Eat bacon, burn in Hell?

[Sidoh]

Nice Myndfyre on all of your posts.

Being atheists takes  A LOT more faith than being christian.

Um, no it doesn't.  Saying you're Christain is also implicitly saying that there are things in this world  that can't be explained using man's logic.  Saying that there is no purpose or reason to life -- we're just a chain of random, meaningless chemical reactions is a rather bland, static way to look at things.  Taking man's logic and believing it to the fullest extent is rather easy to do.  Saying that you're an infinitely inferior being when compared to God takes a lot more faith than just "explaining" how we came to be does.

Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.

[AntiVirus]

Nice Myndfyre on all of your posts.

Being atheists takes  A LOT more faith than being christian.

Um, no it doesn't.  Saying you're Christain is also implicitly saying that there are things in this world  that can't be explained using man's logic.  Saying that there is no purpose or reason to life -- we're just a chain of random, meaningless chemical reactions is a rather bland, static way to look at things.  Taking man's logic and believing it to the fullest extent is rather easy to do.  Saying that you're an infinitely inferior being when compared to God takes a lot more faith than just "explaining" how we came to be does.

Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.

Actually, yes it is.  Read the book: "I Don't Have Enough FAITH to Be an ATHEIST" by Norman L. Geisler and Frank Turek.

[GameSnake]

No one is offended here, your overeacting MyndFyre. I was actually being really nice in my posts but you guys are taking it the wrong way. Why do you talk about opinions and how we have them yet you're telling me like your arguement is the only way, the bible just doesn't apply to me in these days. My opinion is that we are all spinning balls of negetive nuetral and postive charges that over millions and billions of years in the wonder of it all we're here.

I don't believe in the christian God -- sounds too far fetched but I agree we may be here for a reason and the after life may hold something glorious but we can't even comprehend it.

I respect your opinions, dont get me wrong, I just hoped you will respect mine.

[Sidoh]

Actually, yes it is.  Read the book: "I Don't Have Enough FAITH to Be an ATHEIST" by Norman L. Geisler and Frank Turek.

You and the author of that book needs to redefine 'Faith', then.

No one is offended here

You retract your own words far too often, Gamesnake.

Well, sir, I could be offended because of your imposing I will burn in hell yet I am not because I believe there is not a hell and its a controll method.

Perhaps this is one of the tell-tale signs of what smoking marijuana does to your memory?

[Sidoh]

Did a bit of homework and found this:

I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist argues that Christianity requires the least faith of all worldviews because it is the most reasonable. The authors lay out the evidence for truth, God, and the Bible in logical order and in a readable, non-technical, engaging style. A valuable aid to those interested in examining the reasonableness of the Christian faith, Geisler and Turek provide a firm challenge to the prior beliefs of doubters and skeptics.

Hahahahahahaha.

The most "reasonable"?  How do you say that the explicit statement "We can't understand this.  We lack the capability to reason with something of this nature because we don't contain the mental capacity, resources or knowledge to understand it." is logical?  I mean we're saying that with something such as the creation of the universe, we can't use logic to describe it because it contains so many aspects which we, as humans, lack the ability to understand.

When you pick up your toolbelt you're going to use to describe how the universe was created and you see nothing but "physics, logic and math", that seems a lot more faithless than Christianity.  That's saying you have faith in nothing but man's own logic and that it is impossible that we were created by a superior entity.  Saying that usually implys that you lack the Faith to accept that God exists.

[MyndFyre]

The most "reasonable"?  How do you say that the explicit statement "We can't understand this.  We lack the capability to reason with something of this nature because we don't contain the mental capacity, resources or knowledge to understand it." is logical?  I mean we're saying that with something such as the creation of the universe, we can't use logic to describe it because it contains so many aspects which we, as humans, lack the ability to understand.

Actually, IMO, I have come to the same conclusion.

I believe that the concept of reason is a gift of God to people.  Logic is a law by which God made the universe function.  Being an outside observer of the universe, distinctly separate from the universe itself, God is able to manipulate the universe on a level that would defy normal physical laws.  We term these instances "miracles."

I further think that God created the human race to be reasonable on purpose.

Look at it this way:
Every sin in, say for sake of example, the ten commandments, comes back to pride in self or selfishness in self (or both).  All of them elevate oneself above God.  All sin is, then, is raising the importance of something, someone, or oneself above God -- idolatry.  Jesus said so, too: "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.'  And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'  All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments" (Matt. 22:37-40 NIV).

God first.  Others second.  Self third.

If all sin leads back to pride and/or selfishness, these "laws" or "commandments" are logical representations of such sin.

I believe that reason is a gift because God didn't intend for us to just have blind faith.  People have blind faith in science, but because people tell them it's based on reason, people think it's okay.  If you want to know the truth, then you should look, and not just take what people say at face value.

I was an evolutionist athiest for a long time.  As I became more educated, I found that I had issues with both the way it's (evolution) taught and the theory (macroevolution, generation of new families) itself.  You might disagree with my evidence, and that's fine.  I like debates. ;-)

[Armin]

Actually, IMO, I have come to the same conclusion.

In my opinion, it's all based on opinions, which makes argueing about it as pointless are argueing about politics.

[MyndFyre]

Actually, IMO, I have come to the same conclusion.

In my opinion, it's all based on opinions, which makes argueing about it as pointless are argueing about politics.

It's not pointless.

You might be ardently against my position.  There may be people undecided.  Arguments allow us to learn about other points of view, and it allows people who are more moderate or less-informed to have an opportunity to change or shift their opinions.  When done correctly, it's worthwhile.

[Armin]

Never thought of it that way, but not only it has to be done correctly, but the person your argueing with needs to use the arguements to understand other's points of view as well. It's a mutual thing, which I don't really see going on here.

[iago]

Hmm, I finally wandered over and read this thread, and I guess I'll post what I have to say. 

I come from a somewhat religious family, but I have never personally been particularly religious.  However, that being said, I do think that there are things that we aren't capable of understanding, and am open to the possibility that a God exists.  Whether the God created the Universe and let it run, or whether it pokes at things now and again, or weather it interferes in our day to day existance, I am unsure, and don't think I will ever be sure of.  To summarize: I believe in the possibility of a God existing. 

On the other side, I don't believe in religion.  It seems to me that Catholics believe far too strongly in their religion (the structure of the Church, attending church, the Bible, etc.) and not in their God.  When people begin to believe in the religious structure rather than the God itself, then there's a problem.  And a lot of people I know seem to believe in going to church, but don't really believe in God.  They attend their weekly sermons to ensure that they end up in Heaven. 

Also, I don't think the Church discourages this behaviour.  Somebody mentioned in this thread that Religion is a mechanism used to control people, and I think that's what the Church does.  The Church encourages doctrine, belief, and faith, not logic and clear thinking.  Disagree with me if you want, I don't have hard evidence, that statement is an opinion/observation. 

The reason I went from a complete Athiest (when I was young) to more of an Agnostic is because of the reading I have done in University.  I have a minor in Philosophy, and from reading many old works (not only on theology, also on the human mind and other fun stuff) I've begun to realize that there is really far too much even about my own mind, let alone the world, that I can't explain.  And I don't think that Catholocism or any religion that I know about addresses those issues very well. 

I'm not trying ti disagree with anything anybody has said in this thread.  I'm simply stating what I think is going on.  Agree or disagree, that's fine

[Sidoh]

Hmm, I finally wandered over and read this thread, and I guess I'll post what I have to say.

I come from a somewhat religious family, but I have never personally been particularly religious. However, that being said, I do think that there are things that we aren't capable of understanding, and am open to the possibility that a God exists. Whether the God created the Universe and let it run, or whether it pokes at things now and again, or weather it interferes in our day to day existance, I am unsure, and don't think I will ever be sure of. To summarize: I believe in the possibility of a God existing.

On the other side, I don't believe in religion. It seems to me that Catholics believe far too strongly in their religion (the structure of the Church, attending church, the Bible, etc.) and not in their God. When people begin to believe in the religious structure rather than the God itself, then there's a problem. And a lot of people I know seem to believe in going to church, but don't really believe in God. They attend their weekly sermons to ensure that they end up in Heaven.

Also, I don't think the Church discourages this behaviour. Somebody mentioned in this thread that Religion is a mechanism used to control people, and I think that's what the Church does. The Church encourages doctrine, belief, and faith, not logic and clear thinking. Disagree with me if you want, I don't have hard evidence, that statement is an opinion/observation.

The reason I went from a complete Athiest (when I was young) to more of an Agnostic is because of the reading I have done in University. I have a minor in Philosophy, and from reading many old works (not only on theology, also on the human mind and other fun stuff) I've begun to realize that there is really far too much even about my own mind, let alone the world, that I can't explain. And I don't think that Catholocism or any religion that I know about addresses those issues very well.

I'm not trying ti disagree with anything anybody has said in this thread. I'm simply stating what I think is going on. Agree or disagree, that's fine

I completely agree with you on your view regarding Catholics.  They have too much involvement in church politics and not enough in their faith.  While I still consider the Catholic faith somewhat correct, it definitely has its flaws.

In 1517 (or some time before), Martin Luther was a devout Catholic Monk.  He punished himself to points of near death because he found himself such a disgusting human being.  At this time, the Catholic church had disallowed access to Bibles to any members of their church, only the higher-ups were allowed to read them.  Somehow or another, Martin got his hands on a bible and began to read.  Through his reading, he learned that Jesus preached that "good works" were in no way, shape or form a requirement to get to heaven.  While he strongly encouraged them, there is no scripture that states "You must be a good boy/girl to get to Heaven."  He read that faith (in God and Jesus, believing that Jesus was crucified to redeem the sins of the world) is the only absolution.

During Martin's endeavors, the Catholic church had recently implemented "indulgences."  These were pieces of paper signed by the leaders of the Church which you could purchase with money.  The leaders claimed that they forgave the sins of anyone, alive or dead.  This enraged Martin and ultimately propelled him to create his 95 Thesis, which was a document he posted on the Church door stating the wrongs that the church was doing.  This lead to huge controversy between Luther, his multitudes of followers and the Catholic church.  In the end, Luther ended up breaking off from the Catholic church and now the Lutheran church exists.

The Lutherans (Missouri Synod at least) completely disagree with anything that is added to faith by man (ie the indulgences).  We believe that we cannot add, remove or alter the Bible, because it is the absolute word of God.

In short, not all churches are like the Catholic church.