Are you religous?, And Why? Options

[NoSex]

Words.

So, if I were to ask you again, "how exactly do you plan on going about that," what would you say? By moving your mouth?

I'm looking for a real answer. What method do you think you could use to change someones mind on the issue? Reason, emotionalism? Do you have an idea? I'm curious.

Could you maybe present your argument here on the debate threads so we can see just how convincing it may be?

[omgah_itsmaggiex]

no. im not. i used to beleive in god, attended summer bible school, mass, and some other church events on the weekdays. as i got older, i just stopped believing.

i dont understand how there are so many other gods that other religions believe in where as christians believe in their one and only god. also, the whole adam and eve hooking up together and having like..390 different races of kids? it doesnt really seem true.

[f4113n]

religion is a way to explain what common sense cant, its just that when people believe too deeply their respective religions and disagree with each other on who created the earth or whatev, sometimes things get a little violent and a little bloodshed happens. totally not worth defending ur belief about who makes rain fall or whatever

sorry if i offend anyone but i dont really see the big deal about it all....lets just all be friends, regardless of who we believe created humans or w/e

[ComradeRed]

Everything in moderation; I've never met an atheist who couldn't be improved by some faith or a fundamentalist who couldn't be improved with some doubt.

[unicocira]

You can't have a truly open mind and be religous because every religion has guidelines tat you must follow.

In the bible it clearly states that God wants us to be open-minded, to gain knowledge.
Turning your ear to wisdom and applying your heart to understanding - Proverbs 2:2

[FoxBandCutie08]

I am agnostic, raised in a Catholic house, and I decided to not be christian because I decided I can't find any proof that can convince me of God's existence.

I agree in the fact that religion is a comfort for many people, and I think deep down that some of them know that it's just a concept to help people emotionally. As far as christianity goes (I know nothing about Buddhism) most of the religions in it are very controlling. I think if there was a God, he would be open and understanding, but the people who worship him are often greedy and mean, and intolerant of other people's religious beliefs. They say such things as, you will burn in hell, for eternity, etc. That's not being very tolerant, OR trying to help them.

I think that we should get more people to believe in themselves instead of worshiping things they can't see. If you have strength in yourself, you have enough confidence to not have to pray and go to church all the time to make you feel better.

[yo pusha]

I am not religeous. I think that more and more religeous type people are using god as an excuse for their own mistakes, that is where the phrase "god has a reason for everything" comes into play. I believe that you manufacture your own luck, luck is labor under correct knowledge. I believe in hard work; the harder you work the luckier you get. There is nothing to convince me that God ever existed, and yes Kryogenix, try your best to change my mind. I am pretty open minded, and I am very interested in what you have to say.

If religeon helps you be a better person and is beneficial to you, then enjoy it. I, myself will rely on my values and my morals to help me be the person that I want to be.

respecting it depends on the case

Does their beliefs harm you in any way? What if there was such thing as God? Then we would all look stupid. And visa versa. So yes, I do not have to agree with your opinion, but I see no harm in respecting it.

peace

[Mulder]

no. im not. i used to beleive in god, attended summer bible school, mass, and some other church events on the weekdays. as i got older, i just stopped believing.

i dont understand how there are so many other gods that other religions believe in where as christians believe in their one and only god. also, the whole adam and eve hooking up together and having like..390 different races of kids? it doesnt really seem true.

well thats not exactly how its described in the torah.

though im not an expert. i havent been to services for like 4 years..

but..
basically god "created" the different races and languages from the people that already existed. dont remember why though. some form of punishment.


im still agnostic.

[NoSex]

well thats not exactly how its described in the torah.

though im not an expert. i havent been to services for like 4 years..

but..
basically god "created" the different races and languages from the people that already existed.  dont remember why though. some form of punishment.

It was because they built the tower of babel and tried to reach heaven. I guess back then the tower of babel was infinitely taller than our tallest buildings, cause God had to knock that f**kin' tower down. He even seperated these people by moving them all across the planet. He went as far as to change their languages and cultures so they would be so different that they wouldn't ever be able to build such a tall building again and reach heaven.

Oh, and the Bible is literally true.

[*kryogenix*]

It was because they built the tower of babel and tried to reach heaven. I guess back then the tower of babel was infinitely taller than our tallest buildings, cause God had to knock that f**kin' tower down. He even seperated these people by moving them all across the planet. He went as far as to change their languages and cultures so they would be so different that they wouldn't ever be able to build such a tall building again and reach heaven.

Oh, and the Bible is literally true. 

God didn't knock the tower down. The people stopped building the tower because they couldn't communicate anymore. The tower just became dilapidated.

[NoSex]

God didn't knock the tower down. The people stopped building the tower because they couldn't communicate anymore. The tower just became dilapidated.

My bad. Still. Super silly.

[vash1530]

^i love ur care free tone!!!

[pshaa.shauna]

vash----

To tell you the truth, athiesism is just as ridiculous as religion is. there is so many things both of them have not explained.

On the religious side, religion was in fact made by ancient people who needed to explain all of the miracuous things that were happening around them. How the sun came up, life grew, etc. Now that we can explain these things with science, some of the things in our "holy scripts" are wrong, but that's to be excepted. these texts were written by man, supposedly holy men, but man nonetheless.

On the other hand, science has prooved that there is no such thing as spontaneous cgeneration, so how do you explain how life was made in the first place? Plus, there are still many unexplained things on the planet, random miracles where people can see by being touched by a "healer" (granted, most of the time this is faked, but it has happened), "ghosts", "seerers". (Also, what I have listed could be classified as satanic in many religions, but the point still stands)

And again, is there is a higher being, I highly doubt any religion knows about it, there are so many, with so many contradictory beleifs, it's ridiculous. So it can be stupid to strictly follow one of these religious, but it's also extremely close-minded to have no faith at all.

[NoSex]

shauna,Jan 30 2006, 10:02 PM]To tell you the truth, athiesism is just as ridiculous as religion is. there is so many things both of them have not explained.

All atheism is required to explain is why we should not believe in a God. And, that is an easy one, there is no reason to believe in a God in the first place. An athiest is not obligated to explain or justify anything aside from his lack of belief in a God in order for his atheism to remain rational.

shauna,Jan 30 2006, 10:02 PM]On the other hand, science has prooved that there is no such thing as spontaneous combustion, so how do you explain how life was made in the first place?

Spontaneous combustion is actually a reality. You may also know it as Spontaneous Human Combustion. It happens.

Anyways, I believe you were refering to spontaneous generation. Yes, spontaneous generation was debunked, for the most part, in 1859 by Louis Pasteur. However, this has very little to do with "how life was made in the first place."

This is an issue for science, but not so much for the atheist. The atheist simply does not believe in a God. How does the problem of the emergence of life challenge the idea that we have no reason to believe in God?

You have also failed to observe the exstensive studies in abiogenesis, the emergence of life from non-life, and the reality of virtual particles in the universe. Although spontaneous generation is not a reality, this does little to complicated the origin of life.

shauna,Jan 30 2006, 10:02 PM]Plus, there are still many unexplained things on the planet

Ok? Sure. We don't even understand how gravity exactly works. Now, how is this a serious argument against atheism? Atheism is simply the lack of belief in a god. All an atheist needs to do is justify being irreligious. Which, isn't hard.

shauna,Jan 30 2006, 10:02 PM]random miracles where people can see by being touched by a "healer" (granted, most of the time this is faked, but it has happened)

Uhhhmm? How do you know it has happened? Prove it to us.
Recreate it in a controled enviroment. Record it so we can all see. Give us all the data available surrounding the situation.
There is a reason no one has been able to do this, cause these things most likely do not truly happen.

As David Hume has always said, in any given situation where a "miracle" is claimed, there will always be more evidence that someone has simply lied, created a hoax, or hallucinated, rather than that the laws of the universe have overturned for a moment in time. As, we know that people lie, create elaborate hoaxes, and hallucinate. On the other hand, we have never documented the laws of the universe being overturned, and if we were to grant such an instance, what would become of scientifc vigor?

shauna,Jan 30 2006, 10:02 PM] "ghosts", "seerers". (Also, what I have listed could be classified as satanic in many religions, but the point still stands)

Again, prove it.

http://www.randi.org/research/index.html

Go take James Rani's million dollar challenege. You would be a first if you won.

shauna,Jan 30 2006, 10:02 PM]So it can be stupid to strictly follow one of these religious, but it's also extremely close-minded to have no faith at all.

Ok. This has got to be the worst statement of them all.

Main Entry: 1faith
Pronunciation: 'fAth
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural faiths /'fAths, sometimes 'fA[th]z/
Etymology: Middle English feith, from Old French feid, foi, from Latin fides; akin to Latin fidere to trust -- more at BIDE
1 a : allegiance to duty or a person : LOYALTY b (1) : fidelity to one's promises (2) : sincerity of intentions
2 a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust
3 : something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs
synonym see BELIEF
- in faith : without doubt or question : VERILY

So it is close-minded not to have a firm belief in something for which there is no proof?!

[Spirited Away]

shauna,Jan 30 2006, 10:02 PM]To tell you the truth, athiesism is just as ridiculous as religion is. there is so many things both of them have not explained.

As I've mentioned before somewhere in this forum, atheism (and/or secular affiliates) doesn't (do not) claim to know all, the religion Christianity, along with Islam and Judaism, claim that their God is Almighty in power and knowledge...etc. So, while it's acceptable, plausible, and even excusable for atheism to miss the mark on knowing everything there is to know, I cannot say the same for some religions.

On the religious side, religion was in fact made by ancient people who needed to explain all of the miracuous things that were happening around them. How the sun came up, life grew, etc. Now that we can explain these things with science, some of the things in our "holy scripts" are wrong, but that's to be excepted. these texts were written by man, supposedly holy men, but man nonetheless.

As noted above, to claim that one's God knows all and that one's Holy Scripture contains the words of one's God made everything you said very contradicting. No, claiming truth while truth falls far, in the context that you said certain things are wrong, SHOULD NOT be "excepted" (I'm guessing you meant expected) when such deceit impacts so many, many lives, as well as the pursuit of truth and knowledge.

[pshaa.shauna]

All atheism is required to explain is why we should not believe in a God. And, that is an easy one, there is no reason to believe in a God in the first place. An athiest is not  obligated to explain or justify anything aside from his lack of belief in a God in order for his atheism to remain rational.

And a religious person has to only explain why they beleive as they do for them to remain rational. I stated it as irrational because vash---- seems to be under the impression that religion is ridiculous, but not taking in the flaws atheism has.

Spontaneous combustion is actually a reality. You may also know it as Spontaneous Human Combustion. It happens.

Anyways, I believe you were refering to spontaneous generation. Yes, spontaneous generation was debunked, for the most part, in 1859 by Louis Pasteur. However, this has very little to do with "how life was made in the first place."

On the contrary, Spontaneous Combustion has not been prooven, give me proof and I'll retract my statement but untill then, it's not possible.

And I did mean regeneration,sorry for that. But it has plenty to do with "how life started in the first place". If you are an athiest, you most likely beleive in evolution, unless you have some other unknown theory, because you aren't going to be belive Intellegent Design. So evolution states that every being evoled from another, and science has proven that billions of years ago, there was no life. Earth was a humongous ball of unihabital fire. So somehow, little tiny micro-organisms sprang to live, and no one knows how. It's unexplainable.

Ok? Sure. We don't even understand how gravity exactly works. Now, how is this a serious argument against atheism? Atheism is simply the lack of belief in a god. All an atheist needs to do is justify being irreligious. Which, isn't hard.

I'm not argueing against athiesm my dear, if you noticed, I also pointed out the flaws in religion. Religion was createed so primatives species had something to explain what went on around them, and now that we know (for the most part) we still have grown out of it. I'm simply stating both sides because many athiests tend to be arrogant, and think that science can explain what goe son. To be quite honest I am athiest.

Uhhhmm? How do you know it has happened? Prove it to us.

Again, prove it.

The point is you can't. Yes people lie, but people also tell the truth sometimes. We can't proove what they say is true, so we say that it isn't, but many people don't seem to realize that there are still many things that we can't proove, but that doesn't mean they aren't true.

Main Entry: 1faith
Pronunciation: 'fAth
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural faiths /'fAths, sometimes 'fA[th]z/
Etymology: Middle English feith, from Old French feid, foi, from Latin fides; akin to Latin fidere to trust -- more at BIDE
1 a : allegiance to duty or a person : LOYALTY b (1) : fidelity to one's promises (2) : sincerity of intentions
2 a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust
3 : something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs
synonym see BELIEF
- in faith : without doubt or question : VERILY

So it is close-minded not to have a firm belief in something for which there is no proof?!

Okay so my point wasn't as clear as I thought it was, let me reiterate:

So it can be stupid to strictly follow one of these religious, but it's also extremely close-minded to have no faith at all, if you aren't willing to accept that what you belief doesn't explain anything.

Sorry for the confusion.

[*disco infiltrator*]

1) People need to start proofreading their posts. ><

^ Illiterate? You mean reiterate?

2) ACTUALLY, the current upheld theory DOES explain where life came from.

Millions and millions of years ago, when the Earth was cooling down from the large blast that had created it, many large asteroids were still flying around space from the blast. As would be expected, some of them ran into Earth. These asteroids contained the nucleotides that are found in DNA (Thymine, Cytosine, Adenine, etc.). These nucleotides synthesized themselves along with the elements present from the blast to form a sort of "molecule soup". Over time, the "soup" grew and formed into tiny matters of life. So, the theory that I accept as truth (because, to me, that makes a lot more sense than 'this guy came out of nowhere and created everything with his awesome powers and stuff') does indeed present an answer the formation of life.

3) The point Nate was trying to make about atheism not having to explain things is that the view doesn't try to explain things. Just because most atheists accept evolution as truth does not mean they are one in the same. Most religions present an explanation for life and to be a follower of that religion, you must accept that religion's explanation as truth. Atheism does not require you to have any view on the origin of life except for that a god did not create life.

4) Miracles are unexplained? Ever heard of coincidences? Sometimes, things just happen. Events don't need assistance to occur.

My "belief" does explain things. There's no need for me to accept something that isn't true. Having no faith in a god isn't stupid; it's logical.

[De112]

aight so where did this "large blast" come from? just popped up?

[*disco infiltrator*]

A giant star died. When large stars die, they explode. It happens all the time. People have seen it happen.

[NoSex]

shauna,Jan 31 2006, 7:12 PM]And a religious person has to only explain why they beleive as they do for them to remain rational.

Granted, of course. However, a religious person has a greater amount of assumptions than an irreligious person. The burden of proof is much heavier on the religious individual. All an atheist has to justify is a lack of belief in God, which makes rather decent sense as we have little-to-no evidence of any religious claims. However, a religious individual must validate and make reasonable a great number of seemingly absurdist claims, ideas, and propositions.

shauna,Jan 31 2006, 7:12 PM]I stated it as irrational because vash---- seems to be under the impression that religion is ridiculous, but not taking in the flaws atheism has.

What exactly are the flaws of atheism?

shauna,Jan 31 2006, 7:12 PM]
On the contrary, Spontaneous Combustion has not been prooven, give me proof and I'll retract my statement but untill then, it's not possible.

It has not exactly been proven, however it has been demonstarted to be at least reasonably possible by the "wick theory" in which human fat, or other living fat cells, burn in a peculiar fashion.

However, most cases are just emphasized by an unknown source of ignition.

shauna,Jan 31 2006, 7:12 PM]
And I did mean regeneration,sorry for that. But it has plenty to do with "how life started in the first place". If you are an athiest, you most likely beleive in evolution, unless you have some other unknown theory, because you aren't going to be belive Intellegent Design. So evolution states that every being evoled from another, and science has proven that billions of years ago, there was no life. Earth was a humongous ball of unihabital fire. So somehow, little tiny micro-organisms sprang to live, and no one knows how. It's unexplainable.

1. An atheist is not required to believe in evolution or any particular theory of the origin of life.
2. This does not threaten the original atheist proposition that "there is no good reason to believe in God."
3. Read about abiogenesis.

We can create the building blocks of life in a lab.

shauna,Jan 31 2006, 7:12 PM]
The point is you can't. Yes people lie, but people also tell the truth sometimes. We can't proove what they say is true, so we say that it isn't, but many people don't seem to realize that there are still many things that we can't proove, but that doesn't mean they aren't true.

The burden of proof is still with those proposing a miracle.

shauna,Jan 31 2006, 7:12 PM]
Okay so my point wasn't as clear as I thought it was, let me illiterate:

So it can be stupid to strictly follow one of these religious, but it's also extremely close-minded to have no faith at all, if you aren't willing to accept that what you belief doesn't explain anything.

I'm a rationalist. Of course I don't believe that what I believe can explain or does explain even half of everything.

shauna,Jan 31 2006, 7:12 PM]
Sorry for the confusion.

Not a problem at all.

[*kryogenix*]

A giant star died. When large stars die, they explode. It happens all the time. People have seen it happen.

Where'd this star come from?

[pshaa.shauna]

1) People need to start proofreading their posts. ><

^ Illiterate? You mean reiterate?

*sigh* Yes, sorry. Dang it.

2) ACTUALLY, the current upheld theory DOES explain where life came from.

Millions and millions of years ago, when the Earth was cooling down from the large blast that had created it, many large asteroids were still flying around space from the blast. As would be expected, some of them ran into Earth. These asteroids contained the nucleotides that are found in DNA (Thymine, Cytosine, Adenine, etc.). These nucleotides synthesized themselves along with the elements present from the blast to form a sort of "molecule soup". Over time, the "soup" grew and formed into tiny matters of life. So, the theory that I accept as truth (because, to me, that makes a lot more sense than 'this guy came out of nowhere and created everything with his awesome powers and stuff') does indeed present an answer the formation of life.

Where is this at? I'm not saying you're lieing, I just would like to know more about it.

3) The point Nate was trying to make about atheism not having to explain things is that the view doesn't try to explain things. Just because most atheists accept evolution as truth does not mean they are one in the same. Most religions present an explanation for life and to be a follower of that religion, you must accept that religion's explanation as truth. Atheism does not require you to have any view on the origin of life except for that a god did not create life.

Ah, okay. I didn't gather that.

4) Miracles are unexplained? Ever heard of coincidences? Sometimes, things just happen. Events don't need assistance to occur.

That's your opinion. Question: Have you ever heard of the Chaos Theory?

My "belief" does explain things. There's no need for me to accept something that isn't true. Having no faith in a god isn't stupid; it's logical.

I never said it was stupid, again I say, that I am an athiest. The wole reason i posted was that vash seemed to be a bit arrogant in the matter.

[sheridan_whitesi...]

Listen kids, when you get to college, you will learn all the science needed to prove the vast amounts of mysteries concerning the origins of life, the universe and everything. You might not understand these things, that's because they take the knowledge of more than thirteen years. On the other hand, the idea that a big guy in the sky did it can be understood by the average three year old. Due to religious indoctrination at a young age, people cling to the idea they heard first. Luckily, the first explanation I got was the real one, and when I started kindergarten at a Lutheran school and they told us about Adam and Eve during story time, I turned to my neighbor and said: "That's not how it happened." Of course, everyone else thought it did, and it seems that an embarrasingly large percentage of adults still think so. The only hope is for smart people to reproduce and introduce your children at an early age the wonders of science like my parents so graciously did.

[*disco infiltrator*]

Er, Shauna, it's still wrong. Sorry.

Me: oh my god
Me: i corrected that chick on "reiterate"
Me: she still did it wrong
Me: she had "illiterate"
Me: now she has "re-literate"
Me: noooo
John: re literate? To once again be literate?
Me: i guess.
John: like if I forgot how to read, but then figured it out again
Me: haha

[De112]

Where'd this star come from?

that's exactly what I'm saying. Sorry but everything points to a creator.