Religion: Christianity & relationship with God.

Because I can watch those two debate and not have to take a side.

 

@ Summonerbrandon, it is her choice. Support her, I know I do. She can believe in anything she wants. You don't see her asking you question on why you believe in your God, do you?

 

Pay attention to the two posts preceding the post in question.

Oh, and the short way to say Moogle is Mog.

And I'm whatever you believe I am. *Wink*

 

There are plenty of reasons to love being an atheist. Heck, I wish I lived in a life in which I could do anything I want with no supernatural, permanent consequences. It's the choice most people want to adopt these days, albeit it seems a bit like dodging responsibility.

But I don't. To me, every action I take floats through my mind that night, to an almost unhealthy extent. I agonize over my word choices and my emphasis when speaking certain words. I question whether or not I was too hard on people, or not hard enough. Self reflection is (or at least in my opinion, should be) fundamental to any religious person's life (of any religion), regardless of religion. Atheists have more freedom. I do this to an unhealthy degree, and it's problematic. It gives me insomnia, stress and makes me angry at people for, in my personal opinion, being foolish.

Case in point: "I choose not to believe in God" ~ the words of perhaps the sluttiest girl I know. I was inevitably able to hammer out of her that she does not believe because then she would be a sinner and have to change her lifestyle.

One other thing that gets annoying about religion is to constantly be an apologist. Particularly in an academic community, where 'science' is the infalliable body of knowledge and people fail to question its validity but immediately attack any other system of measurement, your religion would constantly be under attack.

But yeah, barring that...Mog, you should not love being an atheist since it is just what your gut tells you about the universe. It really is a bit of a neutral state, and your posts here do not suggest that you seek to convert anyone.

------------------------------------------

To play devil's advocate, here's something nobody's mentioned:

I believe that if reincarnation is true, then this is a manifestation of hell.

 

1. I'm not 'dodging responsibility', just FYI.

2. No offense, but you sound like Twilight, or Jesse, or whatever the hell his actual name is.

3. And I know plenty of atheists who are virtuous and Christians who are complete bastards. Your point?

4. Yes, well, Science is my buddy.

5. Neutral state? Bulltofurkey. And who says I WANT to convert anyone? This is a debate thread, not an "EAT AT JOE'S" Thread.

6. . . . . . Have you not been paying attention to the last few pages?

 

Well, I'm a christian, but I am also pretty open-minded too. I have several aethist friends and they tell me that they don't believe in god simply because they don't have proof. But that's their choice too. I personally believe it's a person's actions and their heart, that determine the whole heaven or hell thing.

 

I personally don't believe in any God.

If there was a good then why does humanity suffer? The 'God helps those that help themselves' excuse shows that God is lazy and shows favoritism. Yet God loves all things equally? If there was a God then why so many religions? A real God would stop any false religions or reveal himself/herself/themselves to the masses to inspire belief. 'God works in mysterious ways' is simply a religous excuse saying we don't know but let's blame God.

I just can't believe in any God.

 

The answer to your question is free will. God does not affect people's free will. That is why humanity suffers. That is why there are multiple religions. And also, (This is a question for everybody) why should God reveal Himself to us if many people ignore Him?

 

believe what you want but i still believe that there is no God. i just shared my opinion.

 

Yes, well done. Now do me a favour. Take your right hand, close your fingers, swing your hand over your head and make a 'whoosh' sound.

That's right. My whole point was that you do not wish to convert anyone, judging from your posts here. Hence your atheism is a neutral state, and not an aggressive one and as such you do not 'love' to be an atheist. You simply are one. Feel free to tell me I'm mistaken, because I've been known to misjudge characters now and then.

The way you've responded indicates you read the first sentence, assumed I was trying to convert you, developed a predisposed notion of annoyance, and failed to notice the punchline of my post (textbook case of jumping to conclusions and closed-mindedness). So for the members who are a little slower, here is a summary of what I'd written:

I opened by suggesting that people who 'love' being atheist are no different from 'loving' to be any other religion. They seek both, to convert, and cling firmly enough to their beliefs to sit with their fingers in their ears, refusing to listen to any other perspectives.
And then there's you...I closed off my argument by noting that you do not fit these criteria and hence do not 'love' being an atheist. People who do not 'love' being a given religion are in a neutral, 'peaceful' state. They feel comfortable with who they are and their gut feelings / predispositions guide how they feel.

So yeah...well done, you've turned a post that was supposed to be a compliment into a challenge. Now I'll respond to each point in turn.

1) That's my point. Well done.

2) I don't know, or particularly care, who you're refering to. I'm Mike, nice to meet you. I come complete with my own thoughts and even some ideas too! (Let's not get into who you are reminding me of right now...it's not flattering, I assure you) And thanks for insulting my obsessive compulsive nature, really means a lot to me. (I wasn't sensitive enough about it before, as a matter of fact).

3) My point was that you did not match the description I was posting. Well done.

4) You're putting faith into your buddy, as I also do. (Yes, I'm saying I put some faith into science...infact, I hold a degree in science.)

6)I most certainly have.

EDIT:

You know what, I have to emphasize how silly this is:

I'm certainly not saying that:

 

I'm slightly perplexed by your questions...particularly because I'm not sure which thing I said has got you confused. I do want to point out that I say what needs to be said in topics like these...I don't just come and blindly state my beliefs, because then I wouldn't really have coherent arguments. There are many things I believe which I have never posted anywhere because they are personal...I will point out that I do believe in God, and yes even Christ and the Holy Trinity, so do not take any of these things I am about to say as attacks. I really do not intend them that way.

I would also like to point out, that if you are saying "I will be saved" you are reciting what's known as the sola scriptura, the belief that scripture (specifically the bible) is the single, infalliable body of knowledge, from which people derive their salvation. Thus people conclude "Jesus Christ is the word, and the way" and slander other perspectives as being 'unjust to Christ's gift, our salvation.'

But then you turn around and say "This includes for all religions, either christians, buddhits, atheists, whatever & this is not to be mean" which goes against sola scriptura! I must say I'm slightly confused what perspective you are trying to pitch...

But now, suppose you accept this as some new dogma, wherein we are all saved by Christ's gift regardless of our choice of faith (argueably, this makes more sense to me personally). But then...how can one account for eternal damnation? Would Christ not have saved them as well?

What is the criteria for 'salvation?' Is it a matter of effort? 'Righteousness?'

--------------------------

Let me tell you what I believe.

I believe that time is one giant mathematical equation (haha...ok not literally, but it's an analogy!). Past, Present, Future, are like 'points on a graph' to God.

God designed physical law, in the same way a mathematician forms what's known as a differential equation (Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differential_equation).

Differential equations are very special equations. Has anyone here ever seen a 'quadratic function' ? (Something like y = x^2) These functions are 'set in stone' if you will...there is no variability, once you write down a function, its behaviour is full specified, any two people graphing it correctly will not disagree.

A differential equation is very different...it depends on initial conditions! Here's a simple example:

Suppose you look at populations. If the population is 0, it will just stay at 0...you can't spontaneously create life! If the population is low, it will grow! If it is really large, over-populated, the population will shrink...

So what does the differential equation model for this look like? What curve? ... It depends on the 'initial data.'



Now let's go back on-topic. I believe God's formulation of physical law is just like a big very intricate differential equation, with trillions (or more!) of variables...and God, in his omniscience, has selected the perfect initial data, the optimal starting position, which will get every single person to heaven.

Why do I think this? (This is a little informal here) Because suppose even one person was eternally damned...Then God could have done 'a little better' and so He would have, in his infinite wisdom.

This also addresses the 'if God was all knowing, how can people go to hell? Would he have created people just for damnation?' hypothesis.

(Also note...I'm not saying Hell does or does not exist here. I'm simply suggesting that it's not as permanent as we think...and perhaps the word 'eternal damnation' have a different meaning to God)