Is God real post your thoughts!

[aspokaspofkjsopfkapo]

 

A lot of stories in the Bible are metaphors, especially the New Testament, so Jesus' ascension may or may not literally happened.

 

If Jesus's ascension was a metaphor then why couldn't Jesus being god or the ten commandments or heaven and hell be a a metaphor?

[Alg]

The ten commandments are a set of rules, I'm not sure they could be metaphors. Jesus being God, I'm sure is. Heaven and hell are more incentives to be good in life... Though the rules tend to get bent in practice...

 

Why would "god" be a male?

 

It's simpler, isn't it? "He" is an easy way to refer to something, and gives it a sense of humanity that "It" wouldn't.

 

How can a male alone create the earth and everything on it?

 

A Christian would say, by being omnipotent. Though being omnipotent would probably mean It isn't strictly male.

 

Why do Bible, quran and other holy books contain things that aren't true?

 

Perhaps because they thought they were true then. As you pointed out, people knew less then, so of course a 2,000 year old book isn't going to be up to date with out 2009 facts. And editing it would probably be the same as editing Shakespeare to be more up to date (Which I think MTV did, horribly)

 

If there was a god, why is the world so messed up, and why do people kill eachother for "their one true god"?

 

Probably for the same reason that they kill each other for anything else. They want something (Ex. power) or the other people are different than they are.

 

So is this about a God or Christianity...?

[aspokaspofkjsopfkapo]

Jesus being God, I'm sure is.

 

My examples weren't the point, my point was: How are you sure?

[Alg]

Jesus being God, I'm sure is.

 

My examples weren't the point, my point was: How are you sure?

 

Ehh, add in "a metaphor" before the period. I more or less agreed :lol:

 

Could have worded it much better in retrospect.

[mmmcannibalism]

On the why god is/was male; does it make more sense to believe that there is a god who chooses to look human or believe that god looks like this.

 

 

 

 

 

 

edit--just remembered, the bible says man was created in god's image.

[warri0r45]

 

I suspect the belief in ascension is because people back in those times literally believed that heaven was in the sky. Now that we know it's not, there's no reason why Jesus would have ascended, is there? You may argue that heaven is in the universe somewhere, but, apart from having no evidence whatsoever, that's at odds with Christian belief I would have thought. Don't you guys believe that heaven is supernatural? The idea that you would need to go in a direction to get there just seems silly.

 

 

 

A lot of stories in the Bible are metaphors, especially the New Testament, so Jesus' ascension may or may not literally happened. Ascension can have a lot of different meanings. And yes I believe heaven is in the supernatural "realm" or whatever, I was just stirring up different possibilities, as many religions have different, but still ultimately similar, versions/locations of an after life and I think they are interesting to think about.

 

 

 

You could look at it that way, but a lot of people think Jesus ascended bodily into heaven. I'm pretty sure that's not a metaphor any more than a virgin birth or ressurrection from the dead is. If you don't believe that Jesus actually physically ascended, then my argument isn't with you.

[Harakiri]

They had something on the TV talking about how God gave people the choice between being smart but having shot lives, or having long lives and being stupid. That is why he flooded Earth, not because people were praising him, but because they were too stupid.

 

 

 

Well, if that were true the Earth should have been flooded long before our existances. :lol:

[mmmcannibalism]

edit--just remembered, the bible says man was created in god's image.

 

Was probably just a metaphor.

 

 

 

I just took it to mean god's earthly form was human in appearence but adam didn't literally look like him.

[Shinjula]

How about these similar questions: How big is the universe? If there is a boundary, what's on the other side? What was there before the big bang? What created the stuff in the big bang? What caused the big bang was made of? Nobody really knows and maybe nobody ever will.

Except that scientists are working on it, trying to construct fool proof methods of testing it rigorously.

 

 

 

Maybe if Christians were doing the same thing I'd give them the same level of respect.

 

Though can you truly test the boundary of the universe? All scientists have so far is an estimate based on what we can see. Science still has a long way to go before fully answering any of those, and "working on it" isn't the same as having an answer.

 

Though did you ever stop to think that some Christians may be the ones working on it? There are a couple billion, so it isn't unlikely...

 

I suppose you could consider 'working on it' as less ideal than having a concrete answer, but really thats not a good position to take, comparing 'working on it' and 'having an answer' is missing the point of science. The idea is to hypothesise, experiment and then confirm or disprove. This is not something that Christianity for the most part is having anything to do with. That said there are the Gnostic Christians, who are at least more flexible in their approach, but I've yet to hear any of them on this thread, nor do I think it was them to whom you were referring.

 

I also suspect your understanding of just how much progress they are making in these fields may also not be correct, since in the last ten years scientists have made giant leaps forward in our understanding of the early Universe, and whilst these dont answer the questions you mentioned they are vital information in creating a landscaping in which we could start to frame the questions. These questions have to be considered at the correct scale, these are vast, vast questions if we truly want to know the answers to them as a species we must be willing to devote hundreds of years to answering them (in addition to the hundreds of years we have already spent on them), requiring many generation of scientists. Useful results and technologies will, by the nature of the work be found as a result (which is good in these days of market forces) and can be exploited, but the work will go on.

 

 

 

I really dont see anything that Christianity has which compares to that.

[k00ldud95]

I believe in a creatior. Instead of trying to "prove" it in nonsensical ways, I take it entirely on faith with no proof. there is no proof that god exists, there will never be, and the bible effectively says as much multiple times. Any christian who claims to have proof of god has never read the bible, and does not understand this religion at all.

 

 

 

"Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God"- luke 4:12

 

 

 

Ye shall not tempt the LORD your God, as ye tempted him in Massah.- deuteronomy 6:16

 

 

 

I haven't read the bible since I was 11 years old, and I was aware of this. i used google to get the actual quotes and references.

 

 

 

i don't go to the church, but I wish I did, and I think it is important.

 

 

 

It is difficult to argue in favor of christianity because of this. But if you want to defend christianity, you have to start there. If you start your argument by saying you have proof of god, you are contradicted by the bible. If you start your argument by saying simply that god IS real, then you have no proof. I believe it anyway. That is why it is called 'faith".

[Alles99]

I don't believe in God and i will never do

[aspokaspofkjsopfkapo]

I believe in a creatior. Instead of trying to "prove" it in nonsensical ways, I take it entirely on faith with no proof. there is no proof that god exists, there will never be, and the bible effectively says as much multiple times. Any christian who claims to have proof of god has never read the bible, and does not understand this religion at all.

 

 

 

"Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God"- luke 4:12

 

 

 

Ye shall not tempt the LORD your God, as ye tempted him in Massah.- deuteronomy 6:16

 

 

 

I haven't read the bible since I was 11 years old, and I was aware of this. i used google to get the actual quotes and references.

 

 

 

i don't go to the church, but I wish I did, and I think it is important.

 

 

 

It is difficult to argue in favor of christianity because of this. But if you want to defend christianity, you have to start there. If you start your argument by saying you have proof of god, you are contradicted by the bible. If you start your argument by saying simply that god IS real, then you have no proof. I believe it anyway. That is why it is called 'faith".

 

I'll ask this again:

 

On faith....how do you choose which god to believe in? When you have no logical basis, why is Yahweh any more believable than Thor, Zeus, Voldamort or The Flying Spaghetti Monster?

 

Why do you choose to believe in Yahweh(Yahweh=christian god) rather than Thor? Faith provides no method for choosing.

[Zierro]

When you have no logical basis, why is Yahweh any more believable than Thor, Zeus, Voldamort or The Flying Spaghetti Monster?

 

 

 

The fact that atheists made up the Flying Spaghetti Monster as a tool to show that anyone can make up a ridiculous deity points to its nonexistence. As for the others, you're right. It mostly stems from your background rather than a logical basis.

[k00ldud95]

I believe in a creatior. Instead of trying to "prove" it in nonsensical ways, I take it entirely on faith with no proof. there is no proof that god exists, there will never be, and the bible effectively says as much multiple times. Any christian who claims to have proof of god has never read the bible, and does not understand this religion at all.

 

 

 

"Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God"- luke 4:12

 

 

 

Ye shall not tempt the LORD your God, as ye tempted him in Massah.- deuteronomy 6:16

 

 

 

I haven't read the bible since I was 11 years old, and I was aware of this. i used google to get the actual quotes and references.

 

 

 

i don't go to the church, but I wish I did, and I think it is important.

 

 

 

It is difficult to argue in favor of christianity because of this. But if you want to defend christianity, you have to start there. If you start your argument by saying you have proof of god, you are contradicted by the bible. If you start your argument by saying simply that god IS real, then you have no proof. I believe it anyway. That is why it is called 'faith".

 

I'll ask this again:

 

On faith....how do you choose which god to believe in? When you have no logical basis, why is Yahweh any more believable than Thor, Zeus, Voldamort or The Flying Spaghetti Monster?

 

Why do you choose to believe in Yahweh(Yahweh=christian god) rather than Thor? Faith provides no method for choosing.

 

 

 

The difference between Yahweh and and the characters you mentioned is that billions of people worship that god, and billions of people take the stories of that god as truth entirely on faith, and have for thousands of years.

 

 

 

As far as I know, FSP is just a sarcastic character used to make a point with no real followers, except maybe a few people with a little too much time on their hands.

 

 

 

Faith to god doesn't provide any method for choosing, but he has done extremely well in gathering followers in spite of that. Large groups of people are often wrong, but that just brings me back to my point that there is no proof anyway.

[Nenga]

I believe in a creatior. Instead of trying to "prove" it in nonsensical ways, I take it entirely on faith with no proof. there is no proof that god exists, there will never be, and the bible effectively says as much multiple times. Any christian who claims to have proof of god has never read the bible, and does not understand this religion at all.

 

 

 

"Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God"- luke 4:12

 

 

 

Ye shall not tempt the LORD your God, as ye tempted him in Massah.- deuteronomy 6:16

 

 

 

I haven't read the bible since I was 11 years old, and I was aware of this. i used google to get the actual quotes and references.

 

 

 

i don't go to the church, but I wish I did, and I think it is important.

 

 

 

It is difficult to argue in favor of christianity because of this. But if you want to defend christianity, you have to start there. If you start your argument by saying you have proof of god, you are contradicted by the bible. If you start your argument by saying simply that god IS real, then you have no proof. I believe it anyway. That is why it is called 'faith".

 

I'll ask this again:

 

On faith....how do you choose which god to believe in? When you have no logical basis, why is Yahweh any more believable than Thor, Zeus, Voldamort or The Flying Spaghetti Monster?

 

Why do you choose to believe in Yahweh(Yahweh=christian god) rather than Thor? Faith provides no method for choosing.

 

 

 

The difference between Yahweh and and the characters you mentioned is that billions of people worship that god, and billions of people take the stories of that god as truth entirely on faith, and have for thousands of years.

 

 

 

As far as I know, FSP is just a sarcastic character used to make a point with no real followers, except maybe a few people with a little too much time on their hands.

 

 

 

Faith to god doesn't provide any method for choosing, but he has done extremely well in gathering followers in spite of that. Large groups of people are often wrong, but that just brings me back to my point that there is no proof anyway.

 

People also believed in Thor Odin, Zues, and Jupiter before they started believing in only one god.

[k00ldud95]

I believe in a creatior. Instead of trying to "prove" it in nonsensical ways, I take it entirely on faith with no proof. there is no proof that god exists, there will never be, and the bible effectively says as much multiple times. Any christian who claims to have proof of god has never read the bible, and does not understand this religion at all.

 

 

 

"Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God"- luke 4:12

 

 

 

Ye shall not tempt the LORD your God, as ye tempted him in Massah.- deuteronomy 6:16

 

 

 

I haven't read the bible since I was 11 years old, and I was aware of this. i used google to get the actual quotes and references.

 

 

 

i don't go to the church, but I wish I did, and I think it is important.

 

 

 

It is difficult to argue in favor of christianity because of this. But if you want to defend christianity, you have to start there. If you start your argument by saying you have proof of god, you are contradicted by the bible. If you start your argument by saying simply that god IS real, then you have no proof. I believe it anyway. That is why it is called 'faith".

 

I'll ask this again:

 

On faith....how do you choose which god to believe in? When you have no logical basis, why is Yahweh any more believable than Thor, Zeus, Voldamort or The Flying Spaghetti Monster?

 

Why do you choose to believe in Yahweh(Yahweh=christian god) rather than Thor? Faith provides no method for choosing.

 

 

 

The difference between Yahweh and and the characters you mentioned is that billions of people worship that god, and billions of people take the stories of that god as truth entirely on faith, and have for thousands of years.

 

 

 

As far as I know, FSP is just a sarcastic character used to make a point with no real followers, except maybe a few people with a little too much time on their hands.

 

 

 

Faith to god doesn't provide any method for choosing, but he has done extremely well in gathering followers in spite of that. Large groups of people are often wrong, but that just brings me back to my point that there is no proof anyway.

 

People also believed in Thor Odin, Zues, and Jupiter before they started believing in only one god.

 

 

 

That religion died out, and was relatively short lived in comparison. Also it had far fewer followers, it never had the size or scope. There are probably about 10 million holes in that argument that you could pursue. It's very hard to argue in favor of something that cannot be proven. I feel like i've lost the arguement before it even started.

[mmmcannibalism]

I believe in a creatior. Instead of trying to "prove" it in nonsensical ways, I take it entirely on faith with no proof. there is no proof that god exists, there will never be, and the bible effectively says as much multiple times. Any christian who claims to have proof of god has never read the bible, and does not understand this religion at all.

 

 

 

"Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God"- luke 4:12

 

 

 

Ye shall not tempt the LORD your God, as ye tempted him in Massah.- deuteronomy 6:16

 

 

 

I haven't read the bible since I was 11 years old, and I was aware of this. i used google to get the actual quotes and references.

 

 

 

i don't go to the church, but I wish I did, and I think it is important.

 

 

 

It is difficult to argue in favor of christianity because of this. But if you want to defend christianity, you have to start there. If you start your argument by saying you have proof of god, you are contradicted by the bible. If you start your argument by saying simply that god IS real, then you have no proof. I believe it anyway. That is why it is called 'faith".

 

I'll ask this again:

 

On faith....how do you choose which god to believe in? When you have no logical basis, why is Yahweh any more believable than Thor, Zeus, Voldamort or The Flying Spaghetti Monster?

 

Why do you choose to believe in Yahweh(Yahweh=christian god) rather than Thor? Faith provides no method for choosing.

 

 

 

The difference between Yahweh and and the characters you mentioned is that billions of people worship that god, and billions of people take the stories of that god as truth entirely on faith, and have for thousands of years.

 

 

 

As far as I know, FSP is just a sarcastic character used to make a point with no real followers, except maybe a few people with a little too much time on their hands.

 

 

 

Faith to god doesn't provide any method for choosing, but he has done extremely well in gathering followers in spite of that. Large groups of people are often wrong, but that just brings me back to my point that there is no proof anyway.

 

People also believed in Thor Odin, Zues, and Jupiter before they started believing in only one god.

 

 

 

That religion died out, and was relatively short lived in comparison. Also it had far fewer followers, it never had the size or scope. There are probably about 10 million holes in that argument that you could pursue. It's very hard to argue in favor of something that cannot be proven. I feel like i've lost the arguement before it even started.

 

 

 

That is arguably circular logic, since your saying faith in god is justified because people have faith in god.

 

 

 

Also, it is fair to say that the greek gods were just as widespread, I would say that for each ten people exposed to christianity now or greek back about the same amount of people follow that religion.

[Alg]

You could argue that on a basic level it's the same thing (You worship a creator because he/she/it/they created you and everything you know), but the names are changed. Instead of the Greek Gods you have one God that does the same thing, for example. The way you worship is what is defined by your culture.

[Nenga]

You could argue that on a basic level it's the same thing (You worship a creator because he/she/it/they created you and everything you know), but the names are changed. Instead of the Greek Gods you have one God that does the same thing, for example. The way you worship is what is defined by your culture.

 

Well actually in Greek mythology Humans were not created by the gods. Humans were created by the titan Prometheus. (and animals by Epimethius but that's not that point)

[mmmcannibalism]

You could argue that on a basic level it's the same thing (You worship a creator because he/she/it/they created you and everything you know), but the names are changed. Instead of the Greek Gods you have one God that does the same thing, for example. The way you worship is what is defined by your culture.

 

Well actually in Greek mythology Humans were not created by the gods. Humans were created by the titan Prometheus. (and animals by Epimethius but that's not that point)

 

 

 

I thought Prometheus was the guy who gave humanity fire for their benefit; not realizing that we would smith weapons using it. That is where the secondary title of frankenstein(the modern prometheus) came from.

[Lateralus]

You could argue that on a basic level it's the same thing (You worship a creator because he/she/it/they created you and everything you know), but the names are changed. Instead of the Greek Gods you have one God that does the same thing, for example. The way you worship is what is defined by your culture.

 

Well actually in Greek mythology Humans were not created by the gods. Humans were created by the titan Prometheus. (and animals by Epimethius but that's not that point)

 

 

 

I thought Prometheus was the guy who gave humanity fire for their benefit; not realizing that we would smith weapons using it. That is where the secondary title of frankenstein(the modern prometheus) came from.

 

 

 

It depends on your reading, really. Across the many texts he's mentioned in, Prometheus created mankind, gave them fire, started civilisation by giving humans maths, art and the like, and generally just pissed Zeus off in any way he could.

[Nenga]

You could argue that on a basic level it's the same thing (You worship a creator because he/she/it/they created you and everything you know), but the names are changed. Instead of the Greek Gods you have one God that does the same thing, for example. The way you worship is what is defined by your culture.

 

Well actually in Greek mythology Humans were not created by the gods. Humans were created by the titan Prometheus. (and animals by Epimethius but that's not that point)

 

 

 

I thought Prometheus was the guy who gave humanity fire for their benefit; not realizing that we would smith weapons using it. That is where the secondary title of frankenstein(the modern prometheus) came from.

 

 

 

It depends on your reading, really. Across the many texts he's mentioned in, Prometheus created mankind, gave them fire, started civilisation by giving humans maths, art and the like, and generally just pissed Zeus off in any way he could.

 

He also never told Zeus which son would overthrow him. Which is what started the whole bird thing. Until Hercules came along and freed him.

[aspokaspofkjsopfkapo]

 

 

 

The difference between Yahweh and and the characters you mentioned is that billions of people worship that god, and billions of people take the stories of that god as truth entirely on faith, and have for thousands of years.

 

 

 

As far as I know, FSP is just a sarcastic character used to make a point with no real followers, except maybe a few people with a little too much time on their hands.

 

 

 

Faith to god doesn't provide any method for choosing, but he has done extremely well in gathering followers in spite of that. Large groups of people are often wrong, but that just brings me back to my point that there is no proof anyway.

 

So...I presume you are a catholic? It is the biggest christian creed and you'd be an idiot not to choose the creed with the largest following, amiright?

[k00ldud95]

I believe in a creatior. Instead of trying to "prove" it in nonsensical ways, I take it entirely on faith with no proof. there is no proof that god exists, there will never be, and the bible effectively says as much multiple times. Any christian who claims to have proof of god has never read the bible, and does not understand this religion at all.

 

 

 

"Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God"- luke 4:12

 

 

 

Ye shall not tempt the LORD your God, as ye tempted him in Massah.- deuteronomy 6:16

 

 

 

I haven't read the bible since I was 11 years old, and I was aware of this. i used google to get the actual quotes and references.

 

 

 

i don't go to the church, but I wish I did, and I think it is important.

 

 

 

It is difficult to argue in favor of christianity because of this. But if you want to defend christianity, you have to start there. If you start your argument by saying you have proof of god, you are contradicted by the bible. If you start your argument by saying simply that god IS real, then you have no proof. I believe it anyway. That is why it is called 'faith".

 

I'll ask this again:

 

On faith....how do you choose which god to believe in? When you have no logical basis, why is Yahweh any more believable than Thor, Zeus, Voldamort or The Flying Spaghetti Monster?

 

Why do you choose to believe in Yahweh(Yahweh=christian god) rather than Thor? Faith provides no method for choosing.

 

 

 

The difference between Yahweh and and the characters you mentioned is that billions of people worship that god, and billions of people take the stories of that god as truth entirely on faith, and have for thousands of years.

 

 

 

As far as I know, FSP is just a sarcastic character used to make a point with no real followers, except maybe a few people with a little too much time on their hands.

 

 

 

Faith to god doesn't provide any method for choosing, but he has done extremely well in gathering followers in spite of that. Large groups of people are often wrong, but that just brings me back to my point that there is no proof anyway.

 

People also believed in Thor Odin, Zues, and Jupiter before they started believing in only one god.

 

 

 

That religion died out, and was relatively short lived in comparison. Also it had far fewer followers, it never had the size or scope. There are probably about 10 million holes in that argument that you could pursue. It's very hard to argue in favor of something that cannot be proven. I feel like i've lost the arguement before it even started.

 

 

 

That is arguably circular logic, since your saying faith in god is justified because people have faith in god.

 

 

Also, it is fair to say that the greek gods were just as widespread, I would say that for each ten people exposed to christianity now or greek back about the same amount of people follow that religion.

 

 

 

Christianity, at least, is justified because billions of people have faith in the god that the three major western religions speak of. it cannot ever be proven, because the religion itself says it can't be proven. Like I said, the argument has about ten million holes.

 

 

 

I can't use this argument for Islam or Judaism, because I honestly don't know if the texts of Islam or Judaism make similar statements regarding proving god.

 

 

 

In my opinion, it is impossible to win an argument in favor of religion because even though it is a traditional thing that people believe in, and have for thousands of years, it is totally illogical. You are asked to believe stories of men parting deep rivers with magical powers, and stories of seas of blood, and people being created with rib bones, and talking snakes. You have to be crazy enough to take it entirely on faith, with no proof at all, and christianity, at least, actually says it it against the rules to even request any proof.

 

 

 

You have to be crazy enough to buy into all of this with no proof, but the vast majority of the population of the world DOES buy into stories that have no proof. We ARE crazy enough.

 

 

 

The problem is, you cannot win an argument just by saying, "We believe it, so it must be true." To win an argument, you have to have structure, and logic, and facts, and religion doesn't have any of those.

 

 

 

Billions of people, including me, ARE dumb enough to buy into religion though, even though there is no proof and you have to take it entirely on faith. In fact, some people are actually willing to KILL PEOPLE to defend something that they have no proof of. Isn't it wonderful?

[mmmcannibalism]

Christianity, at least, is justified because billions of people have faith in the god that the three major western religions speak of.

 

 

 

Thats not justification, its circular logic. If Everyone should believe in Christianity because a lot of people believe in it, then there shouldn't be any christians in the first place. People should believe in whatever religion because they actually have faith in it; faith is useless if its not actually faith.