Havent been on here in awhile. Thanks Arcemedes for offering some input!

So to the question of what me definition of religion is? Come on, we're in the general religion chat area, it's pretty clear That was a little glib, sorry, but anything that has to do with spirituality is "religion", not something you do over and over "religously".

Why are there atheists? That was how I was raised, to not believe in a higher power, I was always taught to always depend on Numero Uno, which is myself. I dont resent the upbringing, it's left me selfsufficient and Ive turned out to be a pretty decent person. I feel that its how you are raised as to what your views are and when you get older, you have EVERY right to decide for yourself.

I should leave this next part for your email, but what the heck!
One reason Im an atheist is Im gay. I refuse to bend a knee to any religion that has already promised me an eternity in a fryer basket for something I have NO control over. I've heard so often from many religous people just how sick,disgusting,abominable and unnatural I am soley based on me being gay. And I've been told that there is no hope, even though the Arms of Love open wide, just not wide enough for me. That's all. Later!

doesn't religious and crazy go hand in hand?

How did it come about? By being able to think for oneself.

Why do you take it so personally. It's not an attack at all. He could have spent far less time if he wanted to just attack something. He makes very good points, better than what I could have done. Of course I also agree with him.

to address one of your questions, "Why are there atheists?"
Some are raised that way. Some become that way after realizing that all they've been told about some belief system isn't necessarily true.

OK buddy, I see our misdirection. well, Im an atheist so I still stick to my original statement that we are energy that changes form.

Religion is a deeply personnal choice to people and the product of years of instillment by the family, peers and community.

But when you say "good life", we need to look at what comprises that sort of life. Is it merely following all human laws to a "t", being nice to all for your entire life and helping all those that you can in your power? That seems like a nice life, in that YOU get the personnal satisfaction that YOU are not a "bad" person. why do you need validation?

Now, as to a "bad life", this can get a little grey. Circumstance is tricky when we make choices in life. Is a murder wrong if you are truly defending yourself from being murdered? Is cruelty or revenge wrong when you finally snap & crack from others treating you poorly? This can go on and on, I think ultimetly it resides in the person if they feel they have lived an appropriate life.

Now as to the comment on all those that deny jesus burn in hell, I feel that is really BLEEPED up. The message there is not one of love, but an ultimatum: EITHER you are with this god OR you are against it. I feel that life is not so cut and dry. You are basically forced into subservience through fear of recrimination in an afterlife that NO ONE is really sure exists. Im just a human, so I can't really see the big picture, but the piece Im given to look at ( the arguement here) leaves a bitter taste in my mouth.

I was very torn on the issue for awhile, but i'm not anymore.
We all agree sex is fun great whatever u want to call it but God wants that in the marriage.
I have heard several say if u really care for the person, and when it ends it ends. I just came from a relationship where we had sex and i loved him a lot and had no intentions of being with anyone else then the guilt started I realized i was not and have not been in Gods will for a very long time. I tried to rationalize what i was doing by saying "well eventually we will get married so it will be ok". For me I could not live with myself like i was and so when i turned my life back over to the Lord my thoughts changed to what they should of been in the first place on the Lord, and in turn me and the guy and nothing but sex in common.
Right now i am happier than i have been in a while and one day when the time is right He will send me the one He has for me not one of my making.
I like the 4 questions Jon asked and if we all would ask those in everything we do we would be alot better off.
Love the Lord with all your mind body and strength and you will be ok. Blessing to u all.

It's interesting you say that the religions on't say what happens to non-believers. All the ones I researched in the judeo-christian realm all say that non-believers burn in hell, gnash teeth and are flung into outer darkness.

They say the non-blievers deserve this because they have "denied a god", whatever that means.

We are energy and condensed energy, i.e. matter. Since energy is neither created nor destroyed, it can only change forms.

Sure, I'll be glad to expand on this.

You ask, "why do you always look to attack something you do not believe in"

I don't. I was responding to a direct accusation that was aimed at "me" or anyone in general actually.

This was the charged:



I personally don't care what trunner69 believes for himself. If he wants to believe that Christ was the son of Yahweh and that he's personally full of sin and need to find salvation, that's perfectly cool with me.

But that's not what he posted.

He posted that if "You" (the reader that he is addressing) has no accepted Christ as your Savior your are doomed. (I'm sure he didn't mean domed )

In any case he's making blanket statements about the fate of other people and he's claiming to know the 'will' of God for everyone.

As soon as a person moves into that terriory they are no longer just spiritual, but instead they are claiming to speak for God!

They are claiming to know what God wants from other people.

I feel compelled to point out to him that the dogma that he claims to be the "Word of God" isn't even consistent much less divine.

After all, if one human being can point to a mythology and claim that it's the word of God, then another human being has just as much right to point to the same dogma and express their opinion as well. And if their opinion is that the dogma is inconsistent, ignornat, and bigoted, and far from divine, then so be it. That's a valid opinion.

To then turn around and claim that I'm 'bashing' his views is utterly asburd. Because he had already 'bashed' by views when he demanded that if I don't accept Jesus as my Savior I'm doomed.

Do you see?

He already told me what he expects me to believe, and he has already denounced whatever I might believe by implying that if I don't believe his views I'm "Doomed".

Actually if he would have simply stated it as follows I wouldn't have jumped on him.

If he would have simply said, "I believe that accepting Christ as my savior is the only way to salvation". I wouldn't have said a word.

But that's not what he said.

He said, "If you have not accepted Christ as your Savior you are domed."

That's telling me what I must accept to be true, that's not telling me what he believes to be true for himself.

As long as Christians engage in proselyizing their beliefs, and trying to push them onto other people I will always respond in a like manner by pointing out how absurd the whole Biblical picture truly is.

The day that Christians quit proselytizing their beliefs is the day that I'll quit responding to them in kind.

And by the way, I never even told the man that he is doomed. All I did was point out how absurd the mythology is that he is referring to.

As long as the Bible is claimed to be the word of the creator of all human beings, then all human beings should be able to comment on what they think of it whether their thoughts about it are favorable toward it or not.

Why should any human being be chastised for seeing the Biblical story of "God" as being utterly absurd?

You say,...



What does that have to do with anything?

First off, no one needs to twist the religion to make it apper to be bad. Just look at history and you can see all of the evil works that were done in the name of this religion, and even continue to be done to this very day. The religion still inspires people to be hateful toward same-gender lovers, as well as inspiring people to denounce anyone who doesn't believe in the religion as being 'doomed' just as trunner69 has done.

Secondly, why would you suggest that I need to have been hurt by this religion to recognize that it's utterly absurd?

A supposedly all-wise God who always solves problems using violent gory methods?

That's utterly absurd in IMHO, no need to be hurt to recognize that.

A supposedly loving compassionate God who is appeased by blood sacrifices to begin with (not unlike Zeus who came before him)

I don't need to be hurt to recognize the absurdity of that.

A supposedly all-knowing, all-powerful God who's supposedly so dependable and trustworthy that he never changes his mind. At one point tells people to judge their brothers and stone sinners to death. (isn't that supposed to his job to judge people and deal them?)

At one point he floods the planet as a response to sin, and the next moment he's desperately sacrificing his son to appease Satan.

This is a supposedly all-knowng, all-powerful God who's at war with a fallen angel?

I could go on and on and on at how absurd this story is.

So what up with suggesting that the religion must have hurt me?

As a human being who has read this story and has heard all sorts of supposedly 'excuses' for the behavior of this God, I've simlpy come to the conclusion that the creator of this universe couldn't not possible be as stupid and unwise as Yahweh.

And I don't mean to offend anyone by that conclusion.

As a human being that's my assessment of the mythology. I have every right to assess it since it's authors claim it to be the word of my creator. I reject it as nothing more than the controlling writings of mere mortal men who weren't even all that wise, much less divine. And clearly male-chauvinistic to boot.

I don't believe that the creator of humanity would be a male chauvinist. That's absurd.

Do I love to explain how absurd this story is?

Yes I do. Because it's so absurd that's it's actually fun to make fun of it.

In all honesty I think the story of Zeus is more reasonable. And no one has any problem dismissing Zeus as mythology.

I wonder what Vishnu thinks of that point of view. He is after all the creator of time and the destroyer of all things and was around five thousand years before anyone even heard of Moses

Experiments have been done that prove "life" can come from an organic soup. Put the elements thought to be on the Earth before life in a sealed container. Add energy like electricity. And presto, you get self-replicating organic molecules. Tends to turn the inside purple.
This experiment has been done dozens of times. Works everytime. Now, we've never had something crawl out, but we've never let the experiment run for a few billion years either.
However, we have seen through this experiment, that over time, the molecules become more complex (information is added).
To say "abiogenisis", as Eljay has defined it, hasn't been proved, is simply untrue.

The problem with accepting Christ as my Savior is that it necessarily means that I must also accept that God is a desperate idiot who can't handle situations wisely.

In order to accept that Jesus was the sacrificial lamb of Yahweh, I'd first have to believe that Yahweh is in an egotistical war with a fallen angel, and that Yahweh is clearly desperate. So desperate that he had no choice but to sacrifice his own son in a bloody appeasement to himself just to prove something to Satan.

I'd also have to believe that Yahweh solves all his problems using violent methods (because that's what the Old Testament stories reveal to us).

So ultimately I'd have to accept that God is stupid and can't solve any problem using truly wise and constructive methods.

I'd also have to believe that Yahweh is both consistent, dependable and trustworthy (because the Bible says he must be) yet I'd have to simultaneoulsy believe that God is confused and never does things the same way twice (because that's what the stories in the Bible demand is true).

For example, at one point when mankind became sinful God simply wiped out the entire population of humanity via a flood and saved only a few people and some animals in a boat.

But then later (after his first method didn't work) he decided to send his son to be butchered on a pole to save mankind from sin.

Well, clearly if I am going to accept Christ as my "Savior" I must also accept that Yahweh is confused and is desperately trying differnt things experimentally at random.

Since his first method didn't work, there's really no reason why I should place anymore faith in his second experiment. Clearly Yahweh has no clue how to solve problems. He's already displayed gross ignorance and no wisdom at all.

Well, clearly this whole story has no more credibility than the stories of Zeus. Another God who was appeased by blood sacrifices for by some strange coincidence.

Although I don't think it was ever claimed that Zeus was all-wise. I think he was also assumed to have human frailties like a jealous personality, etc. Plus Zeus wasn't a male chauvinistic pig.

So by comparing these two ancient myths it sure looks like Zeus was both wiser and more highly moral than Yawhew.

It is claimed that Yawhew is supposed to be perfect, but the first thing out of his mouth is the commandment, "Thou shalt not have any other Gods before me for I am a jealous God".

Well, jealousy is not a perfect personality trait, so he already stuck his own foot in his mouth before the mythology even got off the ground. His very first commandment proclaims that he has an imperfect human personality.

The whole mythology just shot itself in the foot right off the bat.

Yahweh couldn't possibly be the all-wise all-perfect creator of this universe, and therefore Jesus could not possible be his sacrifical lamb.

Next!

Many people would probably be surprised that their basic beliefs about right and wrong are very closely alligned, very similar, even if their religious semantics are totally different. People don't realize that right and wrong are basically the same from one religion to the next, regardless of the title that is attached to the belief system. For me, I'd like to find someone who believes in rather similar religious semantics, because that makes the whole religion thing much less complicated. I don't want someone telling me that because I don't believe in sleeping around, and I don't think that it's right to steal, and I think that it's in everybody's best interest to help each other, doesn't mean that I want for my boyfriend (or eventually husband) to try to convert me to his religion because I already know the difference between right and wrong, have morals, and don't try to cheat anyone, just because he thinks that those traits are only prevelant in his religious affiliation. (Wow, is that a run-on sentence)
So, yeah, religion is kind of important to me when looking for someone to have a relationship with.