God/Santa

[OneLastBreath]

Okay. So. The previous two posts basically says: " People were born knowing God and that he exists. People worshiped him the minute they were alive."

That is all good and finite if you want to live by no evidence. Most people believe in God because that is all that they know. They accept this too, it's just the way of life. So where has your argument gone? Did something else conjure up God? Obviously someone composed the idea of a God. Or there would be none. The answer is right in your face, yet religion and the consequences restrict choice and individuality.

Obviously someone composed the idea? Your argument overlooks a very important aspect of Christianity: that we believe the Scriptures, while recorded by humans, were written by God. So you see, the argument that someone had to come up with idea of God is only valid from the point of view of someone who doesn't believe the Bible to be His Word. Hence, we have a redundancy. Only one who already denies the existence of God can argue your statement as proof of this fact. Why do we believe that the Scriptures come from God? Faith. "Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see." - Hebrews 11:1. While we, as Christians, see evidence of God everywhere in the world, if one refuses to see this evidence then it all comes back to faith. As for "the answer is right in your face" I could equally state that fact to you. When I look out my window in the morning, and see the sunrise, the answer IS in my face: God the Father created everything through God the Son, who redeemed the world, and God the Holy Spirit lives in me to reveal these things to me. I don't see religion as a restriction- I see it as what sets me free.

 

[nadroj1985]

Obviously someone composed the idea of a God. Or there would be none.

Prove this statement, or stop talking.

 

[jingwei]

Santa was probably Saint Nicholas, who put a bag of gold secret into the home of a poor family down the chimney.
However, corporate marketing in the 1800's has transformed a role model CHristian symbol into an anti christ figure, "for I shall be like the most high"

 

[prayerposition17]

Alright fine. Let's go through this again. Now One Last Breath said that the scriptures are direct word from God. That's respectable, good and solid. However, as said by Chief Bromden in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, "It's the truth even if it didnt happen." How can I possibly relate this? Well, anyone can write a book. ANYONE. Pending they are literate, and it is the christian way so I added that. And again, everyday people hear voices and etc. Does this mean these voices are real? Someone that hallucinates see's what is not there, yet do we assume the truth?

In some cases, people reportedly claimed that the word of Satan forced them to do certain acts. Yet there will be a skeptic denying his existence. Now we know, Satan is involved in christianity as well. But people still believe he does not exist.

And you Nadroj. A human being. You following? Wrote the bible. A HUMAN BEING. As I love to repeat myself, anybody may write a book, especially one on the answers of life, the starting and all that jazz. I myself can make up some idea on religion. However, it is a cult until more people believe it. As was the christian faith. And Buddhism, and Hindu, every major religion had to start somewhere. Where it starts it is a fictous idea and then it will spread to others, and test the solidity. Just because people believe a certain idea certainly does not automatically make it true.

At one time people KNEW the world was flat.

 

[joebudda]

Alright fine. Let's go through this again. Now One Last Breath said that the scriptures are direct word from God. That's respectable, good and solid. However, as said by Chief Bromden in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, "It's the truth even if it didnt happen." How can I possibly relate this? Well, anyone can write a book. ANYONE. Pending they are literate, and it is the christian way so I added that. And again, everyday people hear voices and etc. Does this mean these voices are real? Someone that hallucinates see's what is not there, yet do we assume the truth?

In some cases, people reportedly claimed that the word of Satan forced them to do certain acts. Yet there will be a skeptic denying his existence. Now we know, Satan is involved in christianity as well. But people still believe he does not exist.

And you Nadroj. A human being. You following? Wrote the bible. A HUMAN BEING. As I love to repeat myself, anybody may write a book, especially one on the answers of life, the starting and all that jazz. I myself can make up some idea on religion. However, it is a cult until more people believe it. As was the christian faith. And Buddhism, and Hindu, every major religion had to start somewhere. Where it starts it is a fictous idea and then it will spread to others, and test the solidity. Just because people believe a certain idea certainly does not automatically make it true.

At one time people KNEW the world was flat.

Just like at one time the sun revolved around the earth. Even before that it was a god that pushed the moon and sun across the sky. But today we know different. But what we do not know for sure is if there is a God or not. To say that it is a fictions idea is still only making a claim which you can not prove.

We know there are many world religions. We know that they all can’t be right. So only one or none could be right, Correct? But to claim you know without providing proof you are just expressing your theory.

You can say that as far back as we can tell we have worshiped some sort of something. So chances are good that there is something within our makeup that needs or wants something bigger then us to be looking down and taking care of us in some way. So we might make such a thing up.

But it can’t be proven either way, so the verdict is still out.

 

[nadroj1985]

And you Nadroj. A human being. You following? Wrote the bible. A HUMAN BEING.

Your sarcasm is not needed. Some well-defended points might be nice, though To address your point, yes, a human being wrote the Bible. What does that have to do with "creating" God?

As I love to repeat myself, anybody may write a book, especially one on the answers of life, the starting and all that jazz. I myself can make up some idea on religion. However, it is a cult until more people believe it. As was the christian faith. And Buddhism, and Hindu, every major religion had to start somewhere. Where it starts it is a fictous idea......

If your first premise is "it starts with a fictitious idea," of course all religions will be fictions, according to your reasoning. You leave no room for the very real possibility that the idea these religions start with- God exists- is a true belief.

 

[prayerposition17]

Very close minded. VERY.

 

[OneLastBreath]

Very close minded. VERY.

Close minded? Nadroj only said that you weren't leaving for the possibility of God the Creator. You counter his accusation of close mindedness by calling him that without anything in your defense? There's a difference between being stubborn and being steadfast. Just because someone has firm convictions about something doesn't mean they are close minded. If your read the Apostles Creed, the Nicene Creed, or any broad statement of Christian faith, then what you are reading is what I believe. And there in lies the difference. If I were to argue origins with another believer, then my view of how God created the Universe would be negotiable, it's not mentioned specifically anywhere in any creed or scripture. Refusing to budge on my point of view would allow me to be seen as close minded. If I were to argue origins with a non-believer, the fact that I believe God created the Universe is not negotiable, it's in the creeds and in the Bible. You can't call someone close minded over their absolute truths. Without solid faith in the important things, faith that can't be shaken, believing in anything is futile. Therefore:

I believe in God, the Father almighty,
creator of heaven and earth.
I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord.
He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit
and born of the Virgin Mary.
He suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried.
He descended to hell.
On the third day he rose again from the dead.
He ascended into heaven,
and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty.
From there, he will come to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic Church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting. Amen.

 

[prayerposition17]

Very cute, I respect your faith and beliefs. My comment was to everyone. And, just for the record, I have read way too many scriptures, researched a lot of religions, read the bible, the whole nine yards. So I would assume I know what I am talking about and not going in without argument.

 

[nadroj1985]

Very close minded. VERY.

If you are reffering to your claim that you should accept that all religions are based on a fictitious ideal a priori, then yes, I would most definitely call it closed-minded. If you are referring to something else that I said, then I honestly have no clue what you are talking about.

 

[12volt_man]

I have only one firm belief about the American political system, and that is this: God is a Republican and Santa Claus is a Democrat.

God is an elderly or, at any rate, middle-aged mate, a stern fellow, patriarchal rather than paternal and a great believer in rules and regulations. He holds men strictly accountable for their actions. He has little apparent concern for the material well-being of the disadvantaged. He is politically connected, socially powerful and holds the mortgage on literally everything in the world. God is difficult. God is unsentimental. It is very hard to get into God's heavenly country club.

Santa Claus is another matter. He's cute. He's nonthreatening. He's always cheerful. And he loves animals. He may know who's been naughty and who's been nice, but he never does anything about it. He gives everyone everything they want without thought of a quid pro quo. He works hard for charities, and he's famously generous to the poor. Santa Claus is preferable to God in every way but one: There is no such thing as Santa Claus. - P.J. O'Rourke, "Parliment of harlots"

 

[prayerposition17]

Im...wow.


speechless.

 

[nadroj1985]

I have only one firm belief about the American political system, and that is this: God is a Republican and Santa Claus is a Democrat.

God is an elderly or, at any rate, middle-aged mate, a stern fellow, patriarchal rather than paternal and a great believer in rules and regulations. He holds men strictly accountable for their actions. He has little apparent concern for the material well-being of the disadvantaged. He is politically connected, socially powerful and holds the mortgage on literally everything in the world. God is difficult. God is unsentimental. It is very hard to get into God's heavenly country club.

Santa Claus is another matter. He's cute. He's nonthreatening. He's always cheerful. And he loves animals. He may know who's been naughty and who's been nice, but he never does anything about it. He gives everyone everything they want without thought of a quid pro quo. He works hard for charities, and he's famously generous to the poor. Santa Claus is preferable to God in every way but one: There is no such thing as Santa Claus. - P.J. O'Rourke, "Parliment of harlots"

Although, in answer to the last sentence: Santa, IMO, is not preferable to this "Republican" God in that way because that God doesn't exist either

 

[prayerposition17]

Amen

 

[OneLastBreath]

As you said, that's your opinion. Now I'll offer mine: Without the existence of God, without there being a goal that we strive for but can never quite reach, that being perfection in Christianity, there is no purpose to life. This doesn't mean humans created God so they could have a purpose, but that God is required as an actual entity in order for humans to have purpose and therefore even exist. Otherwise, everything is pointless and we wouldn't even be here. Prayerposition, you call yourself buddhist. While I have no clue as to how strongly you believe in the principles of buddhism, nor do I claim to be anything near an expert on the matter, hypothetically lets say you're buddhist through and through. Say some day you manage to reach nirvana. As I understand it, that's the ultimate goal of buddhism. Then what? What point is there to existence if there's nothing more, no one to serve, nothing to strive for?

 

[nadroj1985]

Say some day you manage to reach nirvana. As I understand it, that's the ultimate goal of buddhism. Then what? What point is there to existence if there's nothing more, no one to serve, nothing to strive for?

I'm not sure you understand the concept of nirvana very well. I believe (and prayerposition or another Buddhist can correct me if I'm off-base here) that the process of achieving nirvana is one of eradicating the need to "strive" for anything. In essence, once one has achieved nirvana, the desire to achieve anything else is long gone.

 

[OneLastBreath]

As i said, I don't claim to be an expert. However, nirvana being held in the highest esteem in buddhism, it still seems as though it's case of, once you reach the top you have no where to go but down

 

[nadroj1985]

As i said, I don't claim to be an expert. However, nirvana being held in the highest esteem in buddhism, it still seems as though it's case of, once you reach the top you have no where to go but down

Yes, but the point is, once you have achieved nirvana, you are quite happy with that predicament. You don't want to go up anymore.

That's the ideal, anyway. I, for one, doubt it's possibility.

 

[OneLastBreath]

As do I which was the entire point of my first comment regarding it

edited to add: By the way, what exactly does an "agnostotheist" believe anyways?

 

[prayerposition17]

Now before you say something I find offensive, you should at least research what you are going to argue. To reach nirvana is to be of the highest possible amount of compassion and love for others. It is not a goal which you come down from.

There are Four Noble Truths in Buddhism. 1.The reality of suffering. So this means there is suffering in the world. No one can control that. 2.The cause of suffering. There is a desire for certain goals and this is what may cause suffering. 3. The cessation of suffering. This is Nirvana. It is the mind state where you let go of desire. 4. The path to Nirvana. This is how you may reach Nirvana. It is called the eight-fold path.

To put it in your terms, yes it is a goal. But by no means is it easy to reach. By reincarnation and karma it may take multiple lives to reach Nirvana. So you cannot go down. You have let go of all desire and wanting.

With you theory on God and such, you are in constant fear. And you have extreme guilt. And you treat people of other beliefs as if they do not know what id good for them and they will be forever lost. And they are inferior. Buddhism encourages the respect of others beliefs. And it is choice. You may choose to follow the eight-fold path, or not. You do not get smite from doing so. For the record, the eight-fold path teaches choices like right mind, right actions, right speech, and all that. By no means does it become "Thou shalt not do whatever because if you do so you will be condemned to and eternity of fire in Hell." That is the fear and guilt created.

So please, respect my beliefs and do not treat others like they are infants whom do not know what they are doing. We are not blind and a lot of us have actually researched this more than you would initially assume.

All on the individual, people are intelligent enough to choose their own beliefs. Let them do it.