I just don't get it

[slide to the left]

I don't understand! I find more satisfaction is finding the flaws in Christinity than finding the good in it. I really only believe in Jesus because I am scared of going to hell. You can see the fruit of the spirit in my life for sure, but intellectually I just don't get it.

[amitten]

1. ??? Are you being sarcastic? I don't get your post. n/t

[slide to the left]

4. I am for real

I just don't understand why I feel this way.

[amitten]

5. Well, then maybe you need to do some soul-searching.

And if you only believe in Jesus because you're scared of going to hell, than I guess you don't really believe in him. But that's up to you to decide.

If you are living a good life and treating others well with acts of kindness, I'm not sure you need the intellectual understanding. Actions speak louder than words, always. Be proud that you live a kind life.

[MadMaddie]

2. I was watching Battle Star Gallactica last night....

And there was a scene that went like this.....(I am paraphrasing but I thought...hunh...what a revalation..)

Priest sitting across from the Chief of the Flight Deck..

Chief: I have been having these dreams...I pray to the Gods to save me....because I think I am evil
Priest: I don't believe in the Gods coming in and saving us

Chief: How can you say that you're a priest
Priest:I have been doing this job a long time and I have come to the conclusion that the Gods designed our lives this way...they never had any intention of swooping in and saving us..They gave us the tools to figure out what is right and what is wrong...they gave us a roadmap....We are the owners of our destiny.....they have given us the guidence...

The Neocons have used Jesus and the Bible to use it as "an opiate of the masses" and hatred vs using Jesus and the Bible as a guideline for each man and woman to choose their paths between right and wrong.

Historically religion has been used to start wars, justify the slaughter of millions of people....and today to destroy America.....

Intellectually I don't get it either!!
Welcome to DU

:hi:

[davidinalameda]

8. confirms my belief

if you cross the street against the light, more than likely you're gonna get hit no matter how hard you're praying

God helps those who help themselves, and that includes taking care of yourself as well

[TallahasseeGrannie]

3. Any thinking person looks for flaws

in a belief system. There are a lot of things about Christianity that make you stop and go hmmm. Like the way it has been used for ill purposes for centuries. But personally, that convinces me that there is something to it. Anything that is a magnet for that much evil must be very threatening to someone or something.

But I'm kind of strange.

[squarepants]

9. i have a lot of questions

myself about christianity. I believe in God/Jesus, but like others, I have a real problem with the way PEOPLE use it. PEOPLE are the ones who start the wars, and PEOPLE are the ones who use the bible for hate. It isn't the bibles fault people are the way they are. Most christians today are supposed to be focusing on the new testament, and I've read no where in there where it says to go start a war, or kill someone, or to go around hating anyone. Yet, you have people who do that stuff and still call themselves christians. The bible didn't tell them to act that way. THEY chose to act that way. Jesus was quite liberal. It's like going to the store and buying a kitchen knife that's meant to cut food, but the person who bought it decided to use it to kill someone. Well, is it the manufacturers fault that person used the knife in the way that it wasn't intended? Likewise, if you have 2 parents raising a child, and they constantly teach that child to love others and not to harm anyone, yet, that child grows up to become a serial killer, is it the parent's fault? How could it be? The child chose to do their own thing regardless to what their parents said. There are a LOT of hateful so called christians out there, but it isn't God's fault. Most of them need to crack open their bibles once in a while and they'd see for themselves how they should conduct themselves, instead of worrying about everyone else's sins.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

10. There is a lot of wisdom in your words.

[trotsky]

18. The kitchen knife

Your analogy might be a little more valid if the maker of the knife had also only released instructions for using it 2000 years ago, to a very primitive people, who had since copied, recopied, translated, and re-translated it a hundred times before being packaged with a modern knife. (On edit): Including adding sections that explain when killing someone with the knife is necessary!

Oh, and if the knife manufacturer had also produced the knife-wielder and his brain, which is capable of being altered by chemicals, injury, and disease to produce raw aggression capable of motivating one to harm someone else.

Then you might have a pretty accurate analogy. Of course, that means your analogy wouldn't be making your point.

[Orrex]

20. An Additional Note

Despite any evidence to the contrary, the knife-manufacturer would have to declare an absolute and unfailing love for the knife-purchaser, regardless of what the purchaser does with the knife. One could reasonably question, therefore, why the manufacturer, fully capable of ensuring that no harm is caused by misuse of the knife, would sit silently and invisibly by while the beloved purchasers use his knife to kill over and over again.

God, such as he is, is not like any person, thing, or idea, so any analogy about God is inherently doomed to fail.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

32. Well that's it

Tilt...my head just exploded. I like my analogies very simple.

[Goblinmonger]

25. Hey

knife-wielders need to have the free choice to use that knife as it was intended by the manufacuter. If they choose differently, the knife manufacturer will deal with them later. In the mean time, batshitcrazyinsanse knife-wielders should just stop calling themselves knife-wielders and use guns like they should.

[trotsky]

6. Just read.

Read everything you can on the subject. Read your bible cover-to-cover, then explore other sources. Consider the works of some famous skeptics and doubters - Robert Ingersoll, Bertrand Russell, Carl Sagan.

[Goblinmonger]

7. You make an English teacher happy, trotsky.

The quest for knowledge is NEVER a bad thing. I love Bertrand Russell--he had a huge impact on me in high school.

[LaurenG]

13. Wow!

Really and sincerely Wow!:thumbsup:

[hunter]

11. Tossing you one of these...

Hold tight, it's always a wild ride when the boat is moving!

[catbert836]

12. I used to be exactly where you are.

Then, I realized that a man, or god, like Jesus, wouldn't be so petty as to send those who don't believe in him to hell for eternity. Other than that, I second what Trotsky said. Read all you can on the subject, and when you feel you are informed enough, make your decision. Good luck!

[LaurenG]

14. First, you don't have to be afraid of anything

You have the right, no the responsibility to figure out for yourself what fits for you. There is nothing to be afraid of. I agree with Trotsky, read, study and lean. You will be OK.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

16. I don't agree.

One should try and figure out what's true and what isn't. Whether or not it fits isn't you isn't relevant.

In some ways I'd rather be a Christian than an atheist, but I'm not, because I don't think the observable evidence is consistent with Christianity. Conversely, if having looked at as much evidence as you can, you can prove tht Christianity is true, you have no choice but to believe it, whether it makes you feel comfortable or not.

[LaurenG]

41. IMHO if you are truly looking

no matter what religion (or none), you WILL come out the other side right where you started but with an array of information that makes sense to the seeker. The wonderful thing about gathering information is that you will NEVER know it all but, you will incorporate a solid foundation on which to free yourself from the fears that being human brings about in the psyche of all people. Besides, there is not only one truth and there are too many ways to interpret the truth that one thinks is the truth at the time. (In other words, the truth will change as we mature and develop).

I think that the perception we all have of the truth is just different facet's of the same diamond. It just depends on the angle you see it from. Abstract thought is one area that science cannot measure but we all realize exists within us. It is that process where by we know what we know until we know something else.

[Silent3]

44. I don't think that's a very useful way to use the word "truth".

Besides, there is not only one truth and there are too many ways to interpret the truth that one thinks is the truth at the time. (In other words, the truth will change as we mature and develop).

We've got words like "perspective" and "personal values" and the like to express the idea I think you're going after here. Why not use those words instead of talking about multiple "truths"?

To me, by the most useful sense of the word "truth", there is only one truth. Admittedly, one can never disprove things like solipsism and other philosophical quagmires you can end up in when trying to discuss the nature of truth, but at a practical level, I think it's obvious that we all tend to function (at least on some levels, and especially when we don't have some sort of wacky dogma to defend) as if there's some sort of stable, common ground between us all, a consistent backdrop of places and events and objects from which we draw our experiences, with a history which we can hope to objectively determine.

Is chocolate ice cream the best ice cream? Some people think so, other's don't. But it's absurd to treat the Supremacy of Chocolate Ice Cream as some sort of "truth" which is different for different people. It's all just a matter of taste -- much of which is probably explicable, at least theoretically, given sufficient knowledge of biochemistry, genetic and experiential differences between people, etc. Pound hard enough on what exactly you mean by "best ice cream", however, come up with an explicitly clear definition ("best is what Joe says is best", "best is what the majority of New Yorkers polled in March of 2006 think", etc.) and you'll have a question with a definite and invariable answer which is true for everyone.

Well, I'm up way too late as it is, so I'll have to continue this later, but I hope you can see more or less where I'm going.

[LaurenG]

48. I think you can interchange those words with "personal truth".

I wouldn't rule out using "personal values" or "perspective" for the word (personal) truth.

In answer to "you'll have a question with a definite and invariable answer which is true for everyone".

When dealing with cultural values, perspective, or the way I am using the word truth there is no way to come up with a definite and invariable answer which is true for everyone. There is at this point in our collective evolution, no way to come to a consensus and IMHO no need to. I feel strongly that because we are sentient and complex beings we won't come up with a linear, one dimensional, scientific statement that fits for everyone.

We will never absolutely agree on everything so why try to stuff beliefs into a standard that won't fit individual convictions. Evolution not only occurs physically it occurs emotionally and mentally. Everyone is not in the "same grade". Therefore, I believe if we were gentle with ourselves and others we would allow them to believe what they think the truth is (and which may have some truths impregnated within it), though who knows how we will ever measure that and come to a scientific answer.

I guess that I also believe that people must be allowed to be comfortable in whatever they believe within certain guidelines that values address. If one isn't hurting anyone else or trying to cram a set of beliefs down someone else's throat who cares. The truth will never, ever be stagnant when it comes to theology because there isn't a way, at this point, to measure thoughts that make up individual humans or for that matter read the same book and come up with a pat answer to the meaning of that book.

My perspective on this is, since we can't measure individual beliefs and we can't prove or disprove if anyone's beliefs, experiences and personal truths are correct it's important to nurture the thought process in others in order for them to be comfortable enough in their own skin to then come to a logical conclusion on their own.

[Silent3]

55. This use of the word "truth" just leads to sloppy and lazy thinking

My perspective on this is, since we can't measure individual beliefs and we can't prove or disprove if anyone's beliefs, experiences and personal truths are correct it's important to nurture the thought process in others in order for them to be comfortable enough in their own skin to then come to a logical conclusion on their own.

The fact that two or more conjectures or ideas each can't be 100% proven doesn't make them all equal. Here's one idea: dinosaurs were warm-blooded. Here's another idea: there's a copy of Alice and Wonderland buried at the center of the Moon.

Neither idea can be absolutely proven or absolutely disproven. That hardly makes both ideas equal in value. One is a well-considered idea with some persuasive evidence behind it, the other is a random bit of baseless speculation about a totally nonsensical situation. Even if the first idea turns out to be wrong, you can learn a lot simply by studying the problem. The second idea is worthless except perhaps as a bad example.

A lot of the religious dogma and other crazy religious/spiritual/mystical ideas come a lot closer to the Alice in Wonderland side of the idea value spectrum, especially when you get away from the core common values you might extract from some religions and get into crazy specifics of many belief systems. I don't think much of it warrants the use of the word "truth", personal or otherwise.

Are you recommending the "whatever gets you through the night" standard of truth? If standing on a stack of Bibles helps me get a box down from a high shelf, does the efficacy of those Bibles in helping me achieve a goal say anything about the truth value of the content of those Bibles? That religious beliefs help some people feel better about themselves, give them a sense of purpose, help them kick a drug habit or whatever is not a measure of the truth of those religious beliefs, is only a measure of the efficacy of those beliefs as a drug or a therapy. Completely contradictory doctrines can achieve the same end goals -- to me it makes more sense to say that this shows a lack of evidence for truth value in either doctrine, rather than tap dancing to say the each is a "personal truth" for the person helped by each.

I think it's much better to encourage people to try to get out of their own heads to search for public and common truths that to abet the often lazy and narcissistic focus on "personal truth" we often see. Just because absolute public truths might be hard to come by and might never be pinned down 100% is no reason to undervalue the attempt to head in that direction, rather than settling for an almost solipsistic notion of truth with "well, you can't PROVE anything" as an excuse.

[marcapolo]

15. recommended reading

I'm in the midst of reading a fascinating book--The Case for A Creator, by Lee Strobel--which is interesting because it's written by a former atheist who interviews several leading scientists about Big Bang, Intelligent Design, etc. I think you'd enjoy it because it's very scientific and intellectual, albeit obviously biased towards a belief in God. Next I intend to read "Theism, Atheism, and Big Bang Cosmology" (which is sort of a debate between an atheist and a theist) and something by Bertrand Russell, to get different perpectives on the issue. My feeling is that the main thing to keep in mind about religion is not how people have screwed it up (which they inevitably have) but whether or not it's true. If it's untrue, no matter how happy it makes you feel, it's a bunch of hogwash and you shouldn't believe it. And if it's true, then no matter how much destruction has been done in its name, you're gonna have to come to terms with it because you can't ignore the fact that it's true. Personally, I don't think that either theism or atheism can be totally proven or disproven, so in the end you're just going to have to go with your gut instinct.
As regards Christianity and Jesus specifically, Lee Strobel also wrote a book called The Case for Christ. I don't know much about it but it might have some answers for you.
Best of luck figuring it all out, as much as it's possible to figure it all out.

[trotsky]

17. For an analysis of Lee Strobel's work,

go to http://www.infidels.org/ and type "Strobel" in the search box.

I'm sure that reading his stuff is a good thing, as long as you are aware of the incredible logical errors and shoddy scholarship.

[marcapolo]

19. lee strobel

Thanks for the heads up. I've been wanting to see how people respond to/refute his claims, so I'll check it out.

[Orrex]

21. Lee Strobel is the worst apologist in the history of apologetic writing

Welcome to DU, by the way.

Strobel is intellectually dishonest from cover to cover in each of the three books I've read by him so far. He postures himself as a competent journalist and a former atheist, and then undertakes investigations in a way that no serious journalist or atheist ever would. Strobel speaks only to true-believers in the faith and asks questions that he pretends to think that an atheist would ask, but his questions are flaccid at best, and he doesn't follow them with serious inquiry.

In fact, Strobel's blatant disregard for journalistic integrity borders on false witness. He is offensive to reason and logic, and he's a pushy jackass besides.

Avoid Strobel at all costs. Do not purchase his books. If you feel that you must read them, borrow them from the library or a friend.

[trotsky]

24. "Lee Strobel is the worst apologist in the history of apologetic writing"

Hmmm, I'm not so sure about that. I'll take Josh McDowell for that title any day. ;-)

[Orrex]

26. Maybe

I've read more Strobel (groan!) than McDowell, but they're both pretty bad. My conclusion is probably based on my skewed sample size.

[trotsky]

27. Did you see Lowder's latest commentary on McDowell's "NEW Evidence"?

Evidence that Demands a Refund *snark*
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jeff_lowder/newetdav.html

[Orrex]

28. Oooo! I'll check it out!

I haven't been on Infidels for a while, but Lowder is always fantastic!

[marcapolo]

30. The Strobel issue

Thanks for the welcome and for everyone's responses. It's great to have a forum like DU to ask a question or air out a theory and benefit from other people's research and insight. The intellectual life here in Arizona is pretty bleak--it's a desert in more ways than one. As for Strobel, I'm surprised you tell me to avoid him at all costs when you've read 3 of his books. I certainly feel he jumps to conclusions, but I'd rather go about it the way you apparently did, which is to read books on all sides of the issue. So I'll continue to read him, but will withhold judgment until evidence from both sides is in.

[Boojatta]

22. Possible reading on the pro-religion side of the controversy

One world : the Interaction of Science and Theology
by John Polkinghorne, 114 pages

[sutz12]

23. Maybe it is because....

you are seeing so many people exhibit all the worst faults of religions in general, perpetrated in the name of Jesus. I can see a lot of people doing a lot of evil things in the name of Jesus. I'm not a Christian, but it bothers me to see so many people abandoning the true teachings to follow false prophets.

As an agnostic, I fear a Christian takeover of this country. I know I would not like to live in a 'Christian' America, any more than I would like to live in an Islamic country. I hope you don't feel offended, but I fear the 'Christians' more than the Muslims right now. They're closer.

[heidler1]

29. I fear the limited human brain hooked on any religion, too.

IMO Unreasonable belief in anything is dangerous and we humans are evidently designed to fall victim to this problem. I wish I believed that knowledge could resolve this de-lima, but here again proof disappoints. I do believe that knowledge can and is used to confirm beliefs in every direction. After Koko the Gorilla learned sign language she lied on occasion for unapparent reasons. IMO humans also lie without even knowing why and/or the conscious purpose of the lie frequently. Conscious lying is another matter.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

31. Look at things with your heart and not your head

Thinking about spiritual matters can simply get you muddled. Look to what is in your heart. How does it feel when you think about Christianity? If it doesn't feel "right", perhaps you either need to look at Christianity from a new angle or look at other spiritual paths. One place you might wish to start is to read the books of Neil Douglas-Klotz. He is a scholar and a mystic who has studied Aramaic, the language Jesus spoke, and has translated Jesus's words directly from Aramaic to English. "Prayers of the Cosmos" is a book about the Lord's Prayer and the Beatitudes. Check it out-after reading one page you'll know if it is right for you.

Good luck in your spiritual quest.

[sutz12]

33. Good sentiment....

but most Christians will not encourage that. They are hung up on the whole "I am the truth and the light" thing. Some are willing to enforce that with violence and/or the power of government. Unfortunately, it is happening right now, right here. :puke:

My biggest beef with western religions in general is the whole tribal aspect of it all. You know, "You're either for us or against us." Probably the one phrase ever uttered that I hate the most. So many of these fundamentalists, as their first act, draw a circle in the sand and start attacking everyone outside of it.

I prefer the more eastern philosophy of one goal, many paths.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

34. If you like Eastern religions, you may like this story

This really happened, btw.

A group of Sufis on tour in India got an audience with His Holiness, the Dalai Lama, who gave a talk on fine tuning their Sufi practices. One Sufi asked, "Why aren't you telling us about Buddhism?" His Holiness answered, "Because you are Sufis." The Sufi asked, "What is the difference between Buddhism and Sufism?" His Holiness replied. "That's easy. In Buddhism, nothing is. In Sufism, everything is. Same thing, no difference."

[sutz12]

39. In truth, I'm not real religious....

but if I were, it would be either in the Eastern disciplines or maybe even a nature based religion, like Wicca. I've read a bit of Joe Campbell, and I like him. I spent some time in a mythopoetic group and enjoyed the fellowship there.

I believe that true spirituality should bring people together. Most of the religious fanatics (not saying anyone is in this group locally, but....) are too busy emphasizing the differences between people and forgetting the whole "Love your enemies, for what do you gain by loving your friends?"

See, I can quote a few Bible lines, too. I can't quote chapter and verse, maybe, but I think I have a pretty basic idea of the core teachings. There are a lot of people calling themselves Christians out there that know less than I do about it, or at least their actions would appear to point that way.

In many very important ways, there is more love in a faith like Wicca than in these fanatical fundamentalist groups.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

49. I think you'll find

that the mystical sects of any religion actually meet your criteria. I've met with Bhuddist monks, Catholic mystics, and Hindu swamis, and we found our goals to be the same.

[Zebedeo]

37. For us or against us

The phrase you hate the most? Consider the source:

"He who is not with me is against me." Matthew 12:30

[sutz12]

38. Which is supposed to what?

Make me like militant Christian radicals more or something?

Sorry, but the source does not change my opinion of what that statement represents. It is pure tribalism, couched in the dualism that plagues most (all?) western religions.

If the biggest idiot in the world says the sun is shining, that doesn't make it dark outside.-Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.

[MikeH]

42. Perhaps even that source might not be infallible

The phrase you hate the most? Consider the source:

"He who is not with me is against me." Matthew 12:30

Perhaps even that source needs to be questioned. It seems dangerous to consider any one person, or any one source or book, however revered, to be infallible and not to be questioned.:think:

[Zebedeo]

45. You can make up your own beliefs as you go along

But then what is the chance that those beliefs are true?

I prefer to put my faith in an objective source, and I can't think of any better source than Jesus Christ.

[MikeH]

47. Not so much making up beliefs

as not accepting anything dictated to us, from any source, as absolute truth.

[MikeH]

56. Sounds like a very subjective decision

I prefer to put my faith in an objective source, and I can't think of any better source than Jesus Christ.

It seems to me a very subjective process by which a person decides, and claims to be certain, that Jesus Christ is an "objective source", or that the Bible is the "Word of God".

[hunter]

43. How do you know you are with Him?

That's always a good question.

[Zebedeo]

46. Agreed.

We should all ask ourselves on a daily basis if we are doing His will.

[hunter]

50. I guess if you are an atheist, pagan, etc., you are simply out of luck.

How can these people ever know if they are doing "His Will?"

:sarcasm:

I doubt it matters. I don't believe Gandhi was sent to some circle of hell simply because he was never "born again" in Christ.

I often examine how my own ethical systems are put together; a good deal of my ethics are "Christian." But I tend to look upon other people's ethical systems in terms of function, not in terms of structure. There's never any reason to look inside another person's ethical systems for some Christian label, although it sometimes seems to me that many ethical systems prominently labeled as "Christian" were clearly manufactured in hell.

Two of the most hideous experiences I had as a young adult were directly caused by people who considered themselves to be good Christians acting in good Christian faith. I was almost happy to see one of these people die, and I say "almost happy" because I sometimes think this "born again" rat bastard got off too easy -- he never got to witness in life all the damage his religion had caused. I might have preferred he'd suffered a bit longer here, and I confess I sometimes consoled myself thinking he went someplace worse.

I probably have more reasons to hate Christianity than not. That I still go to church on Sunday may only be a function of my personality; there's some autistic component to me that feels at home in church.

But I strive not to nurture hatreds, however much the fields of Christianity are ripe for them. To steal someone else's words: "There isn't a single human life that's not touched by God and drowning in grace -- you just have to look."

Sometimes you have to look really hard, sometimes not. In some people this grace is overflowing, and this happen in people who are not religious as well as religious.

Christian ethics can almost always be rephrased in secular terms. Here's Matthew 7:

Do Not Judge

“Do not judge so that you will not be judged. For by the standard you judge you will be judged, and the measure you use will be the measure you receive. Why do you see the speck in your brother’s eye, but fail to see the beam of wood in your own? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove the speck from your eye,’ while there is a beam in your own? You hypocrite! First remove the beam from your own eye, and then you can see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. Do not give what is holy to dogs or throw your pearls before pigs; otherwise they will trample them under their feet and turn around and tear you to pieces.

Ask, Seek, Knock

“Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened for you. For everyone who asks receives, and the one who seeks finds, and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened. Is there anyone among you who, if his son asks for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? If you then, although you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him! In everything, treat others as you would want them to treat you, for this fulfills the law and the prophets.

The Narrow Gate

“Enter through the narrow gate, because the gate is wide and the way is spacious that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. But the gate is narrow and the way is difficult that leads to life, and there are few who find it.

A Tree and Its Fruit

“Watch out for false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are voracious wolves. You will recognize them by their fruit. Grapes are not gathered from thorns or figs from thistles, are they? In the same way, every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree is not able to bear bad fruit, nor a bad tree to bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. So then, you will recognize them by their fruit.

Judgment of Pretenders

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the kingdom of heaven – only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven. On that day, many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, didn’t we prophesy in your name, and in your name cast out demons and do many powerful deeds?’ Then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you. Go away from me, you lawbreakers!’

Hearing and Doing

“Everyone who hears these words of mine and does them is like a wise man who built his house on rock. The rain fell, the flood came, and the winds beat against that house, but it did not collapse because it had been founded on rock. Everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. The rain fell, the flood came, and the winds beat against that house, and it collapsed; it was utterly destroyed!”

When Jesus finished saying these things, the crowds were amazed by his teaching, because he taught them like one who had authority, not like their experts in the law.

http://www.bible.org/NETbible/mat7.htm

The Christian churches are overflowing with the sorts of people Jesus warned against --

Those who judge others, the hypocrites who have planks in their own eyes, those who do not seek the truth but rather obscure the truth by deception, those who hand their own hungry sons and daughters snakes and stones, those who tear down others to build themselves up, those who mindlessly follow the pack through the gates that lead to destruction, those who are false prophets, and those who follow false prophets, those who bear bitter fruit, and those full of hatred who prophesy in God's name.

The part about false prophets is especially important. This land is rife with false prophets. An atheist railing here against religion may be more fruitful than a Christian following a false prophecy. Like any other imperfect human institution, Christianity can serve evil.

[Zebedeo]

51. You answered your own question

Question:

I guess if you are an atheist, pagan, etc., you are simply out of luck.
How can these people ever know if they are doing "His Will?" :sarcasm:

Answer:

Christian ethics can almost always be rephrased in secular terms.

Anyone can do Christ's will. They don't have to be Christian to do it. They can be atheist, pagan, Hindu, or worship a fictional deity such as the Borg or FSM.

When you help the less fortunate, you are doing Christ's will. When you love your fellow human beings, you are doing Christ's will. When you obey your parents, you are doing Christ's will. When you refrain from murder, you are doing Christ's will. When you refrain from idolotry, you are doing Christ's will. When you refrain from adultery, you are doing Christ's will. When you refrain from hypocritical judgmentalism, you are doing Christ's will.

None of these things require as a prerequisite that you be a Christian. All of these Christian principles can be (and have been) rephrased in secular terms.

Rephrased or not, they are the will of God, and behaving in this manner glorifies God. I am sure that will cause some consternation to some of the atheists on this forum, but it is the truth.

I am sorry that you have been wronged in the past by Christians. That is a shame, and I am truly sorry that it happened to you. But please remember that you were wronged by Christians, not by Christ. Christians are sinners, just like everybody else, and we all fail to abide by God's will the way we should.

[hunter]

52. And you just answered my question.

You co-opted someone else's goodness for Christ. I imagine if I was an atheist, and I was doing something "good" just because it seemed to be the right thing to do, then I would be quite irritated to have you telling me I was somehow motivated by the invisible hand of a God I do not believe in.

co-opt 3. to persuade or lure (an opponent) to join one's own system, party, etc.

[Zebedeo]

53. Why does it "seem to be the right thing to do?"

Because God has written it on our hearts. There is an objective good and an objective evil, and it is self-evident, because it is written on our hearts.

Since for me "good" is defined in reference to doing God's will, it is hard for me to agree with your assertion that I have co-opted someone's else's "goodness" for God. The only way that person's act could be "good" is if it was in compliance with God's commands - IMHO.

Is there some other way that you define "good"?

[hunter]

54. Human altruism can be explained as a biological trait.

In general, communities in which individuals had a stronger propensity for altruism were more successful than communities that had a weaker propensity for altruism.

A propensity for racism may also be built into us. People will identify with their own community and discriminate against another.

There is no need to invoke God to explain this.

[JerseygirlCT]

35. Some smart folks have told me

that doubt is the leading edge of faith.

In other words, your questions are good things -- they're leading you somewhere. Maybe where isn't quite clear yet, though.

I'm sorry that you feel fear -- that seems an unfortunate thing, to me. Personally, I can't grasp the idea of hell in the context of an all-loving God. So, I basically reject that premise as unworkable. Hell is simply the absence of God, and needn't exist for anyone...

Give yourself time, without feeling stressed about "should believe" stuff. Let your mind work, let it all percolate, you know?

[believerinchrist]

36. As difficult as it may seem, I think we need to lay aside

the group mentality of Christianity. The purpose of Christ was not to start a new religion--it was to provide forgiveness for the human race (anyone here never done anything hurtful or bad?--good, you don't need it, but the rest of us do) and to open the door for humans to overcome evil. God is interested in each individual, no matter what his/her circumstances are--and He does not send people to Hell. He is not schizophrenic--on one hand, "saving" people and on the other, tossing them into hell. God is love, and despite the fact that people have misused the Bible for their own nefarious gain, His love will prevail.

My "advice" is go to God and ask Him about what you don't understand. Please don't expect to hear a voice, but see if you don't begin to understand things in the Bible that you didn't before. One thing I have learned about God is that He doesn't get upset when I let it all hang out. I've done my share of yelling at God and blaming Him. Lightening did not strike me; as I kept bugging Him, I began to see ways out of the challenges I've faced and to see good come out of bad. No, not all my prayers have been answered the way I originally wanted them to, but I have grown in the grace and mercy of God.

[FM Arouet666]

40. I still think you are baiting

I read your post last night after a bit too much time in Old San Juan, wanting to give you the benefit of the doubt and curbing my tongue parched from too much rum, I refrained from responding. However, with benefit of a clear mind and a few cups of coffee, I still think your post is baiting. Perhaps I am jaded?

Playing devils advocate, do you see anything good that has resulted from christianity? Do not confine your answer to contemporary events, christianity has a long history. Sure there are dark periods, witch burning, inquisition, crusades, but you cannot judge a whole religion based on a few negative events? Many of the morals which contemporary society avows can be traced through centuries of Christianity.

You believe in jesus because you are afraid of going to hell? I don't believe in jesus. There is no hell, save for that created on earth by our fellow human, far too often a human who believes in a god. Committing violence in defense of religion, a thin veil covering the real motivation, a desire for personal eternity.

Take my advice, dump the jesus nonsense, go with your intellect.