Do you believe in God?

  • Thread starter Patrik
  • 24,489 comments
  • 1,148,521 views

Do you believe in god?

  • Of course, without him nothing would exist!

    Votes: 624 30.6%
  • Maybe.

    Votes: 368 18.0%
  • No way!

    Votes: 1,051 51.5%

  • Total voters
    2,042
You clearly either didn't read the two links or didn't understand them, neither of which would be a surprise.

Oh and we are not talking about future devices, the device you are using right now to post (and the infrastructure used to post it) is built upon quantum mechanic.



If by lived comfortably you mean were not able to communicate, trade, create and share art, avoid conflict, live longer and better understand each other, then I guess so.

Personally no I don't agree with that at all, and at some level neither do you (or you would not be using said devices).


No. It wasn't designed.


And? The psychotic and often murderous way that relgion has used to spread its message over the years is proof of what exactly?

Well, you won't miss what you didn't have. Growing up in a modern world, obviously using it's technology would be fitting.
I also don't see any conflict being avoided at this moment. Where did knowledge of good and evil come from, because what ever is designed or invented by man, its used for both good and evil. Only the bible answers that question so wisely.

One thing I agree with you right there. Religion is a serious problem, including the religion of evolution. Survival of the fittest. One day it's god will say "the religious are unfit, and they are not allowed to survive. Lets chemtrail them", or something like that.

They all have, and always will be a problem in this world, until the world stands in judgment.
 
DCP
Well, you won't miss what you didn't have. Growing up in a modern world, obviously using it's technology would be fitting.
I also don't see any conflict being avoided at this moment. Where did knowledge of good and evil come from, because what ever is designed or invented by man, its used for both good and evil. Only the bible answers that question so wisely.
No it doesn't.

Not only does morality exist outside of humanity, but the biblical ideas of reciprocity is not even original!

You are claiming something for your religion that it didn't originate and certainly is not the source of (unless you consider theft to be good that is).

DCP
One thing I agree with you right there. Religion is a serious problem, including the religion of evolution. Survival of the fittest. One day it's god will say "the religious are unfit, and they are not allowed to survive. Lets chemtrail them", or something like that.
Once again showing that you have no understanding of evolution at all, the same nonsense that got you banned from posting in that thread. Continue to do it in here and the fate will be the same.
 
DCP
Knock yourself out. Believing in this books, or believing in nothing is your free will. Enjoy whatever while it last, because tomorrow is promised to no one, and neither the afterlife, whether there is one or not, who knows.
As for me, I'm open minded. I believe that if there is any kind of good or evil out there to explore, well then, I believe that magic is real, and like wise aliens or demons that could be werewolves or vampires. Who knows.

Just to let you know if it wasn't completely obvious in the post, I was being sarcastic. In no way do I believe that these books are real and I drew similarities between what I thought of that and what I thought of any religious book. For all we know, this could have been completely made up and billions of people have believed this for thousands or hundreds of years.
 
DCP
Well, you won't miss what you didn't have. Growing up in a modern world, obviously using it's technology would be fitting.
I also don't see any conflict being avoided at this moment. Where did knowledge of good and evil come from, because what ever is designed or invented by man, its used for both good and evil. Only the bible answers that question so wisely.

Yea, super wise. Let's divide all of mankind into two groups - good and bad. For the good people, eternal bliss. For the bad people, eternal torture. God's threshold is 75% good deeds vs 25% bad deeds. Joe performed 23,476 deeds in his life. 17,372 were good. 6,104 were bad. That's hell for Joe, who only got to 74%. Mary, also performed 23,476 deeds in her life. She got to 17,650 good deeds with only 5,862 bad ones. The extra 300 or so good deeds put Mary over the top, and she gets eternal bliss. Better luck next time Joe.

Or maybe you don't interpret the bible that way, let's try the even less moral view of morality.

Joe performed 23,475 bad deeds in his life. His last deed, number 23,476 was to beg forgiveness from God and welcome him into his heart. That's heaven for Joe. Mary, on the otherhand, performed 23,467 out of 23,467 good deeds. She lived her life without a single bad deed. She got close when she was 5 years old and thought about taking a toy away from her younger sister, but she held out and shared like a good girl. Other than that it was smooth sailing to a perfect score. Mary's an atheist so of course that'll be eternal torture for her (one cross each).

The bible says one of the 10 most important commandments is to honor your parents (uh... my parents are horrible people who stole from me so...). Parents of course come in all shapes and sizes. Some of them beat (or worse) their children, but the bible says honor them so... it must be moral.

Don't take lord's name in vain? This is worthy of a commandment? This is in the top 10 things you shouldn't do? Super important moral code for humanity to live by there.

How about "don't hurt children" or "try not to enslave your fellow man". No? not that important? Actually the bible kinda teaches away from those. Honestly I think a grade-school student could do better coming up with a moral code.

*For full disclosure, this post was heavily influenced by the writings of TheraminTrees and Christopher Hitchens.
 
Last edited:
DCP
Because things don't just pop out of no where.

Gotcha. So you don't believe in God either. That seems at odds to what you've been telling us all for months.

If the big bang fits your world view and lifestyle, so be it.

It's not about fitting my world view or my lifestyle, whatever that might be. It's about it fitting what I and other people can see.

I just don't see how understanding more than what you've already seen, is helping you in your day to day life.

It doesn't help. But understanding things is fun. I find fun things to be fun, but my mother always told me that I was a little strange.

As for me, I'm open minded.

No, you are not. You are closed minded.

DCP
People lived comfortably without these things.

So go back to cavorting druids, death by stoning and dung for dinner.

You're on the internet and you obviously shouldn't be.
 
DCP
Religion is a serious problem, including the religion of evolution. Survival of the fittest. One day it's god will say "the religious are unfit, and they are not allowed to survive. Lets chemtrail them", or something like that.
Seriously, dude, if you think that evolution is a religion, that clearly establishes that you know neither what evolution is, or religion.
 
DCP
Well, you won't miss what you didn't have. Growing up in a modern world, obviously using it's technology would be fitting.
I also don't see any conflict being avoided at this moment. Where did knowledge of good and evil come from, because what ever is designed or invented by man, its used for both good and evil. Only the bible answers that question so wisely.

One thing I agree with you right there. Religion is a serious problem, including the religion of evolution. Survival of the fittest. One day it's god will say "the religious are unfit, and they are not allowed to survive. Lets chemtrail them", or something like that.

They all have, and always will be a problem in this world, until the world stands in judgment.

Did you know that both black and white have no corresponding wavelengths? Likewise, I can't relate to any of this.

Maybe in another universe, "The Origin of Species" is toted around a congregation of scientists, and they mutter the quadratic equation in its presence, while making the sign of the benzene ring over their heart. Then, they make a pilgrimage to CERN, donning only their white lab coats, and chant the periodic table together, vowing to follow a double-helix path to enlightenment. Of course, since dubnium was proposed, and the punk eeks came about, there's been a Great Schism and scientist brawls break out regularly, forcing new department heads and even separate classrooms to contain all the mummery.
 
Last edited:
DCP
Science says that the universe will perish, or implode or explode or whatever they come up with. Amazingly they don't realize that the so called goat herders knew this 3000 years ago.

I'm sure people from 3000 years ago could come up with whatever. They certainly were unable to predict the most likely end states for the universe though. This is something you can test yourself. First, go find some hypothesized ends to the universe and then compare them to predictions made 1000's of years ago.

Ignorance won't help you. You can't possibly provide informed dialogue on things you know nothing about, but your post made it seem like you tried to.



Of old You founded the earth, And the heavens are the work of Your hands. 26"Even they will perish, but You endure; And all of them will wear out like a garment; Like clothing You will change them and they will be changed. 27"But You are the same, And Your years will not come to an end.…

But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up.

Specifically what is this predicting? What modern theory is this supposed to represent?

I'm just mind boggled how people see these things with their own eyes, and can't accept what is really happening.
This is why you get the responses you do, you keep putting forward ideas that you've heard, but never bothered to check. Flaws pointed out with them over and over, but you won't address them. We could go back to my last post. What is the genius in an Earth with an expiration date? If God is responsible for the Earth's orbit, it should be a pretty easy thing to at least keep it someplace where it will be habitable wouldn't?

Don't ever forget why things are not perfect. The fall of mankind. If you ignore this, you will keep asking the same questions.
As before, the fall creates only more problems. No answers. Why make flawed humans? Why lump innocent people with "guilty" people? etc.

Also, the universe wasn't made for man. Man was giving dominion over the earth. That's proof
of why man can't get out of the earth, to live on any other planet himself. He can just marvel at the vast universe, and hopefully one day, he could show us more and more universe with his instruments.
This is one of the core problems. There is not a shred of proof in what you typed.

You have stated something that is consistent* and possible, but it is not the only possibility. In other words, while humanity's inability* to leave Earth is consistent with some being keeping up tied to the planet, it is also consistent with leaving the Earth being costly and difficult. Proof of your idea would be an observation consistent with your idea that is not consistent with other ideas.

* I am being generous, we've already been to the Moon, let achieved escape velocity from the solar system, so what you said isn't even true. People can leave Earth if they want to.
 
Yea, super wise. Let's divide all of mankind into two groups - good and bad. For the good people, eternal bliss. For the bad people, eternal torture. God's threshold is 75% good deeds vs 25% bad deeds. Joe performed 23,476 deeds in his life. 17,372 were good. 6,104 were bad. That's hell for Joe, who only got to 74%. Mary, also performed 23,476 deeds in her life. She got to 17,650 good deeds with only 5,862 bad ones. The extra 300 or so good deeds put Mary over the top, and she gets eternal bliss. Better luck next time Joe.

Or maybe you don't interpret the bible that way, let's try the even less moral view of morality.

Joe performed 23,475 bad deeds in his life. His last deed, number 23,476 was to beg forgiveness from God and welcome him into his heart. That's heaven for Joe. Mary, on the otherhand, performed 23,467 out of 23,467 good deeds. She lived her life without a single bad deed. She got close when she was 5 years old and thought about taking a toy away from her younger sister, but she held out and shared like a good girl. Other than that it was smooth sailing to a perfect score. Mary's an atheist so of course that'll be eternal torture for her (one cross each).

The bible says one of the 10 most important commandments is to honor your parents (uh... my parents are horrible people who stole from me so...). Parents of course come in all shapes and sizes. Some of them beat (or worse) their children, but the bible says honor them so... it must be moral.

Don't take lord's name in vain? This is worthy of a commandment? This is in the top 10 things you shouldn't do? Super important moral code for humanity to live by there.

How about "don't hurt children" or "try not to enslave your fellow man". No? not that important? Actually the bible kinda teaches away from those. Honestly I think a grade-school student could do better coming up with a moral code.

*For full disclosure, this post was heavily influenced by the writings of TheraminTrees and Christopher Hitchens.

Good thing you don't know what's truly in Joe's and Mary's heart, so you can only just speculate and second guess, like sciences theories of the unanswered.
Try other religions that need works and deeds to make it to their gods.
Islam is perfect for Joe and Mary, as their deeds will be weighed on a scale, and even so, Allah still has the final say, even if the scales are in favour of good.

Let me help you with the commandments:

Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. 2Honour thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise;) 3That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth.
In the Lord, meaning parents who follow Gods commandment, especially the one below:

AND YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND, AND WITH ALL YOUR STRENGTH.' 31"The second is this, 'YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.' There is no other commandment greater than these
So, if you follow this commandment, I'm guessing you can see that there is plenty room for "don't hurt children", "don't enslave fellow man", don't hate a person in your heart, don't commit adultery in your heart, don't lie in your heart etc etc.

Honestly, I think even the hardened heart of a sinner or determined scientist to disprove God can see this in his heart, yet the pride and his carnal mind, allows him to refute this through free will. No excuses on J day. None brother.

I'm sure people from 3000 years ago could come up with whatever. They certainly were unable to predict the most likely end states for the universe though. This is something you can test yourself. First, go find some hypothesized ends to the universe and then compare them to predictions made 1000's of years ago.

Ignorance won't help you. You can't possibly provide informed dialogue on things you know nothing about, but your post made it seem like you tried to.





Specifically what is this predicting? What modern theory is this supposed to represent?


This is why you get the responses you do, you keep putting forward ideas that you've heard, but never bothered to check. Flaws pointed out with them over and over, but you won't address them. We could go back to my last post. What is the genius in an Earth with an expiration date? If God is responsible for the Earth's orbit, it should be a pretty easy thing to at least keep it someplace where it will be habitable wouldn't?


As before, the fall creates only more problems. No answers. Why make flawed humans? Why lump innocent people with "guilty" people? etc.


This is one of the core problems. There is not a shred of proof in what you typed.

You have stated something that is consistent* and possible, but it is not the only possibility. In other words, while humanity's inability* to leave Earth is consistent with some being keeping up tied to the planet, it is also consistent with leaving the Earth being costly and difficult. Proof of your idea would be an observation consistent with your idea that is not consistent with other ideas.

* I am being generous, we've already been to the Moon, let achieved escape velocity from the solar system, so what you said isn't even true. People can leave Earth if they want to.

Still struggling to understand the fall I see. Is free will a flaw? Don't you like to watch any movie, or sleep with any female, or hate or love whomever you prefer? Be obedient, or completely make fun of people or their beliefs by choice?
How is free will a flaw, if you use it admirably?

I'll post it again, only because I love the Word:

31And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: 17But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

So, are you basically saying that God shouldn't have given us, including Satan, free will?
In that case, we'd all be robots in the garden, till this day.

Nope, you can kill or love, hate or forgive, marry or divorce and believe Gods word or not.
Enjoy your free will, because life is short, so short that tomorrow is not promised to anyone.

It's so typical, when you see how Adam blamed Eve, then Eve blamed satan.
Likewise today, people who don't believe in God, spend most time talking about Him, as well as blaming Him for everything. Oh that day, no excuses will be made. Incredible.


@Scaff

Bud I've got a simple question for you.
So you know the bible talks about the mark of the beast (anti-christ), taken on ones right arm or forehead.
I'm sure you've seen this technology take full effect recently, coinciding with end times biblical prophecy.
Now I know you don't believe in the God of the Bible, or His future prophecies, so my question is, do you think people are just going on with this technology unaware, or are they actually reading the bible and trying to fit it's description, or is this just plain luck?

Also this one:

15And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains; 16And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb: 17For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

John is obviously shown a vision during the great tribulation. He doesn't know what is a bunker, so he says caves. Why else would presidents and celebrities and their body guards etc hide in caves, when they can afford bunkers using your tax money.
Same story, do you think it's just coincidence, or are they reading and going according to what the bible says, or is it just plain luck?
 
DCP
John is obviously shown a vision during the great tribulation. He doesn't know what is a bunker, so he says caves. Why else would presidents and celebrities and their body guards etc hide in caves, when they can afford bunkers using your tax money.
Same story, do you think it's just coincidence, or are they reading and going according to what the bible says, or is it just plain luck?

How is it that the horoscopes in the newspaper manage to be so accurate week after week? Are they divinely inspired also?
 
DCP
Honestly, I think even the hardened heart of a sinner or determined scientist to disprove God can see this in his heart, yet the pride and his carnal mind, allows him to refute this through free will. No excuses on J day. None brother.

Hulk-Hogan-Point.jpg
 
DCP
Good thing you don't know what's truly in Joe's and Mary's heart, so you can only just speculate and second guess, like sciences theories of the unanswered.
Try other religions that need works and deeds to make it to their gods.
Islam is perfect for Joe and Mary, as their deeds will be weighed on a scale, and even so, Allah still has the final say, even if the scales are in favour of good.

You say "what's truly in Joe's and Mary's heart" as though it's black and white. This is more childish thinking - the notion that the world is binary - good and evil. Joe and Mary aren't either good or evil, they've lived their lives based on some good and some evil. Nobody is purely good or evil - and this is why I said that the bible's moral high ground is nonsense. It's a rather pathetic excuse for an attempt at morality. Most people could do a better job.


DCP
Let me help you with the commandments:

Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. 2Honour thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise;) 3That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth.
In the Lord, meaning parents who follow Gods commandment, especially the one below:

Classic revisionist nonsense. "In the lord" becomes whatever you want it to be. Honor thy mother is a separate statement, without the caveat "in the lord" whatever that means.

DCP
AND YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND, AND WITH ALL YOUR STRENGTH.' 31"

There is no morality in this statement. It's pure religion.

DCP
The second is this, 'YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.'

This is pretty much the opposite of morality - it's rather a form of servitude to all humanity.


DCP
So, if you follow this commandment, I'm guessing you can see that there is plenty room for "don't hurt children", "don't enslave fellow man", don't hate a person in your heart, don't commit adultery in your heart, don't lie in your heart etc etc.

Sure, I kinda think those were worth saying though... you know... before some of the other kinda silly non-moral ones.
 
DCP
@Scaff

Bud I've got a simple question for you.
So you know the bible talks about the mark of the beast (anti-christ), taken on ones right arm or forehead.
Yes.

DCP
I'm sure you've seen this technology take full effect recently, coinciding with end times biblical prophecy.
No. what technology?

DCP
Now I know you don't believe in the God of the Bible, or His future prophecies, so my question is, do you think people are just going on with this technology unaware, or are they actually reading the bible and trying to fit it's description, or is this just plain luck?
Take you pick, it (and you) are so vague as to mean anything.



DCP
Also this one:

15And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains; 16And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb: 17For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

John is obviously shown a vision during the great tribulation. He doesn't know what is a bunker, so he says caves. Why else would presidents and celebrities and their body guards etc hide in caves, when they can afford bunkers using your tax money.
Same story, do you think it's just coincidence, or are they reading and going according to what the bible says, or is it just plain luck?
Are you unaware that caves have been used since the dawn of man as natutral defensive positions, as such this reference could quite easily apply to any point in human history!

Not to mention that the use of 'bunkers', by which I take it you mean cold war style bunkers? In which case you seem to be unaware that the vast majority of them have been decommissioned, what with the cold war ending about 25 years ago. Seems your prophecy forgot that bit. So I guess given that I would go with self justifying noise on your part that ignores the facts that make it nonsense.
 
Without reading too in-depth, as I am just seeing this thread, I believe he is maybe referring to the medical chips perhaps?

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/6237364/ns/health-health_care/t/fda-approves-computer-chip-humans/

This will give one a better understanding of the near future of the technology.
Though yeah, it's just incredible how people love to remain blinded, even when the world is somehow, doing what the bible says, when they could have chosen to do it any other way.



@Scaff , I didn't know these bunkers have existed since the dawn of time. Care to share your facts?
If I'm not mistaken, the first man made bunker was made in the late 1800s.

http://www.therichest.com/expensive...e-bunkers-how-the-elite-prepare-for-doomsday/
 
Roflmao. Im almost given up following.... this thing after all things i face in life (most are personal). After I gone mature, while im not fully turns away, I start to get easier questioning and joke around on this subject. Some of fundamentalists apparently didnt like my move but i know some of religious people are actually supportive, mostly the more advanced people.

I think some of my friends were right: Those who question their subjects (in this case religion) are more likely correct than those who think their subjects are always right. Just think of it for a second. Even Mother Theresa questions her religion sometimes.
 
DCP
@Scaff , I didn't know these bunkers have existed since the dawn of time. Care to share your facts?
If I'm not mistaken, the first man made bunker was made in the late 1800s.

But, as you said;

DCP
He doesn't know what is a bunker, so he says caves.

Clearly to say Caves instead of Bunkers John has to have some idea of the thing he's talking about?

If you're looking for evidence of ancient "bunkers", that is to say fortified underground structures built for military and civil protection then you could look at Derinkuyu for starters.
 
DCP
This will give one a better understanding of the near future of the technology.
Though yeah, it's just incredible how people love to remain blinded, even when the world is somehow, doing what the bible says, when they could have chosen to do it any other way.


You will seriously believe anything that you think supports the Bible, no matter how unsupported by actual evidence it is.

A question, do you own a mobile phone?


DCP
@Scaff , I didn't know these bunkers have existed since the dawn of time. Care to share your facts?
If I'm not mistaken, the first man made bunker was made in the late 1800s.

http://www.therichest.com/expensive...e-bunkers-how-the-elite-prepare-for-doomsday/
You used the term Bunker, your source text didn't mention it at all.

However if you are referring to man made underground structures (and not cherry picking a single term to create a self forefilling prophecy) the the city of Petra alone shows you are quite wrong (by a few thousand years), and if we simply looking at living in caves (which is actualy what the Bible says) its gets even older, with evidence of human ancestors living in caves around 2 million years ago.

So yes the facts are rather easy to show.
 
Roflmao. Im almost given up following.... this thing after all things i face in life (most are personal). After I gone mature, while im not fully turns away, I start to get easier questioning and joke around on this subject. Some of fundamentalists apparently didnt like my move but i know some of religious people are actually supportive, mostly the more advanced people.

I think some of my friends were right: Those who question their subjects (in this case religion) are more likely correct than those who think their subjects are always right. Just think of it for a second. Even Mother Theresa questions her religion sometimes.
Mother Theresa actually stopped believing in the Christian God.

Anyway, I found this very fitting: A friend of mine and the father of my best friend from Kindergarten is actually a priest in Topeka, Kansas. He's one of the smartest and greatest persons I know and these are the things his church posts on Facebook:
12799207_969766256411884_1279529412599617487_n.jpg

12734283_961554717233038_2686953578883196641_n.jpg

12742664_961010957287414_7753319910031799460_n.jpg

12592476_954812797907230_8629864123115102557_n.jpg


They're also accepting everyone regardless of sexuality or race.
 
Here is my take on the science vs. Religion. They need to be kept separate. I am Christian, but remain very open minded. There is no reason for science and religion to mix at any point, as they are two completely different fields. As Christian as I am, I still have no problem to admit that the majority of ALL religion is based off of faith and not true knowledge, it's a choice we make to believe as opposed to not believing. Science on the other hand provides hard facts.

As for this technology advancement argument, I don't think there is anything to worry about. The "mark of the beast" is outlined in the bible yes; but simple technological advancements in medicine and such is not going to equal up to what the bible is speaking about and to think it is, is simply working yourself up. A big thing the bible teaches on with the end times is one world government and government in general being the downfall of the world.
 
Not to ruffle any feathers, but I have more respect for people that follow religion properly than people who adapt the bible constantly to fit their life.
If there is a god, and he did write a book, it shouldn't be taken lightly, and scribbled out.
 
Not to ruffle any feathers, but I have more respect for people that follow religion properly than people who adapt the bible constantly to fit their life.
If there is a god, and he did write a book, it shouldn't be taken lightly, and scribbled out.

If they're doing it properly they can't say that God wrote a book at all - even the holly bibble doesn't say that.
 
Not to ruffle any feathers, but I have more respect for people that follow religion properly than people who adapt the bible constantly to fit their life.
If there is a god, and he did write a book, it shouldn't be taken lightly, and scribbled out.

That's kind of ironic, because fanatics following their holy texts by the letter tend to show very little respect for those who doesn't.

As for taking a text lightly, I'd argue that reading a text by the letter is to take it more lightly than to reflect upon it, interpret it and think about the meaning behind the words.
 
That's kind of ironic, because fanatics following their holy texts by the letter tend to show very little respect for those who doesn't.

As for taking a text lightly, I'd argue that reading a text by the letter is to take it more lightly than to reflect upon it, interpret it and think about the meaning behind the words.
Yeah, it's easier to just change it to fit your lifestyle, sure.
Cherry picking passages to believe in and swear by is incredibly illogical. It's either real, or it's not.
But that's just my opinion, I suppose.
 
It's either real, or it's not.
It could have been written by God and then changed later. Or maybe only parts of it were written by God.

Your stance has the same issue that Pascal's wager does. It incorrectly boils down all the possibilities to two arbitrary choices. In reality there are many. Choosing one view and refusing to change that view based on evidence is a pretty bad choice to make if you want to pick the right choice though.
 
Yeah, it's easier to just change it to fit your lifestyle, sure.
Cherry picking passages to believe in and swear by is incredibly illogical. It's either real, or it's not.
But that's just my opinion, I suppose.

Being real and needing to be interpreted are two different things. If you believe that, for instance, the bible is the word of god, then you've got these options:

  1. The bible is the word of god, and it needs to be interpreted
  2. The bible is the word of god, and it doesn't need to be interpreted
Both options are based on assumptions, the first option on the assumption that the text is not to be taken literally; and the second option on the assumption that it is to be taken literally. Neither is more or less logical than the other, when the only circumstance you consider is that it is the word of god.

When it comes to modern christianity, only the most conservative branches of protestant christianity believes in sola scriptura ("by scripture alone", basically "the word is the word - end of story"). Almost everyone believes that some interpretation is needed.
 

Latest Posts

Back