Religion could become extinct in up to nine Countries "within years".

[FionordeQuester]

I think death as a whole is something that should be avoided. People can't begin to make amends if they caused any problems if they're killed, and a constant cycle of death doesn't make anything better. I'd have an immensely hard time defending myself if it weren't for the simple fact that there are people that need me.

I see.

Well, that sounds better. Guess for me sins always, to me, implies much much worse, though of course that's partially caused by just the general nature of the way it's used.

Well, I'm glad I could clear that up for you. Of course, some sins ARE utterly abominable in terms of the sheer amount of damage caused as well as the attitude they're done in, but the definition of "sin" is not nearly as specific as most people probably think.

And I think oddly, I realize this. But... I don't want perfection. I think a lot like Yune does, but in the end I want something like Ashera wants, a world free of violence and suffering (just... not by wiping everyone out), using RD as a parallel to it all. I value the struggles that humanity makes to be better. Sometimes they don't do so well, but in the end, I believe they can make something truly wonderful, and each person has the capacity for so much good.

We all do. I believe that God makes it possible through the Holy Spirit inside all of us (our conscience basically), even in people who are either reluctant to join or people who've never had the chance to become a Christian.

So being in Heaven... well, as well, there are people here who need me. And people I need who are here. Plus, if the afterlife is eternal, or even just significantly longer than my life here, then I'd rather get as much out of my time here than go on to something that will be so much longer.

That's a good attitude to have. In fact, I think I should make a point to remember this more often, whenever I'm down or extremely depressed. Not so much the "I only have a limited time" part, but the "there are people who need me" part.

Oh, I know that. No religion really wants to cause problems. People just use the parts that support what they want, missing the entire point. In the end, I can't think of a religion that is truly about harming people, it's all about trying to make things better. They may have different beliefs in how to make people better, but I feel all of them just hold a piece of the overall puzzle. I just wish more Christians would realize this. That just because you aren't Christian doesn't make you bad, and some things, just because they're in the Bible, aren't necessarily the clear cut way. I think honoring the spirit of the Bible, and not the literal word of it, is the way to go.

You are sort of right in that regard. The Bible teaches that following the law literally means nothing if you aren't following the spirit of that law. That's why Jesus was so angry with the Pharisee's, the ones who taught the law in Israel. Personally, I choose to follow it literally, but I understand. So, you keep on living you're life, and I'll wish you luck.

Edited July 14, 2011 by FionordeQuester

[Rewjeo]

I just wish more Christians would realize this. That just because you aren't Christian doesn't make you bad, and some things, just because they're in the Bible, aren't necessarily the clear cut way. I think honoring the spirit of the Bible, and not the literal word of it, is the way to go.

I think a lot do. You just don't hear about them. I mean, as far as I know, everyone except my dad that I know in real life believes in a god, and 95% of them believe in the Christian God but very very few have anything against non-Christians or people who are gay or anything like that. I mean, I know a lot of Mormons that went to the Gay Pride festival. The worst any of them are is thinking that it would be weird to be around someone making it very clear that they were homosexual. And, at least where I live, very few people take the Bible very literally. I mean, my mom/sisters basically believe that there is God, Jesus, and Heaven. They also believe in evolution and we have discussions about theoretical physics and the possibilities of aliens being near Earth and what could happen. I dunno, maybe I just know weird people.

[Mirron]

Thank you, I suppose? Still worry about eventually finding problems due to the way I live life, but I'll do my best to show people that I'm a good person. Just so long as people don't think being a good person is only as narrow as the religion or sexuality of the person, and nothing else, I think things can be fine. But yes, be more positive. :) There are a lot of good things out there, and people that care about your being around. Like me, for instance. Even if I don't know you well, I can't see your being around making things worse in the slightest, which is always a good thing. So long as you work to make things better, and focus more on trying to get people to be good as a whole, it's all good.

No, I think they aren't weird, just the most vocal people are the people who make a big issue about it all. And yeah, I know people who aren't, just think the issue comes with getting the people who are so negative away from vocal positions which influence people's perception.

Edited July 14, 2011 by Mirron

[FionordeQuester]

They also believe in evolution and we have discussions about theoretical physics and the possibilities of aliens being near Earth and what could happen. I dunno, maybe I just know weird people.

Personally, I'm in the "Evolution is how God created the world" camp myself. I believe in evolution to (well, not so much that cats evolved from alligators and hawks or whatever some scientists say, but the general idea of it), I just don't think it disproves God.

[Mirron]

Same way I feel, really. Science and religion don't need to be mutually exclusive.

[FionordeQuester]

Well, your welcome Mirron, and thanks for the encouragement. Have a nice night/day, whichever time zone you're in. I'm headed off now. Good night.

[Ragnell]

The main book being derailed seems to be Genesis, by presenting the first 11 chapters as symbolic. Of course, that causes a problem. The main focus of Christianity is the fact Jesus died for our sins. This meaning that we are cleansed from the Sin Curse that each and every one of us are born with. However, it is made clear that this came about from when Adam and Eve sinned. If the creation account in Genesis is merely symbolic, then said curse is symbolic. Why would Jesus die for an abstract concept.

A symbolic presentation of why a curse was placed on humanity does not imply that the curse itself is symbolic. If you assume that much of Genesis is symbolic (which I personally do), then you can pretty easily say that Adam and Eve represent humanity as a whole as it descended into sin, which in the end resulted in our separation from God. The completely un-symbolic separation still exists, even if it occurred over a thousand years as the result of the actions of numerous generations and was explained through the literary usage of two people. So I don't see how symbolism ruins it.

It wouldn't take too much thinking for most people to see the conflict right off the bat. Now, at a more basic level, if one can't trust the beginning, how can one trust the middle and end? By taking away the literalness of Genesis, the rest of the Bible is instantly on shaky ground. Then comes school. Most people go to secular state run schools. By middle school or high school, they start to learn evolution presented as fact (I'm a big evolution skeptic, a Young Earth Creationist, if you will) and other things contrary to the Bible. With said shaky ground, it's amazing that anyone that was taught comprised Bible beliefs can make it out with their Christian belief intact. Personally, I believe if churches would stand up and actually teach their congregations on how to defend their faith by taking God's Word at God's word, Christianity overall wouldn't be viewed in such a sorry state as it is currently.

Again, I have to disagree, though I see your point at the beginning. Yes, saying that part of one chapter is symbolic does immediately bring forward the question of what isn't symbolic, however this problem already existed in the Bible long before the debate on Genesis. The Bible rarely (outside of parables) straight up says that it is not being literal, so deciding what is symbolic and what is not is left up to us. Think: Revelation. I think you can figure the rest out.

Also, something that irks me greatly: are you saying you do not believe in evolution as a concept, or evolution as an explanation of the origin of all life? My dad and I discuss this sort of thing often, and I loathe always trying to decipher which he is referring to. Because, while it is fairly easy to say (even if I disagree) there was a point of creation and not a gradual change through evolution, it is very difficult to say that evolution as a biological concept is false. I mean, we've literally watched it happen to various organisms, and have documented it. It makes logical sense, given an understanding of heredity and likelihood of survival. There are certainly areas where it doesn't apply, but the fact that it does happen now is about as close to proven as anything in science can be.

[Kintenbo]

A symbolic presentation of why a curse was placed on humanity does not imply that the curse itself is symbolic. If you assume that much of Genesis is symbolic (which I personally do), then you can pretty easily say that Adam and Eve represent humanity as a whole as it descended into sin, which in the end resulted in our separation from God. The completely un-symbolic separation still exists, even if it occurred over a thousand years as the result of the actions of numerous generations and was explained through the literary usage of two people. So I don't see how symbolism ruins it.

Also, something that irks me greatly: are you saying you do not believe in evolution as a concept, or evolution as an explanation of the origin of all life? My dad and I discuss this sort of thing often, and I loathe always trying to decipher which he is referring to. Because, while it is fairly easy to say (even if I disagree) there was a point of creation and not a gradual change through evolution, it is very difficult to say that evolution as a biological concept is false. I mean, we've literally watched it happen to various organisms, and have documented it. It makes logical sense, given an understanding of heredity and likelihood of survival. There are certainly areas where it doesn't apply, but the fact that it does happen now is about as close to proven as anything in science can be.

Well, Jesus himself referred to Adam and Eve as historical figures. There's Mark 10:6, John 5:45-47, supplemented by Exodus 20:11 (referring to Moses, who wrote Genesis), and Matthew 19:4-5. I doubt Jesus would either intentionally lie or try to console the "lack of knowledge" of the people during that time.

To clear things up, I don't believe in what one can call "molecules to man" evolution. I believe in natural selection, but only within a "kind", if you will. For example, we easily observe variation in "canine kind", with many breeds of dogs, along with foxes, wolves, and other wild canines. The only exception would be humans. Some would try to say, "aren't we a part of 'ape kind'", but the Bible specifies "man kind". However, I don't believe the concept of something like reptile to bird and mammal evolution. Some will try to point out fossils of "winged dinosaurs", but fossils can only tell us so much. The rest is pure assumption based on one's worldview. Ultimately, evolution in the Darwinian sense is as much a faith based worldview as any religions. So I don't see this as religion vs. science as much as worldview vs. worldview. Its not that Young Earth Creationists lack evidence, its just that they interpret the evidence differently. This article should explain it better than I can.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v22/n1/creation-proof

Do remember that yes, the people of this site do believe one can be Christian and still believe in Darwinian evolution, although it makes them vulnerable in their understanding. Ultimately, trusting in Christ's shed blood as payment for our sin debt is the important part. Trusting that Jesus is as claimed is ultimately the hard part for many people.

Edited July 14, 2011 by Kintenbo

[Esau of Isaac]

To clear things up, I don't believe in what one can call "molecules to man" evolution. I believe in natural selection, but only within a "kind", if you will. For example, we easily observe variation in "canine kind", with many breeds of dogs, along with foxes, wolves, and other wild canines. The only exception would be humans. Some would try to say, "aren't we a part of 'ape kind'", but the Bible specifies "man kind". However, I don't believe the concept of something like reptile to bird and mammal evolution. Some will try to point out fossils of "winged dinosaurs", but fossils can only tell us so much. The rest is pure assumption based on one's worldview.

You've already said this before, and you've already been shown as being pathetically mistaken before.

And I'll say what I believe I said earlier: What you are essentially saying is a distance of thirty inches exist, but not thirty feet. As most other Young Earth Creationists you've applied your ignorance of a subject as though you have all the answers.

Ultimately, evolution in the Darwinian sense is as much a faith based worldview as any religions. So I don't see this as religion vs. science as much as worldview vs. worldview. Its not that Young Earth Creationists lack evidence, its just that they interpret the evidence differently. This article should explain it better than I can.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v22/n1/creation-proof

Answersingenesis? Seriously?

Are you actively trying to ruin your credibility here or something.

[Rewjeo]

There is a BIG difference between believing in evolution and believing in a religion. There is a TON of evidence for it while there is zero for creationism, which is the difference between science and faith. Creationism also requires that you assume that God put all of this evidence around just to trick us, or maybe He decided that he wanted to give us mental stimulation, I dunno. Either way, something is wrong with your point of view, I think, because either your God tricks us or you're going against what He wants. Of course, this does not apply so much to you as to a pure Creationists. Also, there are no winged dinosaurs, unless you want to look at the dino->bird thing in which case it's pretty subjective as to whether or not you'd say that any of those dinosaurs had wings. I may have been slightly obsessed with dinosaurs as a young child, so certain things bother me. Anyways, yes, fossils can only tell us so much, but they sure imply a lot. Follow the fossil evidence of Australopithicus (did I spell that right?) through to Homo sapiens and tell me that there is no evidence for humans evolving from apes.

The problem with taking the Bible literally is that, well, it was written thousands of years ago. After the stories were passed down orally for hundreds or maybe thousands of years. In a different language. Then it was translated through multiple languages before coming to English. The thought of it still being 100% the way it was originally seems absurd to me.

[eclipse]

Thank you, I suppose? Still worry about eventually finding problems due to the way I live life, but I'll do my best to show people that I'm a good person. Just so long as people don't think being a good person is only as narrow as the religion or sexuality of the person, and nothing else, I think things can be fine.

There will forever be those who are intolerant of difference of some sort, who will judge you based on something that they shouldn't be poking their noses into. I will apologize on their behalf, because I doubt they'll apologize for their own behavior.

I think you're cool.

But yes, be more positive. :)

Yes, sir!

[Kintenbo]

You've already said this before, and you've already been shown as being pathetically mistaken before.

And I'll say what I believe I said earlier: What you are essentially saying is a distance of thirty inches exist, but not thirty feet. As most other Young Earth Creationists you've applied your ignorance of a subject as though you have all the answers.

Answersingenesis? Seriously?

Are you actively trying to ruin your credibility here or something.

Hmm? I'm not pretending to be an expert. I'm just a simple college bound 19 year old. I know full well that what I'm posting is something a lot of people on this site disagree with, but its still my honest opinion.

Do you have any personal knowledge of this organization? Is there any legal or otherwise malicious act this organization did to discredit itself? Please, give me something other than "they base their research on the Bible, that's so unscientific". I'm talking dishonest activities, something beyond teaching things you disagree with. Otherwise, no, I'm not trying to ruin anything about me.

[Mirron]

Heh, you're very nice Clipsey. :) And a very good example of how people in general should try to act when it comes to religion.

[FionordeQuester]

Kintembo, I checked out "answersingenesis.com", to try to see what Esau meant. But I had a little trouble understanding exactly what it meant, so I checked it out on Wikipedia, and found one interesting tidbit about something they did in 2009.

Apparently, the organization posted a billboard in Texas that had a young boy pointing a gun towards the camera with the words "If God doesn't matter to him, do you?". This same image was also used in a T.V. add. When questioned on this, the organization tried to defend it's actions by saying that the rise of school massacre's in America is partially because of the teaching of Evolution, using a video posted in Finland about some nutjob trying to "put natural selection back on track". Basically, their adds implied that because we're not teaching Creationism, it's influencing children to become murderers....

Yeah, seems pretty bad to me. Maybe that wasn't their intention, and they're saying that it wasn't, but, it's the message I got when I first read it. Here's some of the links on Wikipedia if you want to clarify...

http://crooksandliars.com/nicole-belle/christianist-groups-billboard-compare

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2009/04/20/if-you-dont-matter-to-god-you-dont-matter-to-anyone

Edited July 14, 2011 by FionordeQuester

[Kintenbo]

Kintembo, I checked out "answersingenesis.com", to try to see what Esau meant. But I had a little trouble understanding exactly what it meant, so I checked it out on Wikipedia, and found one interesting tidbit about something they did in 2009.

Apparently, the organization posted a billboard in Texas that had a young boy pointing a gun towards the camera with the words "If God doesn't matter to him, do you?". This same image was also used in a T.V. add. When questioned on this, the organization tried to defend it's actions by saying that the rise of school massacre's in America is partially because of the teaching of Evolution, using a video posted in Finland about some nutjob trying to "put natural selection back on track". Basically, they're saying that because we're not teaching Creationism, it's influencing children to become murderers...

Yeah, seems pretty bad to me. Here's some of the links on Wikipedia if you want to clarify...

http://crooksandliars.com/nicole-belle/christianist-groups-billboard-compare

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2009/04/20/if-you-dont-matter-to-god-you-dont-matter-to-anyone

From what I've read, they're not actively trying to put Creationism in schools. However, their main point was what can happen with an evolutionary worldview, not what absolutely will happen. The main point they made was, if we're nothing but advanced animals, what's the point of right and wrong? Yeah, the billboard definitely is something that attracts attention, but I fail to see how that instantly discredits what they teach.

Edited July 14, 2011 by Kintenbo

[Zanarkin]

From what I've read, they're not actively trying to put Creationism in schools. However, their main point was what can happen with an evolutionary worldview, not what absolutely will happen. The main point they made was, if we're nothing but advanced animals, what's the point of right and wrong? Yeah, the billboard definitely is something that attracts attention, but I fail to see how that instantly discredits what they teach.

You can't say evolutionist are animals, savages, with no morals. Just because a few wicked people take these things and twist them to justify their cause, doesn't mean everyone is like that. You know, Christians had their dark past, and many other religions have had it too. To say that this world will become a world without order siumply because there is a lack of believe for God just shows me, that these people need a God so they do no evil. It seems to its them without morals, and they just try to be "good" people because they don't want to suffer eternal damnation.

I find it offensive to be seen as some wicked twisted person, or have the possibility to become one, just because I decided to follow the Evolution theory.

[Zkirsche]

the billboard definitely is something that attracts attention

Attracts attention is one way of putting it.

I fail to see how that instantly discredits what they teach.

"If god doesn't matter to him, so will you?" is a horrificly prejudical sign which goes exactly against what christianity is about - acceptance and forgiveness. Instead atheists are depicted as inhumane monsters who don't care about anyone.

Christian Exremism is no better than Muslim Extremism.

And just so you know, I'm a christian too.

[Kintenbo]

You can't say evolutionist are animals, savages, with no morals. Just because a few wicked people take these things and twist them to justify their cause, doesn't mean everyone is like that. You know, Christians had their dark past, and many other religions have had it too. To say that this world will become a world without order siumply because there is a lack of believe for God just shows me, that these people need a God so they do no evil. It seems to its them without morals, and they just try to be "good" people because they don't want to suffer eternal damnation.

I find it offensive to be seen as some wicked twisted person, or have the possibility to become one, just because I decided to follow the Evolution theory.

It's not being said that all evolutionists are like that. You are right, people twist just about anything for their own cause. However, there is no basis on what is right or wrong in evolution. It's not that non-Christians can't do good, in this case, what is defined as good in the Bible, but they have no basis on why it is good. Of course, from the viewpoint from a Christian, God decides what is good and bad. For what it's worth, yes, Christians, even the most dedicated, still sin. I know I've said, thought, and done plenty of things that I'm not proud of. Historically, arrogance and pride has indeed stained the Christian testimony. The main difference between the Christian and non-Christian is that the Christian has admitted that he or she does indeed sin, and that he or she is in need of the Savior. Anyway, if there is no God, what is good and bad, and why is the good and bad as such? It's all relative. Some people can conclude that various horrific acts are perfectly acceptable. No, Christians can't really claim some moral high ground. No one can. We can only accept that we sin and repent for it, so God can forgive us, or we don't. Of course, acknowledging God tends to be the hard part.

[Zkirsche]

Anyway, if there is no God, what is good and bad, and why is the good and bad as such?

Because it makes people happier when you help them with a difficult task, and if you care about someone you try to make them feel better when they're just for the sake of making them feel better. It's in our instinct and it's taught to us from children that helping otehrs is what we should do. That may have christian background, but that doesn't mean people only act nice because they think it will please God, they do it for themselves and the person they're helping.

God will likely prefer someone who is good hearted by nature, and not good hearted just because he told you to be.

[Esau of Isaac]

Hmm? I'm not pretending to be an expert. I'm just a simple college bound 19 year old. I know full well that what I'm posting is something a lot of people on this site disagree with, but its still my honest opinion.

That has been shown to be lacking and outright false beforehand.

Do you have any personal knowledge of this organization? Is there any legal or otherwise malicious act this organization did to discredit itself? Please, give me something other than "they base their research on the Bible, that's so unscientific". I'm talking dishonest activities, something beyond teaching things you disagree with. Otherwise, no, I'm not trying to ruin anything about me.

Read through the site. It's predicated on misinformation and outright lies in an attempt to combat established scientific information because of an outdated worldview. Is an active campaign of deliberate lying because the world doesn't agree with your opinion not count as malicious to you?

From what I've read, they're not actively trying to put Creationism in schools. However, their main point was what can happen with an evolutionary worldview, not what absolutely will happen. The main point they made was, if we're nothing but advanced animals, what's the point of right and wrong? Yeah, the billboard definitely is something that attracts attention, but I fail to see how that instantly discredits what they teach.

Because they're a bunch of maniacs with a corrupted worldview attempting to make erroneous arguments and disgusting assertions all because of an incredibly unhealthy aversion to reality.

It's not being said that all evolutionists are like that. You are right, people twist just about anything for their own cause. However, there is no basis on what is right or wrong in evolution.

Because the theory of evolution is not concerned with what is right and wrong. The theory of gravity also doesn't expound on morality, does that mean it's somehow false, or something?

It's not that non-Christians can't do good, in this case, what is defined as good in the Bible, but they have no basis on why it is good.

How? By what basis can you say that people cannot define a moral code of their own without a God in their lives?

Of course, from the viewpoint from a Christian, God decides what is good and bad. For what it's worth, yes, Christians, even the most dedicated, still sin. I know I've said, thought, and done plenty of things that I'm not proud of. Historically, arrogance and pride has indeed stained the Christian testimony. The main difference between the Christian and non-Christian is that the Christian has admitted that he or she does indeed sin, and that he or she is in need of the Savior. Anyway, if there is no God, what is good and bad, and why is the good and bad as such? It's all relative. Some people can conclude that various horrific acts are perfectly acceptable. No, Christians can't really claim some moral high ground. No one can. We can only accept that we sin and repent for it, so God can forgive us, or we don't. Of course, acknowledging God tends to be the hard part.

It's all relative anyways. Even were your God to exist, it wouldn't definitively mean that an objective good exists, just good in the eyes of your God.

Edited July 14, 2011 by Esau of Isaac

[Kintenbo]

Because it makes people happier when you help them with a difficult task, and if you care about someone you try to make them feel better when they're just for the sake of making them feel better. It's in our instinct and it's taught to us from children that helping otehrs is what we should do. That may have christian background, but that doesn't mean people only act nice because they think it will please God, they do it for themselves and the person they're helping.

God will likely prefer someone who is good hearted by nature, and not good hearted just because he told you to be.

I suppose the main problem is whether or not one can be good hearted by nature. Yeah, that sounds rough, but the Bible is clear that none is righteous by their own merit. I suppose that's another thing some people have believing. Yeah, it is nice when people do good for goodness' sake, but once again, the question is what is good without God to define it.

[Mirron]

And I already defined that. Doing your best to help others without harming anyone. Making others lives happier, giving them love and comfort. You don't need the Bible or God to define what is good. It's something innate... you can feel it from the action itself, in it's purity. Certainly there are times when the line is less clear, but that's the case with anything.

And I truly believe human beings are good, and can do good. So yes, people can be good without relying on the Bible.

[Zanarkin]

I suppose the main problem is whether or not one can be good hearted by nature. Yeah, that sounds rough, but the Bible is clear that none is righteous by their own merit. I suppose that's another thing some people have believing. Yeah, it is nice when people do good for goodness' sake, but once again, the question is what is good without God to define it.

Why do you need a God to tell you what is good? Can you not make your own opinion about it? I know how i determine if something is good or not. Why is it so hard to find an answer to things by thinking about them? Why do you need to be told these things. What is good and what is wrong should be your opinion not someone else's. If you happen to agree with someone else's well good for you, but don't force it on others, or say others have no basis for moral views. Just because i don't believe in your god doesn't mean i can't determine what good. I'm not some mindless person that can't determine good things from bad things. I use a list of things to determine my morals (i'll just post the two most basic):

- Does it hurt me?

- Does it hurt others?

If the answers to one or both of those questions, then i'd say its not good. There is more to this list, but that is the basics of it. No just because something hurts me doesn't mean it can't be good (before you or anyone else mentions it).

[Kintenbo]

Why do you need a God to tell you what is good? Can you not make your own opinion about it? I know how i determine if something is good or not. Why is it so hard to find an answer to things by thinking about them? Why do you need to be told these things. What is good and what is wrong should be your opinion not someone else's. If you happen to agree with someone else's well good for you, but don't force it on others, or say others have no basis for moral views. Just because i don't believe in your god doesn't mean i can't determine what good. I'm not some mindless person that can't determine good things from bad things. I use a list of things to determine my morals (i'll just post the two most basic):

- Does it hurt me?

- Does it hurt others?

If the answers to one or both of those questions, then i'd say its not good. There is more to this list, but that is the basics of it. No just because something hurts me doesn't mean it can't be good (before you or anyone else mentions it).

So basically, its all subjective. Of course, since you don't believe in God, what I say doesn't mean much. That's why most religious debates turn into one big tennis match. Ultimately, it's up to you on what you believe, I just choose to defend my beliefs.

[Zanarkin]

So basically, its all subjective. Of course, since you don't believe in God, what I say doesn't mean much. That's why most religious debates turn into one big tennis match. Ultimately, it's up to you on what you believe, I just choose to defend my beliefs.

I'm fine with that. Just don't go saying i (or anyone else for that matter) don't have (or can't have) a base for morals because i don't have a God.

Edited July 15, 2011 by Jhen Mohran