Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there! Sign in to have your say on this topicNew here? Join for free to post

Choose Jesus not religion

Announcements Posted on
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaarrrggh)
    Provide some evidence, prove me wrong.

    This is silly, we can't prove he exists and you can't prove that he doesn't. You can't prove that he doesn't exist without taking into account the bible (i.e. famine and floods are unjust, man is so mnay thousands of years old etc etc). This thread is about God as an entity and not about religion.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blissy)
    This is silly, we can't prove he exists and you can't prove that he doesn't.
    But you believe in him anyway?
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaarrrggh)
    But you believe in him anyway?
    Yes, but that's irrelevant to the thread.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Intermittent)
    I've been here a few months, and religion is my interest and hobby. I'm passionate about my faith in Jesus Christ and feel the desire to speak against lies, especially those covered in nice looking disguises. I hope nobody has been personally offended by any of my comments. Here's your chance to challenge me on my faith. What is everyone's opinion on the message of Christ? What is your experience with Christianity and the church? I believe beyond all things that the message of Christ is best and perfect answer to a fulfilling life and the best thing for every person's life. I'm putting myself on the defensive here, but I'd love to hear all your rants, complaints, or praises about your experience or opinions about it, so let's have it. I'm more than happy to try, God-willing, to respond to anyone's criticisms.

    Let's hear what you have all got to say.
    That's the first post in this thread. Seems like it's pretty relevant to me. Why believe in something for which there is no evidence? It baffles me.
    • 6 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaarrrggh)
    I think it's a perfectly logical statement if you take into account the fact there is no evidence for his existence. What follows from this is that he is nothing more than a human creation.

    Provide some evidence, prove me wrong.
    Nonsense. There is no evidence for the existance of anything until it's actuall found. They still exist.

    What about space exploration. There was no evidence of life on Mars until someone discovered the odd microbe. The fact that there wasn't evidence didn't mean the microbe wasn't there until we found it does it?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    Nonsense. There is no evidence for the existance of anything until it's actuall found. They still exist.
    The point is that there has never been any evidence for the existence of 'god'. If you are making the claim for the existence of something, it makes sense to find evidence first doesnt it? The fact that there is no evidence means the only place god could have been created is in the human imagination.

    And I'm pretty sure we're just going around in circles now. I feel like I've made this point about 8 times.
    • 6 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaarrrggh)
    That's the first post in this thread. Seems like it's pretty relevant to me. Why believe in something for which there is no evidence? It baffles me.
    Because people have believed in things for which there was no supporting evidence civilization has progressed.

    DaVinci designed a theoretical helicopter with absolutely no evidence that human flight was acheivable. Years later such a machine was designed and flown.

    There was no evidence as to how the human body worked. Early phycisians worked on "hunches" about how to cure this and that and a process of trial and error, not evidence, brought medicine to where it is today.

    If humankind had sat around doing nothing because there was no evidence that doing something was worthwhile we wouldn't have invented the wheel yet.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by piginapoke)
    Hmm there's a fair amount of evidence for the existence of Jesus. Whether you agree with what he had to say is anothe matter.
    Yeah there is a certain amount of evidence that the fictional jesus in the bible may have been based on a real human being, however, I don't see how this is relevant. I don't dispute that the bibles main heroic character may have been based on a real person, that doesn't make him the son of 'god' however.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    Because people have believed in things for which there was no supporting evidence civilization has progressed.

    DaVinci designed a theoretical helicopter with absolutely no evidence that human flight was acheivable. Years later such a machine was designed and flown.

    There was no evidence as to how the human body worked. Early phycisians worked on "hunches" about how to cure this and that and a process of trial and error, not evidence, brought medicine to where it is today.

    If humankind had sat around doing nothing because there was no evidence that doing something was worthwhile we wouldn't have invented the wheel yet.
    This is a different thing however. We are talking here about using the imagination to conceptualise something new, and then subsequent attempts to make it a reality. That's invention.

    The 'god' theory is relating to the nature of objective reality. It's not about speculating about how to make something new or to create something nobody has ever thought of, but about explaining the nature of reality itself.

    "There was no evidence as to how the human body worked. Early phycisians worked on "hunches" about how to cure this and that and a process of trial and error, not evidence, brought medicine to where it is today."

    When they worked on these 'hunches' they were using similar methods that scientists use today. Trial and error only worked when they realised when an error had been made and didnt repeat it. This is learning through investigation and the accumulation of evidence.

    The unshaking belief in a divine god has no such basis in evidence. People believe it through faith, and faith in a religious context is simply belief without evidence. Faith serves to block logical thought.

    Religious belief, stemming from faith in the first place, has throughout history been responsible for slowing the scientific evolution of the human race (not to mention the MILLIONS of people who have died for their unshaking religious belief - sept 11th anyone?). Even today we have examples. Who rejects the teaching of evolution to school children? Fundamentalist christians. Why? Because the science contradicts the account of creation in genesis. Who tries to prevent stem cell research, which could eventually save thousands of lives and provide a possible cure for degenerative brain diseases such as parkinsons? Fundamentalist christians. Why? Because of their religious beliefs.

    Religion is a dangerous thing, and so is the unshaking belief in an entity for which their is simply no evidence. Invention is an entirely differnt thing.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by piginapoke)
    Well you didn't respond to Howard's comment about life on Mars. The point I'm making (again, over and over) is that its perfectly valid not to believe in God, but you've categorically stated that God does not exist. Not even the teensie-weensiest chance of God existing in your book.

    All of which has proven my much earlier point of some atheists being arrogant and believing themselves superior
    I told you before I do consider myself superior for not believing.
    • 6 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaarrrggh)
    I told you before I do consider myself superior for not believing.
    Well, you can't be that superior given your current reading list! Got a hold of PJ O'Rourke yet?
    • 6 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by piginapoke)
    Well you didn't respond to Howard's comment about life on Mars. The point I'm making (again, over and over) is that its perfectly valid not to believe in God, but you've categorically stated that God does not exist. Not even the teensie-weensiest chance of God existing in your book.

    All of which has proven my much earlier point of some atheists being arrogant and believing themselves superior
    Yes. Most atheists are just as arrogant for insisting God doesn't exist as those whacko's who insist that "you accept Jesus or burn in hell"

    I really don't know. I believe in God (though probably not in the traditional judeo-christian sense of belief) but I wouldn't ever say "God exists. Period." Surprizingly, even I'm not that arrogant!
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    Because people have believed in things for which there was no supporting evidence civilization has progressed.

    DaVinci designed a theoretical helicopter with absolutely no evidence that human flight was acheivable. Years later such a machine was designed and flown.
    There was evidence that flight was achievable by heavier-than-air creatures. Da Vinci's helicopter, vacuum balloon and winged flyer were all theoretical- it was only when people combined theory with pragmatic experiments, the one supporting the other, that anyone got anywhere.

    There was no evidence as to how the human body worked. Early phycisians worked on "hunches" about how to cure this and that and a process of trial and error, not evidence, brought medicine to where it is today.
    What is the difference between trial and error and evidence? Surely trial and error is seeing what works, and applying that knowledge in future. Early medicine wasn't even that reliable. It was based on theories- most notably the humours- for which there was no evidence whatsoever. Because the theories were put forward by respected people they were assumed to be true until the accumulation of evidence that they didn't work was so powerful even the doctors had to reject them.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    Well, you can't be that superior given your current reading list! Got a hold of PJ O'Rourke yet?
    lol, no but I'll get hold of a copy when I've finished my exams
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    i would like to go on an alpha course introducing religion. i consider myself an athiest, but tbh, i know nothing about christianity, have never read any of the bible, didnt do RS at school, and am turned off it by the bad press it seems to generate. i really dislike how the church is rejecting gay priests/bishops, i dislike how male dominated the religion is - majority of male vicars/priests and correct me if im wrong but you never/very rarely get female bishops (or whatever the highest person is).. i think terrible acts are often committed in the name of religion (suicide bombings etc) and so the above reasons have really put me off it, plus i like to believe that im in control of my own life rather than some higher entity being in charge. this doesnt mean to say i am not a spiritual person, but i really dont feel that religion is for me. i would however like to find out more about it, and im veyr interested inthe buddhist faith as a principal although i know very little about that as well - im actually quite embarrassed about how very little i know about it all!
    • 6 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by piginapoke)
    Yes they are amazingly arrogant sometimes. Given that Christianity is allegedly tolerant of other religions, the intolerance of some devout Christians is breathtaking.
    Christian fundamentalists are a very dangerous group of people.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by presebjenada)
    i would like to go on an alpha course introducing religion. i consider myself an athiest, but tbh, i know nothing about christianity, have never read any of the bible, didnt do RS at school, and am turned off it by the bad press it seems to generate. i really dislike how the church is rejecting gay priests/bishops, i dislike how male dominated the religion is - majority of male vicars/priests and correct me if im wrong but you never/very rarely get female bishops (or whatever the highest person is).. i think terrible acts are often committed in the name of religion (suicide bombings etc) and so the above reasons have really put me off it, plus i like to believe that im in control of my own life rather than some higher entity being in charge. this doesnt mean to say i am not a spiritual person, but i really dont feel that religion is for me. i would however like to find out more about it, and im veyr interested inthe buddhist faith as a principal although i know very little about that as well - im actually quite embarrassed about how very little i know about it all!
    Alpha courses are courses designed to promote religious beliefs. If you want to learn about religion properly you should go elsewhere.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Give me Nietzsche over Christ any day!
    • 6 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tommorris)
    Give me Nietzsche over Christ any day!
    Give me nestle over both of them.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    if God does or exist then he certainly isnt the christian one since the world has so much unnecessary evil in it that shows it wasnt created by intelligent design.
Updated: March 14, 2004
New on TSR

£50 in vouchers up for grabs!!!

Post a fun fact and quote in a member to win!

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.