Letters from earth. If someone from 19th century could see it, I don't know how is possible to someone with senses not to see the falacy in the One Book (All of them).

God as defined by the religions is just a JOKE. A really bad joke.

'MajorTom' said:

I'm an atheist. ( It's not that scary, is it? I mean, have you played Amnesia? That's way scarier… )

Yet, I believe that "God" exists.
The concept of God lives in the mind of the believers of "God", much like Father Christmas.
There is no hard evidence of God, as we don't yet have the technology to prove the concept.

Interestingly, perhaps God exists in another sense; perhaps this world/universe is a prison or rehabilitation, or even a school.
Imagine the possibility of there only being one concious life, "God", yet the universe is populated by uncountable lifeforms.
Perhaps, in this situation, God is to live the full life of each lifeform in turn, which exists, will exist, and has existed, to better itself.
Perhaps this is a simulation, inwhich all of this happens in the blink of an eye.

By definition atheism is the lack of belief in a god/gods, attributing the label god to something else like nature is just trying to fool yourself to feel comfortable with something you don't fully understand.
There is no reason to label something God just because we don't understand it yet, finding out and learning is a part of the human experience and maybe even in a philosofical sense the meaning of life.

If you get overwhelmed about all the amazing and beautiful stuff in the unverse and give up trying to learn about it that's fine, I and most atheists have nothing against believers.
But if you're trying to make a science out of your religion/belief then we'll try to fill in the blanks which you don't want to understand, we call ourselves rationalists because we are actually trying to find the truth.

Also we dont have the technology to prove the concept of a god?
That is just silly, it's impossible to invent a way to measure something which the believers (which has the burden of proof) can't even define themselves.

So in conclusion, if you really want to call yourself an atheist then you need to let go of the ambiguous term "god"

"God" is just a word. It could be replaced by "Cheese" and still have the same meaning in that context.

I was simply proposing an alternative idea, in a more open minded way than "There is no god.".

In the Greek mythology, many of the gods did in fact have parents: Athena was born out of the head of Zeus. Zeus in turn was created by Uranus who was birthed from Gaia who was born of Chaos and Chaos existed eternally before that: nothing created Chaos, it was timeless.

Yeah, this is something that is neglected by most that decide to "worship" the Greek Dodecatheon: That the first "chapter" of greek myths is Theogonia, which mentions that at first there was Chaos that gave order to existence, then came Uranus/Gaia, then Kronos that mutilated his father to take over, Titans, then Zeus and his brothers/sisters, then humans. These are of course myths, it just shows of a concept that the "divine", whetever it is, just "dillutes" into the physical world instead of staying up there and "running" things. If GOD is just defined as existence itself, all possible permutations of all possible states of existence, then it followes that we are a (tiny) part of it. What remains is to decide where we align ourselves in that "field".

As far as the original post, I have thought of this many times. And my opinion is that it's not worth *that* much thought. Everyone's got talents, it would be much more benefitial if we were trying to go out and do our thing than anything else. My current approach is that it's not worth raping your brain over and over again. I want to believe? Fine. I don't want to believe? Again, fine. Noone knows what will happen the next day that will make me revise my opinions. The real(and tragic) problems start with people that claim they have been given the "englightment" or "grace" from whatever version of God they believe in, and think it's justfied to force their views on others, either with physical or verbal force, terrorising them with the flames or "hell" or other such complete and utter nonsense. Or enter politics with "God" as a flag. *If* there is such thing as "God"(By now, I have my own views on this, but they are mine, they fit with my psyche and my personality and my current state), the most rational thing to assume is that It will give whatever knowledge about Its nature to everyone, whenever It sees fit. After that, it's up to the individual to do whatever they think best with that knowledge. Yelling and preaching on TVs or temples or whatever to the "flock" and scaring them with demons and divine punishments and paranormal bullshit just makes most people defensive and confused. Just my opinion on this.

"good" by what standards and who gets to say that standard is valid/correct? That's the thing and I never will understand this argument.


We have been through this again, haven't we?

Ok, example...Say person A is a "good Christian".Behaves *exactly* like a good Christian would do. That is, pray to God the "correct way"(whatever that means), respect his family and others, try to help whenever others ask for his help, use his talents to help other people and himself of course. Of course he/she will make mistakes too. Now, imagine the same person, doing the exact same things, but not caring about religion, that is, not go out of his way to "convert" people into atheists, but just doesn't show interest in the whole "God" thing either. According to your religtion, how do you classify that person? Is it even possible that this person has already been given the "grace" by God and doesn't know it, because religion in their eyes seems a bit monolithic? I'm only asking this time, I know you feel strongly about your religion and I'm just interested to hear the answer on this.

I think I fully agree with MajorTom on this one, that "God" maybe, after years of performing miracles and splitting seas and killing Egyptians and whatnot, decided that the most rational way is to "hide" into our minds and wait the time that we unlock that part. That, indeed, would make life nothing less than an experience and a great lesson. Which brings me back to my original point: God or no God, the best thing to do is to start take advantage or our talents and skills(musician? make good music, not rape people's ears. Economist? Contribute into the wellfare of the society as a whole, not to the profit of XYZ corp and so on) and see what we do from there.Maybe the talents and skills we are given *are* actually our "divine mission" and we're wasting time obsessing over past scriptures(correct or not, I find many parts of them(and I mean all of them, Bible, Torah, Quaran and the rest, although I have not read the entirety) very interesting actually, despite the not-so-great literaly value) when the whole thing is right in front of our eyes.

If you believe God as stated in the Bible is real, then believing what you've stated here is silly because the Bible says your belief is invalid. You can't have it both ways.


The Bible does mention people that have "the Law written in their hearts", doesn't it Machaira?

Let's not kid ourselves. Religion and words written in books cannot make you "experience" God. They can only confirm what you already feel, and of course that's a big thing, but it's a means, not the end. And the choise of religion is most times cultural and based in your upbringing. It would be *much* better if some people tried to find where the 3 great monotheistic religions(Islam, Judaism, Christianism) converge, instead of the other way around. Jesus specifically mentioned those that are able to reconcile great past differences as "blessed" and "children of God". Of course, Jesus is arguably the most irrelevant character in most Christian doctrine today...I mean you don't hear the speech about the bees and the lillies too often in chuches, do you?(I wonder why!)

Meh...words, words, words...

Do you think I just go to church on sundays because my mother told me to? and she went because her mother told her to? Do you think I pray because the bible tells me to? In all of my 23 years, most of which as a catholic, do you think I never questioned my faith or pried deeper into what I believe to form the belief structure I hold today?

If your mother and father told you to go to a Synagogue and pray to God, but taught Jesus was not Christ, and Mary was not a virgin when you were a child, do you think you would NOW be going to a Catholic church and praying to the Trinity, and believe Jesus is Christ? No, you would probably still be believing Jesus was just that carpenter that Mary and Abraham had and nothing more.

Or, change Judaism for Islam, it holds true to that too.

'Xest' said:

if there are 2.2 billion christians in the world and 1.3 billion muslims and the christians turn to be wrong and it was Allah they should've worshipped then are those 2.2 billion christians to be condemned anyway?

they are the same God.

The differences between Islam, Christianity, and Judaism are similar to the differences between Catholicism and Mormonism just earlier.

This is the cheap way out, and it's totally wrong, especially coming from a Christian. Only Christian believe Jesus was Christ, and it clearly states, if you do NOT believe Jesus is Christ, you will be damn to Hell for eternity. Do you disagree?

What about Hindu? Is Gandhi in Hell now, to be punish for eternity since he didn't believe Jesus was Christ? What is the loophole here that I'm sure Christian use?

And Mormonism? What a crock of S**T. Some regular Joe found a "golden book" made with golden plates, written in an "unknown language" (which only ole Joe seemed to understand), and wrote down all it's laws, including polygamy. Oddly enough, modern Mormon's can't be Mormons at all because the selectively choose which of the laws from the Golden Book they follow. I can't help but chuckle about Mormonism, and anyone who reads the historical background of that religion would probably do the same

This is the cheap way out, and it's totally wrong, especially coming from a Christian. Only Christian believe Jesus was Christ, and it clearly states, if you do NOT believe Jesus is Christ, you will be damn to Hell for eternity. Do you disagree?

Uh, where does it mention that exactly?

Btw, "Christ" means "annointed one", mostly means someone that has a task to carry out a mission. Muslims consider him a great prophet, thus obviously believe he has carried out a great mission. I'm not a muslim, because it doesn't quite align with my personality, but I totally see how eastern nations understand the divine easier through those beliefs. They see things differently. It's not *that* damn hard of a concept. It's all faces of the same Truth, different translations of the same thing. Whoever tries to use these differences in the translations to stir hatred, when we could do so much better finding out where they converge, is a jerk in my opinion. Religions(especially the Abraahamic ones) should not try to overcome one another. They should try to unite and rediscover their common routes, as much as possible, without discarding their core of course. It can be done. It will just upset certain people. Tough.

Don't confuse religion, flawed or not, with the revenge-focused, hatred-filled bullshit some people feed others with, with the intent to make life on earth, literally, hellish.. I'm pretty sure God wants to save all people from "Hell". It is mentioned in the Bible, "come and receive it as a gift".

I struggle to understand how people can truly believe in their religions, if they spend any time studying the history of them.

I struggle to understand how people can truly believe in their religions, if they spend any time studying the history of them.

Why?

If your mother and father told you to go to a Synagogue and pray to God, but taught Jesus was not Christ, and Mary was not a virgin when you were a child, do you think you would NOW be going to a Catholic church and praying to the Trinity, and believe Jesus is Christ? No, you would probably still be believing Jesus was just that carpenter that Mary and Abraham had and nothing more.

Or, change Judaism for Islam, it holds true to that too.

I would probably hold similar beliefs to those I do now, but that sort of change would have affected everything about my life significantly. I would have gone to different schools with different qualities of education, etc.

It's especially difficult to swap out Judaism and Islam as the core of the beliefs are generally similar. My beliefs would probably be in line with what I have today, but I'm not sure either faith would ever displeased me enough to get me to switch.

edit: I forgot to bold that part to point out why threads like this offend people.

And Mormonism? What a crock of S**T. Some regular Joe found a "golden book" made with golden plates, written in an "unknown language" (which only ole Joe seemed to understand), and wrote down all it's laws, including polygamy. Oddly enough, modern Mormon's can't be Mormons at all because the selectively choose which of the laws from the Golden Book they follow. I can't help but chuckle about Mormonism, and anyone who reads the historical background of that religion would probably do the same

I didn't say I believed in it. I'm just saying the split was similar. Core faith X has some new prophet that causes a rift in the faith causing some believers to start believing in new faith subset X.1 and others to believe in faith subset X.2.

'EricRRichards' said:

I struggle to understand how people can truly believe in their religions, if they spend any time studying the history of them.

Why?

Because some religious people tend to adopt(and want to force on others) the most outrageous interpretations of their religions.

Want an example? "Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth". It *could* be interpreted as a law of replenishment, not retaliation. That is, you hurt one's vision, you "lend" him your eyes. Generally, when you cause damage, you try to fix it. Does it make sense for such a command to be given to a tribe walking around in the desert, when no resource, human or otherwise, could be wasted? Damn right it does. Of course, that's too damn hard, isn't it?

Another example? Jesus' birth. Yeah, let's all sit down and talk on and on about 5 million years how could that happened. Of course, it all could happen the simplest way possible, Mary was assigned to a significantly older man, Joseph, to marry her, who was attracted to her but had serious moral dillemas about her age, but one night God send them a dream when they were sleeping and...it happened. There. It's just a theory, but as plausible as any other. Can we move on with our lives now?

People want religions to be outrageous and imagine all kind of supernatural destructions and entities, because they don't want to accept responsibility. They don't want to accept that your "position" towards God is a matter of choice, not a matter of genetics or "original sin" stuck in the cells. A simple, down-to-earth interpretation would mean that we have to build "the kingdom of heaven" ourselves. And we can't have that, can we?