I refuse to think we are the highest being present in this universe, so there has to be in essence a "God". However, the premise the Bible is based off of may be right or wrong. I can say the Bible is full of fictional tales and it doesn't take a Scientist to know that. Read about Samson, or read about Abraham's sacrifice, these tales don't depict real life but mystical powers in fact Samson is something that should be in Greek mythology and Abrahams tell doesn't show a merciful "God" that the same book talks claims he is.

I also tend to find it hard to believe that 1 billion Budapest are wrong and going to hell, or people who believe in Hinduism. All beliefes are based around the same premise "There is a God", yes it would make perfect sense that anything in the universe that could be considered a higher being is essentially a "God" to us. As big as the universe is, how can we be the only intelligent beings out there? I actually grew up going to a Christian church and to be honest it took to the age of 15 before I realized that something wasn't right about this function. Someone reading to me a book I can do so myself and telling me how he thinks I should live my life, people telling me I'm going to hell because I'm not this or that. What is the saying "You're damned if you do and damned if you don't" pick a religion and to at least 10 other religions you are wrong.

Those are my two pennies, how you enjoyed my point of view.

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

it was a rhetorical why designed to get people to realize that extremists are not the best representation of a religion.

The Ghandi quote, "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ," somewhat highlights the issue. It should be every christian's goal to strive to be like christ. Evil people who have been linked to the church have no bearing on my faith as my faith is based on Christ.

I also like the Angels and Demons quote, "Religion is flawed, but only because man is flawed."

'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?

I would say it is because religions are created by men. For instance, the Church selected what documents regarding the life of Jesus are accepted as canon. Do you think it was in the Church's best interest to select those most favorable to their existence? The whole new testament was not divinely inspired, but selected and edited by a Church with it's own agenda. Therefore, even if Jesus was real and the true son of God, what is in the bible does not necessarily represent his life and message.

I also like the Angels and Demons quote, "Religion is flawed, but only because man is flawed."

I very much like that too.

If religions is the history of mankind trying to understand God and act accordingly, then of course they're "flawed" since we're not there yet. Which is great, because it gives us something to strive for.

Things are simple. But of course it's our nature to sit down and talk and talk and talk instead of doing. I'm a prime example of this, actually, but working on it.

You are trying to rationalize something that is obviously fiction but this is just going to lead you back to where you started. Embrace the truth and forget the lies you were taught as a child because they will lead you no where. A large majority of the people on the internet are atheist because it is the most logical assumption when you have access to an infinite source of information like the internet. The only people who believe in god are those who have been taught it from a very young age and who do not have the information to realize the truth.

If I told you that I had an invisible pink hippo living in my apartment you would think me crazy because it is an outrageous claim. If I showed you strong evidence such as a bag full of invisible hippo poop you would have to accept it as truth. God is a magic man in the sky which is an extremely outrageous claim and should require strong evidence but there is none...

Infinite source of information on the internet?
1) If God exists, 1 property of God has to be omniscience. Otherwise He's no longer God now is He?
2) Since every word about God in this thread is likely (though admittedly not guaranteed) to be examined with a fine tooth comb, may I point out that you just made the internet a God of sorts?
2.5) We all have God(s). We all believe in and worship something. If there is a God with the characteristics He would have, no wonder He's not thrilled that we choose other stuff instead of Him as our God...
3) There is not infinite source of information on the internet. Only what we have put on it up to any given point in time...

I would say it is because religions are created by men. For instance, the Church selected what documents regarding the life of Jesus are accepted as canon. Do you think it was in the Church's best interest to select those most favorable to their existence? The whole new testament was not divinely inspired, but selected and edited by a Church with it's own agenda. Therefore, even if Jesus was real and the true son of God, what is in the bible does not necessarily represent his life and message.

this is actually very very wrong.

The bible is actually one of the most accurate historic documents to it's original text around. Compared to other historical texts it's accuracy to it's original copies from around a couple hundred years AD to now is pretty solid.

http://www.worldviewweekend.com/worldview-times/article.php?articleid=909

'tstrimple' said:

I would say it is because religions are created by men. For instance, the Church selected what documents regarding the life of Jesus are accepted as canon. Do you think it was in the Church's best interest to select those most favorable to their existence? The whole new testament was not divinely inspired, but selected and edited by a Church with it's own agenda. Therefore, even if Jesus was real and the true son of God, what is in the bible does not necessarily represent his life and message.

this is actually very very wrong.

The bible is actually one of the most accurate historic documents to it's original text around. Compared to other historical texts it's accuracy to it's original copies from around a couple hundred years AD to now is pretty solid.

http://www.worldview…p?articleid=909

So you're saying that the Apocrypha don't exist and that the construction of the bible was not a long, drawn out political process? I'm not saying the existing gospels aren't accurate compared to their original document, I'm saying that the Church picked the gospels that most supported them while leaving out dozens of other texts that were just as "accurate" as those included in the bible.

So you're saying that the Apocrypha don't exist and that the construction of the bible was not a long, drawn out political process? I'm not saying the existing gospels aren't accurate compared to their original document, I'm saying that the Church picked the gospels that most supported them while leaving out dozens of other texts that were just as "accurate" as those included in the bible.

You are jumping to a conclusion that is not entirely accurate. Books are added or left out of different versions of the Bible for similar reasons that a basic chemistry book doesn't contain sections on astro-physics. The Bible is meant to be the divinely inspired word of God written by man. It makes sense that only the books that are believed to be divinely inspired be in there. You are more than welcome to compile your own version of the bible with every gospel and every scripture ever written

'owl' said:

Religion is the clever explanation of WHY everything turns into misery in your life. The fact that it is spread by morons doesn't take the truth away from it. The best thing the devil did was convincing everyone that the truth can only be found in one place.

I am sorry you feel that way, but clearly you have never studied Christianity or Buddhism.

Excuse me sherlock, how did you come to that conclusion based on what I said? The sermon of the mountain accounts pretty much for my first statement. The amount of pedophile priests for the second in relation to the first. And the third is just a personal appreciation.

Excuse me sherlock, how did you come to that conclusion based on what I said? The sermon of the mountain accounts pretty much for my first statement. The amount of pedophile priests for the second in relation to the first. And the third is just a personal appreciation.

In what way does the sermon on the mount tell you why your life is miserable?