Why some people believe in God and in the bible and others do not.

double post somehow

originally posted by: DeathSlayer
Do I pray daily YES. Are my prayers answered? YES Is this supernatural? YES because my specific prayers are answered.

Have I seen people be healed instantly from broken bones, deaf, blind and various illnesses? YES, is this supernatural? YES

Maybe you can ask God to heal some amputees?

originally posted by: WakeUpBeer

originally posted by: DeathSlayer
Do I pray daily YES. Are my prayers answered? YES Is this supernatural? YES because my specific prayers are answered.

Have I seen people be healed instantly from broken bones, deaf, blind and various illnesses? YES, is this supernatural? YES

Maybe you can ask God to heal some amputees?

Are you an amputee?

Do you have a relative that is an amputee?

a reply to: DeathSlayer

The horrific things that have occurred on this planet on behalf of religion was directly done by mankind and not God

Most of the issues within the bible are insignificant mistranslations that has entered the bible over time but if you do your research you will find the overall teachings have not changed

So if the written word is so clear yet all the actions are done by man then that would prove that it isn't as clear as you pretend it is.

But I can see why you think the way you do when you used the teaching methods of a cult like the Jehovahs Witness' as an idealized example;

If the church would teach their flock globally like the Jehovah Witnesses do to their flock then there would be less confusion and misleading statements made by Christians.

You dont wont dissension

a reply to: Ceeker63

I have problems with atheist trying to prevent Christians and governmental agencies co-existing together in a belief that God created us. Our founding fathers believed in a Christian belief. Atheist just need to accept that fact.

Baloney!!!

Founding Father Quotes Conservative Christians Will Hate

“If I could conceive that the general government might ever be so administered as to render the liberty of conscience insecure, I beg you will be persuaded, that no one would be more zealous than myself to establish effectual barriers against the horrors of spiritual tyranny, and every species of religious persecution.”

Founding Father George Washington, letter to the United Baptist Chamber of Virginia, May 1789

“Of all the animosities which have existed among mankind, those which are caused by a difference of sentiments in religion appear to be the most inveterate and distressing, and ought to be deprecated. I was in hopes that the enlightened and liberal policy, which has marked the present age, would at least have reconciled Christians of every denomination so far that we should never again see the religious disputes carried to such a pitch as to endanger the peace of society.”

Founding Father George Washington, letter to Edward Newenham, October 20, 1792

“We have abundant reason to rejoice that in this Land the light of truth and reason has triumphed over the power of bigotry and superstition… In this enlightened Age and in this Land of equal liberty it is our boast, that a man’s religious tenets will not forfeit the protection of the Laws, nor deprive him of the right of attaining and holding the highest Offices that are known in the United States.”

Founding Father George Washington, letter to the members of the New Church in Baltimore, January 27, 1793

“The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses.”

John Adams, “A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America” 1787-1788

“The Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.”

1797 Treaty of Tripoli signed by Founding Father John Adams

“Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind.”

Founding Father John Adams, “A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America” (1787-88)

We should begin by setting conscience free. When all men of all religions shall enjoy equal liberty, property, and an equal chance for honors and power we may expect that improvements will be made in the human character and the state of society.”

Founding Father John Adams, letter to Dr. Price, April 8, 1785

“I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibit the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state.”

Founding Father Thomas Jefferson, letter to the Baptists of Danbury, Connecticut, 1802

I have another 24 quotes from the founding fathers than disprove your comment - care to show us where the founding Fathers wanted the US governed by the Christian Faith?

I've added a picture below as well for ease of reference for exactly what the Founding Father thought about your nonsense - and it seems the Founding Fathers were correct is distancing themselves from state sponsored religion as the way you guys in the states are going, you'd have your own version of Christian ISIS the way you have been carrying on lately.



You guys obviously have an agenda to turn the once Great U.S.A into a Christian Theocracy - Good luck with that!

originally posted by: mOjOm

I would think a valid reason for not believing in an invisible God would simply be that he's invisible. You need go no further than that actually.

Ahmen to that for sure

a reply to: flammadraco

This issue was already addressed on the previous page.

You are simply beating a dead horse.

Why don't you respond to my post concerning this issue instead of repeating someone else and their narrow minded post?

I too discuss this issue in depth at a six grade level.

When it's all said and done, there are two outcomes ....believers and non-believers. Does the 'unified field theory' have a creator component ? If so, can it ever be known and understood ?

And what if we continue to exist after death.
Some have mentioned 'missing' books edited out of the bible. I would tell you all those books still exist, and very likely have been translated for use on 'Archive and or The Guttenberg audio libraries' for those wishing to have it read to them...While the Vatican has a stranglehold on ancient manuscripts they have hidden away from scrutiny, there are still sources outside the Vatican to be had.
Choose Life.......

a reply to: DeathSlayer

You are simply beating a dead horse.

DITTO

a reply to: DeathSlayer

I have some time this evening so here is another thread concerning why people believe in God and in the bible and others do not.

The two are not exclusive.

It's one thing to acknowledge the mystery of life; to revel in awe at the beauty of the universe, to experience the euphoria of love, and to attribute those things to something greater than oneself, calling it "God".

It's quite another thing to attribute this energy to a entity written about in a 3000 year old book, composed of tribal myths, who flies around, angry and jealous, in a Pillar of Fire, barking out commandments and ordering murder, rape and pillage.

Why should I believe that 3000+ year old Middle Eastern nomadic folk lore defines the "One True God", especially since biblical teaching go against the core values, ethics and morals of so many rational individuals?

originally posted by: DeathSlayer
Are you an amputee?

Do you have a relative that is an amputee?

Nope. You are free to choose an amputee to have miraculously healed.

a reply to: DeathSlayer

I remember when I started believing in god too. It was because my parents told me to believe in him and I just accepted their words because I was a child and children can't conceive of their parents lying to them or not knowing all the answers to things.

I also remember when I stopped believing in god. It was because I actually attempted to verify the claims in the bible and they didn't work out.

Amazing how these things work out... Though nice circular reasoning thread you got here.

a reply to: DeathSlayer

Well that's a yawn-fest since all reasoning for yay or nay is given as quoted from the Bible. No real thinking here!

a reply to: spygeek

Except I didn't say imperialism is Christianity.

&

The church was responsible for the massacres, starting with St. Augustine and carrying on for a millennia of repression of anything that may challenge it, including not only differing religious beliefs but also scientific inquiry.

Your words, bud.

As for

The Christian church trained armies, dedicated to taking the lives of innocent people in order to purify the population.

Oh really. Because it seems that European armies do this regardless of their professed beliefs.

Evolution does not work like that. Non human primates did not suddenly have human offspring.

I agree.

A whole population of non human primates eventually evolved into homosapiens over successive generations. It wasn't a couple of non human primates having human offspring. They way you describe it is funny indeed, but only because it is incorrect.

Yes, my point exactly. It wasn't a couple of non human primates having human offspring, that's ludicrous.

Yet Dr Tony Von Dracht's theory states scientifically that Darwin was a British citizen who famously justified the treatment of non-European populations as subhuman by the assumption that we weren't all as evolved.

A whole population of non human primates eventually evolved into homosapiens over successive generations. It wasn't a couple of non human primates having human offspring. They way you describe it is funny indeed, but only because it is incorrect.

Expanding on this quote of yours, which is a great summary of the point we're making:

The moment, subjective as the theory of the origin of species makes it, where the first primate worthy of the title of man is born is not cloaked by the unobservable and unreproducible and therefore not methodically scientific claim that long long times make stuff into other stuff. This is a precise moment.
So if no primate that isn't a human does not have offspring that is indeed human, that doesn't go.

originally posted by: DeathSlayer
a reply to: spygeek

Good post and I would like to add:

...

Why did you leave out the settlement of the original white people in what we call USA today? Clearly you have heard of the Puritans and they were living in the USA long before any of the founding fathers were born.... long before the founding fathers grandparents were born. The Puritans left England because of the strict rules and punishments set by the King and the protestant church. This too is a part of USA history. For those who do not know about the Puritans here is a link

I left this out because it is not relevant to the point i was addressing, which was:

originally posted by: Ceeker63
...
I have problems with atheist trying to prevent Christians and governmental agencies co-existing together in a belief that God created us. Our founding fathers believed in a Christian belief. Atheist just need to accept that fact.

-----

originally posted by: DeathSlayer
a reply to: spygeek

Not sure why the deception with your post and also being one sided but did you forget that it was forbidden to own a bible? For OVER one thousand years it was illegal to own a bible.

Not sure to what deception you refer.. Yes, private ownership and interpretation of the bible was forbidden, for half a dozen centuries, (not OVER one thousand years). This was decreed by the church, as you have referenced, to dissaude differing interpretations and solidify the church's power. The bible was God's word, and the ministers of the church were God's appointed representatives; they assumed total control, for if they did not, the church's authority could not prosper.

Have you forgotten this? It appears many at this site have too. Many have been executed for having a bible. The Vatican controlled what message they wanted to teach and the followers had NO OTHER way to know any better. So to say that Christendom has slaughtered and murdered the answer is yes but it needs clarification as to why.... due to a FEW men not an entire organization.....which is a lie.

It was due to a few men who were, according to the church, appointed by God, to represent Him on Earth. The entire organisation is guilty of aiding and abetting these atrocities.

The message of the bible has been hidden by our ancestors for a thousand years after the apostles had been murdered AND it was in ONLY ONE LANGUAGE. The Catholic church knew to keep control of the believers they had to keep its message a secret.

They taught from essentially the same bible current churches teach from. Sure, they manipulated the teachings, cherrypicked passages and lessons, and justified their self-serving behaviours with holy authority, but all churches did and still do that. There is very little difference between the biblical message and teachings of the middle ages and today, save for a few translative and interpretive discrepancies and a generally more humanitarian moral base.

The Church survived and prospered through oppression and prejudice over two millenia, until it became so ingrained in western culture as to be simply accepted as the truth without question and considered above reproach. The bible and the teachings of the churches became normalised over this time and it is now such a cherished and protected institution as unlike any other.

The same fear and defensive paranoia towards those who question or disbelieve the bible's authority that led to things like the inquisition in the past, is still quite alive and well today, (minus the torture and murder, mostly). Churches still claim absolute authority over its rightful translation and interpretation, there are now just more of them to choose from. The core beliefs of Christianity are essentially the same as those taught five hundred years ago, the only real difference is that it is no longer forcibly taught with the sword.

When discussing religion.....especially Christendom I think people should discuss both sides something not being done within this OP. Most here make remarks which show they actually know very little about the Christian faith.

I find both sides are being addressed and discussed here, however, I find the truth is often found somewhere in the middle, from a more objective perspective that takes no sides.

I find it interesting that the oldest Christian churches are often claimed to not have been true to God's word, when they adhered far more strictly and literally to what the bible actually says than most modern idealised churches. Indeed, they wrote, translated and reinterpreted a lot of what is currently called "God's word" themselves.

At what point did the church actually 'become Christian', in an ethical and humanitarian way? When did it go from institutionalised tyranny and oppressive manipulation of the populace to an honest and loving relationship with Christ and dissemination of God's true message? Did it ever happen? Is there a time, place or denomination one can point to and say, "All before this was Godless heresy and the work of evil, misguided men"? I suspect not.

At the end of the day, you have to put it in perspective. You have to take the bible in the context of the time and place it was written, who it was written by, what it was written about, and the state of knowledge and wisdom of the age it was written. Objectively speaking, it is indeed quite disputable that it is the word of God at all.

a reply to: spygeek

Objectively speaking, it is indeed quite disputable that it is the word of God at all.

None of the new testament or the quran evn claim to contain words from God.

In the OT there are a handful of paragraphs that the author attributes to God.

Those paragraphs are the interesting ones, the reason why versions of the book may have significance to believers, and the best way of scientifically: meaning by one's own experience, assess whether it seems more or less likely true than contradicting sources that would make it finally obsolete.

The interesting part is comparison of bibles from different centuries and kingdoms, and noticing the subtle changes edited into those paragraphs specifically.

ON good thread , but something needs to be said . You are contradicting yourself . As someone who has been in this dilemma countless amounts of times I understand why this happens and it's not your fault . The bible is written in a way where many things are giant mysteries and it feels contradictory on many levels . It's hard to even know what to believe because there's so many things written that conflict with each other and leave room for vast interpretation . Hence .. why you have so many denominations within Christendom.
You say initially that not all are chosen by God , and you sight the Genesis 3 example of the serpent seedline. You some will not be able to understand because they are not chosen period .

But then you go on to agree with another poster in the replies here and state that ." God is waiting for us all to come to him , and it's a personal decision and easy to do ."

Problem with your statements is they don't add up . Because if we are not all God's children and some of us are not chosen , God being all knowing obviously knows this , hence he wouldn't be waiting for us all to come to him . Also it's not a personal decision on our part because of your logic holds up , nothing about it is personal or a matter of free will on out part. It only is ever personal if we have the choice to choose God to begin with . But apparently we don't . Only if we are chosen .

It's a contradiction unfortunately . If I'm wrong please help give me insight as to why .

The more intelligent a person is the less likely they are to believe in Gods.
People are getting smarter this is why atheism is the way of the future. Even believers are atheists to all other Gods, all Gods but the one their born or indoctrinated into.
With the way atheism is trending, it will only take a few generations before practically all people are atheistic to all Gods..
www.dailymail.co.uk... s.html

a reply to: flyingfish

Even believers are atheists to all other Gods, all Gods but the one their born or indoctrinated into.

That's not what atheist means. Believers aren't atheist to anything. Anglophone atheists usually believe things also, starting with the soup becomes monkeys thing, and the big bang.

The more intelligent a person is the less likely they are to believe in Gods.

How so?