Is There A God Or Supreme Being?

[JCviggen]

Physical difference? What would it be?

I'll look it up and link you later

How do you explain the fact that most "believers" were once "non-believers" and have seen both sides of the argument with first hand experience and do not revert back to their original beliefs?

How has religion and God survived for this long and not faded away with time?

Why is your belief of no God putting you in a major minority?

Most believers were never non-believers. You pulled that out of your @#{

The overwhelming majority of religious people in this world were born and tought religion.

Religion and God have survived because people still want answers they may not get outside of relgion. Wether the answers are actually right or not doesnt matter.

Major minority is VERY relative. Religion is usually much stronger in underdeveloped areas of the world. I guess the US is a bit of an excepton, down here in Western Europe religion is fading by the day. Churches are empty. The only thing keeping up the religion numbers around here are the Muslims.

There is nothing at all that indicates this decline is going to end. The more understanding people have of their surroundings the less religion matters.

Dont believe me? Look at this religion vs IQ chart then.

http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/001523.html?entry=1523

Notice anything?

But to assume anyone with a religious foundation is narrow-minded is, well, narrow-minded.

I was talking about hardcore believers and well, I never met any that would say "well sure maybe we're wrong" but i dont believe that I am. They're slightly more fundamentalistic than that.

Edited December 12, 2005 by JCviggen

[gdizzle]

I was talking about hardcore believers and well, I never met any that would say "well sure maybe we're wrong" but i dont believe that I am. They're slightly more fundamentalistic than that.

Really, that's surprising. I always tell people if I'm wrong, I've "lost" a life time. If I'm right, you've lost an eternity. ;)

[JCviggen]

You would think being a good person and leading a normal good life would be enough to be "accepted"

Of course the cult would have trouble sustaining itself if it ever was as compassionate and forgiving as it claims to be.

Good luck with religion fellas, i've spent enough braincells on it :)

[gdizzle]

You would think being a good person and leading a normal good life would be enough to be "accepted"

Of course the cult would have trouble sustaining itself if it ever was as compassionate and forgiving as it claims to be.

Good luck with religion fellas, i've spent enough braincells on it

Which cult would that be? Do you know what a cult is? ;)

[atbspinner]

Most believers were never non-believers. You pulled that out of your @#{

The overwhelming majority of religious people in this world were born and tought religion

I've never seen anyone born "saved" (Christianity). True you are taught these princilpes but also you

are exposed to everything else under the sun. At some point an individual has a choice to make.

You seem to think it's like brain washing and there is no other choice once you make the decision to

accept religion. I've yet to see anyone show me any proof that there is no God. I'm always open to

new ideas and thoughts. I've yet to find any source or guidelines for how to live that's better than the

Bible.

Religion and God have survived because people still want answers they may not get outside of relgion. Wether the answers are actually right or not doesnt matter

No, religion has survived because of the answers people find IN religion. Of course I don't expect you

to understand this fully because you do not have that experience.

Edited December 12, 2005 by atbspinner

[djscoggins]

You would think being a good person and leading a normal good life would be enough to be "accepted"

Sorry I dont have my bible with me so i cant site the verse numbers for these...

"Verily, I say unto you, lest a man be born again he shall not see the kingdom of heaven"

"I am the way, the truth, and the light. No one comes to the father except thru me"

"Of course the cult would have trouble sustaining itself if it ever was as compassionate and forgiving as it claims to be."

You must understand this...All of us deserve hell and damnation for our sins...all but one. Jesus was without sin and he has taken the blame for our transgressions. That is compassion, love and grace. I feel the peace that comes with this... its hard to describe... but some things mean more to me now and some mean much less. For instance on some mornings I notice how beautiful the sky is, and how I picture God painting it for us to enjoy and marvel. And some things that I used to get mad at or aggrivated with, I now know that these are trivial things. Why be mad at some one when you can love them? Jesus teaches us to love all as he loved us.

John: 3:16

"For go so loved the world, he gave his only begotten son."

Our pastor had an intresting quote for us sunday... "Its better to be born twice and to die once than to be born once and die twice" Believers are born-again and die in the body, but not in the spirit, and spend eternity in paradise with God. But unbelievers are born only once and when they die, the body is dead and the soul is damned to hell and seperation from God for all eternity.

Eternity is timeless... its forever.

[beachnut]

The Bible and a God/Supernatural presence are not one and the same. The bible was written and edited by people.

This is a very common misconception of the Bible, ironically, even among some of those who believe in God. Yes, the Bible was written by men, but the Holy Spirit of God instructed them what to write. The uniqueness of the Bible is that it was written by man so that man could understand it, so that what we have today is a book that relates to man's mind, but reveals the mind and will of God.

"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness." 2 Timothy 3:16

"Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. For prophecy never had it's origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit." 2 Peter 1:20-21

Of course, if you don't believe in God then it's a moot point. But if you do, then there is no middle ground. You cannot believe that some of the Bible came from God while other parts of it are just men's interpretations, therefore leaving it up for debate. Think about this: why would God, who created man in his own image, who sent his one and only Son to die for our sins, risk having his word distorted by simple man, or just leave it to chance that maybe we would wind up with an authentic version of his word?

But in the best case scenario it at least shows the arguments of hardcore religious people are incredibly superficial and narrow-minded and not based on any sound logic whatsoever. Believing is fine, just keep an open mind and dont push it onto others. I would say that includes your own children. Let them figure it our when they have reached an age where they can think for themselves.

Since I am on the subject of the word of God, I have to say that I agree with you on one point ... being narrow-minded (as you call it). I honestly don't care what term people use: closed-minded, intolerant, or politically incorrect ... that fact is that the word of God is truth, not half-truth, 1/4 truth, partial truth, good words, nice maxims to live by ... TRUTH! In matters of truth I am not ashamed to admit that I am, what I prefer to call, "single-minded". The people that I love the most, my children and my family, deserve to hear this truth ... in fact, I am commanded to tell them (and anyone else who will listen). I will not shove it down their throats and I will not punish them if they choose not to heed the truth, but my love for them and my desire to see them again one day when our lives on Earth are over compels me to try to lead them to God.

By the way, I am very open-minded to any matter that does not relate to the truth or goes against the word of God ... like whether we should use 2.5" or 3" exhaust systems on our cars! ;)

[steve s]

calling ppl narrowminded is well narrowminded...but it can be hard to argue some sense into really fundamental ppl.. do we not all agree modern medicine enhances lifes, usually? so why do some ppl believe faith will cure all and refuse any medicine? anyway..

This is a very common misconception of the Bible... Yes, the Bible was written by men, but the Holy Spirit of God instructed them what to write..... but reveals the mind and will of God.

--> let me pose this question..

if the Bible written by men under instruction of God.. then there is pretty much absolute truth in it correct?

u believe in the teachings because to believe in the word of God and acting according under these guidelines will lead to salvation (or something similar)..

--> let me ask another question

so why does the Bible condone slavery?

leviticus chapter 25 clearly illustrates god condones, slaves are to be bought, sold, and handed down like property. there are other passages including the exodus that illustrate similar points.

i think we can we all agree slavery is immoral. however, slavery clearly is articulated in the Bible as ok..

--> you are left with a few choices..

1) believe Bible is word of God, written under instruction of God, and therefore, believe Bible is correct. believing so thus leads to believing slavery is right because God condones it.

2) perhaps the Bible was not word of God.. because slavery is obviously wrong. if all-compassionate God (which/who can be quite vengeful in the old testament), then why is slavery condoned? this leads to conclusion, perhaps the Bible was written by men who condoned slavery (which was common practice around the time of Christ).

which do you choose?

[djscoggins]

calling ppl narrowminded is well narrowminded...but it can be hard to argue some sense into really fundamental ppl.. do we not all agree modern medicine enhances lifes, usually? so why do some ppl believe faith will cure all and refuse any medicine? anyway..

--> let me pose this question..

if the Bible written by men under instruction of God.. then there is pretty much absolute truth in it correct?

u believe in the teachings because to believe in the word of God and acting according under these guidelines will lead to salvation (or something similar)..

--> let me ask another question

so why does the Bible condone slavery?

leviticus chapter 25 clearly illustrates god condones, slaves are to be bought, sold, and handed down like property. there are other passages including the exodus that illustrate similar points.

i think we can we all agree slavery is immoral. however, slavery clearly is articulated in the Bible as ok..

--> you are left with a few choices..

1) believe Bible is word of God, written under instruction of God, and therefore, believe Bible is correct. believing so thus leads to believing slavery is right because God condones it.

2) perhaps the Bible was not word of God.. because slavery is obviously wrong. if all-compassionate God (which/who can be quite vengeful in the old testament), then why is slavery condoned? this leads to conclusion, perhaps the Bible was written by men who condoned slavery (which was common practice around the time of Christ).

which do you choose?

I will try ask my Pastor if there is other scripture on it on sunday, but in the meantime I found this answer at Gotquestions.org:

Question: "Does the Bible condone slavery?"

Answer: The Bible does not specifically condemn the practice of slavery. It gives instructions on how slaves should be treated (Deuteronomy 15:12-15; Ephesians 6:9; Colossians 4:1), but does not outlaw the practice altogether. Many see this as the Bible condoning all forms of slavery. What many people don't understand is that slavery in the Bible times is completely different from the slavery that was practiced in the United States in the 1700s and 1800s. The slavery in the Bible was not based on race at all. People were not enslaved because of their nationality or the color of their skin. In Bible times, slavery was more of a social status. People sold themselves as slaves when they could not pay their debts or provide for their family. In New Testament times, sometimes doctors, lawyers, even politicians were slaves of someone else for one reason or another. Some people actually chose to be slaves so as to have all their needs provided for by their master.

The slavery of the 1700s and 1800s was based on skin color. Black people were considered slaves because of their nationality, most slave owners truly believed black people to be inferior human beings to white people. This is similar to the slavery the Jews experienced when they were in Egypt. The Jews were slaves, not by choice, but because they were Jews (Exodus 13:14). The plagues God poured out on Egypt demonstrate how God feels about racial slavery (Exodus 7-11). So, yes, the Bible does condone slavery. However, the slavery the Bible allowed for in no way resembled the racial slavery that plagued our world in the past few centuries.

Edited December 13, 2005 by Raeleus

[steve s]

so...

it's ok then, for the current smugglers/traders (who ship ppl in cargo around the world) to enslave the ppl they smuggle into a life of servitude because the shipped ppl cannot pay for their way to the destination... reasoning behind that is because it's not a slavery of race... ?

[Gregg]

I think JCViggen has brought up the best arguments so far. Religion is more present in undereducated and low-intelligence groups.

It's only a matter of time (but not in this lifetime) before science can explain in greater detail about how we evolved into humans.

[whitev70r]

so why does the Bible condone slavery?

leviticus chapter 25 clearly illustrates god condones, slaves are to be bought, sold, and handed down like property. there are other passages including the exodus that illustrate similar points.

i think we can we all agree slavery is immoral. however, slavery clearly is articulated in the Bible as ok..

--> you are left with a few choices..

1) believe Bible is word of God, written under instruction of God, and therefore, believe Bible is correct. believing so thus leads to believing slavery is right because God condones it.

2) perhaps the Bible was not word of God.. because slavery is obviously wrong. if all-compassionate God (which/who can be quite vengeful in the old testament), then why is slavery condoned? this leads to conclusion, perhaps the Bible was written by men who condoned slavery (which was common practice around the time of Christ).

which do you choose?

Just a couple of points, it's not that simple as yes or no.

1. Is the US immoral today because at one time it was okay to treat blacks differently than whites? In fact it was okay in American history to own and trade slaves. Times have changed and now it is at least illegal to treat blacks differently but whether they are or not (treated differently) in reality, is another question. Most people would argue that though laws have changed, in essence, not much has. The movie 'Crash' is quite a provocative look at racism in America. My point is this: just because a country or a religion has had some laws in the past that appear to be discriminatory and then later on changed, it does not make that country or religion totally invalid today. No person of the Christian faith I know of today, thinks slavery is legitimate. Just as you can't hold present day US immoral for slavery in the past based on their history on this issue, you cannot conclude that the Christian faith is wrong based on the same grounds. Or if you do hold Christians responsible for slavery in the OT, then you should similarly, hold yourself responsible for the sordid history of US. Yes or no?

2. During the time of slavery in the US, there were stories of brave men who could not overturn the slavery law immediately and so, within those laws, they treated their slaves differently, with respect, fair provision, protection, and not abuse. I think we consider those examples as noble ones. Another illustration from history, WWII. Though some Germans could not overthrow the Nazis, there were many stories of Germans who treated Jewish people kindly, hid them, protected them, and fed them. Schlinder's List. If you cannot make a societal wrong, right immediately, then you have to be as moral/kind/loving as you can within those societal conditions. If you read Lev 25, and I'm hoping you did and not just quoting without reading, you will see that the law given then were for the people of God to be kind, generous, respectful to the slaves that they have. Eg. Every 7 years, they are to set them free. Lev 25:43, Show your fear of God by treating them well; never exercise your power over them in a ruthless way.

I hope the above helps to shed some insight on the whole discussion.

Edited December 13, 2005 by whitev70r

[Volvokiller]

Just a couple of points, it's not that simple as yes or no.

1. Is the US immoral today because at one time it was okay to treat blacks differently than whites? In fact it was okay in American history to own and trade slaves. Times have changed and now it is at least illegal to treat blacks differently but whether they are or not (treated differently) in reality, is another question. Most people would argue that though laws have changed, in essence, not much has. The movie 'Crash' is quite a provocative look at racism in America. My point is this: just because a country or a religion has had some laws in the past that appear to be discriminatory and then later on changed, it does not make that country or religion totally invalid today. No person of the Christian faith I know of today, thinks slavery is legitimate. Just as you can't hold present day US immoral for slavery in the past based on their history on this issue, you cannot conclude that the Christian faith is wrong based on the same grounds. Or if you do hold Christians responsible for slavery in the OT, then you should similarly, hold yourself responsible for the sordid history of US. Yes or no?

2. During the time of slavery in the US, there were stories of brave men who could not overturn the slavery law immediately and so, within those laws, they treated their slaves differently, with respect, fair provision, protection, and not abuse. I think we consider those examples as noble ones. Another illustration from history, WWII. Though some Germans could not overthrow the Nazis, there were many stories of Germans who treated Jewish people kindly, hid them, protected them, and fed them. Schlinder's List. If you cannot make a societal wrong, right immediately, then you have to be as moral/kind/loving as you can within those societal conditions. If you read Lev 25, and I'm hoping you did and not just quoting without reading, you will see that the law given then were for the people of God to be kind, generous, respectful to the slaves that they have. Eg. Every 7 years, they are to set them free. Lev 25:43, Show your fear of God by treating them well; never exercise your power over them in a ruthless way.

I hope the above helps to shed some insight on the whole discussion.

So the writings "instructed by God through the Holy Spirit" were wrong? So God was wrong? Interesting. So maybe its ok to have slaves so long as we treat them nice and let them go after 7 years? I don't think so.

You've dug quite a hole for your argument.

[whitev70r]

So the writings "instructed by God through the Holy Spirit" were wrong? So God was wrong? Interesting. So maybe its ok to have slaves so long as we treat them nice and let them go after 7 years? I don't think so.

You've dug quite a hole for your argument.

Volvokiller, you are so simple minded. I certainly do not have to disprove the earlier statement: "Religion is more present in undereducated and low-intelligence groups", whenever you post, you prove that this statement is wrong. (Just copying you, more emoticons mean that your arguments are stronger, right?)

Nobody said that it is okay to have slaves today if you release them in 7 years. But instruction like that during the days of Leviticus was a monumental difference compared to what was accepted as societal norm.

Edited December 13, 2005 by whitev70r

[steve s]

ok. but.. if God was all knowing.. it should've known that slavery is wrong. yet, writings in the Bible still consider slavery ok.. which leads us back to the question of who wrote the Bible..