Do u beleave in God

[hairyjuan 0]

WHAT A GOOD EXPLANATION OF THE DEFINITION OF FAITH: BELIEVING IN SOMETHING EVEN WHEN YOU KNOW IT IS FALSE





WWW.TRUTHBEKNOWN.COM

we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively


wishers never choose, choosers never wish

[steveorino 7]

What a good example of you have nothing to offer of substance to the debate ... post a plethora of redundant links.

steveOrino

[hairyjuan 0]

you haven't looked at anything i post, by your own admission, making your statement about nothing of substance to add to the debate ABSOLUTELY AND COMPLETELY FALSE




as always, the only thing a believer can do is deny, they cannot prove false the book posted below

we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively


wishers never choose, choosers never wish

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

So do you not believe anything the history books tell you about the 1st century as true? After all there are no original manuscripts of such work, and the copies are very few and quite old.

That's quite a good argument. However there is a big difference between history and any religion. The historians do not push their theories over everyone. They do not tell you how to live, or that you could change your life because some historic figure said so.

[emphasis mine] Actually they do. While you may be from Russia, your info says you live in TX now. I grew up there. I had TX history throughout my schooling in the 60s & 70s. What is taught now is different than then.

Well, my definition of "push" is slightly different, and I have explained it as "They do not tell you how to live, or that you could change your life because some historic figure said so". When was the last time you saw a historian coming to your home, or approaching you on a street just to tell you about Nero, and how His existence is going to change your life?

Quote

Why would that be? Could it be the Texans had an agenda then as much as the Tex-Mexs that are gaining influence in the politics and education of Texas do now?

The history should not change because of changes in political agenda. We had the same thing in Russia - first people said Stalin was genius, then he was a tyrant, then he was a "good for that time" dictator. None of those changes really affect history. The purpose of history is to tell you what the guy did, not how good or bad was what the guy did.

A good historian, as a good history book, has to be neutral and non-emotional. And a lot of books really are, mostly there are teachers who make it sound emotional.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

• Quote

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

It is hard to say with 100% accuracy anything happened in the first century. Our records are simply incomplete. We must depend on circumstantial evidence for the most part.

The main problem with circumstantial evidence is obvious when you base your whole theory on it. If the evidence is proven to be invalid, it invalidates your whole theory. That's why circumstantial evidence would be accepted as a small, non-important part of theory, but cannot be really accepted as a base of a theory you base your life on.

Quote

Such as while there are no original copies of anything written by Ceaser or his historians available today, we can say with some certainty he existed. This is partially based on "circumstantial" evidence such as coins with his likeness do exist, just as writings on the catacombs of 1st century Christians do exist.

This is correct. However, the case here is dfferent. Is the whole history science based on Ceasar existense? No. Is the whole Ancient history based on Ceasar existense? No as well. What changes tomorrow if there is strong evidence proving that Ceasar did not exist, and all this circumstantial evidence was faked? A small piece of Ancient history would be corrected. Would it change lives for any major group of people? Nope.

Now let's see the Jesus. The whole Christianity is based on Jesus existence and behaviour model. Therefore if tomorrow there is strong evidence proving that Jesus did not exist, and all this circumstantial evidence was faked, the whole Christianity will collapse. And it would definitely change lives for a lot of people.

That's why circumstantial evidence could be used to prove that Ceasar exists, but cannot be used to prove that Jesus exists.

Quote

It is the job of each of us to find that truth. I have found what believe to be true.

There is a big difference between truth and what you believe to be truth. People used to believe in a lot of things they were sure is truth, which were not.

Generally if you cannot prove it to somebody who does not share your beliefs, you cannot say that you found the truth.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[philh 0]

"It is hard to say with 100% accuracy anything happened in the first century. "
Agreed and that includes the Gospel stories. Yet most christians seem pretty damm sure. i dont know whether you would include yourself in that or not.

"This all boils down to trying to define God/Christianity by the same guidelines that we use to define science. As I said before I think that it is an impossibility to define one who is outside of creation and scientific laws with natural and scientific laws. "

Im sorry this is a comlete cop out and i supsect somwhere inside you know it. What you are saying is there is no evidence to back up your claims, but you dont need evidence.All you need is your experience. But religious experience can be simulated by stimulating certain areas of the brain. i would reccomend you read this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2003/godonbrainqa.shtml

What is shows is that religious experiences can be very powerful and can be caused by temporal lobe epilepsy. In fact you will see that religious experiences can be induced by magnets over the brains temporal lobe. Now of course that doesnt prove that your experience is a temporal lobe epilepsy but what it does show is that you cant necessarily trust your experience as representing any external reality. This is the same reason why we dont trust alien abudction stories, they are also brought about by temporal lobe epilepsy. That is why alien abductees are so sincere . That is why we need science to verify what we consider to be true about the universe. Without that verification we might as well go back to the dark ages.

[steveorino 7]

Quote

you haven't looked at anything i post, by your own admission, making your statement about nothing of substance to add to the debate ABSOLUTELY AND COMPLETELY FALSE




as always, the only thing a believer can do is deny, they cannot prove false the book posted below

I looked at most of your post in the past. They don't change. Wow! I never read that Jefferson quote before.

steveOrino

[hairyjuan 0]

go to www.jesusneverexisted.com and order vthe book! it stands, all any believer can do id deny the truth

we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively


wishers never choose, choosers never wish

[steveorino 7]

Quote

but you dont need evidence.All you need is your experience. But religious experience can be simulated by stimulating certain areas of the brain. i would reccomend you read this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2003/godonbrainqa.shtml

Here is a more poignant question. Why would I want to change my religous experience? Today my life has meaning and purpose. Today I sense a presence in my life bigger than me or my agenda.

IMHO I haven't lost anything because of my Christian worldview. Before I had a real narcisstic lifestyle that left me feeling empty. I'm confident those who knew me before Christ would echo my sentiments that I'm a better person now.

As Buber implied in his book ... every relationship I had before was an "I-it" relationship. Now I have a lot of "I-thou" relationships with people and with God.

steveOrino

[philh 0]

"Here is a more poignant question. Why would I want to change my religous experience?"

Well there are two answers to that one I can think of straight away.
1) I guess it depends about whether you care or not about truth. If you do,you will want to know if there is objective verification of your subjective experience. You will also want to know whether its possiblle that your subjective experience could be caused by factors other than your current interpretation. But what I would add is that if you are interested in truth you might note there is no objective evidence for god as you yourself have admitted.
Moreover there is evidence that your subjective religious experience can be caused by natural occurences, temporal lobe epliepsy is certainly one example.
Heres a hypothesis: certain brain activites cause convincing religious experience, it is then interpreted by the person in terms of their cultural surroundings. If they live in a Chrsitian culture they might interpret it as Christ, if they watch too many Sf movies they might interpret it as aliens, if they live under thhe influence of a demoniant messianic figure (someone like David Koresh perhaps)they interpret it as the presence of that figure. Now if you care about truth you may wish to consider sucha hypothesis, if you dont you wont.

2) The second answer I think is more important. You dont exist in a vacuum, but you are part of society. if an entire society belives in something false that can have detrimental effects on society. For example it took a long time for the germ thoery of disease to be discovered partly becuase it was widely held the disease was a punishment from god. Another example: many homo sexuals commit suicide because they live in a society that is intolerant, again at least in part, because of widespread Chrsistian beliefs that homo sexuality is wrong. The beliefs of society have effects, so its important to know if our beliefs are true and not just comforting. I will give you an example just from yesterdays news:
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30200-1258762,00.html
If you cant be asked to read it the summary is
"Thousands of Aids and Hiv patients are risking their lives by refusing medication in favour of holy water".
Now if those people die as a result you may say well this has nothing to do with me, Im over in USA nowehere near Ethiopia. But the theistic idea is a global idea and the more widespread it is the more stories like these will happen and this is far from the worst of them. We can all do our part by abandoning ancient superstition and basing our beliefs on evidence. This will lead to mroe people relying on evidence based medicine and a whole host of other rational outcomes like homo sexuals not wanting to kill themselves, no more stoning people to death for trivial "crimes" and who knows maybe if eveyone had a rational world view we wouldnt have suicide bombers killing thousands of people. Bottom line is widespread beliefs have widespread effects and your beliefs are included in that.

[steveorino 7]

So what you are saying is I should reject the belief system that has turned my life around and given iut purpose and made me a better person. One who is now more concerned about others rather than myself. I should do this because if I treat my belief system like a science experiement I cannot prove it true without faith. Faith, which is the key ingrediant for religous experience. Yeah, that makes good sense.

You are right we don't live in a vacuum. People having a faith system that encourages them to better people make our society as a whole better.

So do you still believe I should give up my faith and return to my narcisstic ways?

steveOrino

[philh 0]

"So what you are saying is I should reject the belief system that has turned my life around and given iut purpose and made me a better person"

Are you suggesting that one cant be a good person without your belief system? I have to tell you it can be done and plenty of people do it all the time. What we have seen is that giving up religion does not make people or society bad. The evidence of this is that if we compare similar cultural societies and economic systems but with one big difference , extent of religious observation, most secular societies in the world, Europe and particularly Scandinavia do not have higher crime rates, lower human rights, standard of livings etc etc. The countries in the Western world with the highest percentage of non believers is in order: 1,Sweden 2 Denmark 3 Norway 4 Japan 5 The Czech Republic.
If there was any relationship betwen being a good person/having a good soceity and having faith we would see these societies failing compared to those in the West with very low non believer rates eg Coratia, USA and Portugal. But we dont see that.

You can be a good person without your belief system, many soceities are doing it now and they all doing very well. But even if they werent that wouldnt make your belief system true.

[steveorino 7]

I suppose anyone can be anything if they are motivated.

Trying to follow Christ's teachings made me a better person. I sense a presence (warm fuzzy to you) that I did not have before. That presence has been both comforting and inspiring. I'm typically very narcissitic and self-centered. In other words I'd kick your butt if you crossed me. All of that changed when I met JC.

I'll stick with him.

steveOrino

[philh 0]

"Trying to follow Christ's teachings made me a better person. I sense a presence (warm fuzzy to you) that I did not have before. That presence has been both comforting and inspiring. I'm typically very narcissitic and self-centered. In other words I'd kick your butt if you crossed me. All of that changed when I met JC. "

Its funny you say you were self centred before you got JC in your life. Yet your argument in this passage is about the effect JC has had on you. You didnt address the news story I mentioned in Ethiopia, not the suicides of gay people, nor the effects of seculrisation on Scandinavian soceities (societies which used to very religious but no longer are). None of these issues were addressed, the only thing you addressed was the effect JC had on you and your life, how it feels for you. Then you tell us its made you less self centred. Forgive me if I dont accept that.

[steveorino 7]

It seems a little self serving to mention but since you missed my point.

The SteveO before JC took care of himself. Maybe his immediate family, but few things outside that.
The "new man" SteveO who found purpose in life through the grace of God changed that. I have traveled many times on my own money to third world countries and lived for weeks on the floor of a hut, in the rain forrest bathing in the rivers, eating with the locals while building orphanages, churches, homes, installing toilets, walls and other building projects. For the last twenty years I have given over 30% of my income to feed & clothe hungry kids in the USA and abroad, give shelter and hope to the homeless, to encourage impoverished pastors of third world countries, etc.

I have worked in homeless shelters and AIDS clinics as a volunteer, I have befriended and included many who find themselves outside the circles of communities. Every Easter and Thanksgiving I invite strangers to my home for dinner and an afternoon with my family. Do I need to go on? I typically do not boast on this service as it is simply a part of who I am in Christ. It was never a part of who I was apart from JC.

steveOrino

[philh 0]

Your reply is still about you and your work. You are still not addressing the wider issues I brought up.

[steveorino 7]

Quote

Your reply is still about you and your work. You are still not addressing the wider issues I brought up.

You're kidding right? How will those issues be resolved or made better if it is not through the acts of individuals?

Here are some Christian organizations that are making a difference.

CAFOD - the Catholic Agency for Overseas Development - is a major British charity that has been fighting third world poverty since 1962.

The Christians who run CREE are all convinced that God wants them to do all they can to help these people, so they collect clothes, bedding, food, computers, bicycles, sewing machines and medical goods in this country. They are sorted and packed, and go to churches in Romania and Moldova where they are given to absolutely anyone who needs them.

TEARFUND works to fight poverty by providing disaster relief and long-term development in some of the world's poorest communities. Tearfund's work is carried out through local partner organizations, with Tearfund providing grants, consultancy and expertise. This work is undertaken not just because people living in such conditions are extremely needy, but because we also believe that it is a biblical calling: Jesus was deeply affected by the poor, the marginalized and the oppressed and called us to also serve the poor.

The Leprosy Misssion (TLM) is currently caring for the needs of over 200,000 people affected by the disease. Most of our patients and hospitals are in India, though we also work in Africa and South East Asia.

The Salvation Army is both a church and a charity. Its charity work is a result of trying to fulfill the teaching of Jesus. It is an organization working in over 100 countries worldwide and providing humanitarian relief, alongside other relief agencies whenever disaster strikes - be it a natural or man made disaster.

YELDALL BRIDGES. In the 1960's and 1970's, two Christian couples - Doug and Barbara Henry and Bill and Joanie Yoder - met some young people who were addicted to drugs and felt they had to do something to help them. Both opened their homes to many who the world would normally shun, but soon found the work out-grew these houses. The rehabilitation houses have grown and developed over the years and now house up to 46 men and 16 women.

CWA (Christian World Adoption) exists to feed, clothe, medicate, educate, and care for children without regard for color or class, based on the teachings and love of Christ

Among the many others are …

HOPE WORLDWIDE
PHYSICIANS FOR PEACE
INMED

steveOrino

[steveorino 7]

Quote

STEVE: "This all boils down to trying to define God/Christianity by the same guidelines that we use to define science. As I said before I think that it is an impossibility to define one who is outside of creation and scientific laws with natural and scientific laws. "

PHIL: Im sorry this is a comlete cop out and i supsect somwhere inside you know it. .

Really? So should I respond the same to you? I suspect deep down you may have a doubt or two about God, and you are afraid to find out differently? Nah, I won't say that, as it adds nothing to the debate but only implies something about you I have no clue about. You should do the same.

steveOrino

[livendive 8]

Quote

I suppose anyone can be anything if they are motivated.

Trying to follow Christ's teachings made me a better person. I sense a presence (warm fuzzy to you) that I did not have before. That presence has been both comforting and inspiring. I'm typically very narcissitic and self-centered. In other words I'd kick your butt if you crossed me. All of that changed when I met JC.

I'll stick with him.

Cool. Different things make people happy. You can have cheesecake and I can have creme brulee, and as long as we both enjoy it, that's what matters.

You might like this article.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

The SteveO before JC took care of himself. Maybe his immediate family, but few things outside that.

Steve, you did not change. You are still self-centered :)
The main question Phil asked you was not related to you nor your archievements. It is basically the same question I asked you several times, but Phil has stated it much better. I'll repeat it for you:

Quote

2) The second answer I think is more important. You dont exist in a vacuum, but you are part of society. if an entire society belives in something false that can have detrimental effects on society. For example it took a long time for the germ thoery of disease to be discovered partly becuase it was widely held the disease was a punishment from god. Another example: many homo sexuals commit suicide because they live in a society that is intolerant, again at least in part, because of widespread Chrsistian beliefs that homo sexuality is wrong. The beliefs of society have effects, so its important to know if our beliefs are true and not just comforting.

So, to say it short, you are spreading your beliefs just because you believe it is good. But you do not KNOW whether it is good or bad, and we have a lot of examples of Christianity spreading beliefs which were clearly harmful.

So the question is, it is one thing if you are spreading "good". What if you are spreading "evil"? How could you prove you are not spreading "evil", and therefore should not be restricted doing it?

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

So what you are saying is I should reject the belief system that has turned my life around and given iut purpose and made me a better person.

Steve, you again mixing facts and beliefs. This sounds like an Arabic boy, who was taught by Muslim fanatics that his only purpose is to serve Allah, and the best way it is to kill non-Muslims. This boy would definitely say that after he had learned this, he became a better person, and got a purpose of life. Most likely his family and friends would say it too. But did he really become a "better" person in terms of common sense? I doubt it.

Quote

One who is now more concerned about others rather than myself.

I would disappoint you - a lot of people feel really worried when Christians start concerning about them. We all remember good old times, when Christians initiate crusades, killed a lot of their own people in witch hunts, halted the medicine and science progress, and a lot more. We remember newest history where judges enforce stupid laws on Christianity ground, and Christians tried to force our children to study Bible theories in schools.

After all, what your concern means? It means that, as a good Christian, you need to teach others to follow Christ as well, so they won't go to hell. This means that your religion insists you to "teach" others to follow the same beliefs as you are, and this "teaching" is not restricted to anything, including lobbying the government.

Please, do not be concerned about me. I'm not going to Heaven with you.

Quote

You are right we don't live in a vacuum. People having a faith system that encourages them to better people make our society as a whole better.

Sure, crusaders and witch hunts did make your society better.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[steveorino 7]

I'm still trying to figure how building buildings like orphanages, tolilets, and digging wells is bad.

steveOrino

[philh 0]

No one is denying that there arent charitable organisation who are Christian. There are also charitable orgisation who are not Christian. Bottom line: Christianity is not needed to be charitable.
However to give up medical treatment in favour of holy water, to burn someone at the stake for heresy,etc etc that takes Christianity (or some other silly dogma that is not backed up by evidence).
Im sure you can provide examples of Chrsitians doing good and I can provide examples of Chrsitians doing bad. heres the real issue: if there was any substantial corrleation between having good people and therefore a good sciety and belief in god, we should see those societies without belief in god either in turmoil or at least doing significantly worse than their believing counterparts. If we take societies that have a similar political and economic conditions but have one big difference - their belief in god , we find we do have some soceities we can look at and see the effects. Scandanivia is mostly non religious ,countries like USA and Portugal are very religious. they are both democratic, indutrial, capitalist socities so we can control for those factors.

What do we see? Well the UN publishes a list of coutnries ranked by what it calls "human development" this tries to rank the quality of life in countries including more than just economic wealth, but political freedoms , access to education, health care , crime rate etc.
Guess who consitently wins?
Norway
The list for 2006 was this:

1. Norway
2 Iceland
3 Australia
4 Ireland
5 Sweden
6 Canada
7 Japan
8 United States
9 Switzerland
10 Netherlands

Now why would the 3 of 5 most non believing countries in the world be so high on the list?
this shows without doubt that theism is not needed for good people or a good society.

The fact that you personally might have improved after becomeing a theist is not really relevant in the grand scheme of things, we need to look at the bigger picture. Above I have done that and shown the theism leads to good societies hypotheis is falsified. On the other hand there are plenty of examples of oppresion and murder thats been motivated by theism. There is a very good quote whos details I cant remember but I think is very relevant, it something like this:
bad people do evil things, good people do good things, but it takes religion to make good people do evil things.

I would also add stupid things to that statement, like ecnouraging people not to use condoms in Aids decimated Africa or refusing medicine in favour of holy water. these are real effects of theistic belief.

[steveorino 7]

Quote

Quote

I suppose anyone can be anything if they are motivated.

Trying to follow Christ's teachings made me a better person. I sense a presence (warm fuzzy to you) that I did not have before. That presence has been both comforting and inspiring. I'm typically very narcissitic and self-centered. In other words I'd kick your butt if you crossed me. All of that changed when I met JC.

I'll stick with him.

Cool. Different things make people happy. You can have cheesecake and I can have creme brulee, and as long as we both enjoy it, that's what matters.

You might like this article.

Blues,
Dave

Great article Dave! I guess it is sad some of our atheist friends here have such a limited view of christianity and freedom in general. One wants to put limits on how one can vote, the other loves to bring up the straw man argument of the evil christianity has done when confronted with the reality of a life that was positively changed by an encounter with JC.

I'm not sure I know what you believe but I have read a lot of your posts on dropzone.com. You are obviously intelligent and know a lot about skydiving as well. I respect your views even if they don't align with mine as you have been a fair in your posts whether it be about religion or being a skydiving instructor. Peace to you!

steveOrino

[jakee 1,563]

Quote

Great article Dave! I guess it is sad some of our atheist friends here have such a limited view of christianity and freedom in general. One wants to put limits on how one can vote, the other loves to bring up the straw man argument of the evil christianity has done when confronted with the reality of a life that was positively changed by an encounter with belief in JC.

Fixed it (IMO anyway).

I don't agree with the way Phil has been arguing his point but I wouldn't say that the underlying argument is a strawman. Now, it would be stupid for me to say that your faith hasn't had a positive impact on your life, it evidently has been beneficial for you and those around you. However, strong faith can just as easily swing the other way. Some people find God and they go and fly food to Ethiopia, others find God and start brutalising people who haven't.

There's a quote on the subject, "With or without [religion] you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion." I don't fully agree with it, but faith/religion would certainly be in my big three along with strong political ideologies and fervent nationalism.

As for the voting thing - yes, I would put limits on how far you could vote your* religious (or any) morals into law. That is the whole point of a Republic, to protect the freedom of the minority from the tyranny of the majority. No-one here wants to be living in Saudi Arabia, do they?


*Not you, but others who actually would want their own particular morality enforced by law.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?