lol, I will pass,,,,

I really don't see what this has to do with anything said in the last 2 pages here. I do think you are continuing arguments you've had in the past, and in doing so aren't looking at what is actually being said here. I'm very interested in discussing this with you, but I'd like to do so by keeping things in their proper context, and without straw man arguments.

Where should we start?



I think you missed the point, and projected meaning unto my words that isn't there. You are correct that some religionists already aren't concerned with what others believe, and I am correct regardless of how atheists conduct themselves, there will be religionists who think its imperative to convert atheists. Its simply part of those religionists worldview, that such is their duty - and that the conversion is more important than peoples behavior.

So tell me - after actually reading my words, and without projecting your own interpretation on it - which point am I supporting, and how am I supporting it?



This comment highlights something which Red and I have stated repeatedly - there is potential wrongness in any situation where many people organize themselves by belief. 'Nationalism' is a great example of this.

Its important to remember that your description above is not a fair characterization of Christianity. You are not just a group of people with similar beliefs who hang out - you also have your Book, your Jesus, your God, and your history. You have the promise of eternal life, and your beliefs themselves deny alternative possibilities. Many of you have beliefs against marrying outsides, or even associating excessively with outsiders. There are many implications which follow from all of this which go far beyond 'a group of people with similar beliefs who hang out'.




By 'your religion', do you mean Christianity? And does that include Jerry Falwell, or anyone else who calls themself Christian?



Straw man, logical fallacy of extremes. Its not a matter of holding one member responsible for the conduct of other members - its a matter of identifying influencing factors in a person's decisions.

=======================================
answer's will be short and to the point
=======================================

The bible in no way demands people be punished for there sins. In old testament times yes, but not now Jesus FULFILLED the old testament. As of now, we are to not judge anyone for Jesus is the Judge of all.
---------
But once again, that rule book is extremely controversial
---------
A lot of people say there is controversy in the bible, but every time i ask they can not say anything controversial about it. So I'll ask you, what controversies are there in the bible? Give a couple examples please.

---------
all of those have a myriad of different sects and interpreations of these tales
---------

And again that is cause Satan works through manipulations. Of course Satan is going to play tricks on people to believe this, and play tricks on someone else to believe that. This keeps us all from being united. If we were all united Satan would then have lost.

EVERYTHING in a persos life has some influence on them and potentially their decision and if there is 'potential' wrongness in where many people organize themselves by belief, there is an equal 'potential' for wrongess when people isolate themselves and live ONLY what they believe with no , support, discouragement , or input of any kind from others,,,that is because HUMANS have the potential to be wrong,,,,period

so we are both right,, those who dont want to believe may or may not be good people ,and those who do may or may not be good people

but the cause and effect argument of religion to 'goodness' is not any further a stretch than the opposite(balanced) application of the argument implying non faiths correlation to 'badness'.

A good person will take a tool or resource and use it in ways to do good,,,,the Bible happens to be a pretty big tool. A bad person will do the same. You will find good people, who find in the bible things like The commandments and the sermon on the mount to try and lead good lives. There are others who will take things in the bible, like homosexuality being an abomination or women having been stoned,, and use that to justify their personal feelings and behaviors (mostly their behaviors) towards homosexuals and women.

Likewise the non religious have good and bad people,,,they each have their own individual tools and references for doing what they do and it seems that because their reasons dont have a specific book or arent organized with others, they arent seen in the same negative light. Like history books, or parents(they make mistakes too and some kids will use that as an excuse their whole life, while others will move on ,,)

From where I sit it just seems like people oppose religion alot because it is more POPULAR than other belief systems,,,if its more popular its seen as yielding more power and being more 'potentially' dangerous...

You:
Speculation is not a judgement, but a consideration due to evidence given by manner. Peccy's attacking is a clear sign of bitterness by the manner used. As far as things I say are silly to those not able to see and decern....it is to be expected and I take it willingly. I like all do make mistakes due to lack of tone and visual clues. It is the nature of online. if I make a rash judgement....I will make it right with regret of my error and apology due. If patience is given and kind manner....it will be returned with a like manner. If vile things come my way, being human I may not reply as is best....this is the nature we fight against within ourselves. I will do my best to be kind in all things.

Back to silly things! If one will obey the scriptures and hear, then seach to see if these things are so.....many will find most of that taught is 180 degrees from what the scriptures say. It is this awakening that is needed to shed lies put in place by the great liar...Satan.....even in the Churches. This is why God's flock is called the little flock in scripture. I care about people greatly and hate wrongness....it is the pains of the people and the way of all our sorrows in this life. God is not the cause, he is a father trying to open the eyes of rebellious teenagers who know everything. But in this case, it is life and death....not crashing up the car...etc.

These silly things I tried to prove wrong with all might, but with a sound mind.....they are true and wise. but to those wise of this world they are foolishness. To a child a father will say,"Don't play your car stereo so loud as to drown out things around you!" To the child it is foolishness...until he does not hear the train that takes his legs and an arm from him.....then he understands the wisedom. We are all like that child.....that is why the world is as it is. Silly.......it is a wise silly...life and death!

Thank you for your kind manner of comment. We can talk.

True, but not relevant to the question of whether religion is particularly capable of motivating people to do wrong.

Lets look at this:

Person A: I think street gangs are bad. Street gangs influence people. Street gangs convince youth to commit crimes.

Person B: But everyone influence everyone else!

Do you see how the response above is completely irrelevant? Its probably easy for you to see how the response doesn't address the claim, because it is easy for you to relate (if not agree) with the POV that street gangs might be bad.




Individual humans, whether isolated or in a group, have the capacity to be wrong and to do wrong, agreed. This is obviously not the only factor in whether a person does wrong. You seem, as usual, to be completely denying the role of ideology, community membership, and shared values.




Are you saying that "religious people are good" is equally sensible as "non-religious people are bad"?




So majority of people who went to some particular southern baptist church in the 50s, and believed that blacks were inferior to whites - they were all just bad people, who choose to have bad beliefs? Their beliefs were in no way a consequence of their membership in a racist church and their acceptance of religious authorities, who promoted this view?

What's a good person to do with faced with the Absolute Authority of the bible, and someone who convincingly argues that the bible endorses a particular (wrong) behavior?




Exactly! And on this particular sub-topic of discussion - that is as it should be - not the samenegative light. There are other things to look at, though. For my agnostic anarchists acquaintances, I see 'evil' in the way they reinforce each others rationalized greed.



People who? Some people have silly motives for the criticism. I would go farther and say that some people put a lot of effort into casting blame on religion because of some particular personal experience, which logically has nothing to do with the larger cultural/social dynamics here.

For me, the popularity of religion is not the most dangerous factor - it is the grandiose and absolutist connections that are made.

Let me give a silly!

If asked when Christ and the thief went to paradise. Most all (in my area) will say, "As soon as they died on the cross.""Christ even said,"Verily, Verily, I say unto you today you shall be with me in Paradise."

Christ was three nights and three days in the heart of the Earth. (He's late!) he was with the diciples about forty days before he accended to his father. Even telling Mary the Magdalene, "Touch me not for I have not yet accended to my Father." Christ is now at least 43 days late!

People are taught wrongly to support a teaching that is antichrist.

Christ did not say "Today" to the thief meaning "this day we go to paradise" But "today" I tell you that you will be with me in paradise.

If I say to you. "I tell you today, you will be with me in Texas Friday!" It is clear! people error in puncuation and meaning due to old style of verbage use and laziness.

Christ was not late! Because the thief will be in paradise after Christ returns and the first resurrection happens....in our future with us that are his.

It is sound logic many find foolish and silly, being taught all their life a lie.

Subject jog but in context! We all know electricity has a positive and a negative. People learn the current flows from positive to the negative and find it silly that some say it is not so. Study eletronics or ask a person who does eletronics......the electron is the only moving particle....moving from hole to hole in the valence bond. So in fact....currect flow is from a more negative to a less negative valence bond.....the positve particles (the proton, never moves). This is the kind of confusion I speak of with the faith. The common does not fit the scriptures but most find it foolish....the same as the find one a fool who says negative flows to a less nagative. (That fool must be on drugs! they say!) Now thats silly huh!

Look it up! Eletronics 101

Forgive my spelling....I error more tonight due to illness. I will retire.

Peace and good rest to all!

Cyclops wrote:



Thank you, Cyclops, for the same.

You've got to be kidding.

First off, we're basically talking about all of the Abrahamic Religions when we speak about the "Biblical God". That includes, the Torah, Quran, and the KJV of the Bible which is actually a quite recent offshoot of the religoin historically speaking.

So when I say that there is tons of controversy concerning the "Bible" I'm speaking about the whole Abrahamic Religion. Some people believe that Jesus was "The Christ" other's do not. That whole controversy is what seperates Jews, and Christians, and of course, the Muslims have a whole different take on it altogether.

Trying to pretend that these are actually different religions is truly limited thinking.

Moreover, even if you just limit it to the later and more recent offshoot called "Christianity". Then you have extremely different opinions between the Catholics and the Protestants. These two sects didn't parts ways for no reason. Finally if you want to look at Protestantism (which is actually the least credible of all the Abrahamic religions) that's just a free-for-all of personal interpretations. I grew up in an extended family where several of my uncles where protestant pastors, and even they did not agree with each other on many concepts.

So to even pretend that the Bible is not highly controversial is truly silly. Even the most devoted religious leaders can't agree on what this God supposedly wants from us.



Right. Blame it all on that nasty Satan fellow. Let him be the scape everything arguments get extremely weak.

This is just yet another reason why the whole religion is a basket case. Not only do we need to have FAITH that this God exists, but we must also have FAITH that this demonic fallen angel exists. In fact, we must put Satan BEFORE Jesus, because without Satan Jesus would have nothing to save us from. Satan gives Jesus' sacrifice purpose! Which itself implies an extremely desperate God who actually see Satan was a real threat.

The thing just breaks down on every possible level. And it's clearly so confusing that even the greatest theologeans can't even agree on what it supposedly says. Everything is abscured by "Personal Interpretations". The very FACT that people always speak in terms of "Interpretations" when referring to the Bible basically proves that it's extremely ambiguous and vague.

This whole idea of a Fatherly God who is trying to raise his childern but he can't even communiate with them property because some stupid fallen angel is interferring in that communication is truly an utterly asburd notion. That would be a creator who has truly LOST CONTROL of his own creation.

Moreover, the very idea that a Demonic Satan is required flies in the very face of the idea that people are supposed to be making their OWN CHOICES.If a demonic demon has BLINDED someone from the TRUTH, then that person cannot be held responsible for having been BLINDED. They would technically be INNOCENT. So this isn't even a valid excuse for God.

And that's really what it basically comes down to with the Biblical God, to DEFEND the idea of this God is to do nothing more than make EXCUSES for why he appears to be so lame. And calling upon Satan is the excuse that's always given. But that excuse itself is extremely lame.

There is no excuse for this religion. It's just an absurd religion. Period. Instead of constantly making excuses for it, why not just face the truth that it makes no sense?

Would that be the end of the world for you?

Would you be disappointed to realize that in truth you never actually fell from grace from your creator and you aren't responsible for having Jesus nailed to a pole for your sake?

Personally I think it's GREAT that the Bible turned out to be nothing more than a false mythology not unlike the tales of Zeus. It was all a big lie all along.

Isn't that GREAT! I think it's WONDERFUL!

Surely you wouldn't find that to be disappointing I hope?

It's just to bad that studies (that I have mentioned, and brought up info on in other threads) and the Prison Population prove your statement wrong.

Organic Atheist(Atheists by choice, not force) tend to be more moral, and have lower crime rates, abortion rates, and divorce rates than their religious counterparts.

I think there is a common tendendy to change correlation to causation,,,the examples given include a variant determined by the number or percentage of religious in a country or region while disregarding equally significant factors such as their economy, or politics, or laws , or even the very SYSTEM used to keep track of those things from place to place. If I said someone is more or less moral,, that is a subjective description that is truly hard to prove. If I placed certain criteria on what morals include,,such as the prevalance of crime, or abortions, or divorces,,, it would also require me to do a direct comparison to prove. Lower crime rates does not prove lower crime(they prove the incidence by which crimes are detected), abortion rates also are hard to prove based on a mere religious to non religious comparison because what we have is the ability to state the INCIDENCE by which abortions are reported or considered criminal and not an actual gauge of the numbers committing the act, the same is true of divorces. We cant truly use divorce alone as a gauge of morality, as there are too many variables leading to divorce and no real way to track those either.

The flaw in your judgment is in gauging morality by the RATES which are recorded for things like divorce, or abortion, or crime. Divorce is an indication that people are TYRING to be moral(by getting married) and those rates arent fairly assessed without considering how many dont bother to marry at all but continue to be promiscuous or sexually active.

You can sit there and cry that there MUST be different factors since you apparently don't like the results. The problem there is we aren't talking about just 1 study. We are talking about multiple studies. Studies with different criteria. They are all pointing the same direction.
They aren't pointing in your direction, and they aren't painting the picture of the "immoral, heathen Atheist" that religion does it's best to paint.

I'm not going to bother looking up the verses, but I'm absolutely certain that there are places in the Bible where it clearly states that all heathens and atheists are indeed immoral and wicked. So it's not just a religion that tries to paint this picture. The authors of the Bible demand that it must be so!

Clearly that is indeed a falsehood. That single fact alone should be enough to dump the Bible as being clearly the totally untrustworthy lies of mortal men.

The bottom line for any religion that claims that the a particular book contains the sacred word of God, is that the book must then either only contain pristine holy words, or be recognized to be corrupt. And once it is indeed recognized as being corrupt then it instantly becomes totally undependable because it would be impossible to know which parts of it might be holy and which parts are nothing more than the over-zealous lies of the authors.

This is why it's perfectly fine for individuals to look to the Bible for personal guidance if they wish to do so, but as soon as they start holding the book up as the "infalliable word of our creator" then the religion becomes obnoxious.

I have absolutely nothing against any so-called "Christain" who wants to place their faith in these stories for their own personal spiritual journey, but as soon as they start shoving the book in my face as the "Infalliable Word of God" then they've crossed a very serious line.

And if they confess that the book is indeed falliable, then they're totally lost, because at that point I'll agree, and even suggest that as far as I'm concerned the whole "Sacrifical Lamb" thing is a total fallacy, as well as any claims that Jesus was the "only begotten son" of Yahweh. I also reject the notion that Yahweh was even real. As far as I'm concerned he's just another version of Zeus.

About the only credit I'll give to the Bible in terms of valuable spiritual lessons are some of the moral lessons that have been attributed to Jesus, and this is because I believe that Jesus was a Mahayana Buddhist Bodhisattva. Most everything he taught in terms of morals is in perfect agreement with that philosophy. As far as some of the doomsday predictions that the gospels attribute to Jesus, I just personally chalk those up to part of the falliable part of the book. And as I've pointed out many times, even those parts have Jesus clearly stating that those prophecies would occur before the current generation had passed, so they wouldn't apply to us today in any case.

In other words, it's my personal view that the Bible is about 90% fallacy and maybe 10% coincidental truth on some of the minor insignificant details.

my book, my God, my studies, and my church taught me that ALL are imperfect and immoral,,,,not one is without sin,,,

we didnt study atheists or 'heathens', we studied Jesus and the bible and concerned ourselves with living OUR lives the right way,,,

Try as I may to avoid these threads because of my dislike for confrontations, I eventually jump in somewhere because I do read and follow them.

I have seen such studies also and have made a point of learning more about them because of my own feelings of organized religion.
A factor in why many atheists "tend to be more moral" is because they are given the freedom to choose.

Many, most strict religious homes do not give children the option of choosing their religion. It is a thing that they are taught as soon as they can walk. They are drug off to church kicking and screaming. The fear and guilt is implanted from day one. That doesn't go away until they get older and find it's time to work out those issues...we all have had them from this guilt and fear concept that Christianity teaches.

For those who want to say..Oh no, my life is great, I never had issues, I liked church, my parents didn't make me go, I was never taught fear..I was taught love. Be honest with yourself at least, no need to post such things. Bottom line is we ALL have issues to deal with. No one can be taught such things as "hell" "fear" "sin" "satan"...just to name a few without it affecting us somehow, it's done at a sub-conscious level.

They are put threw some sort of baptism at very young ages. When the time comes to ask questions, many times they are hushed and just told again "this is the truth, if you don't follow this, you'll be at risk of damnation". It isn't resonating with their inner being, their higher self...they rebel, they fight against it, they want to choose their own truth.

An atheist is given the freedom to look at ALL religions, do their own research, come to their own conclusions, follow their hearts. They come to peace with themselves that way. The self destructive behavior isn't necessary. The dulling of pain isn't necessary, the acting out isn't necessary. No one wants to be told what to believe.

Those given the choice will rarely act out with behavior issues that eventually lead to crimes as they move into adulthood.
This isn't rocket science. It's a simple concept of freedom to choose what resonates with yourself. Well intending adults do this to their children, always have...hopefully not " always will".

It is the domestication of humans being passed on generation after generation. It is the greatest lie being passed on and on.
As a parent I understand the responsibility we have to teach our children. The best thing we can do is give them the opportunity to look at ALL religions, ALL traditions, ALL cultures. Not force our own belief system on them.

My boys have been to several Christian churches, a Buddhist Temple, A Krishna Temple, and they see me practice my Shamanism. They have been exposed to all. They get to pick for themselves which resonates in them, I don't force them to practice Shamanism with me. They don't get in trouble, don't drink, don't do drugs...hell, my almost 19 year old is still a virgin. They don't have a desire to dull an ache and pain from being oppressed, living in fear and they don't pack guilt around with them.

amen we all fall short in the glory of God. We fall down and sin from time to time, we just have to get up and dust ourselves off and learn from it.

There is no such thing as "sin" unless you subscribe to that concept by agreement.

The Biblical God has no glory. He's a mass murderer and downs innocent childern to deal with adult sinners. He instructs people to judge each other and stone unruly childern to death. He hardens the hearts of pharohs. He has his own son nailed to a pole.

A person would need to become a heinous criminal before they could fall short of the glory of the biblical God.

Going by this for a definition of sin we must then conclude that most average people are completely free of any sin. They all far exceed the glory of the biblical God.

I respect ur peaceful heart and always will, and believe it or not, those who know me consider me extremely peaceful as well. I know we often compare what WE have been through with others,, and when we are young we believe it is normal and what everyone goes through. However, I was indeed given a choice, there was no beating or guilt or any of that used to make me believe what I believe. I also dont drink, dont do drugs, and dont get in 'trouble'. I was a virgin until 17. These were all choices I made because they set in my heart as the right thing to do. As I have stated in these threads before,, there is ALOT of information in the bible. AT younger ages it is hard if not impossible to grasp ALL of it. But as a child,, my parents were already instilling certain values and principles in me that made sense and felt right, I trusted my parents completely and they didnt let me down. I had no reason to believe they would ever tell me anything that would harm me or set me back,,,this is all WITHOUT church

What church did was reinforce what my parents were already teaching me, about balance, about actions and consequences, about the power of thought, about loving others and respecting elders..etc..

As a child, the Lord was the star of the bible for me. His ability to guide(like my parents did us), his ability to love(like my parents did us), and his willingness to sacrifice for my good(like my parents did). The Lords life was one that I respected and chose to try and emulate. His words, (loving God, loving your neighbor as yourself, and doing to others as you want done). It was my PARENTS who taught me valuable lessons and church and the bible re inforced those lessons and explained their purpose even further.