Do you believe in God ?

[Pelle]

I believe the ancient greeces were right. At least their gods were funny. After all, christianity and jews and islam descended from a then heathen religion made up by a conquered tribe whose conquerer let them go on with their religion as they thought they would be pleased with that. As long as they paid their taxes to their masters they were fine with that. What would've happened if that tribe weren't allowed to go on with that religion with only one god?

Anyway, that's rather hypothetical. In the end religion has always been a way for some people to rule other people. "We're close to the god(s) so you shall do what we say if you want to have a good life and find a good life after death. Don't think for yourself, whatever you need to know is here in this book. Read it. And if you have any problem, ask us, cause we know. And you shall always honour us, because by doing so you're honouring god. And if you do anything against us, you do that against god." If it wasn't for power, religion would never appear on the world stage. Ok, there's one more reason for religion and that's the fear of death and what comes after.

I always find the christians way of answering the question why all the shite in the world happens by blaming it on the devil quite amusing. I thought god were almighty. There are so many flaws in most religions, christianity not the one with least flaws, that I can't for my life understand how people can believe in it. But each to their own.

[choffer]

I always find the christians way of answering the question why all the shite in the world happens by blaming it on the devil quite amusing. I thought god were almighty.

I don't know many Christians that would blame the devil for that. My understanding of the Bible is that the state of the world is because of mankind's actions. Not sure why people expect anything from God as it's us that has turned our backs on him. The consequence of that, according to the Bible is eternity in hell. God gave us free will to chose our path in life but showed His love to us by giving us an opportunity to avoid what was due to us.

At least, that's my reading of it.

[kidlewis]

from this entire topic all religion seems to do is pose questions. No one can say "I spoke to God" or "God says to do this", it all sounds like assumptions humans have made on his behalf. If he was the creator and left "signs" and "guidance" for us to live our lives, we are assuming what he means by this.

Which is why within every religions hierachy they discuss and debate what the scriptures actually mean. All it does is make yourself think about who you are and why we do certain things.

Some people believe they get guidance through believing in god and the scriptures man wrote on his behalf. God DID NOT write the bible, we did, based on humans interaction with him. It's a philosophical book based on words written down by man about God, and therefore open to interpritation. It is not fact, it is not confirmation of his existence. It's confirmation throughout human history some people may have interacted with him and written down their experiences.

It's all about whether you choose to believe what those people wrote down. Some people do, and some people don't.

[TrentVilla]

I'm a non believer yet fasinated in the subject largelly in a historical context. One question I always have for believers is if you believe Jesus was the son of God and that he will return why did he choose that point in human history and why did he choose that place to appear?

If at that time God sent his son because he thought that mankind needed saving has he not returned or sent another messenger in 2000 years despite man kinds deprevity sinking to far greater lows in the last 2000 years. Why not send an envoy when the world twice tore itself apart killing millions in the process? why not step in when we started dropping atomic bombs?

I just don't understand the logic in the belief he felt the need to send his only son 2000years ago to save man kind but has more or less been happy with the last 2000 years of human history.

While I respect others views and beliefs I'm affraid this "Did the Creator have the right to exercise universal sovereignty over his Creation or could they rule themselves without his guidance?" arguement doesn't cut it with me as its contradicory in its nature. If you believe in God and in Jesus as the son of God then that was direct intervention and a statement that as creator he did have the right of universal control, that he hasn't chosen to excerise that right in 2000 years since you can't claim its because he doesn't have the right of intervention.

[The_Rev]

True, but there is more than only Holy book. One of the reasons I jumped from Christianity to Islam was all of the holes that can be picked in the Bible.

[TrentVilla]

Some people believe they get guidance through believing in god and the scriptures man wrote on his behalf. God DID NOT write the bible, we did, based on humans interaction with him. It's a philosophical book based on words written down by man about God, and therefore open to interpritation. It is not fact, it is not confirmation of his existence. It's confirmation throughout human history some people may have interacted with him and written down their experiences.

Its not even that. Man wrote the bible sure but not based on any interaction with God. The bible over the centuries has been changed, edited and even sensored in accordance with the beliefs and the desires of those who run the Christian Church. Entire sections of the bible have been removed not only is the bible open to interpritation it is in its very essence an interpritation much of which was written by people who weren't even alive at the time of Jesus.

[Risso]

True, but there is more than only Holy book. One of the reasons I jumped from Christianity to Islam was all of the holes that can be picked in the Bible.

Yes, I can see how believing that an entity powerful enough to create the universe is bothered if you eat pork or not would make more sense than the other brand of fairy tales.

[Pelle]

True, but there is more than only Holy book. One of the reasons I jumped from Christianity to Islam was all of the holes that can be picked in the Bible.

An iranian guy I met two summers ago at a temporary job I had back then, put it like this: They're all about the same books, but the bible is a defined version of the jews bible, and the chorane is a defined version of the christian bible. I think he might have something there. He was an atheist, btw.

I don't know many Christians that would blame the devil for that. My understanding of the Bible is that the state of the world is because of mankind's actions. Not sure why people expect anything from God as it's us that has turned our backs on him. The consequence of that, according to the Bible is eternity in hell. God gave us free will to chose our path in life but showed His love to us by giving us an opportunity to avoid what was due to us.

At least, that's my reading of it.

I've heard it numerous times and a couple of times on here. But I've heard your version too, but that the reason Jesus died on the cross was that he died for our sins so we have the free will to do whatever we want and still get salvation and get to heaven because of that. Still, will wonder what happened to Hitler and Stalin and those guys.

[Pelle]

True, but there is more than only Holy book. One of the reasons I jumped from Christianity to Islam was all of the holes that can be picked in the Bible.

Yes, I can see how believing that an entity powerful enough to create the universe is bothered if you eat pork or not would make more sense than the other brand of fairy tales.

But the choran doesn't say that, does it? I think I've heard that loads of times, anyway.

[The_Rev]

True, but there is more than only Holy book. One of the reasons I jumped from Christianity to Islam was all of the holes that can be picked in the Bible.

Yes, I can see how believing that an entity powerful enough to create the universe is bothered if you eat pork or not would make more sense than the other brand of fairy tales.

But the choran doesn't say that, does it? I think I've heard that loads of times, anyway.

It says it. Again, its a question of faith. Risso clearly doesnt believe in it, and thats his prerogative where as I do, which is mine. You can break anything down to look stupid if you want though. Im sure you love football. How many times has your missus asked how the hell you can enjoy watching 22 men running around after a bag of air for an hour and a half?

[dundeevilla]

Yes I have actually. We had a huge discussion on here on Evolution V Creation a couple of years ago. I can't remember the name of the thread. You have to remember that there are a number of scientists who now question the theory of Evolution because of issues over evidence of Intelligent design.

Not true. There is no controversy in the scientific community over the theory of evolution. Scientists continue to argue over its finer points and refine the theory - that's what science does - but there is no argument over whether evolution happens. Evolution is a fact. Of course there will always be a few scientists who dispute evolution, but these people are usually funded by organisations like Answers In Genesis and are usually not even biologists. There is zero evidence for intelligent design, which is just creationism with a fancy name.

I am not a Creationist....I do not believe God made the Earth and all it's contents in 6 or 7... 24 hour periods... I do however believe that God did create everything over time. including the precise mathematical laws that govern our Universe.

I love looking at the Night sky and stars and I love learning about stuff that interests me...and a couple of years ago I took an course on Astronomy at night school for a few months. As I'm lucky enough to live in an area where there's not so much light pollution, the sky at night can be amazing sometimes. It was fascinating and mind boggling stuff.

However I was absolutely astounded that the very first slide the Professor put up on the course was actually a scripture from the Bible...that compared the number of stars in the heavens to the grains of sand on the earth....Only since the discovery of the Hubble telescope and it's ability to see into deep space and trillions upon trillions of stars Nebula and the places where they are born etc.... has that ancient statement proved correct. Scientists have quantified so many stars that they have to give them numbers. Yet in stark contrast the Bible says their Creator has a name for each individual star....(Isaiah 40:26) . . .“Raise YOUR eyes high up and see. Who has created these things? It is the One who is bringing forth the army of them even by number, all of whom he calls even by name. Due to the abundance of dynamic energy, he also being vigorous in power, not one [of them] is missing.

No other ancient writings talk about this or mention the Earth being round, or hanging upon nothing. All these and loads more scriptures have proved scientifically correct many millenia after they were written.

Of course everyone can just choose to ignore, dismiss it all as poetic nonsense as they wish and have as a right...it's called a choice and free will. However it's surely not fair to assume that just because someone chooses to believe in a Creator ...that they would be somehow any less scientific than someone who believes in an alternative explanation.

None of this answers the question I asked, as to why you can't reconcile the theory of evolution with the complexity of life we see on Earth. The theory explains that complexity in fairly simple terms - that's the entire basis of it. If you've studied it, then what is it in the theory that you find hard to accept in terms of the compexity of life we see?

Belief in a creator is about as non-scientific as you can get I'm afraid. Science looks to explain the universe by employing testable evidence. Religion explains the universe with magic. There is no scientific test for supernatural beings.

Also, 'free will' is a logical fallacy if you believe that God is omniscient. See previous posts.

[JulieB]

ot true. There is no controversy in the scientific community over the theory of evolution.

Sorry it is exactly what it says on the box...a theory! If you choose to believe it is a fact then it is your choice...

We had a huge discussion about Evolution V Creation a couple of years ago and there are scientific holes in the theory of Evolution

as I see it...you may feel different..that is your choice.

The house I live in had a designer an architect, a builder a maker.. You would laugh at me if I suggested otherwise. Yet I look at a beautiful flower in my garden and am expected to accept it had no designer, no creator it just happened as part of the natural order according to the theory of Evolution, put forward by fellow humans.

Beleif in a Creator of the natural laws that govern our Universe and of the creations that lie within that Universe are in my book

scientific...

Free will does not contradict there being a Creator as I've tried to explain in previous posts.

As I've stated on numerous occasions in this thread it is up to each of us to make up our own minds.

[TrentVilla]

I'm a non believer yet fasinated in the subject largelly in a historical context. One question I always have for believers is if you believe Jesus was the son of God and that he will return why did he choose that point in human history and why did he choose that place to appear?

If at that time God sent his son because he thought that mankind needed saving has he not returned or sent another messenger in 2000 years despite man kinds deprevity sinking to far greater lows in the last 2000 years. Why not send an envoy when the world twice tore itself apart killing millions in the process? why not step in when we started dropping atomic bombs?

I just don't understand the logic in the belief he felt the need to send his only son 2000years ago to save man kind but has more or less been happy with the last 2000 years of human history.

While I respect others views and beliefs I'm affraid this "Did the Creator have the right to exercise universal sovereignty over his Creation or could they rule themselves without his guidance?" arguement doesn't cut it with me as its contradicory in its nature. If you believe in God and in Jesus as the son of God then that was direct intervention and a statement that as creator he did have the right of universal control, that he hasn't chosen to excerise that right in 2000 years since you can't claim its because he doesn't have the right of intervention.

Excuse me quoting myself but Julie think you might have missed this post and I'm interested in knowing your thoughts on this.

[Clarry]

Humans created the Cylons and look what happened there.

[Jondaken]

If you want to get better eye's how do you go about doing that? That is to say, human eyes could be better, there are animals around today that have better eyesight than us. So if you want that, can you tell you're body to do it? Can you say, Hey, when I have a baby, hes going to have slightly better eyes than me.

Or, do you have no control over wither your eye decides its good enough or not? Is it the eye itself that decided it wants to change next time around, without you're consent? Now surely that eye cannot think for itself? Or the cells in the eye, they don't even know that they are part of an eye do they?

Anyone see what I'm getting at?

[The_Rev]

Not really.

[TrentVilla]

If you want to get better eye's how do you go about doing that? That is to say, human eyes could be better, there are animals around today that have better eyesight than us. So if you want that, can you tell you're body to do it? Can you say, Hey, when I have a baby, hes going to have slightly better eyes than me.

Or, do you have no control over wither your eye decides its good enough or not? Is it the eye itself that decided it wants to change next time around, without you're consent? Now surely that eye cannot think for itself? Or the cells in the eye, they don't even know that they are part of an eye do they?

Anyone see what I'm getting at?

Nope. I think you have evolution confused with X-men.

[Jondaken]

If you want to get better eye's how do you go about doing that? That is to say, human eyes could be better, there are animals around today that have better eyesight than us. So if you want that, can you tell you're body to do it? Can you say, Hey, when I have a baby, hes going to have slightly better eyes than me.

Or, do you have no control over wither your eye decides its good enough or not? Is it the eye itself that decided it wants to change next time around, without you're consent? Now surely that eye cannot think for itself? Or the cells in the eye, they don't even know that they are part of an eye do they?

Anyone see what I'm getting at?

Nope. I think you have evolution confused with X-men.

?

Evolution. According to people that don't believe in a God, our body's think for themselves in how they want to change. Certainly no-one in history has claimed they had a kid different to themselves because they decided evolution needing a little push. Couldn't "evolution" be the work of God?

[LondonLax]

If you want to get better eye's how do you go about doing that? That is to say, human eyes could be better, there are animals around today that have better eyesight than us. So if you want that, can you tell you're body to do it? Can you say, Hey, when I have a baby, hes going to have slightly better eyes than me.

Or, do you have no control over wither your eye decides its good enough or not? Is it the eye itself that decided it wants to change next time around, without you're consent? Now surely that eye cannot think for itself? Or the cells in the eye, they don't even know that they are part of an eye do they?

Anyone see what I'm getting at?

??

Sounds like more support for evolution. If God had designed our eyes why give us a blind spot in them? Why not give us hawk like vision if we were his supposed favourite? Why give us an appendix etc?

Perhaps because our bodies were not created by a perfect being but by an imperfect process of evolution?

[choffer]

Are we talking about Macro-evolution or Micro-evolution? I'm sure everyone knows the difference but it's often the cause of confusion in such discussions.