories, people!!! If you're good, you're going to go to a HAPPY place called Heaven, where everything is just perfect!!! And if you're bad, you're going to Hell!!! Grrrr!!! Monsters!! Fire!! And the Devil!!! It's exactly like a children's book.

 

Most agnostics I know are more tolerant than me about this, so don't take it out on them. But you god-fearing Christians have really got to get your heads out from where the sun don't shine.

 

There, is that un-PC enough for you, tiki??

[Papillon]

Originally posted by Moose

Papillon,

 

I wonder why you decided to become an athiest....but anyway, if you're looking for physical proof, there is the cave He was buried in, even a impression so to speak, of His body on the slab of rock He laid on. Of course, there isn't any DNA tests or bones or anything you can touch or feel to prove scientifically that He did in fact walk the earth, or that it was His body that lay there, all we have is the scriptures.

 

We walk by faith, blind faith, which is the best kind in my opinion. Because it's easy to touch and feel a person to believe he's alive and breathing. But to believe without knowing shows how much we trust His word that He is alive.

 

What was it that made you turn athiest? Just curious.....

 

 

Moose, thanks for the reply. Now, seriously...you can't expect me to accept the cave thing at face value. I don't think any rational person, christians included, should.

 

It was my basically scientific and logical way of looking at the world that conflicted with my religion. I had to choose, and I chose truth.

[Papillon]

Originally posted by dyermaker

: Enemy?

http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a2_275.html

 

 

Heh, I kinda meant that toungue-in-cheek. My point was that I don't want to be caught unawares with this little tidbit if one day I have a religious debate with someone. That's why I asked for the links.

 

P.S...I'm not sure what I'm supposed to glean from the link you provided.

[dyermaker]

Originally posted by bye2past

You know, the funniest thing about Christianity and it's hang up on who does and doesn't go to heaven is that it even says in the bible the 144,000 tribes of Israel are the ones who are going. Israel. That means only Jews, and NO Christians, are going to heaven.

That's not what that means at all. You're just as guilty of taking things out of context to make a point.

 

Everyone has their own 'you know what's funny' point, and most of them suck. Some people don't care about learning a damn thing, and that's sad.

 

Even atheists/agnostics can be dogmatic. Often moreso.

Originally posted by bye2past

And if Jesus were to come back today, guess where he's going to pray? He's not going to any church. He's going to a Jewish temple.

He was content with praying on hillsides before, why would he go to a synagogue [Jews don't have Temples anymore/yet] now?

 

I just have a real stick in my backside about any religion that breeds extremism. You know, you don't hear about militant Buddhists going out and killing people in the name of Buddha. You don't hear about militant Jews going out and killing in the name of Yaweh. But you DO hear all the time about militant Christians and Muslims doing that crap.

 

Remember recently that crazy woman in Oklahoma (I think) who stoned her children to death because Jesus told her to???? Can you f'n believe that crap??? Three of her four young children are now DEAD because she was just SO in love with Jesus. I'm sure that's the kind of god we should all pray to, right, tiki? Oh, and that fourth infant child? It's permanently brain damaged. Thanks, Jesus!

That's hardly evidence of 'breeding extremism'. Your scholarship is awful.

Originally posted by Papillon

 

Heh, I kinda meant that toungue-in-cheek. My point was that I don't want to be caught unawares with this little tidbit if one day I have a religious debate with someone. That's why I asked for the links.

 

P.S...I'm not sure what I'm supposed to glean from the link you provided.

You asked "I've never seen or heard any evidence that Jesus existed. You claim it is a historical fact."

 

The existence of Jesus IS a historical fact--few dispute that he walked Earth.

 

Here's a good link, since my last one was more about the Shroud of Turin, explaining early documents that reference Jesus Christ, a substantial amount of them being from non-Chrisitan sources:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08375a.htm

 

People were persecuted for being Christian. Why would people systematically make up a character, leave their families, go out throughout the lands, and spread a message about a person they knew didn't exist? Why would they embrace death if they knew they were dying for a character they had made up? Makes little sense.

[Papillon]

Dyer, I ask you this, then: where do other religions fit in? How come many other beliefs are practised by so many other different cultural groups... Who was THEIR "messaiah"? How come they believe, and believe with all their hearts and minds?

 

Obviously it's pure psychology. The existence or non-existence of any one person is a moot point. All you need is to be indoctrinated from a young age. Well, I'm not indoctrinated anymore, and no cave or mouldy cloth is going to make me believe otherwise.

 

Edit:

 

I understand your reasoning when you say it's a "Historical fact" - I agree on that, but from my point of view, a fact is something that can be incontrovertibly proved.

[moimeme]

Three of her four young children are now DEAD because she was just SO in love with Jesus. I'm sure that's the kind of god we should all pray to, right, tiki? Oh, and that fourth infant child? It's permanently brain damaged. Thanks, Jesus!

 

OK, then by your reckoning, it's Jodie Foster's fault that Reagan got shot, right?

 

Remember recently that crazy woman in Oklahoma (I think) who stoned her children to death because Jesus told her to????

 

Citing the acts of a single lunatic as 'proof' that religion is bad is completely bogus. Or did you mean to imply that Jesus actually spoke to the woman???? Pretty much, no he didn't.

[moimeme]

If you study most of the major religions of the world, you'll find that they all came to the same conclusions despite being started at different times in very different places. One - there is some sort of Divinity - however you wish to conceive it - that should be honoured. Two - you must be good to your fellow humans. You have a good look at every religion and those will be the most basic of their tenets.

 

Now explain how it was that people in such vastly different places, cultures, and times managed to come up with similar messages?

[Papillon]

Prove to me that she was a lunatic.

 

If jesus exists, then who are we to say that she was NOT given instructions.... this little scenario does not reflect on the religion, it illustrates the dillemma believers face when myth meets reality.

[Papillon]

Originally posted by moimeme

If you study most of the major religions of the world, you'll find that they all came to the same conclusions despite being started at different times in very different places. One - there is some sort of Divinity - however you wish to conceive it - that should be honoured. Two - you must be good to your fellow humans. You have a good look at every religion and those will be the most basic of their tenets.

 

Now explain how it was that people in such vastly different places, cultures, and times managed to come up with similar messages?

 

It's simple - people being the practical creaures they are, realised, by trial, error, and history, that doing good to their neighbours reaped a better harvest than doing bad. This simple dichotomy has absolutely bugger-all to do with religion, but because religious texts love to claim it for themselves, many people (like yourself, for example), are going to see the similarities and say "Hmmm.....maybe their IS something to it".

 

It's nonsense.... one look at native american culture will demonstrate that religion is not a prerequisite for respect for others.

[dyermaker]

Originally posted by Papillon

Obviously it's pure psychology. The existence or non-existence of any one person is a moot point. All you need is to be indoctrinated from a young age. Well, I'm not indoctrinated anymore, and no cave or mouldy cloth is going to make me believe otherwise.

Do you see what I mean by atheists being equally dogmatic as fundamentalist theists?

 

I respect the opinion of an atheist/agnostic who says, "I disagree with you, because I don't have faith in what I can't see", or something to that effect.

It's offensive to me when, instead, they decide to marginalize what others believe. "You're indoctrinated", "You've been decieved into a big lie", etc..--It's as if you think Christians don't do any study at all.

 

Contrary to the opposing argument, religion isn't just 'the way you feel', or 'the way you think'. There's a good deal of scholarship involved in Religion, and there has been for a very long time. Some people (I call them fundamentalists, I don't know the proper term) choose not to make scholarship an aspect of their faith, but many people feel that scholarship is neccessary to strengthen faith.

 

There's nothing anti-academic about having a faith in God.

There's nothing inherently scholastic about not believing in God.

I understand your reasoning when you say it's a "Historical fact" - I agree on that, but from my point of view, a fact is something that can be incontrovertibly proved.

You could say the same thing about the existence of anything. Few scholars argue that Jesus didn't exist.

Wouldn't the burden of proof then be on the atheists/agnostics to prove that he didn't--if that's their assertion?

If jesus exists, then who are we to say that she was NOT given instructions....

Really?

Originally posted by Papillon

It's simple - people being the practical creaures they are, realised, by trial, error, and history, that doing good to their neighbours reaped a better harvest than doing bad.

If people learned this pragmatically, why is there a need for a religion at all?

 

Again, not believing in God does not make you a scholar, simply because you've rejected (your understanding of) a set of beliefs. Laws of logic still apply.

[bye2past]

Again, not believing in God does not make you a scholar, simply because you've rejected (your understanding of) a set of beliefs. Laws of logic still apply.

 

Oh, DyerMaker...where to begin.... (great song, BTW)

 

You can NOT in any context have logic "prove" anything religious. Let's take, for example, the Christian notion of Free Will. (I'll go slowly, so you can follow along.)

 

Christians believe that God is all-knowing, infallible, and all-good. Correct? Otherwise, how could He be God?

 

So then, because God is all-knowing, does He know what you did last year?

 

Does He know what you did last week?

 

Does He know what you did yesterday?

 

Does He know what you're going to do tomorrow? Remember now, he knows everything, and he's never wrong.

 

Does He know what you'll do next week?

 

Does He know what you'll do next month? What about next year? How about 5 years from now?

 

If God knows all of those things about your life, and he's never wrong, then how can you do differently from what He already knows?

 

You have no choice in the matter, because you can't do different from what he already knows. You have no free will.

 

What is choice, then? Just a trick? Does He give you a "choice" just to make you feel good about yourself, even though He already knows what you'll do? That's not a very nice God.

 

I mean, is that what they teach? (Thankfully, I wasn't raised Christian, so I don't know.) They teach you that God gave you free will, even though it's nothing more than a fake choice? Wow. That's downright insulting.

 

There are two ways out of this argument if you are a Christian: either accept that you do not have free will, or don't believe in the Christian God.

 

There's your logic, DyerMaker. You can't refute that. The above is but ONE example of how logic destroys religious arguments. Pick up any textbook in Beginning Philosophy and look under "Appeal to Divinity." You'll see that, through (your favorite) logic, there is no argument religious people can make that can't be logically proven false, because it is all centered around one maxim - that God exists.

 

While others' scholarship may be lacking, your scholarship is absurd. If you've even been to college, that's wonderful. But once you get master's degrees from Cornell and Carnegie Mellon, then talk to me about scholarship. Until then, I'd suggest you know what you're talking about before penning uneducated, sophomoric, religious nonsense.

[bye2past]

I love how religious people (usually Christians) get so frustrated when people show them loopholes in their own ridiculous religion. The problem is that all of their arguments just assume that God exists. Generally, a discussion with a religious person happens in 3 stages:

1) Engagement. The religious person "bites" and finally tries to talk about the religion.

2) Struggle. Inevitably, the religious person can't keep up with the questioning and gets flustered.

3) Detachment. The religious person resorts to the "I don't want to talk about this anymore" excuse, and/or simply walks away.

 

I had a girlfriend once who went to Parochial schools all of her life (until she got to college) and was valedictorian, National Merit Finalist, etc. We had discussions about religion, and she also said that since she took Philosophy and Religion classes in school, she still thinks Christianity is "right."

 

Excuse me? Philosophy and Religion class in a Parochial school? Oh yeah, I'm sure the teachers were really objective. That's like taking a History class in pre-war Afghanistan, with Ahmed al-Junanali of the Taliban as your teacher. I'm sure they'll paint a really accurate picture of what really happens in the world.

 

It's just crazy how these Christians spend time talking about how they "go to school too," as if they're trying to prove that they really are smart. Which a lot of them are, I agree - just like my ex - but the fundamental problem is the Christianity itself. They can be very booksmart, but when it comes to anything philosophical, they enter the closed world of Christianity. They look at the world in a Christian context. They can't possibly be as objective as a non-Christian because they are too deeply rooted in their own religious world. I'm not talking about Christians who were just born that way and never go to church. I mean the god-fearing ones -- the ones who take such offense when their faith is questioned.

 

I love that one quote from earlier -- from Moose, I believe:

But to believe without knowing shows how much we trust His word that He is alive.

haha...What a line. Reality check: To believe without knowing doesn't show trust. To believe without knowing is called being naive. Children do it all the time. That's why they get hurt a lot - because they don't know any better.

 

Unfortunately, you also hear it with rape victims -- a young, attractive girl walked home alone late at night in a bad neighborhood, very naively believing that she'll be totally fine. No amount of "blind faith" in the safety of her neighborhood changed the fact that the big, drunk, horny gangsta walking the opposite way had his way with her.

 

(Obviously, I'm not trying to equate believing in Christianity with being raped, but the concept of "blind faith" being nothing more than sugar-coated naiveté is the same.)

[Papillon]

Originally posted by dyermaker

Do you see what I mean by atheists being equally dogmatic as fundamentalist theists?

 

I respect the opinion of an atheist/agnostic who says, "I disagree with you, because I don't have faith in what I can't see", or something to that effect.

It's offensive to me when, instead, they decide to marginalize what others believe. "You're indoctrinated", "You've been decieved into a big lie", etc..--It's as if you think Christians don't do any study at all.

 

I apologise if I offended you, that was not my intention. In any event, I am simply speaking from my own experience - I grew up in a Dutch Protestant home, and was forced into the religion, simply by proxy of being born when and where I was. I swallowed it whole, until I became an adult and realised that it's OK to question your beliefs. As a counter to your argument, I will assert that religion would not last long were it not for all the religious trappings, like the bible, heaven, hell, satan, angels, baptisement, etc, etc. You wanna tell me you "discovered" Jesus all by your lonesome self? Obviously not, you were indoctrinated by all the trappings and dogma. It's not an insult, it's simple common sense.

 

Contrary to the opposing argument, religion isn't just 'the way you feel', or 'the way you think'. There's a good deal of scholarship involved in Religion, and there has been for a very long time. Some people (I call them fundamentalists, I don't know the proper term) choose not to make scholarship an aspect of their faith, but many people feel that scholarship is neccessary to strengthen faith.

 

There's nothing anti-academic about having a faith in God.

There's nothing inherently scholastic about not believing in God.

 

Some of the smartest, most intelligent people I know, simly use their amazing logical ability to defend their religious viewpoint. In the end it's simply a difference in perspective, but that said, any perspective is borne out through your acquired "knowledge", whether that knowledge is true or not.

 

You could say the same thing about the existence of anything. Few scholars argue that Jesus didn't exist.

Wouldn't the burden of proof then be on the atheists/agnostics to prove that he didn't--if that's their assertion?

 

No. It's logically inconsistent to claim proof for the non-existence of something, and it's a logical fallacy that's often (perhaps deliberately) perpetrated by believers. For example, if I claimed "Aliens do not exist", how would I go about proving it? See? - you cannot have"negative proof". From my point of view, I claim that there is no god, but I cannot prove it. I can simply deduce it from the way I see the world, plus the fact that believers cannot prove the opposite, either.

 

Really?

 

My point exactly. Prove that she's a loon.... The point is that it creates a paradox for believers, because you have to either a) discard religion to prove it, or b) Show how god would never do such a thing, but then that would have YOU decide what god wants or not....

 

If people learned this pragmatically, why is there a need for a religion at all?

 

People didn't invent religion to create peace among themselves. Religion evolved as an answer to deeper spiritual questions that simply had no answers, like "Where did everything come from?", or "What happens when we die?".

[magda]

Originally posted by Papillon

As a counter to your argument, I will assert that religion would not last long were it not for all the religious trappings, like the bible, heaven, hell, satan, angels, baptisement, etc, etc. You wanna tell me you "discovered" Jesus all by your lonesome self? Obviously not, you were indoctrinated by all the trappings and dogma. It's not an insult, it's simple common sense.

"Trappings"? Of course one could argue that if there were no heaven, hell, bible, angels, etc, the Christian religion would not "last long". It's the combination of the dogma and a persons BELIEF. Most people BELIEVE they feel an actual connection between themself and God/Jesus.

 

My point exactly. Prove that she's a loon.... The point is that it creates a paradox for believers, because you have to either a) discard religion to prove it, or b) Show how god would never do such a thing, but then that would have YOU decide what god wants or not....

Interestingly, the "symptoms" for possession in centuries past are very similar if not identical to what is today refered to as schitzophrenia, I believe I heard. Anyway, aside from the fact that no one can prove anything about what is going on in someone elses mind, I don't think there is a paradox for a Christian in that challenge: there is Satan and his demons.

[Papillon]

"Trappings"? Of course one could argue that if there were no heaven, hell, bible, angels, etc, the Christian religion would not "last long". It's the combination of the dogma and a persons BELIEF. Most people BELIEVE they feel an actual connection between themself and God/Jesus.

 

The fact that you have might a spritual need is personal. The fact that you choose x, y or z religion to fulfill it with, is due to dogma and indoctrination.

 

I don't think there is a paradox for a Christian in that challenge: there is Satan and his demons.

 

The woman didn't say Satan made her do it, she said JESUS made her do it.... huge dilemma. A religious person trying to assert that she is satan-infested has to prove she's lying...

 

All in all, thankfully the seperation of church and state is far enough to make this case a no-brainer (no pun intended)