Ok to start off this is a touchy subject for some, so please be considerate of ones beliefs. If you feel upset by this discussion please refrain from posting, commenting, or reading this post.

Reminder: "Political, religious or war discussions are generally not posted here, but if you choose to participate in one of these discussions, we expect that you will be respectful to all involved."



I come from a family that allows one to come to their own conclusion of what faith to believe in, and that person is accepted regardless if it agrees with other family members. How-ever my gf and I are on the verge of marriage, and there are some belief conflicts with her family. They are hard core Christians, and have an un-dying faith in god, how-ever I am an agnostic-atheists. Meaning I'm unsure if there is a god or not (can not prove his existence nor can I prove his non-existence), how-ever I believe if he does exist, he plays little to no role in everyday life. I still believe in evolution, and science beliefs but have a hard time believing in the "acts of god" depicted in the bible (I'm not saying it is wrong, this is just how I take it).

They dont force me to believe what they believe, and I continually tell them that if I am presented with sufficient evidence of gods existence (ruling out events that some can describe as coincidence), but they will purchase me books such as "I dont have enough faith to be atheist", and books about the proof of god. We would also get into long winded conversations about the "supporting evidence" that back our beliefs. These conversations nearly always become futile because he tends to steer toward the "ok then where did that come from, then where did THAT come from" until such point where I no longer can answer (by my dead end in knowledge, he feels this is proof of god. And it might). Or I start asking him about discrepancies in bible, and he replays "talk to the pasture and ask him, I just dont know the answers to this", or if I catch him in a dead end where his religion cant explain something, he'll reply "Thats where faith comes in. You just need to believe that this is how it is, and god will tell you when you meet him". This frustrates the heck out of me. I really have trouble trying to believe something that is explained by "It just is".



So I started this thread to allow questions to be asked, and allow people to answer them. In the hopes of enlightening others about their faith. So please, ask questions and hopefully others may be able to help you understand where they are coming from.

I too have some questions, how-ever I'm limited on time right now to type it all out. So I'll be back later and post of my own questions I hope people might be able to help me understand.



Like I said, please be respectful to others, no ranting and raving, or telling someone they are wrong. Play nice, or dont play at all.

We'll have to keep an eye on this... This is, as you've said, a very touchy subject, and things can get volatile very quickly.

If things get out of hand here, users WILL get warnings and the thread will just dissappear. So, if this thread isn't here at some point, you can probably assume that someone was out of hand, and that's it.

Okay, now that that's out of the way...

Be good!

Suffice it to say the mods will be monitoring this thread religiously.

Second what Supra said....IN ALL CAPS.
We CAN and will be NICE to each other and respect each other's beliefs.

That said, I have views on all of these topics that have caused me woe in the past.
I have no wish to bring these woes to anyone, but I welcome rational discussion.

Lets try to be civil.

SJ

Seems to me 2 things are being bundled together and it causes confusion.

First there is the belief in one or more higher power(s), an ultimate God and creator. There are very few rules to believing in this God as a higher power. It might equate with your moral conscience ie.. why you seem to know it's wrong to steal or kill or why you wouldn't let a child starve while you fill your belly. An inherent moral compass passed on from your creator who you do not know or acknowledge.

Some recognize this God merely by the complexity of existence itself. A watch, a car etc. are complex and we readily admit that someone made them even though we never met the designer and maker. Life in any form and all its interdependency to continue is far more complex than a car or watch yet some balk at recognizing that there is intelligence and planning in the design. Science would have us believe that it's on a voyage of creation but it's only on a voyage of discovery. The path has already been traveled, scientists are just unraveling what is there. Nothing new is being made.

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

The second thing is the belief in a specific God with precise attributes, desires and expectations who somehow at some time has made or is making his will known to certain humans who then pass that on to other believers. Here you have thousands of choices. All of these at some point will ask for a leap of faith on some points because although the adherents would like to think that everything is clear and cast in stone, the reality is that the beliefs of each sect or group oblige you to accept one individual's interpretation (or a leader group) of what certain text or sayings mean for you to be recognized as a faithful member of that church or group. This is true in every religion. Name one and you'll find a variance or offshoot because someone had a different view and convinced others to follow him.

The God described in the Bible or other accepted "sacred texts" is one version of that God but there have been many such over the history of humankind. Not necessarily in the sequence of the placement of the Bible books, but the Bible dates itself back the creation of life in the heavens, the physical universe, sun, moon, earth and the creation of life itself, from animals to the first man Adam, Eve and their descendants and faithful leaders right down to our day. A tidy complete package that allows Christians to show their history through time thus confirming to them that Christianity is the true religion.

Even the God described in the Bible has spawned many versions of followers not all Christians. Some groups cut out after the first five books of the bible and believe in later prophets, some cut out after the "Old Testament" and don't believe the Messiah has come yet. They too can lay claim to being the true religion by professing belief in the earliest written texts (according to the writings credited to Moses as passed down from God either directly or through patriarchal records copied somewhere along the line of Adam, Seth, Noah, Shem, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and so on)

Some who call themselves Christian believe in a trinity of Gods, The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost as 3 distinct persons or personalities in one God, a mystery of sorts. For others the same texts identify, only one God the Father who uses his Holy Spirit to exercise his will and the Son is the Father's first creation or "firstborn" who's life was transferred from heaven to flesh so he could prophecy about the Father and die a sacrificial death to redeem mankind for the sin of Adam. Some don't believe in the redemption teaching of Jesus. Some see Jesus as God in the flesh, some as only God's son while others see him only as a prophet in the line of many. Most Christians (followers of Christ) believe in some variant of these themes. Many Christians believe that the law (the old testament) was fulfilled in Christ and lend more weight to the writings in the "New Testament" mostly about the life of Jesus and the lives and acts of the Apostles. So many variations Christian and non Christian with sub groups and denominations sprung from the same books and yet many more have their roots in other beliefs yet they all sincerely claim to speak the truth about God and his express will for mankind.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

So someone is asking you to believe in one version of God. They feel that they have the right interpretation of his specific goals, expectations, rewards and punishments. They could be right but you haven't even decided whether your life is just by happenstance. You have to decide if God exists before you can decide which if any of the thousands of paths available to you is the right one. Even if you choose to believe in God you might decide on a different organized religion or choose none. No one can do this for you. You might just do it please someone as the path of least resistance.

If you decide that you do accept the existence of God as an intelligent creator, then there may or not be a requirement for you to do more. Your gf's family and all those who belong to any organized religion believe that more is required so they do what they consider to be what God expects of them according to a prescribed set of understandings followed by their group.

Many others who believe in God but are not adherents to a specific faith believe that God gave life freely and all he expects in return is for them to do good and follow their God given conscience. If someone sees another in distress then he doesn't resist the inclination to do what is proper recognizing this leaning as a gentle push from God. That's often what leads many to assist those of lesser means throughout the world.

Many others who don't believe in God may also do good just as above but they don't credit God. To them they are just acting with compassion and being good people by human standards. They follow what is referred to as the "golden rule" but only because it's a good motto not because it's God's direction.

btw) Some people belong to certain churches because it's an acceptable thing to do, it's their parents' religion, the particular church makes few if any demands on them and their time or it offers social opportunities. In truth some of them may actually be agnostics in a religion of convenience.

Im thinking this may be more about what the parents and myYz400 may hold in store for the future. Remember that your duty to your GF is to accept her for who she is, not fix her. Fighting with the parents will only put tension on your relationship with your GF. No matter what she professes to believe, the fact is you are still fighting with her parents.

When confronted with things like this, I generally just tell them Im happy they have found a source of comfort in the world and that I may choose to ask them questions about it later, if they dont mind.

That pretty much always lays it to rest for me.

SJ

I don't think you will find your answer without developing some kind of "faith". Religious "faith" that is.


As it is "faith" that allows one to accept "it just is".

As a religious person myself I share in your sentiment that some God is not micro-managing the everyday events of my life.

In fact in one of the religious text that I follow, a group of people were tossed into a fire for their belief in God. One of the religious leaders asked "Should we not set forth our hand and stop this" the other religious leader stated "No, because the evil doer and the righteous person each have to make a testimony of their life". In essence bad things will happen to good people if simply to test their faith. And the bad person will be allowed to commit the bad act so that in the end the judgment of God will be just. So I accept this bad things to good people based on faith, I do not find any incongruity with God being a loving God and bad things happening in the world.


As for a rational discussion, I do not think it is possible. As what is rational from a religious stand point is completely irrational from a scientific view; or in better words religious and scientific rationality are often at odds with each other.


Another edit....respectful people can discuss religion/science/politics etc.

I could probably go on as long, or longer than gumshoe there, but I'll try not to.

I intend to limit my discussion to the Christian faith.

It is my experience that most Christian churches back up their arguments with the Bible. Of course it makes sense to do so, however, using a Bible-backed argument assumes that one can take this document as ... well, as the Gospel Truth. If you take away that cornerstone, the vast majority of Christian faith arguments start to come apart.

If instead, a person regards the Old Testament as a collection of oral history, with a few legends added in, and the New Testament as a (biased) historical chronicle, then the Bible cannot be the foundation of the argument. Instead, one must first be convinced that God does indeed exist and that the Bible is, in fact His word.

However, I'm not about to embark upon a first principals proof at this point, and the next paragraph or so will be based on the acceptance of the Bible as a complete and true document.

It now having been nearly 2000 years since anything has been added to the Bible, I feel that it is indeed a valid point to ask if indeed God has much to do with the day to day lives of us mortals. It would seem that in the Old Testament, for many generations, there was much direct intervention by God in the lives of the Israelites. They were given clear directions of God's will (which they often disobeyed) and literally spoken to by God. At the beginning of the New Testament, we have Angels of the Lord speaking to people, common and noble alike. Since then, nothing has been deemed worthy to add to the Bible. No more prophets, as per the Old Testament. No new psalms. No new words from God -- at least none that are undisputedly attributed to Him, and can therefore be added to the Bible.

In this, it could therefore be said that the Bible is in fact complete, and that there is nothing more that God need say. All of the answers of infinite creation that mankind need know from nearly 2000 years ago until the end of days is bound within those pages, and nothing need be added. It could also be that God is now speaking to people on a more personal level, and that these smaller interactions need not be documented and chronicled in an ongoing manner. To the latter, I cannot say, having never had God speak directly to me. (I say this in all earnestness, it is not intended to belittle those who say that God has spoken directly to them, it is merely a statement that this has not happened to me, and I can therefore only speculate on this matter.)

I personally feel that it is healthy to question beliefs, especially one's own.

SupraGuy wrote


Hey! That was the abridged version. Don't get me started or we'll end up with a novel.

Very Interesting subject. Here's my takes:

For MyYz400, I can understand your social situation now. I am a Christian, married to a lady who is, well, more or less a non-religious non-christian but God believer. It has been about 5 years we married, and I can share with you that if one of the party is slightly more religious than another, there will be conflict between the couple, NOT when everything is sounds and smooth, but when a family Crisis strikes in the future, which is definitely almost unavoidable in any marriages.

The manner in which how to solve a problem in that situation will certain create some degree of conflicting view, eg. when one party or family is down with cancer, one party might believe in faith healing, but rendered nonsense by another. Conflict of this kind may arise.

I came from a non-christian background in Asia. Right in this part of the world, Taoist mixed with folklore belief rein supreme in some part of the world. It differs from christian belief in a sense that they do not hold similar fundamental belief structure. When I was in the University in Dublin, there was a mild class discussion about social belief. The discussion was based upon the fundamental belief that all man has freedom to start off with. When I questioned (not disagree, but just asked 'why's that'), my classmates actually burst out laughing, well, in a as-a-matter-of-fact way. Little did they know that not all society has that fundamental belief. In Juda-christian culture, it stems frm the basic rights of the 'freedom of choice' that God gives, which ultimately rooted in the western European culture to this day. Subconsciously, it is this basic freedom that even a non-believer has a choice NOT to believe.

So this is how deep the discussion can go.

To make a long story short, I always believe in non-religious way that everyone's life is a journey. We seek, learn, made mistakes and then to correct one's error as we go along. It is healthy to make mistake, unless such mistakes penetrate other's personal rights of existence or choices.

As for mix marriages, its always easy to say that we respect each other's choice of religion. But as a family, some decision has to be done with a single voice. Someone has to compromise at times. There is no compromised decision. Its either a yes or a no in some difficult situation. You will learn as you go along the marriage.

There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who separate people into 10 groups and those who do not.

One of my best friends, UVMike has been talking about you guys for months and referred me to this thread. I joined awhile back but have not been an active member. I don't have any sage words of wisdom on this topic but enjoy intelligent discourse on a variety of subjects. I thought this thread might be a good place to get started. Unfortunately, I'll have to compose it mostly offline due to time constraints.

UVMike speaks highly of you guys and I consider it a priviledge to be a member. I've known Mike for over thirty years. Not only is he a brilliant engineer, he is one of my best friends. We live about 200 miles from each other and have often joked that if we lived in the same city and had our own lab, we might accidentally conjure up a black hole.

EDIT------I read some of the later posts which dealt with other religions, cultures, religious philosophies and doctrine. I purposefully did not mention these due to the fact that the GF's family are hard core Christian types. I have experience with these kinds of folks. ----END EDIT

Now, with regard to the topic, IMHO it's futile to discuss religion and God without a clear understanding of Christianity and the history of the Christian Church. I would humbly recommend Eusebius' "History of the Church". "If Herodotus is the father of history, then Eusebius of Caesarea (c. A.D. 260-339) is certainly the father of church history..." (Paul L. Maier-Translator) You can get it at Amazon here: hxxp://www.amazon.com/Eusebius-Church-History/dp/0825433282.

{--I generally do not post live links due to privacy issues. Just replace the hxxp with http and you'll be good to go. I know you guys know this, but it's pretty easy to miss --}

In the meantime before you receive your book, should you decide to order it, there is a timeline (not to be confused with Crichton) of church history from the time of Christs' crucifiction to modern times. It is a great place to start! What always strikes me when I study this stuff are the splits and schisms that have occurred during the past two thousand years. When you see this, I suspect some of you might find it as enlightening and shocking as I do. You can find the timeline with commentary and explanation here: hxxp://www.saintignatiuschurch.org/timeline.html

On a more personal note, it's been my observation that the very people that seem to argue their viewpoints most vehemently on God, Christianity and religion are the very ones who have never heard of, nor are they able to recite the Nicene Creed. The Nicene Creed (325 A.D.) is everything a Christian should believe boiled down to about a two page synopsis, in it's original version. Think of it as the "Constitution" of Christianity. Additionally, they typically can't specifically and accurately answer the question regarding the origin(s) of the Bible.

I find it disheartening and frightening that Church leaders since that time have changed the Creed over and over and over. Essentially, these well-meaning dolts changed what it means to be a Christian because the Nicene Creed, spells out these beliefs. It was changed to fit the doctrine of the various Churches and the lifestyles of the congregations. It was perfect the way it was originally written by the Church Fathers. I found about a half dozen different "versions" of the Creed this morning. The Nicene Creed is not the only casualty in our steady march towards marginalism, but to me it's one of the most glaring and dangerous.

I believe one can be a Christian without knowing these things and still go to Heaven. I believe that one can know these things and go to hell. "Do you know Jesus" is one very scary question my new friends, for it is the Theology of demons. Even the demons, especially the demons know who God is. The really important question is, "Does Christ know me?" He doesn't give us a questionnaire, he looks at our hearts and lives and if he sees himself in us, we're Christian.

I have a couple of quotes that are relevant to this discussion. As you guys get to know me you'll find that I love quotes from scholars, scientists, philosophers, religious figures, social scientists, etc.... These people speak a lot of wisdom with very few words. I like that. I like it a lot. I wish I could do it.

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind." ~ Albert Einstein

"I want to know God's thoughts; the rest are details." ~ Albert Einstein

"My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble mind." ~ Albert Einstein

I posted a bunch of facts and a bunch of opinions I'll be happy to debate. I just hope I haven't offended anyone.

Regards,

HAL2001

Welcome...

In my dealings with religion I have come to see it as a firebrand in a caveman's hand. It can just as easily be a thing to be revered and preserved as a thing to set fire to anything around it. The thing that saddens me most is when a religion becomes a tool and not a thing unto itself. As a tool, it is molded and adopted and made to suit a variety of purposes. Many of these were never intended.

As such, my family has usually shyed away from Organized Religion and always focused more on the spiritual aspect of things. The collective thoughts of my family usually lead us to a place where we can appreciate several aspects of many religions.

One thing I have always really wondered about in terms of Western Religion is the concept of being "washed". I had one friend who was convinced ( beyond all doubt) that I would never go to heaven because I hadnt been "cleansed". I rattled off a litany of good things that I had done in this world, told him I would talk with God when I died, and then asked him what he had done.

This is what he said " It doesnt matter how many good things you have done. If you havent accepted ( that certain someone) then the gates are closed to you."

A pastor friend of mine later put forth a theory on this, but I would be interested to hear opinions. Is there truly no room in the hearts of deities that they will accept none but the annointed?



EDIT: The more I read this , the more I realize that I could ask and rewrite this 1000 times and it would still seem awkward. If anyone is offended, I apologize, but this has always made me wonder.

For anyone interested philosophy this may give you an interpretation of the historical religious beginnings.
Mystery BabylonIt’s quite long, about 40 hours of audio but does touch on allot of different religions.
Just for the record I am not of any mainstream religious background.

The issues, with your girl friend’s family, might be as much about human nature, than about religion. Understanding a persons motivation quite often leads to simple effective solutions.

1. Many people of faith like to discuss religion. People talk about the things they are passionate about. In this case it’s nothing personal so merely change the subject.
2. Some people are simply argumentative. Religion is fertile ground and you make a convenient target. It’s not about religion, it’s a character flaw. Simply walk away.
3. You're causing your own problem. By telling them you can be convinced you are challenging them to convert you.
4. People fall into old habits and discussions. Break the pattern and don’t encourage them. Find common neutral interests to discuss.
5. They may be rightly concerned for the spiritual life of your girl friend and any offspring. Did she stop going to church when she started dating you. Will she continue to go to church if you eventually get married. What about the future children?
6. They might want you to become a true member of their family. Religion and faith are major components of many families. Yes they want to save your soul, but they also want you to share in the traditions and common bonds that make their extended family strong.
7. Are they raving evangelists? In extreme cases appealing to a person in authority within the family is your best bet. Skip a few family events and have your gf mention that you are getting tired of being ambushed and it’s turning you off the whole religion thing. This would best be delivered to the matriarch of the family. Let her deal with it.

Summary
If the issues you have with your girl friend’s family are routed in human nature, then don’t let religion cloud the solution. If they are truly based in a religious concern for you or your girl friend, then you have a lot of thinking to do. Should your relationship become more serious you might be faced with 3 basic options.

1. Take an ethical stand and if they don’t like your view on faith then that’s their problem. No more theological wifle wafling or discussions. Keep in mind that most ethical stands are expensive. This can work if handled correctly but if the cost of your stand is born by your significant other then it may be more about your ego than ethics.
2. Compromise with your gf and family. If they leave you alone about your faith, you will occasionally attend some of their services. I’m not saying you should join them. Just sit quietly in the back, suspend your disbelieve, and take out of the service what you can. It’s not hypocrisy, to simply observe. You are there to better understand something important to your significant other. It is also a kind of offering/sacrifice to the girl you love and the family you hope to join. (You would be surprised just how many husbands do just this.) If they can’t understand and appreciate this for what it is then screw them. “Don’t throw pearls before swine”, is a phrase that comes to mind.
3. Join their faith. If done out of convenience I think this is a dangerous option. If done out of love for your gf then who knows.

Are you troubled by religion, or are you searching for a reason to believe, and then by default - have faith. Every human on earth can help you find religion, none of us can help you find faith. Faith is just believing in something you cant see, nor prove; yet you feel in your heart it is true.

If you want proof, one way or the other, the only way to find your answer, no matter what that answer may be - is to seek him out.

as for the in laws - "7 habits of highly effective people" ( Stephen R. Covey) chapter 1, page 23 - 45 section on paradigms says it all.

Stop thinking so much and follow your heart. That said - I truly hope you find your answers.

I think its time for MyYZ400 to weigh in..

Not quite..
Has anyone ever thought that religion is enforced by the government they live under? I tend to think religion was created by governments as a way for people to police themselves.
A good example of this is Catholocism in the 1600's. the church was where taxes were collected, and higher power members of church led the government. I dont remember his name but the man who translated the bible into king james. was killed by catholic leaders for allowing people to understand the word because you literally had to pay gold for your sins, so the catholic leaders were pissed.

Even if the Bible isnt truth. It is full of wisdom and healthy principles that helped nuture a strong moral backbone in our society. Truth is you could never have enough police if people had no discretion or morals of their own. which is where religion comes in. But what do I know? Its a personal conviction of mine and i will never completely disown my god because theres no reason for it. so whatever your path is. if your convinced and your happy with it Its fine as long as you don't start killing people because of it. (cough , cough, world history)

Has anyone ever read this letter to Dr. Laura?



Dear Dr. Laura,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's law. I have learned a great deal from you, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend homosexuality, for example, I will simply remind him or her that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the other laws in Leviticus and Exodus and how to best follow them. To wit:

When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Leviticus 1 ). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. How should I deal with this?
I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as stated in Exodus 21 . In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?
I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Leviticus 15:19-24). The problem is, how can I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.
Leviticus 25:44 states that I may buy slaves from the nations that are around us. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Canadians, but not Mexicans. Can you clarify?
I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?
A friend of mine says that even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Leviticus 10:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?
Leviticus 20:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?
I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Sincerely,
A devoted listener

@SJ: Yes, that's a classic example of how certain people will pick and choose which parts of the Bible they will take as absolute, and which they don't. A quick rad through the Old Testament (Leviticus is particularly rewarding this way, since there is a lot in there on Sin and punishment) will show many things that no modern Christian would adhere to, and yet, the one on homosexuality seems to stick...

Of course the answer, within the biblical framework, is that Jesus paid for all of these sins, and therefore at present the only atonement that must be made is the acceptance of that.

@Hoagtech: I believe that the Church as an entity of political power was more or less unique to the Roman Catholic church. I have read accounts of the Catholic Church trying to establish itself in Japan. The emperor, upon being given the Curch's stance declared that it was not, in fact a religion, but was instead a method for gaining political power. As such he refused to sanction Christianity in Japan, which was cause for a long period duing which Christians were persecuted there.

Of course the coming of protestantism changed things for the Church greatly.

Other religions, animism, budhism, druidism, judaeism, mohammadism, shamanism, shinto, don't have nearly the political component to them that Catholicism does, nor do they exert as much control over the people. As such, your argument seems to be much more limited to one specific religion, and at that, what is now only one fragment of that religion.

North American government is supposed to be completely separate from any Church, the whole "separation of Church and State" thing, which therefore allows religious freedom, and is probably at the root for the large fractures within the Christian church. Ask a theological question of a member of the United Church, the Baptist Church, the Catholic Church, the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Lutherans, the Mormons, Christian Scientists, and you'll get as many answers as there are Churches, yet they all purport to believe in the same thing. This is only possible because the Christian Church is not a part of the State, and does not have real political authority. The predominance of Christian sects is likely due to the fact that many of these sects emigrated to North America to escape persecution of their particular set of beliefs in places where the Church and State were not so much separated.

Christians are taught (or should be) that there are 2 churches; The church temporal and the church spiritual.

1. The church spiritual is God's church (it's not catholic, protestant or other. It's God's church).
2. The church temporal is the physical churchs and organizations you find here on earth. It is run by mere mortals and sometimes we get it wrong and screw it up. Some times we screw it up big time. Witness the string of Corrupt Medici popes and the whole issue of indulgances etc.

Non believers have a hard time understanding how anyone can believe in something which time and again has proven itself corrupt and hypocritical. The issue is they, and christians, are really talking about 2 different churches(temporal and spiritual). The political aspect of the church is not truely based on bibical teaching. It is a physical means to a spiritual ends, unfortunately where there is power there will be corrupt people. That includes the church. The concept of seperation of church and state was one of the best ideas the founding father's of America came up with. Not only did it help the state, it also made the church more focused on spiritual things. (seek first the kingdom of heaven). Jesus in fact refused to allow himself to become emeshed in politics (render on to Ceasar those things that are Ceasar's). Many Jews wanted him to lead them in their rebellion against Roman Rule. Jesus refused this mantel. If only the church had followed the same advice. By the way the jews eventually did find someone to lead them. They occupied Jerusalem from 66-70, where apon the Romans sacked the city, scattered the Jews and destroyed the temple. It is rumoured that the treasures from the temple where melted down and used to finance the bulding of the colleseum.

As to how so many people can call themselves christiians and not agree: Ask a thousand Americans what it means to be american and you will get 1000 slightly different answers. and yet they are all still Americans. The same holds true for the christians. We don't always agree on the finer points but we are all still christians.

I started to write my own spiritual story and then just decided to sum up my view on religion in general. My experience shows that people have my different filters that affect our understanding of reason and faith. I'm Catholic and I love my faith even though I've been a poor example of a "good Christian" many times. I allow many things to shape who I am, religion is a foundation of strength and trust in my life, even though I like to ignore my beliefs sometimes, I always feel at home when I refresh my sense of the sacred in my life. I'm grateful to share my Faith with my wife and family as we can stand on the same foundation and find more unity, focus and strength beyond our little souls. I've learned the more I understand anything, the more responsible I become for that knowledge and to disregard it would be throwing away a treasure. So I try to understand others beliefs and this gives me much more patience and charity. I can definitely draw a line between understanding and believing another person's viewpoint. I've also been "in recovery" with my addictive personality for some time (I've built 4 projectors after all:). Living a recovery life style, I've known MANY wonderful people who are VERY spiritual but NOT religious. Religion for me is a revelation of truth from the God of my understanding. The truth cannot contradict itself so my religion is a solid foundation of truth in my life. It doesn't make me better than someone else, but hopefully more accountable to someone else. When I rely on myself for accountability I tend to ignore what's really important in life. Nobody has to believe me, I just hope they can understand me. If someone want's to hail satan or a stone owl at bohemian grove, more power to them, I'd rather commune with the one who created something out of nothing. I can find MANY human reasons to abandon my faith, I can find MANY MORE divine reasons to pursue it and try to understand it more than I did yesterday.

@SJ While funny that letter shows whats wrong with the majority of people who "read" the bible. It's just another way for people to say "Well that doesn't make sense so I shouldn't do anything the Bible says"

Christianity is founded on the idea that because the Isreallites did not follow their covenant with God, God sent his Son to them to try to redeem them. They of course refused and so God rejected them.

As mentioned by Paul the law Covenant was nailed to the torture stake with the Christ. Meaning the Law Covenant was done away with. Jesus said the New Covenant was the Law of Love which technically was what the Law Covenant was meant to be. In other words the whole "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". If you don't want someone to steal from you , you don't steal from them. Love covers all the laws that were in the Law Covenant.If you have love you don't do anything that hurts other people.

So really the Law Covenant was God's arrangement for the Isreallites but Jesus instituted and New Covenant for us to follow. The old Law Covenant while still a good guideline for good living is not followed by Christians.

That being said everything in that letter can be easily explained:


Animal sacrifices were a foreshadow of the sacrifice of Jesus. Since animals were imperfect the sacrifices were made yearly. Jesus was "sacrificed once for all times" being perfect and all. So he really shouldn't be sacrificing now should he?


Slavery in Isreallites time was actually a very loving thing. If for some reason someone got in seriously bad times they could "sell" themselves or family into slavery. Oh but that is terrible you might say. Well not considering the circumstances. The person was given room and board and was well taken care of. It was more like making yourself or your child take a full time apprenticeship job but instead of pay , the debt was paid off. So slavery wasn't done to "make money" it was done as a way of paying off a serious debt and was not done lightly. Also it wasn't for life. On the 7th year the slave was released from service. And that was every 7 years. So if the person was put into slavery on the 5th year they were still released on the 7th year.


This was for married couples and it was talking about sexual relations. Now since fornication and adultery were condemned we really shouldn't be asking a strange women about such things should we?. And everyone should know when their wife is having her time of the month lol. And it is a very loving arrangement even in our day.

This term is sometimes translated "hired laborers" on many translations of the bible as it seems that it was meant more as hiring people from other nations. But if it was actual slavery they had to be treated as good as fellow Isreallite slaves and they also had to be released from service on the Jubilee year (7th year) .


As mentioned the Law was done away with by Jesus. Even if it wasn't the Law only applied to the Jews. So if he was not a Jew it wouldn't matter. Even if he was that would be between him and other Jews.

Lev 10:10 says nothing about Shellfish so no real comment on that one LOL

Lev 21:20 actually. The scripture mentions several defects which would disallow a Priest from going in the the Altar of God. The Altar was considered Holy so everything that was near it was to be as free from defects as possible. Including the sacrifices. Yet it's interesting to note that priests with those same defects could still come into the temple and even eat from the Holy things after they were presented as sacrifice. So it was just a restriction affecting a very small area in the temple.

It's very easy to look at things in the Old Testament and think they were weird and outdated. Yet when someone actually does some research we usually find it is easily explained and actually makes a lot of sense.

That being said Religion is a hot topic and a very personal thing. And Religion is the cause of almost every War and problem on Earth. So we should all take it very seriously and not make a casual decision about it.

Exactly the reason I posted that letter. My experience with people who take the word "too" literally is that it usually leads to problems. Rather unfortunate since nearly every religious text I have read says essentially the same thing.

1. Dont be a douchebag
2. If you treat people like dirt, they will treat you like dirt.
3. Help your fellow people
4. Be respectful to your fellow people
5. Dont be a douchebag!

And the list goes on...

JJ. Thanks for the commentary on the letter.
I too, find that a little digging often shows us surprising results. Its a lot like that game where you tell one person something and then they go down a chain to the last. Sometimes the start and the end are very different. It could easily be said that the newer a text is, the more likely it has deviated from its original translation. Revisions, like history, are written by the winners.
An old fellow I knew once told me about a certain bible that was translated from the earliest known writings in greek. I wish I could remember what it was called.

But it all boils down to how it's used.

I often compare religion to a fruit tree.

Some people will shelter under it
Some will draw nourishment from it
Some will climb as high as they can
and others will use it as a landmark to explore their world.

As long as you leave other folk's trees alone, its usually okay.

Another 2 cents...(plink, plink)


I would still like to know if MyYZ400 is getting what he was looking for from this thread...

Sorry for not chiming in. I really wasnt expecting this thread to go more than a few post. I checked back a week later and to my surprise, I have ALOT of reading to do. I really didnt want to post back without reading your responses first. And I would like to thank you all for spending your time expressing your views. Helps me understand were some peoples beliefs are based. Now on with my novel.... I mean post Below you will read my views, and a few questions I would like elaborated on (help with my understanding of religion itself).

I thought about it the other night. About why i'm not religious, and why I would classify myself as an agnostic-atheist.

I come from a very scientific background. I spend my life asking why and how. I feel as EVERYTHING has an answer. Everything can be explained, though we may not know how to explain it now, but there is some fundamental, scientific law governing everything. And this is were the trouble starts. If there is a scientific law governing everything, then a higher power "a.k.a. God" can-not fit into this equation. Many of scientist spend life times coming up with formulas for these laws. E=MC2, F=MA, etc. If anyone of them publish in a scientific journal of a formula, that the only way for it to equal true it must consists a "god" constant, they'd be laughed at. I feel as if "god" and scientific law can not co-exist. And thats were the atheist part comes in. As for the agnostic...... So sooner or later, there will be a point in which no formula, equation, or theory will be able to explain "the next step". This is the creation of everything. Everything as in matter itself. Some say matter is balls of trapped energy. Ok fine, I think we could endlessly boil down the composition of of things to it's smallest form, but it still begs the question, who/what created it? Why is it here? So one could conclude that they could be something higher (god).

(----now this part is more directed at my father in law, maybe someone can help me answer a few things----)
Now he's why I dont have faith in religion (we'll use Christianity). From what I've observed through my father in law, he regards the Bible as text that is true. If it's in the Bible, then thats how it is. Thats how God wants it, no questions asked (I dont get that part). How-ever there are a few things that I question, and never get real answers. When I ask about a part in the bible, the only response I get is a quote from the bible. How can you argue the accuracy of the bible, when the only reference you have is the bible itself?

For me, there are too many things that about the bible that really doesnt instill confidence in me. One thing I repeatedly say to my father-in-law is....."I believe in things that have supporting evidence behind them. Things that can be proven, either to my self, or by other indepently and repeatedly." Meaning, if someone were to walk up to me, and give me undeniable evidence of gods existence, and that the wantings of god portrayed in the bible, then I would have no other choice than to follow the word of god. But until then, I'm follow what makes the most sense to me, science.

This has caused trouble in our house-hold though. On one occasion (not sure what sparked it), my gf was ready to move back with our parents, telling me we can never get married because I wouldnt be able to join her and my future children in heaven, b/c I was going to hell. Thinking about this, (forgive me, not sure the exact religion) but someone told me that we are able to repent our sins after death. Once we get to the gates of heaven, we can ask god to forgive us, and if he feels we are truly sorry for our sins, we may enter. If this is true, then with my need for substantial evidence, I think if I'm standing face to face with the big man himself...... Well thats good enough for me. I'll know he's does exist at that point. However some would say "it's too late at that point".


I'm taking a break at this point. I hope to hear what more people have to say. Later I'll bore you with Chapter 2.

Edit: MyYz400...I just wanted to let you know I was typing this before I saw your post, so nothing here is specifically directed at you . But I sort of touch on some of the things you talked about..if someone doesn't believe in the Bible as Gods Word, then it could be silly to point to it as the only reference for the existence of God. There are many "evidences" studies that cover the Bible in regards to History and Archaeological finds and terms used for things not yet discovered by scientists (such as underwater currents spoken of in Job) that link the Bible with the outside world, and I will soon be going over a study like this over the next few months <End Edit>

Although many see religion (or Christianity specifically for my discussion) as sort of a fairy tale for the un-intelligent..there is actually a logical process one must follow to come to a conclusion about God and what his requirements for us are:

1) How do I know about God, Jesus, etc.?..From what I can read in the Bible <Again, speaking in Christian terms>
2) Do I believe in the Bible as the words of God, whether direct or through an inspired prophet/apostle..etc? If so then I must accept that there is authority in the words and commandments contained therein. If not then you can only appeal to the natural world or historical/archaeological findings that give the Bible any merit.

For those who do not believe there is never any appeal other than that of reasoning with one another that we should use. Again, if one believes the Bible is authoritative, they will see they have no authority to force religion by physical means under New Testament Law. I can only present arguments..if you think they are silly/dumb then I should not attempt to bully/intimidate you as then I would be breaking the very law I claim to believe in and therefore abide by.

Christians are to reason with (Acts 19:8) and persuade men (2 Cor. 5:11), and the "warfare" spoken of, unlike in Old Tesament times, is spiritual, not physical (2 Cor. 10:4) and again are used to cast down arguments (again, reasoning).

To echo Jon's post, Hebrews 8/9/10 talk exhaustively about how we are no longer under the Old Law (Old Testament), so things that were done then are not the things that are done now. The Old law is described as a shadow and many things serve as a pattern or type that carries over into the new testament (blood of bulls/goats vs. blood of Christ, etc.). It is evident that we are not bound by them. In fact certain things required under the old testament are condemned under the new!

Ac 15:24 - Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, "You must be circumcised and keep the law"*--to whom we gave no such commandment--

This is an interesting verse because circumcision was a requirement under the Old Law, but here we see some being reprimanded for teaching it under the new..and the interesting argument against it is "we gave no such commandment". We can therefore conclude here as well as many other verses in the Bible that the things of the Old Law don't just carry over unless authorized. This obviously was not!

Another logical argument: If I believe in the Bible, therefore believing in it's authority, I understand that it contains everything we need to know to live our lives in an acceptable manner:

2 Tim 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Ga. 1:8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed.

If I take these things to heart, do I feel it necessary to write some new creed? If so why?


There are many specific commands in the Bible that I had never seen in the first 20 years of my life, especially concerning the early churches and their organization:
1 Tim 3:2 talks about the office of a Bishop (also called Elder, Overseer, Presbyter). What are the requirements?

A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, able to teach; 3 not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, but gentle, not quarrelsome, not covetous; 4 one who rules his own house well, having his children in submission with all reverence 5 (for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God?);

This was completely contrary to anything I had heard before? how should I handle it? What is the logical conclusion I need to make?

I probably went off on a tangent here..I just intended to echo jon and say that I believe Christianity to be a logical process, built on layers of rational argument. You dont' open an algebra book and start in chapter 13, however, it's a gradual process and begins with the simple question, Do I believe in God/The Bible? (Again, speaking in Christian Terms).

Boy talk about confusing. LOL

It would seem that if there were a scientific law governing everything then that would prove the existence of God.

Because science has proven that you cannot get order out of chaos. So if everything has a scientific law governing it then the conclusion is that something orderly caused it ie. a creator.

Well to me anyway , but that's just my thoughts on that matter.

Now what I've found out about the Bible is usually a matter of not understanding it or looking deep enough. Example, I don't understand half of what ole Willy Shakespeare said or meant. But once I look deeper into the language and views of the day I can understand it. Same with the bible.

Second the fact that modern Christianity has twisted and warped what the Bible says in order to accomplish it's own ends. Like controlling people, getting money from them, scaring them into doing things their way. This causes people to not trust the bible or even look into it to see what it REALLY says.

My advice is for people to think of it this way. If someone follows what the Bible advice in their life what would happen? I mean if they truly love their neighbor, not cheat on husband/wife, not steal, not lie, not murder, respect their wife, honor their husband, kids listen and respect their parents, etc etc. What kind of world would this be and how different would our lives be?

So my conclusion is this: I will follow the bible as if it were the word of God. I'll live a good life being as good a person as I can. I'll then be happier than 99% of the people in the world now and who knows, when I die there might just be something truly wonderful waiting for me. If not I still die happy

I really just came here today looking for lower prices on 8" or smaller panels

@greymalkin - For the longest time I never knew what was on your head....until I had a child, and my gf showed up with the "bumbo"!

@jonjandran -
It has. It's called "equilibrium" Things will find a natural steady state over time. It may take a LONG time, but it will happen. (thats probably not what you were getting at tho )


I completely agree. Active Christians (poeple who follow the word of god closely) tend to be much more collective. Some of the nicest, trustworthy people I have ever met, were in fact at church. I also agree that with out the fear of "hell" or "damnation" there wouldnt be any long term consequence for ones actions. Thats why I and many other atheist go through life following samuraijack's rule. Dont be a douchebag. I have the ability to do what ever I want on this earth. Hurt anyone I please, "sin" as I like, and release terror of "douchebagginess" in my wake. However, I only have one life. I kinda enjoy it. If I leave everyone p'ed off at me, or get myself thrown in jail.... then I really can enjoy my one and only life. So in a way, my "morals" are really just an act of selfishness. I'm nice to others (try to be ), in hopes they'll be nice back, in turn making my life easier. Sounds heartless i know but if you think about it, it's really not. We all enjoy seeing a smile on our significant others face, why? Because you want to see them happy. YOU want to see them happy. It really all boils down to selfishness.

@MyYz400: In regards to the Bible being the reference to the Bible: One thing that scholars agree on is that the Bible, as a document is internally consistent. Certainly there are discrepancies between the old and new testaments, however, when viewed (As Jon said above) as the New testament being exactly that, a new covenant with God, superceding and overriding the Old testament, it works. Because the whole is consistent, then any given piece which does not seem to fit is likely because that piece needs some of the supporting pieces.

As to everything operating according to a natural law, I'd liken that to a computer. I'm a programmer, and when I write a program, it is my intention that any data given to that program should be processed in a predictable, and organised manner. The computer program will then represent God's creation. However, since I am NOT omnipotent, nor omniscient, a user sitting down in front of a keyboard might do something which I hadn't expected, in which case the manipulation of data does not go in the expected and predicted manner. We're all the users of God's "program" -- the fact that things DO happen in a predictable and logical manner is just more "proof" that God is better at this. Okay, the analogy is strained, but that's the gist of it.

@Jon: in regards that letter, the author is trying to make one point: The use of Leviticus 18:22 to condemn homosexuality is an invalid point. I mean Lev 19:28 also condemns tatooing, but that doesn't seem to raise nearly the ruckus that homosexuality does. (Heh, looking it up, Lev 19:19 condemns my poly-cotton blend T-shirt.)

The point being that it's not only those who aren't taking the Bible seriously who are guilty, and the point that that "letter" brings home is perfectly valid. Even if a homosexual individual is living against God's law, I would say that so are we all, in some degree or another, and the homosexual person is no more or less guilty than anyone else, and has just as much right to God's love as anyone else.

Morals versus good behavior is a subject that has always been cause for concern for me.

I often see people who are supposedly making moral choices, when they are merely following a set of rules dictates by a higher authority. Since morals originate from a person's weighing and measuring the truth of a circumstance, then how can these people be moral if they have not weighed or measured?

Truth is...they are not.
They are conforming to a set of societal beliefs dictated by an authority.
These people are not moral. They are conformists.

Old Man Smith dies at 95 and the people come out in droves to say what a "good" man he was.
Really? How EXACTLY was he good?

He always paid his taxes.
(They throw people who are late on taxes into court, sometimes in jail.)

He wouldnt hurt a fly.
( Jailtime is pretty much mandated for violent actions against another.)

He was so good to his wife.
( Yes, when your married they kind of expect that. Plus you dont get laid if you are mean to your wife.)

He always kep his lawn neat and was a good neighbor.
(He didnt want to piss anyone off.)


Im not saying this is a bad thing however.
Some people lack the capacity or desire to weigh moral issues and thus find it easier to endorse a belief system that is ready made for them. Its very much like buying a stereo. Just as the person who buys a box stereo set versus a component builder, these two will both end up with a stereo to listen to. The conformist and the moralist will end up with their frameworks to guide their actions.
Yes, you can argue that one is better than the other, but its really a question of what matches up best with each person.

In this way Religion, Philosophy, and Science all play a role in providing the soul with an orderly framework to view what is essentially a very chaotic universe. You can choose one of the frameworks, two, or all three and probably many others as a basis and then work your way to a more comfortable understanding of the hows and whys of your life.

These things are all derived from the human need to understand and possibly control events outside of their influence.

Wether they are moral is decided by the endorsement of the ideals in terms of weighed consideration and a decision that this is indeed the best course of action based on the merits of the framework or idea.

In other words, if you have considered and weighed an idea and found it to be compelling, then actively pursueing it is a moral act.

I like this quote: "I have gained this by philosophy: that I do without being commanded what others do only from fear of the law."
Aristotle, Circa 344BCE.

I like this guy...


My belief system puts forth that people will develop belief systems for themselves and they will be reinforced over time. Any cause of stress in that system will usually cause stress in the person as well. If the system is threatened by a particularly strong outside influence, people will get really upset. Sometimes Religious frameworks will be particularly vulnerable to science influnces and so on...

My take on your realtionship is that you both need to compromise a little if you want to make it work. She must get a little more clinical and you must get a little more "open" in terms of the religious aspect. Accept that her family has strong devotion to their religious framework and that the gifts that they give arent meant to belittle or guilt but that "This makes me feel good and comforts me and I would like you to experience that too."

Above all, do not engage in arguements or discussions about it with them EVEN IF THEY START IT. If you and your GF are really to be together, then you will naturally drift towards each other. But to be blunt, if she is crying over not seeing you in heaven, then she is either overly romantic or she is very firmly entrenched in her religious framework. That does not bode well for you.

As I have learned (quite painfully I might add) sometimes the kindest thing to do is to leave.

But follow your guts and your heart and see where it leads. Life is all about the journey, afterll.

SJ

See thats just it. You computer program follows the laws (commands) you programmed it for. When it returns false data, does not mean the program didnt run as it was programed, it just means an unexpected operation took place. So just because at the time of the error you dont understand why it did what it did, you know that there is a physical reason behind it, and you dont pass it off as "it just is". You can explain why and how it error'ed. Same with the law of nature. Just because something doesnt perform as expected, should we write it off as an act of god? Or should we understand that there must be a physical, finite reason behind it? This holds true about things that we may never understand. Things far beyond the grasp of humans ability to test and prove.

I once was told by a christian, god put everyone on this planet for a reason. Everyone has a purpose. When we die, it is our time to die. God feels we have completed our goal in life, and it's now time to join him in heaven.

If we were to say this statement was true. Why do you look both ways before crossing the street? Why put on a seat belt? Why have hospitals and medicine? If I get in a car w/o a seat belt, god will protect me. And if I get into a fatal accident, then I know it's my time and I have nothing to worry about. For I will be in a better place now, looking after my friends and family from heaven with my lost relatives. Being in total ecstasy while I wait for my love ones to join me. This just doesnt make sense to me? It seems like a oxymoron. God will protect me until it's time to go, but mean while I need to fight to survive?


The other night I watched a christian movie with my gf, called "Facing the Giants" (some of you probably heard of it or seen it). Near the end, (warning spoiler ahead) the underdog team ends up praying to god for help, saying they needed guidance and strength to win this game. After winning the game (sorry for the spoiler), the coach goes around the locker room asking "What is impossible with god" and the team members replied with "nothing coach!" This left me with questions. Why did god help them out? or did he? If the other team prayed just as hard, who would win? Does god only help those who pray more than the other? Who deserves it more? And if I was a member of that team, and I had faith that god helped our team that day, I'm sorry but I'd walk away feeling like crap. Thinking the only reason we won was because god helped us. We werent good enough to win on our own, we needed help. Seems like a foul win to me.

It's things like this that bug me. Feeling of not being in control of my life. Feeling like a child under a parents wing. I'm sure others dont feel the same way as me, or maybe they do and enjoy that feeling. The feeling of not being alone in this world. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Thats part of ones choice. But I cant understand the interest people have in religion. Not saying i think it's wrong or anything, just I can understand it.

The following is based upon the idea that we are looking at it as Christians who believe the Bible is the Word of God.

Yes we are all in some degree or another living against God's law. This is why the bible says we have all sinned and are all sinners.

But if a person is a "Christian" meaning they follow the laws of Christ, then they have a way of getting forgiveness for these sins. That being ....A person must acknowledge his sin, recognize that it is an offense against God, confess it unqualifiedly, have a deep heartfelt sorrow for the wrong done, and have a determination to turn from such a course or practice. Then he must pray to God, asking for forgiveness on the basis of Christ’s ransom sacrifice.

So while all sins are equal in that they are all sins which alienate us from God, the true "Christian" tries to stop and/or control these sins. Thus a homosexual according to the definition of being a Christian technically isn't a Christian.

And homosexuality is also condemned in the New Testament so it is a part of the New Covenant that Jesus instituted : Romans 1:26,27 and 1 Corinthians 6:9,10

And while we all have a right to God's love the bible clearly shows that he hates those who practice wrongdoing and don't change.

But this is straying a bit to much from the main topic and it could lead down a road of hostility and that is what we want to avoid.

My favorite line in The Matrix : The Oracle talking to Morpheus " I expect what I have always expected. That you will make up your own damn mind." LOL
That's what everyone should do in order to be happy and content with their decisions in life.

I really enjoy GK Chesterton's quotes on religion. He is a Catholic/Christian convert and wonderful author from the early 1900s, sort of the Catholic C.S. Lewis. His writings ring loudly in today's culture. Here's some of his quotes on Religion (I really like the first one):

Religion and Faith

"If there were no God, there would be no atheists." - Where All Roads Lead, 1922
"One of the chief uses of religion is that it makes us remember our coming from darkness, the simple fact that we are created." - The Boston Sunday Post, 1/16/21
"The Bible tells us to love our neighbors, and also to love our enemies; probably because they are generally the same people." - ILN, 7/16/10
"There are those who hate Christianity and call their hatred an all-embracing love for all religions." - ILN, 1/13/06
"The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and left untried." - Chapter 5, What's Wrong With The World, 1910
"The riddles of God are more satisfying than the solutions of man." - Introduction to the Book of Job, 1907
"It has been often said, very truely, that religion is the thing that makes the ordinary man feel extraordinary; it is an equally important truth that religion is the thing that makes the extraordinary man feel ordinary." - Charles Dickens
"Theology is only thought applied to religion." - The New Jerusalem
"The truth is, of course, that the curtness of the Ten Commandments is an evidence, not of the gloom and narrowness of a religion, but, on the contrary, of its liberality and humanity. It is shorter to state the things forbidden than the things permitted: precisely because most things are permitted, and only a few things are forbidden." - ILN 1-3-20
"These are the days when the Christian is expected to praise every creed except his own." - ILN 8-11-28
"Puritanism was an honourable mood; it was a noble fad. In other words, it was a highly creditable mistake." - Blake

One of his main themes on philosophy and theology is that truth contains paradox. My understanding of damnation is that God doesn't "send" us to hell (eternal separation from God) for our sins, we chose separation by our own free will. Many men who believe they are "free" to do as they wish only discover that they are indeed enslaved by their very passions for "free" living. If God created our free will, He could take it away and force us to love Him. So it appears he desires us to choose Him instead of forcing us. Kind of like setting your love free in hopes it will come back to you. The best definition of hell I've heard is "the absence of God".

On the topic of Sin being deadly, Adam and Eve's story explains it best. The serpent tells Eve to eat the forbidden fruit and that God lied about death. God says you eat that fruit and you will die. She and Adam eat the fruit - Do they die? The only death they experience from eating the fruit has to be a spiritual death because they live on to populate the earth long after eating the fruit, passing their sinful nature to all future humans. So Jesus and Mary are considered the "new Adam" and "new Eve" in salvation history. Through Mary's "yes", Jesus enters the world (eternal life), through Eve's "yes", sin enters the world and fallen nature is past on with Adam (eternal death). When the old testament symbolizes the new testament, it's called a "biblical type". This is why the old and new testaments are meant to be read together to "see the big picture of God's revelation throughout history. Anyways, I don't want to be a preacher, I'm just explain my understanding of these matters.

"Let your light so shine before you that they may see your good works and glorify your father in heaven".

Biblical quotes have their authority based in your faith. They can help deepen faith but don't instill faith. The bible even talks about this phenomena. In Isaiah and Matthew they talk about hearing without hearing and seeing without seeing. A quote taken out of context is useless. It's even worse than that. Even if you read the whole bible, it is still out of context if read without faith. Over a life time of reading and rereading people re-experience this as their faith deepens and changes.

Here's an example: A theological professor of mine gave a lecture on the story of the plowman. In this parable it says the plowman who looks back isn't worth his wage. Although his explanation was solid he missed something. Growing up we kept draft animals. I have plowed fields with a gang plow and so immediately saw the significance of the parable. A plowman who doesn't keep his eye on the horizon or who looks back to admire his own work will plow a crooket furrow, and every row after that will also be crooket. Without the life experience of actually plowing (or a smart ass student) the professor missed some of the significance of the message. Likewise the bible is very 2 dimensional without the experience of faith.

So how do you acquire faith. That's where the quote comes in. There are people out their who even athiests would describe as deep spiritual beings. There is simpley something more to them than meets the eye. They don't spout religion. They simply live their faith. Kindness, generousity, sacrifice, and a deep consideration for others are their trademark. They are just people like you and me but have somehow found their way closer to God. You will find them in almost every house of worship. If you want to learn about real faith then don't over intellectualize it. Simply spend some time with people like this. Faith is like love. To fall in love you must spend time with the person you are to love. To find faith you must spend time in the presence of God. I know it sounds hokey but the light refered to in the quote above is the spirit of god. It is the light that inspires the good deads, and it is the light which will eventually lead you to God. It your choice and that's the way it should be.

It is not the messenger of The Light that is important. It is The Light itself.

In the grand scope of things dark vs light, good vs evil, etc correct however the carrier of said message carries a significant weight in how the messege is recived and, even how it is viewed by others out side that section of the world population.

Will Smith defending Tom Cruise for example, two differant messenges of a light message yet both viewed very differantly based on the perception respective figure head / original messenger, AND then sucessive carriers of said messenge.

after thousands of years we have this conclusion: In the end you will know for sure, till then follow your heart.

Agreed!

However it's not always that easy. Others may not agree with what your choice, and my see you differently because of this. Especially when it comes to marriage. If you were a heavily active christian, and you spent a good portion of your life teaching the word of god to your children, and now you see your daughter marrying an atheist, it would go against your faith and maybe even your morals. Shoot, the pasture of my gf's church wouldnt allow me to participant in my own sons birth announcement, because we had a child out of wedlock and "he'd be condoning a sin." Thats just wrong. I went that day, with my gf and son. And when he called her and my son up to the front of the church for the announcement, I walked out. I have no problem bending my personal morals by going to church, but he will not budge under and circumstances. He even refused to marry us (it's ok with me, dont really like the guy anyways. He's a very "my way, or no way" kind of guy.)

This is hopefully obvious to Christians but "Lucifer" means "bearer of light" in latin. In his case of self-enlightenment his actions said "I know as much or more than God" when he fell from Heaven. Before his fall and the fall of other Angels, he was the "brightest" of all the Angels and the most beautiful. We are the brightest and most beautiful of God's creatures on this earth, though sometimes that's arguable. His pride lead to his fall by refusing to follow God's plan of becoming one of those lowly humans (Jesus). So as satanic believers preach, you follow your own "light" to find fulfillment/enlightenment, this is the message of satan's actions against God's will. The satanic message is you are your own god of sorts so why worship your supposed creator. So I understand our fallen nature is the tendency to "do it my way" instead of God's way. For this reason my "messenger of The Light" is hopefully the Holy Spirit as there are MANY fallen spirits who bear a false "message of light" in order to deceive souls and destroy Faith. If God is the source of all Truth then I only need His spirit for guidance. That's not to say any believer has attained perfection in this. I often fall into the trap of self worship. Self worship is a rather dark place from my experience. I hope we can all find the TRUE light and not be deceived by relativism, it's comforting to know that God can always meet us where we are. And one candle can light up a very big place. That being said I believe in the gift of free will and I'll defend anyone's free will to believe what they want as long is they aren't causing harm to the innocent. If they do cause harm to the innocent, hopefully there is a way to protect the innocent.

Good for you, seriously heres some ammo:

When I was a baby, my folks wanted to baptise me at the catholic church ( both sets of Grand parents are catholic ) and the priest told them they needed to sign a contract that said they would come to church every sunday. When they admited they wouldnt actually do that he stated thats fine, just sing this saying you will. I was baptised 33 years later after finding my own path, and odly enough I just cant seem to get that "every sunday" thing down either

I see a couple choices: Does a lawyer fight out side the system? never they will lose instantly, he usues the system against its self, and in turn in order to combat your inlawns your going to have to use (note: Use, I didnt say adaopt) thier belife system to counter them point for point. OR Tell the inlawn to butt out, and tell "dad" that YOU are the man of YOUR family, as he is his own and when she became your wife, his juresdictyion ended, which could cause a rift for a while which I wouldnt recomend.

I was looking things up and I had a thought: Ask him all bout what happens when a man and a woman marry, the family structor etc in the bible. Perhaps by reading and "teaching" you these things ( which you can later use as amunition, and lets face it, the wife _will_ take notice and be pleased..) they will realized they are nosing where perhaps they shouldnt.. You may not like the idea but two things will happen: You can later use this informationas amunition, and your wife will feel loved*** because your taing time and intrest in somethign that is important to her. Either way you win.

***(ok this may thrown a guy, it did me for sure - look into "Love and respec" its a christian based book, a damn good one too no matter what your views are, if you skip it because of the christain part your realy shorting your self on a great resorce, this book saved our marriage.)

Just to be sure: you'll find your own path, wich ever that is, but you have a war here. As any parrent here on LL can tell you ( admit it or not eh?) every time a parent teaches a lesson to thier kids, they always end up learning somethingin return. When sound advice when told to the child clicks in the parents head as well.

Dont war with they inlaws unless they are absolutley insufferable. Try to get "dad" to teach you and through that they should realise thier own mistakes.

this may be a tad redundant but I am whooped fomr a looong day and can barley focus.I hope it was coerant. enough.

yes tyops gallor and spelling erros I sure. Opera apparently doesnt have spell check and right now I'm to tired and lasy to do it.

Limiting access to certain christian sacriments to christians is reasonable from a faith perspective, but the fact that this pastor refuses to marry you is very disturbing. Most christian denominations including Catholics, Anglicans, Lutherans, Baptists etc allow such marriages. Some may discourage it but won't deny it. There is biblical support for such marriages.

1 Corinthinan (7:13-7:14)

13 - And a woman who has a husband who
does not believe, if he is willing to live with
her, let her not devorce him.
14 - For the unbelieving husband is sanctified
by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is
sanctified by the husband, otherwise your
children would be unclean, but now they are holy.

It might be useful to find out if your pastor is stepping outside the bounds of his authority. Seek a ruling from the governing body of your denomination. People are people and sometimes we get things wrong. The trick is not to make it an attack against the pastor. Don't even complain to other parishoners. Undermining will not help your cause and may get you band.

I personnally am a strong believer in the bonds of matrimony. Nothing changes and yet everything changes. If he won't marry you and you still want to get married then get a civil marriage. It's not about the pastor. It's about you, your wife, and God.

Religious theology aside, the above post sets off warning bells for me.
If you go around him, then the family, the GF and the congregation will NEVER forgive you. I know from personal experience that while many christians practice forgiveness, there are many who dont. You arent going to just "get your way". The fact that this man is your GF's and her families Spiritual Leader. That does not bode well for you. They have voluntarily taken his lead and his teaching s and if you undermine him, the repercussions will be severe. The family will see it as a betrayal and the pressure on your GF will be unbearable, even if they dont directly say anything.

(GRAIN OF SALT TIME)
I dont want to seem unsupportive, but this may really turn into a difficult task a few years from now. When the fire turns into the burning embers of a long lasting marriage, support is gathered from around you. The disparity you have now is an inconvenience. Years from now it could be a hardship. Im not trying to stop your marriage. Im just trying to show all sides of this.

PLEASE be careful. This decision is going to effect a lot of lives over the years.

SJ.

agree 100%

Anyone with Athority from the State can preform a Marriage.

Agreed that the ceremony is not about the Pastor, it about you and your significant other.

As for the Pastor, the very fact that he called your GF and son up, shows a double standard, if he does not condone the sin of out of wedlock sex then he would not have called the GF and son up.

As for the reprocussion, I agreed it will be hard if you "alope", however, as true believing Christians they MUST by Command of Almight God forgive you, lest they be dammed.

Romans 12

19 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
20 Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.
21 Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.

Lords Pray "Forgive [me] my trespasses as I forgive others of their trespasses"

Here is a great page on the Christian obligation for forgiveness

http://www.believers.org/believe/bel139.htm

Having had brushes with a church congregation before, there is a difference between what they believe, and what they can do. Whether you agree with what they believe or not, this will always be true.

The Bible may say Judge not, lest ye be judged, however, it is in human nature to judge, and putting it "in their faces" so to speak isn't going to make them say "Oh yeah, I should forive them" and be happy. It's going to make them resent you even more. This is going to put a LOT of divisional stress on your relationship, and then when that gets to be too much, they'll be telling your GF "I told you so." Even if you did get married in a civil ceremony, the Church congregation wouldn't change. They'd probably just refuse to recognise the marriage (though your GF would probably not get invited to the Church Singles fellowship.)

In any case, a difference in religious beliefs is a stress on the relationship, and can represent a fundamental incongruity in philosophical outlook on life. This represents something that I think should be reconciled between you, your GF, and depending on her relationship with her family, them as well. While many a marriage has weathered the disapproval of one or both families, many more have not.

I agree, thats why I was suggesting to have her dad teach on marriage fromm the bible, if possible with out preaching, this hopefully will accomplish 2 things: he should realize what he is doing to your relationship and marriage and 2) even if not she will take this action to heart and will "feel loved" by you doing this. Even if there is no interest in learning to deepen your personal understanding, you may gain a more in depth understanding of your spouse as a person, which she will never forget and will treasure more then if you bought her the moon.. Worse case senario it worth a shot, there is nothing to loose.

As for the paster, he is just being pig headed.

My aunt and uncle are polar opposite when it comes to this as well, she is a JH and he says he'll make up his mind if and when he get to heaven. They have been married for eons and they never talk about it, she keeps it in her circle and not in their personal day to day interaction, then again they sleep in separate beds and barley spend and QT whats so ever.

One thing I told my gf over and over is, when we get married I'm doing it for us, not god. I'm doing it to show my love for her and my child, not b/c the bible says it's the right thing to do. Think about it (bible aside) the day you marry your significant other, do you love them any more the next day b/c of it? No more then you would unmarried. I will love her married or not. Marriage to me it a way of showing others I'm willing to spend the rest of my life with this person, nothing else (ok maybe a tax break too )

I just disagree with strangers (her family's church goers) telling me what I need to do and cant do with my child and soon to be wife. I'll love them and care for them regardless. But when I've been outcast as a "evil atheist sinner" and "devil lover" (how do people even come to that one?) by the church, I feel it's rude and unnecessary, and one could even think "un-christian" (arent they supposed to be excepting to everyone?). It also doesnt help that her father is the deacon of the church, and he runs the "Men's Group", and to an extent I tend to blame him for informing the church of my beliefs. On many of occasions he has introduced me as "This is David....He's an atheist" or "He hasnt been saved...", one of two things will happen. They'd politely walk off, in fear athiesm is contagious, or they jump on me like wild tigers, hounding me with preaches in tempts to "open my eye to jesus christ". I dont understand it. I walk around in life, believing what I feel is true with the understanding not everyone carries the same belief as me, and thats fine with me. I dont try to tell them they are wrong, or look down on them as if I'm better than them. I see people for character, not beliefs. But I tend to get the opposite when people with faith encounter me. They feel it's their civil duty to convert me, to tell me I'm wrong.

To be honest, when it comes to faith (atheism falls under faith too), who knows who is right. We all could be wrong? We all have our own supporting evidence, all equally significant. However no-one can prove our beginnings, only show supporting evidence. That is why it's called faith. You find something that you are comfortable believing in and you have faith that it is true. I feel faith tends to put the blinders on some people (not everyone). They believe their way is the right way, which is ok and understandable, but then they feel as if everyone else (people not of their faith) are false and they are bad people for not sharing the same faith. Some even kill over it. I just dont get this. If someone is going to be forever damned for not following your faith, then so be it. Thats their choice, let them make the mistake.

I guess it comes down to this. We will always have disagreements on which faith is correct and which are wrong. But when will we get to the point of acceptance for ones views? When will we see someone that does not share your faith, and we just simply say "Thats ok, I can understand if someone doesnt share the same religious ideals as me. It's their choice?"

Yes faith is simply believing in something you can not prove, I can not prove he exists nor that he doesn't. Your right: belief in either view is an expression of faith.

I am expressing my own opinion based on observation of other various churches in my search for one that fit me: Its heart breaking, as christians we are supposed to be ambassadors and represent god with class. That is a bad church, based solely on behavior and attitude, even as a believer, saved etc etc I would _not_ attend that church. Such behavior is shameful and, unfortunately all too common. My pastor told a story of a trip he took with his son: after attending the event that spawned said trip they went to I-Hop and made friendly chat with the waitress. The afternoon rush started coming in and the waitress made this comment: oh no, here come the christians. He inquired at the remark and she simply explained that they are the rudest, mouthy, bad tippers etc. There is a bread of christains, (which I thinks a fines example has been made here) called Sunday christains, where they act like they think they are supposed to amougnst each other and then are turkeys the rest of the week.

In light of the revaluation about your future inlaw, That attitude make is seem my idea is moot and a waist of time in regards to him, the other point still stands though.

Though agree about your feeling on marriage, I have since learned that women see marriage 100% differently. Its all about that "feeling loved" I keep mentioning.

I truly hope every thing works out for you, and as a christian I apologize for and I'm appalled by the behavior of those people, its shameful and very UN-christian.

EDIT: Husband to husband - should you choose to read that book: if you think it was a waist of money and time I will personally buy it off you for full retail and I will pay shipping.

Google "theology of the body" for a deeper look at marriage and the sexes if you are interested.

I just dropped in after a month or so to see how things were in lumen-land and: WOW! I am once again amazed at the community that has evolved here. Civil discussion on religion for more than ten posts?!? Bravo! This must be an internet first! I'm proud of us. Way to go!

<$0.02 for MyYz400>
Mixed marriage is a tough proposition. As far as I can tell, mine has been an unparalleled success, but I can easily see how it could have been otherwise. Several happy accidents allowed us to maintain our relationship separately from her parents and the church she attended for several years. In addition, my in-laws were significantly less pushy if no less faithful. Seventeen years into it and no unsolveable problems! I'm a lucky guy. Don't take this as an endorsement. I'm pretty sure we're a special case. I'm afraid you're in for a hard road with someone who introduces you as "an atheist". Good luck.

Advice:
I don't mention my atheism to those who would be disturbed by it in large part to keep them from feeling guilty for not converting me. To me, it's part of accepting them for who they are. No amount of conversation is going to change that, and the conflict hurts us both. Yes, I understand that my decision to avoid the conflict delays its resolution. It's a calculated risk.

You're in the open, so you're past that now. There's not point in hiding it. The only thing left is honesty. Be true to yourself and everyone else. Some will accept you and others will not be able to, reguardless of their intentions. Be patient and courteous, but firm. Recognize when you are in a pissing match and extract yourself. Keep in mind that there is a huge store of valuable wisdom in the world's religions once you can see past the crap. Moderation in all things, love your neighbor, etc. Sage advice.
</$0.02 for MyYz400>

I've put a lot of thought into the subject of religion and I have discovered a simple truth: An omnipotent God is fundamentally incompatible with logic.

Can god create a circle with three sides? Can god create another equal god? Can god have his cake and eat it too? All of these are questions about the border between absolute power and logic. What they really ask is whether god is superior to logic or if god must obey logic.

Reguardless of the answer, logic fails to explain god. If god must obey logic, then logic is actually supreme and an omnipotent god does not exist. I imagine that this is a most unsatisfactory answer for most monotheists. How much authority can you give to a mostlypotent god? (Heh. I invented a word!) I guess it depends on what else they can't do.

Alternatively, if god can defy logic, then we are helpless to understand or explain god, because we use logic to understand and define all our experiences. Discussion and argument are a pointless exercise when god is outside logic, because logic underpins not only the arguments, but the languages we use to express them. Logic cannot explain, prove or disprove a truly omnipotent god. God can eat himself for breakfast and make something he cannot destroy and any other illogical damn thing that crosses his mind. There's no point in trying to understand or argue about what can't be understood or defined. Every effort to find proof of god is doomed to failure before it begins.

Without logic, all that's left is faith. Faith is generally described as belief without proof. Perhaps it could also be defined as 'knowledge attained without the use of logic'. Another way of saying this may be 'abandonment of reason'. No matter how you put it, it boils down to emotion and/or fantasy in lieu of provable facts. Not my particular cup of tea.

I think that religious belief is a normal part of human behavior. It's apparently necessary for the mental health of most humans. The small portion of the populace don't need it or can't accept it probably have a sub-normal capacity for self-deception. I know mine is near zero. That doesn't necessarily mean that I'm right and they're wrong. I've learned enought to know that I don't have anywhere near all the answers.

Reguardless of your religous views, I think we all can all agree on Samurai Jack's axiom of interpersonal relations:

Don't be a douchebag.

Write that on a stone tablet!

Pet peeve: Atheism is NOT a 'faith'. Atheism is a 'faith' in the same way bald a color of hair. :anger: Have some sense!

Logic is simply a word we have made up to describe things we think we understand.

What is logical to Einstein seems very illogical to the normal person.

Just because we can't understand something does not mean it is not possible or can't exist.

What seems impossible or illogical suddenly seems perfectly acceptable once we learn more and begin to understand it.

Really we aren't that smart, we just think we know it all