posted on October 3, 2005 07:39:08 AM new
Replay you are assuming an atheist knows the meaning of "faith" and "belief". Good luck my friend I don't think you will get through the fog that seems to permeate some here.
posted on October 3, 2005 07:42:01 AM new
Replay, just as you can't prove a God exists, we can't prove that he does not. So let's be fair. It's not fair to say that atheists have no hope, guidance, love or purpose. We simply choose to demonstrate and enjoy our hope, guidance, love and purpose here and now rather than with a view to an after death experience.
posted on October 3, 2005 08:31:04 AM new
And Replay proves MY point:
""Leave it to Mingo to prove my point. She's an atheist and has no hope, no guidance, no love, no purpose. Just bitterness against anyone who isn't as miserable as she is, She didn't even read my previous posts where I explain that the President and politicians are NOT representative of most Christians.
Can I prove there is a God? Of course not, no one can. There have been many attempts throughout history to prove God's existence philoophically, logically, or whatever. I'll be the first to say they are all fallacious.
You cannot prove there is a God. FAITH is the entire point.""
Replay, you assume , like you assume there's a god, that I am miserable......that is not based on fact or logic but is based on what you want to believe....just like the belief in a god. Based on nothing but a BELIEF. A BELIEF is NOT a fact.
Faith IS the point....it's not a glowing attribute.
I never commented on the president or politicians so what that has to do with my post is a mystery.........again....no logic, no facts...just something grabbed out of the air by someone who despeartely needs to BELIEVE something...anything.....
posted on October 3, 2005 08:41:37 AM new
Helen, all that stuff about hope, guidance, etc... WAS about here on Earth, not in an afterlife. My benefits from my faith are in the here and now. A bonus in the afterlife would be nice, but I'll take it when it happens.
Christianity is a way of life, not just a belief in the afterlife.
Again, to put this conversation back on the original topic, most of what I've said applies to ANY religion, not just the Christians. Jews, Hinuds, etc would have most of the same benefits. My original point was being "religious" offers benefits that being atheist does not.
-------------------------------------
And now to reply to MingoTroll ONCE and ONLY ONCE.
"never commented on the president or politicians so what that has to do with my post is a mystery"
??? Half your post was about Bush and Iraq and you say you never commented?
"you assume, ... that I am miserable"
It's a pretty fair assumption from my point of veiw. I've never read any of your hundreds of posts that would incline me to believe otherwise.
"Based on nothing but a BELIEF. A BELIEF is NOT a fact."
Well, yeah. I think *I* said that first.
--------------------------------------
Quidquid Latine dictum sit altum sonatur.
posted on October 3, 2005 09:37:47 AM new
So Replay, you can't really defend yourself against facts and logic so will only answer once
Show me a post I made to prove your accusation that I am miserable. You can't, but then your don't deal in facts or logic....just that flimsy "belief" system.
I think the "christian " posters that advocated genocide are quite miserable human beings.
My post on atheism contained nothing about the president or politicians.
posted on October 3, 2005 09:41:31 AM new
"An illegal invasion of Iraq to liberate them from their oil, while a hurricane wipes out 20-25% of our own capacity for oil production in the Gulf of Mexico. President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela has offered to send inexpensive oil to help with our oil shortage, shortly after one of America’s official Christian ministers urged our government to murder him - and the State Department is balking at accepting Chavez’s offer, for fear they may lose face.
So the games continue: the games of politics, one-up-manship, command and control, the illegal war. And the games and political intrigue can almost blind us to all the death."
...
"The religious and political right are wrong about almost everything they say: on religion, the economy, sanctioning torture, killing over 100,000 of our brothers and sisters in Iraq - everything. And the religious and political left seem either too blind or too gutless to say or do anything that matters, as they have endorsed the war, the transfer of America’s wealth to the greediest of our individuals and corporations. Right now, it seems the platform of the Democratic party can only be “Wouldn’t you rather be robbed by Democrats?” And I’m not sure people would."
You're right. That couldn't POSSIBLY be misconstrued as a political post.
TROLL!!!
--------------------------------------
Quidquid Latine dictum sit altum sonatur.
posted on October 3, 2005 09:47:09 AM new
Oh yeah. Just one followup to MINGOTROLL...
"you can't really defend yourself against facts and logic so will only answer once"
No, I'm only going to answer once because you can't debate ANY inssue. All you do is call people names and make assinine statements. Post an original (not cut n paste) statement that isn't insulting or just mean, and more intelligent people MIGHT decide to actually DISCUSS things with you.
I usually disagree with Helen and kraft, but at least they can be civil... At least sometimes
--------------------------------------
Quidquid Latine dictum sit altum sonatur.
posted on October 3, 2005 10:06:54 AM new
Oh, Replay, I see you caught the "I can't answer so I'll call the poster uncivil" bug
Well, you didn't answer "once" and your
""Leave it to Mingo to prove my point. She's an atheist and has no hope, no guidance, no love, no purpose. Just bitterness against anyone who isn't as miserable as she is,""
was definitely uncivil proving your posts to be lies and quite uncivil.
Will I hide and pout like you....no
posted on October 3, 2005 10:06:54 AM new
This excerpt is from a study recently published in the Journal of Religion & Society. The author suggests correlations between social conditions and religiosity versus secularism. Although correlation is not causation this is an interesting study.
" The non-religious, pro-evolution democracies contradict the dictum that a society cannot enjoy good conditions unless most citizens ardently believe in a moral creator. The widely held fear that a Godless citizenry must experience societal disaster is therefore refuted. "
posted on October 3, 2005 10:40:55 AM new
Helen, I don't have time to read all that right now, but it looks interesting. I've bookmarked that site and will take a look at it later.
But prior to reading it, I really don't see the correlation between happy societies and religion one way or the other either. Few societies are as religion as Iran, and I don't see anyone there bragging about how happy Iranian citizens are.
I read that something like 90% of Indians are Hindus, but I don't hear about their blissful lives either.
ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL, I believe being religious is better than not being religious. But if you're living in a cardboard box and lower down the social ladder than a wandering cow, you're less likely to be happy no matter what your beliefs. No, you don't have to be a rich American to be happy, but it's hard to be spiritually fulfilled if you don't have the basic necessities of life.
That being said, poor people often find solace in religion. Remember, the teachings of Jesus (and most other prohpets) were (and are) especially attractive to the poor.
--------------------------------------
Quidquid Latine dictum sit altum sonatur.
[ edited by replaymedia on Oct 3, 2005 10:42 AM ]
posted on October 3, 2005 11:21:01 AM new
Christianity is based on Judaic-law with a twist. The twist is a religion based more on the "dos" (actions) than the "do nots" (Talmud).
In the words of Jesus: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul. and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. --Matt. xxii 35-40.
There is nothing in those commandments about homosexuality, sex education and similar catch phrases of the religious right...Christianity is a religion of love - love of God and love of Man.
Atheists can't be said to be living a Christian life because they are not following the FIRST (and greatest) commandment: Love of God. I guess it doesn't matter much to them anyway. You just can't support an argument calling atheists "good christians" because they are not. They are humanists and not theists.
Will they go to heaven?
My guess is that they stand as good a chance of getting in as the relgious right who have missed the second of the great commandments: "love they neighbor as thyself". You can't spend so much energy mongering hate and negativity and call yourself "Christian".
The MAINSTREAM Christians do their best to follow BOTH commandments - love of God and love of man and maybe are just too busy loving to call the hate mongerers to task for the charlatans that they are. Or perhaps these folks respect the Constitution enough to recognize that the separation of Church and State set forth by our founding fathers is the only way a great nation like ours has survived for 225 years.
It is time for someone to step up to the plate - it's unfortunate that the my generation (baby boomer) is a generation not fit to lead. I hope the young folks hurry up and grow up in time for us to see our 250th anniversary in 2026!
-------------------------------------
posted on October 3, 2005 02:10:35 PM new
Maslow called it "Self-Actualization" it's the highest level function and the most commonly skipped, because most people are busy trying to fulfill the lower needs.
--------------------------------------
Corrected for stupid Typo.
[ edited by replaymedia on Oct 3, 2005 02:16 PM ]
posted on October 3, 2005 02:24:28 PM new
Hummm. Now THAT is inteesting! Your (Wikipedia) link has a step that my psychology books/classes chose not to mention, but actually fits this discussion even better.
FORMERLY at the top of Maslow's list, even above Self-Actualization is:
"Self-transcendence
Self-transcendence refers to connecting to something beyond the ego or to help others find self-fulfillment and realize their potential.
Although Maslow tentatively placed transcendence at the top of his hierarchy, this element has been discounted by most modern psychologists because they feel it really belongs in the domain of religious belief."
Which I don't quite get why they removed it from the list. So it "belongs in the realm of religious belief" ... Why does that not make it a psychological need?
I'd have to say that Maslow got it right the first time and humanist psychologists are making politically correct changes in his psychological theory.
I did not know that step even existed (No, I haven't simply forgotten it!). What does that tell us about modern university education?
--------------------------------------
Quidquid Latine dictum sit altum sonatur.
posted on October 3, 2005 02:26:13 PM new
First we talk about whether God loves atheists and now we're on politically correct textbooks. Amazing how these threads tend to wander
--------------------------------------
Quidquid Latine dictum sit altum sonatur.
posted on October 3, 2005 04:26:53 PM newIt's a pretty fair assumption from my point of view. I've never read any of your hundreds of posts that would incline me to believe otherwise....
ROFL!!!
My post on atheism contained nothing about the president or politicians...
Naw, just those idiotic sermon posts that soooo wants to take the 'Christian Son of God', and make him out to be a mere liberal radical politician wannabe of his time.
You know you forgot one of the most important things Jesus said. That was, he didnt come to cancel out the law of Moses, but to fulfill it. And he also didnt say God loves everybody. He said when the time comes there will be those that say oh lord, lord, and they will be answered with: go away, you were never mine. No matter how you try to twist it around, the Christian religion (as most religions) has conditions.
.
posted on October 4, 2005 12:12:41 PM new
Ok, so a person who is kind and giving to the world but is an atheist, isn't as close to God as people who claim to be kind and giving but aren't, even though they call themselves Christians. Does that make sense to anyone here?
posted on October 4, 2005 12:25:18 PM new
Double, I thought Mingotree's posts were excellent because they reflect the way many people feel. Religion has become the poster child for hypocrisy. That's why so many are questioning it.
And you should talk, being a good little Catholic girl. Are you telling me you don't have a hard time with the structure of Catholicism? (And don't try bluffing or I'll know.)
posted on October 4, 2005 12:45:27 PM new
kraft, first of all, I dont claim to be a good little catholic girl. I have stated in the past I was 'raised catholic', but that doesnt mean that is my religion now.
Second of all, you are quite dense, you know that?
You dont have to be quote: "a kind and giving person" to be a "Christian". You have to accept Christ as your savior. Now once you understand all that implies and encompasses, being a kind and giving person should naturally follow. But you seem to think being "Christian" means doing no wrong ever. Christians are still human beings and all the things that move non-christians affect christians too.
And you dont necessarily have to be a Christian to be a kind and giving person.
You seem to want Christiany to reflect what YOU think it should be all about,rather than what it is. People break off from one religion all the time into something else, but then you are talking about another religion entirely.
Christianty is not about being 'kind' and giving' its about a relationship with God.
posted on October 4, 2005 02:23:44 PM new
Well, how about that! I always thought that being a Christian meant showing a loving concern for others and following the teaching of Jesus! So....according to you, being a Christian can represent only a self serving pursuit of a relationship with God.
Sounds to me like the rightwingers are redefining Christianity.
posted on October 4, 2005 02:37:27 PM new Christianity
1 : the religion derived from Jesus Christ , based on the Bible as sacred scripture, and professed by Eastern, Roman Catholic, and Protestant bodies
Webster
Christian
ADJECTIVE: 1. Professing belief in Jesus as Christ or following the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus. 2. Relating to or derived from Jesus or Jesus's teachings. 3. Manifesting the qualities or spirit of Jesus; Christlike. 4. Relating to or characteristic of Christianity or its adherents. 5. Showing a loving concern for others; humane.
NOUN: 1. One who professes belief in Jesus as Christ or follows the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus. 2. One who lives according to the teachings of Jesus.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language
posted on October 4, 2005 03:18:04 PM newWell, how about that! I always thought that...
Helen, doesnt surprise me what you always thought...would be off-base where religion is concerned.
And, you know, posting the given definition of a word is so passe, and so high-school'ish. I dont have to see the definition as a noun (what is being discussed here) or how it's subjectively used as an adjective to know what a Christian is thought to be comprised of.
The thing that bothers you, is that they have finally become a large enough group in this country to voice their opinions on politics.
posted on October 4, 2005 03:29:04 PM new
Helen, I've gotten it all wrong my whole life as well. I thought by accepting Jesus, you also accepted a lifestyle of giving and helping others. Who knew?
posted on October 4, 2005 06:23:05 PM new
Well, I must say that from all I have ever been told or heard, being a Christian meant not only embracing Christ, but also respecting and trying to live by his teachings & philosophy. Of course, nobody is perfect, but Christians are supposed to try to live and act by his precepts.
But, going by what is being said in this thread, that's all wrong. You just have to say you accept Christ--after that you can be as mean and nasty as you like. Being the sharp cookie he is, Christ is sure to be fooled by the proclamation and ignore the rest...
The question is why anyone would want to worship an idiot they have no respect for.
____________________
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." -- George W. Bush
