<p>And that quote was aimed towards religions that do teach blind faith and allow incidents like 9/11 to occur. That was not directed at people that believe in God in general.</p>
<p>by hedging your bets, I meant playing it safe in case there really is a god or a devil.</p>
<p>Christianity asserts homosexuals will persih in hell along with atheists.</p>
<p>in my Christian belief, i do not think that homosexuals go to hell. homosexuality is a sin, but it is a forgiveable sin like all others. now, i don’t know much about the gene factor of homosexuality which i know is still up to debate, but i believe that homosexuality is actually a deep seated sort of sin. but aside from that, according to my beliefs, it is the nonbelief in jesus’ sacrifice and god that leads a person to hell, put simply.</p>
<p>I’ve always thought it takes as much faith to be sure there is no god as that there is one. Has anyone heard the word ignostic as opposed to agnostic? I have a friend who describes herself that way.</p>
<p>“is the view that the question of the existence of God is meaningless because it has no verifiable (or testable) consequences and should therefore be ignored. (See scientific method.) The term was coined by Rabbi Sherwin Wine, founder of the Society for Humanistic Judaism. Ignosticism is often considered synonymous with theological noncognitivism.” from <a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignosticism[/url]”>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignosticism</a></p>
<p>I am not really one to support Pascal’s Wager. It seems more that those people only have faith because they are afraid of the reprecussions that they will incur if they don’t.</p>
<p>“it is the nonbelief in jesus’ sacrifice and god that leads a person to hell, put simply”</p>
<p>That rule will send a large portion of the world’s population to hell and presumably allow some really nasty individuals to make it into heaven.</p>
<p>Yuck.</p>
<p>“I’ve always thought it takes as much faith to be sure there is no god as that there is one. Has anyone heard the word ignostic as opposed to agnostic? I have a friend who describes herself that way.”</p>
<p>Exactly, it does. They are both based more on a gut feeling than reason or rationale. It is different to argue that statistically god probably doesn’t exist though.</p>
<p>“i believe that homosexuality is actually a deep seated sort of sin”</p>
<p>If they were born homosexual then how could it be deep seated? Unless you are stating that people are born evil or that Christianity somehow supports the belief of reincarnation.</p>
<p>Also, if god is omnipotent and and omniscient you would think god would be above meglanomania, revenge, and torture. I would suspect that god would be benevolent or even emotionless. Hell just humanizes god, as hell ascribes god human characteristics.</p>
<p>“That rule will send a large portion of the world’s population to hell and presumably allow some really nasty individuals to make it into heaven.”</p>
<p>yea, i can see that with so many scandals and the lies that many pastors live. but ultimately, its hard to really discern those who genuinely accept that “rule” which is subtly shown in his/her lifestyle or those who just say it.</p>
<p>as i said, the “rule” was put simply, which actually has a deep, real reason for being so. it’s not some arbitrary man and death on the cross, as many assume.</p>
<p>
From Webster - “one who believes that there is no deity”</p>
<p>So, are you saying that you’re not an Atheist? I thought you were stating that you were one but I haven’t read every entry on this long thread.</p>
<p>qwilde, before you start attacking, i think you should read up on the theological reasons for the christian faith to gain a better understanding for the many different facets that make it all make sense before you make false assumptions.</p>
<p>one author that i like is cs lewis, an athiest turned christian. he explains his views on chrisianity in his book “Mere Christianity” (although he is a layman and not a scholar of the bible) which is an easy and practical read.</p>
<p>one who believes that there is no deity.</p>
<p>You will notice the word believes. I believe that when I through a ball into the air it will fall to the ground. Experience has taught me this much. In science though a postulation can never be proven it can only be disproved (I was shocked to lean this). Law of Gravity is a fact only because it has not been disproved. So, there is the slightest (and when I say slightest I mean infinitesimal) chance that it might not fall back to the ground. I admit that a god could exist, but statistically probably as likely as that ball statically suspending itself in the air.</p>
<p>I am not one to base my beliefs on diction and syntax or on Webster’s Dictionary for that matter-Oxford all the way.</p>
<p>“qwilde, before you start attacking, i think you should read up on the theological reasons for the christian faith to gain a better understanding for the many different facets that make it all make sense before you make false assumptions.”</p>
<p>I didn’t attack you personally and it would be presumptuous of you believe that I am not privy to your theological reasons for a hell. I simply disagree with them. If you seriously consider my thoughts, instead of rushing to defend the integrity of your religion, you might understand where I am coming from.</p>
<p>“if god is omnipotent and and omniscient you would think god would be above meglanomania, revenge, and torture. I would suspect that god would be benevolent or even emotionless. Hell just humanizes god, as hell ascribes god human characteristics.”</p>
<p>If god created hell to punish humanity for its “bad” deeds, then why create man with the capacity to carry out those bad deeds. If you respond with free will then it just seems god is a megalomaniacal spectator at a very violent play.</p>
<p>i didn’t take it as being attacked personally. It just seems that you define your own view of hell without understanding the christian view of hell (and the reasons for it). much of your definition of christianity, i think, comes from very ignorant people that you have talked to/debated with, thus basing most of your assumptions from there. CS Lewis’ book answers the questions intelligently of why things are in the Christian religion such as Jesus’ death and God’s “indifference.” Only if you’re interested…</p>
<p>There is an old saying about there being no atheists on the battlefield. Certainly there must be even fewer agnostics. With all the religions professing to be able to show the way, and a world full of religious history, and what appears to be at least a strong pre-disposition to religious belief, I think it is pretty difficult to maintain neutrality. A thinking, questioning person must sooner or later make a choice. It is really difficult to maintain the position that we cannot know or it makes no difference. The easiest choice is to at least believe in the existence of God and then try to determine the meaning and consequences.</p>
<p>
Okay - from Oxford - "the belief that God does not exist. " </p>
<p>It seems that Webster and Oxford agree.</p>
<p>Obviously it’s about belief since the question can’t be proven. The question at hand is far more complex than the simple law of physics drawing a ball to the ground and far more difficult to prove or disprove.</p>
<p>My point is that you’re drawing a conclusion from your belief just as religious people do. You assert that your belief is more correct than their belief. They assert that their belief is more correct than yours. Who’s really correct? Neither position really knows.</p>
<p>again you make your own assumptions thinking that your way is the only way possible, ie free will = God is an indifferent monster and nothing else. I would hope that you know there is so much more than just saying “free will = love of God” as a response to your argument. that is why i keep suggesting you read up on the theology.</p>
<p>additionally, i hope you noticed i’m not really here to argue the facets of christianity and the existence of God. debate here is fruitless…</p>
<p>
There are some very interesting examples of brain injury dramatically affecting one’s affinity for religion. This has drawn some scientists to identify a physiological impact on religious thoughts - i.e. it may really come down to some specific brain matter and the way it’s wired. Perhaps the overwhelming human affinity towards religion is simply a matter of physiological evolution that we’re just scraping the surface of understanding.</p>