Great list.

"Prayer" is an offense to any notion of an omnipotent diety with a supreme plan. The prayer is second-guessing the supreme plan and in doing so, challenges the supremacy of the diety.

Prayers for thanks are similarly pointless - if the manner of events transpiring was ordained by such powerful and infallable divine decree, why be thankful for it? It would have happened regardless of whether we're "thankful" for it or resentful of it.

I'll stop now. . . ;)

This pretty much sums it up for me, it also made me laugh so hard that I almost coughed up a lung: :D

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/51849

You still might consider reading this book. A lot of your complaints are addressed in it. I'm not saying this book is the second coming (pun intended), but I found the bit that I read pretty engaging, especially since it focuses on the *individual*. If true religion is about the individual relationship with a higher power, then there are no issues of control and whatnot. And what the author actually emphasizes is doing whatever you want, not living according to a bunch of rules written by people. The key is that there are logical consequences to the actions, not ramifications of a vengeful God. Another point he makes is that there is no devil and no hell.

Maybe it's just the near death experience talking. I'm still more Buddhist than Christian, but I'm interested in hearing thoughts on what some of the deeper meanings of life might be.

Yes, great list. You can't post this often enough.

I come from a deeply Christian background, but have come to be very critical of this faith, in part because it is so difficult to discuss it rationally with people who have bought into it. Reason, it seems to me, is critically important for our civilization - and every attempt to limit reason in favour of belief or superstition is negative. For anyone seriously interested in THIS issue I cannot recommend a book entitled "The End of Faith" (by Stanford philosopher Sam Harris) highly enough.

Although the Bible contains much wisdom - it also contains much bunk. For me the key distinction is between the ethics (10 commandments, Sermon on the Mount, various parables etc) and the metaphysics (Heaven & Hell, The holy trinity, virgin birth and other silly miracles etc).

I think it is possible to draw a clear distinction in the Bible between these two (the ethics and the metaphysics) and appreciate the former while dismissing the latter. I understand that many modern theologians are tending in this direction, but of course for hard-core Christians this is heresy.

I lived in Asia for many years and developed a serious interest in Buddhism - in part because it is a happy religion, which does not require you to buy into a whole lot of superstition and metaphysics - but instead concerns itself only with the business of encouraging people to lead better and more compassionate lives.

No Buddhists have ever started wars of faith, and no true Buddhist believes he has a monopoly on the truth. No proselytizing, no guilt trips, no hocus pocus. Just some clear methodolgy to help you focus on priorities and live a saner, better and fuller life.

A rational believer does not attempt to know the "mind of God", and behaves accordingly, understanding that being charitable, just and respectful are right and proper in themselves, not to be done for a reward or punishment.. An irrational believer "knows" that God speaks directly to him or her, and assumes that they are somewhat special and they also act accordingly. It is the latter that are responsible for most of the sadness in the world.

Interesting how close the words "heresy" and "hearsay" are to each other.

I agree with this, but I would add one thing. You say “our ability to conceive at present.” I would add that some things might be beyond our ability, or knowledge, forever.

Our brains are only so powerful. Perhaps there is some form of mathematics beyond what we currently understand that is as foreign to our brains as algebra is to a monkey’s brain. If we knew this form of math, perhaps the unified field theory would be obvious. We’d look at the first few micro-seconds of the big band and say “well, duh, that’s simple.” Multi-dimensional string theory could be resolved.

Nothing we know about can prevent a black hole from collapsing into a singularity, but perhaps there is something going on in black holes that we will never, ever, learn.

For evolution, perhaps we don’t know how species A became species C. But there might not be any fossils of species B in existence. We will never, ever learn this. It doesn’t mean that species B never existed. It just means that there is no fossil record of species B.

Etc, etc.

It's funny how any whiff of religious discussion on this BBS attracts athiests like flies to honey. If you don't believe in God, why do you even care? Now admittedly, believers of many sorts have often been instructed to prostolytize (forgive the lack of spelling), but certainly Athiest have not.

So what keeps bringing you guys (Athiest) back to these topics? If a questioning person makes a comment or asks for insight of a theological nature, almost by definition an Athiest isn't qualified to answer any more then I am qualified to discuss the gastic qualities of potatoes (which I can't stand and never eat).

it was a book review thread... i reviewed... there you go

I'm not christian, and have not real faith in practice, but isn't the idea behind the christian god that he/she gave people free will? to create and/or destroy as they choose? Basically, I didn't think there was a supreme plan or divine decree? And, really people are hoping (see: praying) for some moral guidance from what is deemed a higher power? and giving thanks (see: praying) for any unseen help they got?

personally, I take everything I do as me own decision. I pay the cost if there is one, but claim the reward as my own for the rest!

It takes a long time, but god dies too,
but not before he sticks it to you.

Who's commenting on religion? It seems those that you consider "atheist" (correct spelling, BTW) are commenting on LACK of religion, which by your own description WOULD BE something they're qualified to discuss. . .

FWIW, I'm not atheist, I'm "Recovering Catholic". :) Also I happen to believe that there MIGHT be room for some sort of spiritual multi-dimensional "super-entity" although there's precious little evidence to support it. If you want to call this "God", then fine. But I also find the notion that "God" being anything even remotely close to what's described in the religions of Judeasm, Christianity or Islam to be ridiculous. Any thought that we could understand the mind of such a being/entity is silly - even the notion that such a being/entity has a "mind" in the sense that we think of one is silly. More likely there are certain things that "just are". The notion that we can anthropomorphize "God" into something we can relate to is really dumbing it down.

God didn't make man in his image, man made God into HIS image. This is simultaneously offensive to the nature of such a being (since he/she/it is obviously greater than ourselves) and offensive to mankind, since it embraces ignorance and stupidity, rather than proposing ways to enlighten ourselves to some sort of more transcendent cosmic connection with such a being. . .

How are you so SURE you have freewill?

good one , and for one thing ,we did a piss poor job at making him in our image.. an old grey geezer?? wtf??

if it were me , it would have been a she-God like ... idunno something like Jessica Alba-Scarlett Johansson-Paulina Poriskova

now THAT would be a holy trinity worth some worship and groveling...


drop some acid if you wanna find out for yourself... you can have long and meaningfull discussions about the topic of free will....with yourself...won't even need a mirror

God is intangible and belief / faith are intangible – all are the same, all are one. Belief / Faith is God, God is Belief / Faith.

Because to me it is a very interesting phenomenon that 96% of the people in this country profess to believe in something for which there is no evidence. Isn't that amazing!?!? I'm not in that 96%, so I am an outsider for sure. I used to believe, but after *considerable* thought on the subject, don't any more.

I have spent a lot of time trying to understand why nearly everyone else around here is so sure of something that makes no sense to me. It's one of my hobbies.

Mike

Actually, what you describe is one of the concepts that the three religions you mentioned would actually agree on. Basically that concept is God is beyond all human understanding. Any words used to describe God or God's ways suffer from the "blind men describing an elephant" phenomenon. In some respects Judeasm and Islam have it right when they say that to represent God visually would be idolitry since it would be creating a god in man's image. Personally, I find that many of the atheists (did I get it right this time? :rolleyes: ) succumb to this fallicy whenever they discribe the god that they don't believe in. They describe the charactoristics that they expect from God which they see lacking. From a theological perspective, this by definition ignores the charactoristics that the athiest isn't expecting or doesn't understand.

OK, inquiry I understand. It's the Atheist counter-preaching that has me puzzled. Why do they even bother?

If you don't believe in the invisible dragon in Sagan's garage, (and it is Sagan's garage BTW, and so his private property to do with as he pleases), why go there to argue it's existance. It's not your garage, and in the absense of any belief in his dragon, you're not even qualified to discuss it's properties.

Maybe because Christianity in this country is not in someone's garage. It permeates our society. It influences our laws. It influences people's behavior towards each other. It influences our leader's decisions. It influences what our kids are taught in school. It's hard to ignore. I can't simply *choose* not to care what you have in your garage.

Mike

I am the eggman, they are the eggmen, I am the walrus, goo goo g'joob.

Is that like "I am the BullGod"?