Religion - the responsibility of evidence

Hey Noir,

The fundamentalist side of religion needs to be focussed on, for reasons that are announced daily with bomb blasts in the middle east. It's no lie that fundamentalists take their extreme views from the very same book (i'm talking here about jews, muslims and Christians book) that moderates take their cherry picked morals from. The only difference is the fundamentalists don't ignore all the horrific stuff we...not God..but we, choose to ignore because thankfully most of us have the good sense to see sense. I'll gave some thought to the negative side of moderates in my last post to Sib, did you read it?

PS, Noir, if science is a teenager, religion is a toddler and we all know which one is closest to being an adult.

Sibby,

I have never spoken ill of the importance of spiritual existence, nor the possibilities of contemplation, self reflection..meditation etc etc, I cherish all that. Nor do I think every aspect of our lives need to be testable or objective, that is absurd.

Thing is, you seem to want to seperate a personal spiritual existence, which I'm fine with..from your plainly stated christian faith, and I don't believe you can really do that. Your faith is not personal, it's taken from a flawed book and you personalize it by choosing what parts to believe and what to ignore. I mean really, clear it up for me if I'm wrong but just how much of the story of Jesus do you absorb into your faith?

The absolute source of the christian faith, your faith is based on the idea that the gospel account of the miracles of Jesus are true. That is why people believe in the bible, and god. You can't really call yourself a christian if you don't believe in the miracles, because they are what made Jesus divine.

I am not petulant to say I find any faith based on totally unsupported miracles stories to be highly unlikely. Nor is it rude of me to say by adhering to the christian faith, even in a totally non violent "personal" way, you are giving credence to the bible and everything in it. If that weren't the case you'd just be a non religious spiritual individual...something perhaps like I am.

Now I'm just trying to remember the last time I actually identified myself as a Christian, without any qualifications. Maybe high school? Even when I was a thirteen year old going through Confirmation I shied away from any positive statements, and instead expressed my own ignorance and my intention to keep questioning. If anything, I probably would have said I'm a bad Christian. I go to church sometimes, but not really by my own initiative. I believe in God, but don't really recognize the anthropomorphized God of the Bible. I think Jesus probably existed, and I think he probably was a representative of something really good... but beyond that, I know close to nothing. Overall, I believe in the importance of having religious aspects to life - something I think you believe in, too, despite saying that we can get all we need from science.

You seem to be saying that you either have to take the Bible as all true or else reject the whole thing. I really don't think that has to be the case. That's only something I've heard Christian fundamentalists say. The Bible is a collection of stories haphazardly tied together, and constructed by humans, obviously. Whether or not it was originally divinely inspired, it too has passed through the filter of human ignorance and bureaucracy. So you say to be Christian you have to stand by that? I don't think I can agree. Maybe if you want to feel at home in a Southern Baptist Church, yeah. But otherwise? If you consider Christian as "following the path of Christ," as I've heard it described, then no, I don't think the laws of Deuteronomy are particularly helpful.

On another, theoretical note, if a religion is to survive it has to be able to evolve... just like every other living thing in existence. It has to be vital and changing or it will stagnate and die. Why wouldn't a god, containing intelligence and an interest in its creation, seek to set down a religious seed that was able to change as the changing times required? Of course, this rules out things like Absolute Truth, but I have yet to come across a good case for that anyhow. In this example, though, wouldn't what people believed be allowed to change over time?

Hey Ricky..yeah, comparing a man using his miracle powers and a wave of his hand to turn water into wine is just a tad different from the highly complex procedure of turning crude oil into plastic. The difference shouldn't have to be explained, but I'll do it anyway.

One is based on science, testing and real world laws....

the other is not, so bad comparision from you.

As for you being in Iraq, you'll have to forgive me if I find that highly doubtful. I don't see how anyone could spent time over there with their eyes and ears open, and not understand that a huge part of the conflict is religious intolerance and religiously inspired violence (ji'had). Do you get good news reports over there (not fox news.like perhaps read the British paper "the guardian").

On the final note of your post. I think you have a reading impairment if you have read the bible and DON'T think it advocates the abuse of woman, religious intolerance and violence, the retardation of science and morality and a whole list of other stupidities.

Hey Ricky,

your wish is my command

For slavery

1 Peter 2:18
"Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh."

Leviticus 25:44
"Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves."

Womans rights

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT
If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her

Later, woman is described as being inferior to man. This message is explicit in the words of God spoken to Moses in the Book of Leviticus, chapter 27, verses 1-4.

Now the LORD spoke to Moses, saying,

"Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: `When a man consecrates by a vow certain person to the LORD, according to your valuation,

`If your valuation is of a male from twenty years old up to sixty years old, then your valuation shall be fifty shekels of silver, according to the shekel of the sanctuary.

`If it is a female, then your valuation shall be thirty shekels;

I could go on and on and on..check these if you like.

Great Topic
At times there would be no rhyme or reason for discussing politics or religion "in God we trust" or "God save the Queen" without the blind faith of historical records

Main Entry: rhyme or reason
Function: noun
Date: 15th century
: good sense or reason

"God Save the Queen" (alternatively "God Save the King") is an anthem used in a number of Commonwealth realms. It is the national anthem of the United Kingdom

It may be difficult to prove scientically that wealth is common or any kingdom was ever truly united

The rules of poems and quotes seems to be that there is a time and place for everything

I am happy to have Ricky H on my siide and would loved to had him on my side in the [Locked] "God of Moses\'s Ten commandments vs P.Q. Rules and Guidelines" debate

JESUS THE SON OF MAN
His words and His deeds as told and recorded by those who knew Him

by Kahlil Gibran

Who is like God?
I agree with sib "On another, theoretical note, if a religion is to survive it has to be able to evolve... "

I find rhyme and reason there Amen " In Islam, it is the standard ending to Dua (supplication). Common English translations of the word amen include: "Verily," "Truly," "So say we all," "So be it," and "Let it be." It can also be used colloquially to express strong agreement,[2] as in, for instance, amen to that" to quote wiki

Very interesting Ricky. What you must admit though, is that even if Jesus "might" have went against the old testament, and Leviticus..Jesus didn't write the bible..not a word of it and anyone who is a Christian now is one because of the Bible account of his miracles and not what he "might" have done.

We're talking about evidence here, evidence and likelyhood and the Bible is the only account of ANYTHING to do with Jesus. There are no extra accounts of his life or Miracles outside the bible, not one historical account of those amazing acts...and keep this in mind, those accounts were written down DECADES after their occurance.

Does anyone else see a problem here?

PS, I challenge you to find one quote that speaks out against slavery in the new testament Ricky....just one. The best you will find is quotes about not beating slaves so badly they die from it.

It seems while I was searching for historcal accounts of my ancestors, I found many religious distillers that had servants. It does seem that tradition has supported human intervention that makes mass production of spirits possible. Mountain Dew has not always been a soft drink ,though I am not sure the Scotch have any historical accounts to prove it. The tradition of chemical spirits is almost as old as the belief in holy and evil spirits. The proof of a beverage is more easy to find before it is metablized. Perhaps it's a sign of our increasingly fast-paced, short-attention-span society that even our old proverbs are being shortened and clipped down from the original full sayings. Word Detective and other etymology sites pointed out that the phrase originated as "the proof of the pudding is in the eating." It means that the true value or quality of something can only be judged when it's put to use. The meaning is often summed up as "results are what count.. You can make the case that the power of the United Kingdom, and the United States or the Soviet Union is in the unity. A nation can be seen as a vessel that holds spirits. The vast difference of religion and spirituality produce division. Is the evidence we seek in the cause or the effect?

Ricky, do you know one of the main reasons slavery was so hard to abolish, particularly in America and Britain?

Yeah, the bible. The slave holders of the south were on the winning side of a theological argument..and they never stopped talking about it.

Please tell me, you aren't serious about people not reading and writing properly before the 1500's? you were joking right? You do know the account of Jesus was first written down decades after he died...no 1500 years later...decades..lol..

I don't doubt there was a man named Jesus alive back in the day. He might even have been a teacher or mystic and wise man. But, please..don't even try to suggest the miracle stories found in the bible have any strand of truth to them just because the book survived, or because people still read it and believe it.

I started out in my opening post asking for evidence..for anyone of faith to just point me in the direction of some supporting evidence for the miracles of the bible and the divinity of Jesus..or just the reasons you believe.

If you had to answer

"i believe in the miracles of the bible and the divinity of Jesus because...."

what would you add?

Kevin: Africans before the establishment of monotheistic religion sold their own kind and used slaves before the americans and europeans ever came to shore...

The fact is that slavery is a very old economic custom that was established after the invention of agriculture...

We only just now realised the mistakes of religion because we already in the post industrial age...

Hmm, has there ever been a society that has fallen apart from being too fond of sceptical inquiry and reason? Has there ever been a civilization that has crumbled and vanished becase it was too honest and and logical and asked for proof when anyone made big claims about how the world works?

I don't think so RickH. There is nothing insane about asking questions, quie the opposite dear chap.

Asking people to think about why they really believe in God is an important question. Of course I don't expect anyone to provide proof, because there is none. What I did hope for though was some supporting evidence that was strong enough to stand up to scrutiny.

Viva the Jefferson Bible!!

It would be hard to imagine a colony of ants building cone shaped pyramids without some source of inspiration. Are the ants the masters of their nature or does their nature master them?

Most human colonies have been consumed by inspirations, yet it is good to be inspired

^That rule has always bugged me. At least, if that is your primary reason for believing in God.

Alternate scenario: If there is nothing after this life, it could be that you've spent the only time you have living with a stunted, guilt-ridden existence. I guess it depends on what sort of Christian you are.

Billy rob, you are not so much believing God, than you are bribing God. I am sorry to offend you, but you have made your faith sound fearful, smug and empty. If your statement was the principle thing you have to contribute to this thread, then it has only served to validate why people like Kevin view religion with such disgust. And this is a great pity.

In the course of my life I have made a study of convictions. Some of my covictions have led me to prisons and others have brought me to freedom.

I am reminded of the book " This Present Darkness"
by Frank E. Peretti.
Which definitely had an effect on me in one dark hour of my Life.
As for the Attack, I only see an Inquisitivness of the pair as They have never denied a Higher Power,
So, What is the Reality of Those who die without Faith?

Correct Mr. Billy Rob, it was a fruitless question, forgive me my stupidity, So let me say this..
False prophets can not lead any man or woman to God, only away from God will they lead.
Jesus said, "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life, no man cometh to the Father, but by me."
John 14:6

"It amuses me how nihilists, atheists, and the many other "ists" rush to find fault with a humans' personal beliefs in their God. I simply stated a fact. One that even the most enlightened of our species can't deny. But as most "enlightened " people do, they attack the integrity or intelligence of the person making such an "intolerant" statement. I assure you, I'll not deny Him to please any human..nor will I sugarcoat the reality that awaits those who die without faith...so, have at me..I'm quite a big boy.."

Well, I never said you were intolerant - whether that's true could be up for debate. I also don't know your own beliefs, so can only go off of the Pascal soundbite you're sticking to here.

What I DO say, however, is that a worldview based merely on a system of cosmic rewards and punishments is an empty, sad excuse for a "faith." That's just plain old piss-poor motivation. It seems that if God exists and is worth respect and devotion, then God would prefer adherence based on real belief, rather than... a gamble....

There seem to few organized religions that do not believe in at least a type of rebirth. All must not die a physical death to be reborn. Once I lost seventy pounds after a change of attitude and felt like another person after there was less of me. That was evidence enough for me that change begins with the spirit, because it takes a certian spirit to change ones mind. When I was in elementary school I was made to memorize that God always was and always will be in cateichism. To have a personal God that is the law that always was and always will be one must live in that Spirit. Most religions percieve Faith, hope and, charity as supernatural, and certainly not unnatural. Eternal life is not natural. Nature can only take what nature gives.

If "Religion is the opiate of the people" we should expect to find programs that make religious junkies more productive and self supporting

I must admit that I can only testify to temporal reward and punishment

I know more people who will praise the day they found God than those who praise the day they found heroine

Backing up a belief in God by saying that you're better off in the underworld if it turns out to be true, is basing it on a gamble and calculating your odds of coming out on top. That might not be what you're after, but that's the conclusion that's drawn from Pascal's wager. If you don't stand by it, maybe stop perpetuating it as a persuasive argument for belief.

I have to reiterate what you originally stated, billy rob, so you understand my following words:
"I believe in God and His miracles, if I am wrong... at death..I have nothing to lose. My friend, if you are wrong, you are in one heck of a mess.."

To me, the reason this sounds like a win/lose gamble (either for the believer or the non-believer) is because it seems to imply that you can CHOOSE your beliefs. I don't feel that you can. You either believe or you simply do not. You are acknowledging that your belief may be "wrong", and are quite cozy about it. Your statement, and thereby your faith and your god, shows little integrity here. Would you use those words again, as your most important reason?

I hope that your god (the god that thinks and judges like a human) would value good people with morals based on an honest quest for truth rather than on a faith that deadens reason in favour of blinded or wishful thinking.

You're all talking about Pascals wager..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_Wager

I have faith that religion is on the way out, and I like to view religion from on high.

I don't have anything else to repeat in this thread, so thankyou all for posting and goodluck.

PS, look up Satya Sia Babba, who claims to be a living God and has has his miracles, which are every bit as amazing as the ones Jesus is reported to have done...witnessed by hundreds of thousands of eye witnesses. You can even watch them on youtube.

Prepare to be underwhelmed.

We're just beginning our progression towards the ideal or in other words our own destruction.

I think that religion is constantly uses the same hypothesis, which is: A being higher than us, gives us tools to better ourselves... Everything else is the byproduct of our own foolishness...We cursed ourselves, yet we childishly blame anyone and everyone we can think of rather than the father that sired us.

"Sibyllene...why would a man that has known Gods love and grace care what the likes of a man named Pascal says? I can't think of any man or woman that would call on Pascal as they are close to taking their last breath.."

I don't think anyone should rely on what Pascal says, either. But you seem perfectly comfortable with using it as an argument. Since you seem completely baffled by the connection between your statement and the conclusions drawn from it, however, I guess we can pretend it never happened.

I agree Jarred.

Point is though, whilst you and I can clearly see he is a fake, he has millions of followers around the world, alot of them western educated men and woman who are living eye witnesses to his "miracles".

The same kinds of miracles that, when placed into a 2000 year old book are the sole reason of justification for the divinity of Jesus...yet, Sia Babba is clearly a fake and his miracles don't even warrant 30 seconds on any news channel.

Does anyone else see a problem with this?

I know I do. What I find amusing is I have Christian friends who laugh when I bring up Sia Babba. They think it's ridiculous he claims to be able to bring people back from the dead, and read minds and walk on water etc etc..but of course if the same claims are made in a 2000 year old book, written decades after their supposed occurance...well, that is ok.

: )....

I see you are well on your way to becoming your own cult leader Jarred, kudos to you for speaking so abstractly about things you have no way of proving...doesn't stop you pretending though....: )

I'll address the only salient point I could find in your post.

Any social benifit, or personal benifit religion brings does not offer an additional reason to believe it's true, or factual. Every religion could function like a placebo effect, be totally false and completely benificial and people like me, who are fans of truth would still find the whole idea ridiculous.

There is nothing religion offers that you cannot get from other sources, sources I might add that don't bring with them dogma, lies about our world and all the bad thinking about human morality and actions.

You'd learn more about human nature from one highschool psychology book that any religious book could ever teach you, and all without the fairies and angels and 72 virgins etc etc.