Skepticism

[miguel]

Such a beautiful book, the best stories man will ever write and literature all revolves around it.
But the Bible, as we know it, was not the first book to tell those stories.
The main characters name change but the essence of it remain the same. Good and evil, redemption, sacrifice.
All the issues with religion these days have a common side: passion. If you have it, then you will feel the power of the soul related things. If not, then you will probably judge things by its scientific nature.
I personally believe that men have lost their passion on our modern days, I think that the global society everybody talks is just something to blind our eyes.
Passion remains solely on those that are being invaded and killed because they will not accept to be ruled.
I think that, in the end, they will lose, and so will humanity.

[Nacho]

Anteater: Thanks. ^_^

One quick question: You didn' t understant well my question about the Australian aborigen (The one who needs Christ more than any other, apparently... Dunno why)

I am not asking "If he needs Jesus or not". I am saying that this aborigen has been the most humble, good, loving and polite person on earth, and now he is dead. He died without knowing the concept of "Jesus", simply because he has lived in a place where no Christian or missionere has arrived.

So, my question: Is this humble, good, loving and polite person not going to Heaven because he does not know "Christ"? Is your religion so damn unfair that a person who haven't had the opportunity to know Jesus go to Hell, directly?

If your answer is yes, your religion has a very sad ideology... 

[SSH]

You specifically meant that "Christians, and only Christians are forgiven".

Did I? I wonder, then, why you bother asking me any questions if you know what I mean without me actually saying it.

Probably you'll use your mind-reading powers to somehow interpret this as "Andrew loves terrorists" or something.

[Nacho]

It is curious (Symptomatic, as well) that you want to focus the discussion in what I think that you think and not in replying to the many contradictions that "the message" has. 

[auriond]

I am not asking "If he needs Jesus or not". I am saying that this aborigen has been the most humble, good, loving and polite person on earth, and now he is dead. He died without knowing the concept of "Jesus", simply because he has lived in a place where no Christian or missionere has arrived.

So, my question: Is this humble, good, loving and polite person not going to Heaven because he does not know "Christ"? Is your religion so damn unfair that a person who haven't had the opportunity to know Jesus go to Hell, directly?

For what it's worth, I once asked my Bible study leader the same question. She said "there aren't any places left on Earth where people haven't heard of Jesus."

I wasn't satisfied with the answer either, and it's still a mystery to me.

[Anteater]

Alright, regarding the Aborigine: We are all born with an inherently sinful nature. Somewhere along the line, we are going to lie/steal/cheat/whatever. Therefore, no matter how otherwise humble, good, loving, and polite he is, he has still been damaged (for lack of a better word) by sin. Therefore, he still needs complete forgiveness.

[Nacho]

I never said that the aborigen is a totally sinfull person. I assume everybody sins, even if they are just very few.

But' s let' s imagine he is "The person with less sins on Earth".

That is possible, no? Somebody must be the person with less sins on earth, or at least, there must be a little group of people with the same "X" number of sins, that is at least "X-1", compared with the rest of the world.

So, this aborigine is the person in the world with less sins, or belongs to the small set of people with the smaller amount of sins in the world.

But this PERSON never had the opportunity to join Christianism! He never heard the concept "Christ". He has seen 15 people during his life, all aborigines, no white men.

This guys can' t go heaven? If the answer is "no", it' s totally unsatisfactory.

...

And if the answer is "yes"... then, why believing???

[miguel]

Nacho, why not  believe?
With all respect for you and your beliefs:
Can't you see that all your arguments have an oposite side?
So is life in every single thing you may discuss.
You see, if you want to be sure of something you first have to deny all reason. Do you follow?

[MrColossal]

If you have no intention of posting an explanation of your posts SSH, I don't see why you stick around in this thread. You like to call Nacho out for putting words in your mouth but you only let 6 or 7 trickle out anyway and then seem to enjoy it and egg him on when he goes crazy over them.

Do you believe that a person who does good works and is societally seen as a good human being/humanitarian/philanthropist but is not a christian can get into heaven?

If no, why not?

If you don't want to answer the question just so say and people can't really ask it anymore and expect an answer.

And I was serious about my friend in college, just keep his story in mind when your kids get older, I'd hate for more people to go through the depression he went through because of the concept of hell.

[SSH]

Do you believe that a person who does good works and is societally seen as a good human being/humanitarian/philanthropist but is not a christian can get into heaven?

Yes, that may be the case, although I think what would matter would be if God sees them as good, rather than society. Clearly most Christians would expect various Old Testament characters to be in heaven too: Jacob, David, Daniel, Elijah, etc. although many of these men were hugely flawed characters. God provided a mechanism for the Israelites to achieve forgiveness and he provided a mechanism for Christians to be forgiven, too. Perhaps there are others. Perhaps he is merciful. I'm sure he judges each person on his merits. However, Christianity allows me to be judged on Jesus's merits rather than my own, and I know he was without sin, so that's way preferable for me and for anyone else.

Hey perhaps, like the story of Jonah and the story of the workers, God will be more merciful than any fundamentalist or even myself expect. But only through Jesus is it certain.

[Nacho]

Miguel, if course you can believe in God.

And you can believe in superman, the smurfs, the Yeti or ghosts... Once you opened the "irrational" door, there is no way to stop the flooding.

But of course, believing in the smurfs or aliens is not very harmful (Well... It' s not usually: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven's_Gate_(religious_group))

But if you open the door to believe in something irrational, you apened the door for:

Be scammed by bastards like John Edward, Peter Popoff, and any other kind of cheater asking you money for nothing, such a "spiritual clean" (300â,¬), light on a white candle to increase the power of your aura(100â,¬) or kill a chicken to protect you from bad spirits (150â,¬), spending money in different ways to see the future, recover your lost love, etc..
Abandon serious medical tratments in benefit of homeopatic remedies, oriental medicines, acupunture, psychic surgery, hand imposition, etc... (With the following results for your health).

Maybe I haven' t been clear enough before (I' ve been, saying that I don't  consider believers idiots), but I will try to explain myself again. I respect believers. I hate false beliefs. Believers are victims. I' ve never insulted, made fun, or critizised a believer, my work during the last years has been for and because of them.

So, that's why I fight against irrational belief. Religion is the biggest one, the most accepted, the sacred cow that can' t be touched. Well... we are in the 21sth century, I think that the time to rumble that belief has arrived.

You ask me "Why not believing". Ok... Do you believe that there is a secret kind of cows that fly? Yes... they have wings, wings simillar to the ones raptors have, but bigger, and they can be found in Madagascar.

Did you believe me? No. Okay, if you come with the same story to me, I wouldn' t believe it either. There is not even the smaller trace of reality in that story. Might it be true? Of course! Although all the rational tools that our intellect has to determine if something is real or not say "no".

Every time I approached to religion I found the same. Not even a small evidence. "Healings" Which ones? "Miracles"? Which ones? Like that one that says that Saint Bernadette' s  body is uncorrupted, and you can feel the "shiver of misticism" around her when you enter in the room where she is? I' ve seen it. It' s uncorrupted because it has an inch of wax and "the shiver of misticism" actually is the shiver you feel when you enter in a refrigerated room. Like the miracle of "The blood of Saint Gennaro", that "blood" that magically licuates? That blood that is taken out of the refligerator in August and is kept between the hands of the priest for a couple of hours? Must I believe in God because of the "mystical experiences" I' ve seen in believers? The "same" experiences we can see in teenagers in a concert of "Take That" or in fans at any premiere of a new Star Wars films? Must I believe in God, "because the Bible is a very old book"? Yes, like Critias, and I don' t believe in Atlantis. Must I believe in "God" because it has a lot of followers? Well... 100% of the people believed that the Earth was in the middle of the Universe and it wasn't.

The weight of the evidence must rest on those saying extraordinary things. Religion it's quite extraordinary. They must show the evidences.

I am still here, sitting, waiting, and all I got is "It' s true! I can feel it!"

[Ozzie]

Well, you can still expect common sense from religious people.
Also, I don't like the concept that someone tells other people how they have to believe or what they have to believe in, like the pope or leader of religious sects do.

And a belief in god isn't more irrational than love.

[SSH]

Indeed, your materialistic view Nacho is that nothing intangible can exist: hope, love, trust, happiness...

And its just silly to say that if you believe in God then you're somehow more likely to fall prey to scams: unless of course you're just making up unsubstantiated statements to try to win the argument.

I believe my wife and children love me. I believe that God exists. All I have for proof of either is personal experience. You may think that a God is extraordinary but if God has decided to only show himself by that experience you would thus be impossible to convince. You are thus closed-minded.

[Ponch]

Probably you'll use your mind-reading powers to somehow interpret this as "Andrew loves terrorists" or something.

Andrew loves terrorists?!? I'm simply shocked to learn this! And to think that I've occasionally posted on your blog!

I guess I should expect a visit from the Department of Homeland Security soon. Thanks a bunch, SSH. Here's hoping I can still access the forums in Guantanamo Bay.

And for the record, I think the intangibles are what make life worth living. Without those, it's just eat, sleep, sex, die. Notions like love, divinity, duty, and others help fill out that long stretch of road between the cradle and the grave.

I think Motorhead sang a song about that. And Lemmy is so awesome he borders on the intangible himself.

- Ponch

[Nacho]

Hope, love, trust, happiness are supposed to have a supernatural source?

No.

A difference between Religion and hope, love, trust, hapiness...

Also, as far as I know, hope, love, trust, hapiness isn't receiving taxes at any country in the world.

Two.

Hope, love, trust, hapiness, is not teached at school...

Three.

Anyway, are you recognising that Religion is the same as hope, love, trust, hapiness? Do you finally recognise that Religion is a feeling, and nothing else?

If the answer is "yes", we can, finally afther 8 pages, end the discussion. Weeeh! Finally a believer recognises that "Religion is not actually that big".

If you say that "No, that religion is something else, something bigger..." then why you do use hope, love, trust and hapiness as a comparission? You would be recognising they are not comparable.

[MrColossal]

Sure a belief in god is not something one can debate because you can't tell me I don't believe in tables.

The tough thing is that as soon as one makes a claim of something in the physical world being affected by a non-physical, more often than not it can be tested.

It's not the belief people should be debating, it's the existence. If you say god exists because you believe it to be true and there is no other reason/physical evidence behind it, then there is no where to go with the debate. If you believe in god because a specific event happened.. Now we have something to debate.

If you believe certain claims about a physical object like the bible we have a debate.

Also it doesn't always have to be a debate. I don't see why people can't have a conversation about these things that doesn't end in debate. I know I'm not a saint [hah] when it comes to this stuff but having the age old conversation with a believer of "Why do bad things happen to good people." or even worse "Why do great things happen to terrible people." or "How do you reconcile your belief in a god with the teachings of such and such part of your religion" or "What are the punishments for breaking a commandment and are you ok with that?"or my personal favorite "Why doesn't god heal amputees?". This could go both ways, obviously "How do you define morality without a higher power to set the stage?" "..." I actually can't think of another question a religious person would really need to know from an atheistic person. "What do you do on sunday?*"

And I wouldn't say someone is closed minded if they aren't convinced by a personal experience you had. Unless I misread you.

*sleep late, draw my comic, play games at night, make out!

[Anteater]

But' s let' s imagine he is "The person with less sins on Earth".

But he has still sinned at least once; that is all that is required to separate man from God. He needs atonement. He can never redeem himself because he is fallen. He needs a savior. We have all sinned at least once, except for Jesus himself.
I don't like to deal in absolutes. But God is big enough to deal in absolutes. Each person is either redeemed or not.

But if you open the door to believe in something irrational, you apened the door for:
Be scammed by bastards like John Edward, Peter Popoff, and any other kind of cheater asking you money for nothing, such a "spiritual clean" (300â,¬), light on a white candle to increase the power of your aura(100â,¬) or kill a chicken to protect you from bad spirits (150â,¬), spending money in different ways to see the future, recover your lost love, etc..

Jesus became angry when he visited a temple and people were selling sacrificial animals for profit. He overturned tables and yelled at the salesmen. It is made obvious in the Bible that if one has to pay for a spiritual blessing or relic, you're being ripped off. That's why when churches have offerings they are entirely optional. People who scam in the name of religion are evil.

Abandon serious medical tratments in benefit of homeopatic remedies, oriental medicines, acupunture, psychic surgery, hand imposition, etc... (With the following results for your health).

As a Christian I can say that most 'alternative' treatments should not be used. We are to take care of our bodies, and that includes being responsible when choosing medical treatment.

Every time I approached to religion I found the same. Not even a small evidence. "Healings" Which ones? "Miracles"? Which ones? Like that one that says that Saint Bernadette' s  body is uncorrupted, and you can feel the "shiver of misticism" around her when you enter in the room where she is? I' ve seen it. It' s uncorrupted because it has an inch of wax and "the shiver of misticism" actually is the shiver you feel when you enter in a refrigerated room. Like the miracle of "The blood of Saint Gennaro", that "blood" that magically licuates? That blood that is taken out of the refligerator in August and is kept between the hands of the priest for a couple of hours? Must I believe in God because of the "mystical experiences" I' ve seen in believers? The "same" experiences we can see in teenagers in a concert of "Take That" or in fans at any premiere of a new Star Wars films? Must I believe in God, "because the Bible is a very old book"? Yes, like Critias, and I don' t believe in Atlantis. Must I believe in "God" because it has a lot of followers? Well... 100% of the people believed that the Earth was in the middle of the Universe and it wasn't.

We are to go not by what we feel, but by what we believe and know. Human feelings are flawed because of our sinful nature. Many people do get mixed up in what religion feels like, but that's not supposed to be what it's about. That doesn't mean that God doesn't give us joy or happiness, but that is the result of faith, not a measure of it.

[Ponch]

Anyway, are you recognising that Religion is the same as hope, love, trust, hapiness? Do you finally recognise that Religion is a feeling, and nothing else?

If the answer is "yes", we can, finally afther 7 pages, end the discussion.

I notice that you avoided Lemmy altogether. A wise move on your part. Motorhead is all the proof of the wonder of the universe that I need.

Religion is, at its core, a set of rules and usually a hierarchy concerned with maintaining its position. Guitar music is just a series of chords.

But Motorhead is much more than just guitar chords in the same way that faith is more than just rules and priests.

Both transcend into the sublime.

Is Lemmy god? I'm not making that argument, though I know a guy who has a tattoo to that effect. I just like the notion that there's something beyond what I can see. Something that instills in me a sense of wonder in the world.

Personally, I usually feel it most keenly around Christmas time. If there were some way to fuse Lemmy and Santa, well even you Nacho might be swayed by the awesomeness.

- Ponch

[Nacho]

Anteater, excuse me if I don' t try to reply to all your arguments...

But there is one that called my attention. You say that:

As a Christian I can say that most 'alternative' treatments should not be used. We are to take care of our bodies, and that includes being responsible when choosing medical treatment.

Jehova' s witnesses are Christians, Do we agree? They (Or Most, of at least or some of them, and based on their beliefs) don' t accept receiving blood transfussions. If you are bleeding and are about to die, you must agree with me that "the most responsible medical treatment" should be receiving the blood.

So? Two questions come to my mind:

a) How can you know that your decission (that is accepting the blood, and is based on your beliefs) is "Christian fiendly" and theirs (not taking the blood, according to their beliefs) not?

b) What do you think of the Bible as a manual of morale when two people take different conclussions of it?

And Poch, excuse if I don' t reply to your statement "Motorhead is the proof I need"... I am not really sure if you are serious.

[Ozzie]

Hope, love, trust, happiness are supposed to have a supernatural source?

No.

Which doesn't make love rational, though.

Also, as far as I know, hope, love, trust, hapiness isn't receiving taxes at any country in the world.

Two.

What has this to do with a personal belief in some kind of religion?

Hope, love, trust, hapiness, is not teached at school...

Three.

What has this to do with a personal belief in some kind of religion?

We are discussing the possible need for seperation of state and church all over again. It has nothing to do with the validity of religion itself.

Anyway, are you recognising that Religion is the same as hope, love, trust, hapiness? Do you finally recognise that Religion is a feeling, and nothing else?

If the answer is "yes", we can, finally afther 8 pages, end the discussion. Weeeh!

I don't remember anyone disputing this, so you basically only imagined an opposition. Interesting!

Finally a believer recognises that "Religion is not actually that big".

Religion plays a big role in the life of some people. Do you want to dispute that?

Jehova' s witnesses are Christians, Do we agree?

Well, they're as much the same as the evangelical and catholic church are the same, or the mormons and the amish are the same, so in other words, they aren't.