[Scotty]

I mean, why don't you believe in Mohammed?

Because he (and the religion that follow him), holds some pretty discriminatory and violent ideas.  For example, a non-muslim may not give testamony against a muslim.  That is tantamount to racism, but on a religious matter.  Another is that apostasy is prohibited on pain of death, meaning that if one is a muslim, if for any reason changes, that person may be put to death.  That, said, I do not dislike the Islamic faith, just feel that it is a little belligerent (I don't hold Extremist behavior as an example for Islam.  Those people are nuts, and every religion has its fair share.  Hell, Islam probably has a little more than most.)

You're using Christian dogma

Yes, I am.  I defined dogma earlier in the thread.  It is, quite simply, an established opinion.

It's all just tales in the end.

That would be dogma too.  It's your established opinion.

[Rian]

Dogma is not a synonym for opinion. It is a more specific term for an institutionalized opinion.

[Polpolion]

Accepting Jesus's sacrifice on the cross is what does it.  To explain, Jesus took the blame for anything you may do or have done against God.

Why did God give us freedom of choice

Because God doesn't want a group of automatons to mindlessly voice praises and accolades to Him.  I think TrashMan said something about that a few pages ago.

I'd rather not have freedom of choice and automatically go to heaven than be stuck here and have to not utilize my ability to do what I want and still probably go to hell for something that I did wrong.

And it's your choice to think that.  

still probably go to hell for something that I did wrong

I repeat, Jesus died for you and accepted the blame.  If you accept his sacrifice, and live a life of (relative) innocence (nobody's perfect, except Jesus), you go to heaven.  That's what's written.  (I realize that you have to believe in God and Jesus to accept that explanation, but that's what I see written in the Bible).

So essentially, everyone everywhere goes to heaven regardless of what they've done because Jesus died for them? That's not what I've been told.

From what I been told at 8 years of Christian grade school, this situation with God, sin and free will is pretty much like a Parent giving a kid a computer and saying "I am leaving the room; I don't know when I'll be back. You are to play with this computer, but you may not turn it on."

[Scotty]

Accepting Jesus's sacrifice on the cross is what does it.  To explain, Jesus took the blame for anything you may do or have done against God.

Why did God give us freedom of choice

Because God doesn't want a group of automatons to mindlessly voice praises and accolades to Him.  I think TrashMan said something about that a few pages ago.

I'd rather not have freedom of choice and automatically go to heaven than be stuck here and have to not utilize my ability to do what I want and still probably go to hell for something that I did wrong.

And it's your choice to think that.  

still probably go to hell for something that I did wrong

I repeat, Jesus died for you and accepted the blame.  If you accept his sacrifice, and live a life of (relative) innocence (nobody's perfect, except Jesus), you go to heaven.  That's what's written.  (I realize that you have to believe in God and Jesus to accept that explanation, but that's what I see written in the Bible).

So essentially, everyone everywhere goes to heaven regardless of what they've done because Jesus died for them? That's not what I've been told.

From what I been told at 8 years of Christian grade school, this situation with God, sin and free will is pretty much like a Parent giving a kid a computer and saying "I am leaving the room; I don't know when I'll be back. You are to play with this computer, but you may not turn it on."

You missed this part:

live a life of (relative) innocence

I never said anyone and everyone goes to heaven just because they accept that.  It isn't a get out of jail free card to just go on doing what you were before.

but you may not turn it on

Maybe play some solitaire, but no porn sites for you. 

[General Battuta]

The point is, Scotty, that you're an atheist; we're all atheists.

You're just an atheist about one fewer god than everyone else.

In the end it doesn't matter what we believe -- it's all stories. What matters is our actions.

[Rian]

Well, no, because “atheist” means that one believes in no gods at all. I believe the term you’re looking for is “monotheist.”

I agree with your final sentiment, however.

[Polpolion]

Accepting Jesus's sacrifice on the cross is what does it.  To explain, Jesus took the blame for anything you may do or have done against God.

Why did God give us freedom of choice

Because God doesn't want a group of automatons to mindlessly voice praises and accolades to Him.  I think TrashMan said something about that a few pages ago.

I'd rather not have freedom of choice and automatically go to heaven than be stuck here and have to not utilize my ability to do what I want and still probably go to hell for something that I did wrong.

And it's your choice to think that.  

still probably go to hell for something that I did wrong

I repeat, Jesus died for you and accepted the blame.  If you accept his sacrifice, and live a life of (relative) innocence (nobody's perfect, except Jesus), you go to heaven.  That's what's written.  (I realize that you have to believe in God and Jesus to accept that explanation, but that's what I see written in the Bible).

So essentially, everyone everywhere goes to heaven regardless of what they've done because Jesus died for them? That's not what I've been told.

From what I been told at 8 years of Christian grade school, this situation with God, sin and free will is pretty much like a Parent giving a kid a computer and saying "I am leaving the room; I don't know when I'll be back. You are to play with this computer, but you may not turn it on."

You missed this part:

live a life of (relative) innocence

I never said anyone and everyone goes to heaven just because they accept that.  It isn't a get out of jail free card to just go on doing what you were before.

So I'm lead back to my original confusion, why did God give us Freedom of Choice if he's just going to limit what we should do without limiting what we are capable of doing, and hold it against us?

[General Battuta]

Well, no, because “atheist” means that one believes in no gods at all. I believe the term you’re looking for is “monotheist.”

I agree with your final sentiment, however.

Yeah, but that raises the question of what a god is and what counts as a god.

Better to handle it on a case-by-case basis, in which case we're all atheists about just about everything.

It works just as well with 'unbeliever'.

[Herra Tohtori]

Well, I believe someone summarized my sentiments on the matter of religions long ago.

Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it.

Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many.

Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books.

Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders.

Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations.

But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.

It's been surprising to notice that I'm pretty close to being a Buddhist without knowing...

So. Do I believe that Jesus' teaching about doing unto others as you would prefer done to you? Yes, because it agrees with reason.

Do I believe that God was involved in conception and life and death of Jesus? No. It's possible, but unlikely and unproven and I don't have any reason to believe that, I can respect and agree with Jesis' basic idea of making nice with people even without thinking that God had to be involved.

Do I believe everything else in the Bible because it's in the Bible? No, not as such; if it makes sense to me I don't specifically need to believe in it to agree with it. And for example the concept of original sin, and God as he's portrayed in the Bible, largely does not agree with reason and more importantly, it is on many occasion not conductive to the good and benefit of one and all. Even if Bible would tell it is, I can not agree with that point of view on various things. The mechanisms for salvation are the one of the biggest thing I disagree with on the Bible; I can not believe that God would place such inordinate amount of attention and importance on our faith and I disagree with the basic concept of being "sinful" by default simply as a consequence of something a supposed ancestor did. These things do not agree with my reason.

Always, always consider the source. As soon as something tells you that it can't be wrong, you should have warning bells ringing in your head immediately. Especially when it comes to non-falsifiable claims.

Ironically, I'm quite certain that if God does exist and there's some kind of afterlife, he would be quite understanding of this kind of view of world rather than judgemental, jealous personality that he is portrayed in Christianity. Personally I think that even if God exists, it's not him that would be jealous, but the priests and clergymen that have taken over the basic idea of religions and converted them into their personal tools of controlling people. Not every one of them, but enough that I have no reason to believe in any established religion, I rather make my own mind about things like this and take my chances with my own opinion than put all my chips for someone else's opinion because it's what I've been told from child, one religion of the hundreds available.

If I'm wrong, at least it's my mistake and not someone else's.

After all, this might be what happens just as well as any other option.

So I could say that I have more trust even in the possibility of God than I have faith (nevermind trust) in the traditional portrayal of God in christianity and other major religions.


EDIT: Of course quoting Buddha is dangerous business because probably a lot more has been lost in translation than with Jeshua of Nazareth, but regardless that quote makes a lot more sense to me than Bible as a whole... as do other quotes supposedly from this person.

[Rian]

Yeah, but that raises the question of what a god is and what counts as a god.

Better to handle it on a case-by-case basis, in which case we're all atheists about just about everything.

It works just as well with 'unbeliever'.

But why not let people define their own beliefs as they see fit? A person believes in some entity, and calls it a god. He believes in only one such entity. The most accurate term for his beliefs, then, is monotheist. I suspect that many such people would object vehemently to being termed atheists, and I don’t see how attempting to redefine their beliefs from an external perspective is in any way productive.

[General Battuta]

Yeah, but that raises the question of what a god is and what counts as a god.

Better to handle it on a case-by-case basis, in which case we're all atheists about just about everything.

It works just as well with 'unbeliever'.

But why not let people define their own beliefs as they see fit? A person believes in some entity, and calls it a god. He believes in only one such entity. The most accurate term for his beliefs, then, is monotheist. I suspect that many such people would object vehemently to being termed atheists, and I don’t see how attempting to redefine their beliefs from an external perspective is in any way productive.

Okay.

Anyway, the point is that Scotty firmly believes that his God is real and that Jesus died for the sins of mankind. But billions of other people across thousands of years have believed equally crazy stuff, with equally valid reasons, and in the end it has all fallen into dust and half-remembered myths that we find entertaining and sometimes relevant.

What matters is how you act here and now.

[NGTM-1R]

God told them "Do not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it, you will surely die."  Genesis 2:17

God told them not to.  They did.  Granted, they were tempted by the serpent, but they ate it anyway.  If you read the rest of the book of Genesis, God punishes the serpent by forcing it to slither on its belly on the ground.  You can read that however you want if you believe in evolution or believe that God doesn't exist, but He does not just punish man.  (Genesis 3:14)

Except: they had no concept of good and evil. They were told not to. But they literally had no concept that disobeying was wrong. This is akin to placing a cookie in front of a one-year-old and acting surprised when they eat it despite what you said. They did not know of Good and Evil, so how could they possibly be expected to act in a moral manner? The doctrine of original sin is the story of God blaming those who cannot reasonably be blamed.

Because His son died for you.  If your life was rescued by a cop who was killed protecting you, would you express your condolences to the parents of that cop?  "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life"  (John 3:16)  Similarly, would you spite and hate your biological father, simply because he can ground you if you don't obey him?

False dichotomy. To an omnipotent being, all possible things are equal. Citing Jesus of Nazareth in that case proves only two things: Jesus was a stand-up guy, and it didn't need to be the way it was, thereby managing to make God look like an even bigger asshole. He didn't need to have His Son nailed to a cross to do what He did, He's God, and for that matter if you go into the divinity of Jesus, Jesus didn't need to get Himself nailed to the cross either to accomplish it, but did so out of loyalty to His Father.

Which proves that the Son is worthy of respect, and the Father isn't.

There is only punishment if you disobey him.  Perhaps I have been mis-wording my posts earlier.  Believing and having faith in God is not the way to heavan (though it is a pre-requisite).  Accepting Jesus's sacrifice on the cross is what does it.  To explain, Jesus took the blame for anything you may do or have done against God.

Wow, that sounded really preachy.  Sorry if I offend anyone.   

The supreme irony of this is that by those standards I am saved, though I believe in the violent destruction of the Supreme Being as soon as we have the means.

[Wobble73]

Except: they had no concept of good and evil. They were told not to. But they literally had no concept that disobeying was wrong. This is akin to placing a cookie in front of a one-year-old and acting surprised when they eat it despite what you said. They did not know of Good and Evil, so how could they possibly be expected to act in a moral manner? The doctrine of original sin is the story of God blaming those who cannot reasonably be blamed.

That's how I see it, it's like locking a puppy in a room all day and then punishing it for peeing on the carpet!

[Flipside]

Also, if you consider the Serpent as well, it means that Humanity got punished for being naive and trusting someone that God Himself trusted up to that point, he was, after all, an Angel before he got thrown out. God's supposedly Omniscient, but he didn't see that one coming, did he? And if He did, then that just makes matters worse.

[IPAndrews]

I suspect that many such people would object vehemently to being termed atheists

If you are a theist with respect to one theology you are atheist with respect to the others as they are for the most part mutually exclusive. So we are all, to some extent, atheist. I myself am happy to have shown the independence of thought to resist indoctrination by my parents and draw my own evidence based conclusion about the practically certain nonexistence of god. My lack of faith leaves me uninfluenced by the less positive aspects of religion and not investing time in a group delusion leaves me with more time to spend on learning and other forms of self improvement. This could be why a person's religiosity is inversely proportionate to their intelligence (MENSA research) although admittedly this could be a chicken and egg scenario.

[Scotty]

This could be why a person's religiosity is inversely proportionate to their intelligence

I'm assuming this is an average, and not an absolute.  Pride may be one of the deadly sins, but I'm still guilty of it.  I like to think that I'm not that stupid.  I also have a friend named Hal, who was captain of the debate team, forensics (competitive acting team), Knowledge Bowl team, valedictorian, and one of the most religious people I have ever met.

My lack of faith leaves me uninfluenced by the less positive aspects of religion

And also less influenced by the more positive aspects of religion.

Except: they had no concept of good and evil. They were told not to.

Anyone can see that.  Look at the name of the tree.  The tree of the knowledge of good and evil.  The point is that they were told not to, and deliberately disobeyed him.

it's like locking a puppy in a room all day and then punishing it for peeing on the carpet

So if a puppy pees on the carpet you just let it do it?  Punishing it is how it learns.  Granted, that's not a perfect analogy, but it works for now.

though I believe in the violent destruction of the Supreme Being as soon as we have the means.

I don't know if I can carry on a conversation about this.  As others have noticed, I am a fairly religious person, and if you hold this opinion there is nothing I really feel like saying to you.  Apart from this of course.  No hard feelings.   

[General Battuta]

I would be curious as to your opinion of my last few posts.

So long as you don't try to tell me or anyone else how to act (i.e. gay marriage/abortion issues) and restrict your faith to guiding your own personal life, I don't see why anyone should have any problem with your religion.

[Scotty]

a-thee-ist (n): 1) someone who denies the existence of God.

I firmly believe in God.  Many other people do as well.  Billions of other people may believe in a God as well.  Judaism, Christianiy, and Islam all believe in roughly the same God.  Others, such as Hinduism, does not, and instead believes in many gods.  I think that Hindus are wrong, but that does not make me an atheist. 

I suspect that many such people would object vehemently to being termed atheists

I am one such.  Please do not do so.  I will have to get vehement if you call me one again.   

gay marriage/abortion issues

against/against, but that's my opinion.  Never have I told anyone to act any way or another that they aren't already.  Don't call me an atheist, and I won't tell you how to act.  I will give suggestions though.  It makes me feel better.

[General Battuta]

I am curious as to your opinion of this statement:

Yeah, but that raises the question of what a god is and what counts as a god.

Better to handle it on a case-by-case basis, in which case we're all atheists about just about everything.

It works just as well with 'unbeliever'.

But why not let people define their own beliefs as they see fit? A person believes in some entity, and calls it a god. He believes in only one such entity. The most accurate term for his beliefs, then, is monotheist. I suspect that many such people would object vehemently to being termed atheists, and I don’t see how attempting to redefine their beliefs from an external perspective is in any way productive.

Okay.

Anyway, the point is that Scotty firmly believes that his God is real and that Jesus died for the sins of mankind. But billions of other people across thousands of years have believed equally crazy stuff, with equally valid reasons, and in the end it has all fallen into dust and half-remembered myths that we find entertaining and sometimes relevant.

What matters is how you act here and now.

That clarifies what I was saying about you being an atheist and about the importance of action rather than belief.

[Scotty]

What matters is how you act here and now.

This is true.  In my belief, if you do not act good here and now, farther down the road will not be pleasant.

James 2:17 ...In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

Yes, how you act is what matters.

But billions of other people across thousands of years have believed equally crazy stuff, with equally valid reasons, and in the end it has all fallen into dust and half-remembered myths that we find entertaining and sometimes relevant.

And equal (maybe a little less) have believed what I do and in the end, it has not fallen into dust and half-remembered myths.

EDIT:  Dang, I wish this forum counted for posts.  I'd have about a hundred by now.