The merits of religion

Sorry

Thanks. It's all good.

I grant that faith is a tough issue when it comes to Christianity: in many ways, we're supposed to trust God blindly, but certainly not in all ways.

We're supposed to follow God's every commandment, but 1 John 4 tells us to "test every spirit" and make sure that an urging to take a certain action is a legitimate message from God.

Likewise, we're supposed to walk whatever path God lays before us, even when we cannot see where it leads. But while we cannot know every motivation behind the plan, we can trust in the character of its Author. We are to seek God and come to know that He truly loves us and is really looking out for us. Once we accept that this mighty God's plans are really in our own best interests, it's easier to step out into the unknown.

It's admittedly a tough subject, and I welcome you to stick with this discussion: I may not have all the time in the world, but I'll do my best to address whatever concerns, questions, and ideas you have about Christianity.

Have a good night,
Bubba

 

I'm of the Roman Catholicism I was born a Catholic I will die one. I believe in God nad his son. I also believe that trying to push ones religion on to any one else is wrong. But I would be glad to hear about other peoples religion and what it's about as long as they don't try to convert me.

Know why am I posting in here. Well I believe religion has a lot on merits. It teachs you right and wrong and good and bad. All religions do that. And many of them are about peace. But there are those in each religion that go over the edge and get amd with power and think that ever oen shoudl be like them no matter what.

But that's a small number compered to the number of people who don't do things like that. Well that's all for now.

 

Granted the various religions have a lot to potentially offer people. Just the good feeling that people get when entering a church is important to note.

I myself was born a Roman Catholic as well, I attended Communion but had lost interest by the time I was meant to be Confirmed, partly due to the fact that no one in my family is religious - my mother used to attend church but the last time she went was probably about 10 years ago. I don't deny that my parent's lack of interest in religion rubbed off on me.
(Ironically my name is Thomas)

Anyway the point is that one of my main complaints about Christianity is that it places the most important factor of human existence in the 5th commandment (6 in the Protestant faith!). I find that any organisation that promotes good will but relegates Do Not Kill at #5 cannot be trusted - and as a result millions of people have died throughout history because religious people understood the 4 commandments above it to be more important, people killing in the name of god those who worshipped other 'idols'. Also, another important law, Do not Steal, is at number 7.

In fact, I disagree with not only the organisation but the wording and content of the Ten Commandments themselves. Am I wrong or alone in thinking that perhaps they should be revised and made better?

 

Am I wrong or alone in thinking that perhaps they should be revised and made better?

In Christianity, that treads into dangerous territory. It would depend on what you wanted to be revised or made better. If you mean made clearer or more understandable, perhaps. If you want to change the meaning, then most likely not.

 

Let me explain:

1. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

-Surely this should be changed as it inhibits the freedom of choice. Why must all your love be given to one supreme being?

2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

-Lots of spooky language that's merely saying the same thing as #1. Jealous god? Why is he so insecure? Why does he need total obedience?

3. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain: for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

-I can see this one is an attempt to prevent foul language, or at least to prevent blasphemy, but considering that most swear words aren't related to God, it's a pretty null commandment. How about simply - Do not swear or use foul/coarse/vulgar language.

4. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God...

-People now work regardless of the sabbath, and what about those from other religions that do not adhere to this Judeo-Christian belief? Also, why should one not work on this day? Because it's god's day? Isn't every day God's day?

5. Honor thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.

-I can understand the notion behind this commandment, respect of those that brought you life, but isn't it necessary for parents to earn that honour and respect? It implies that even bad parents who beat their kids should be honoured by their children.

6. Thou shalt not kill.

-The most important of them all, yet why is it at number 6!?! How could any compassionate and benevolent god mention this so far down the line? The commandments that promote God's power and control over people come before the most basic of human laws. So if your father tells you to kill, then that can be justified...

7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.

- Fair enough. Should be higher up the list though.

8. Thou shalt not steal.

- Another important one, but it's at #8?

9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

- Do not lie. Why the fancy words and explicit denounciation of perjury? Why so specific? Why are #6, 7 and 8 acceptable but not a general one for lying?

10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbor's.

- In the words of George Carlin, 'this one is just plain stupid'. Coveting your neighbour's goods is what keeps the economy going. It's a natural tendency of humans, so if he was going to make a commandment against it, why would God put it in us in the first place?

That's basically the underlying problem with the 10 commandments. It's not particularly competent to create beings and imbue in them a bunch of things you don't like and don't want them to do. See what I mean? And if he really doesn't want us to do them, why doesn't he eradicate these bad qualities from us using his godly powers? Is it fun for him to watch us struggle? Does he get a laugh from watching us kill each other and his planet, especially if we do it in his name?

Another problem is the number itself. 10 is an asthetically pleasing number that sounds official, and it's without a doubt a list that has been padded.

I'd be interested in what others have to say about the various questions I've put forward. I realise it's all a bit negative but I honestly believe that if the 10 commandments were not only clear in their language but explicit and sensibly thought out, Christianity would reap far more benefits and

 

My problem with religion is that the more I think about it, the more that important parts of it rely on blind faith. Take that god is perfectly good (using lower case god to denote a generic god). That would be a bad thing to blindly follow, because if he is not, then he can take advantage of you and you would let him.

So how do you not take that part of your faith blindly? Holy books may be accurate in some parts, but not in others (sort of like how the movie Titanic was accurate in some ways, but not in others), so unless you can prove the specific parts that say god is perfectly good in whatever holy book you believe in, that is not good.

Some sort of logic or thought experiment would be good, but until one comes up, faith in that aspect of god is blind.

It is possible that some sort of personal experience convinced you, which works. However, can those who have not had that experience be blamed for not believing?

And if God is not perfectly good, then would you follow him for pure reasons, or just to save your hide (don?t want to tick him off)?

There are defiantly other aspects of god that can go through the same questions, but that one in particular seems rather important to me.

Religion has done a lot of good things, especially if one or most of them are right, and if there is a god/god?s. Even without, faiths and beliefs has done a lot for the world on a whole. Yeah, some dumb things have been done cause of religion, but hey, nothing on earth is perfectly good.


EDIT: I forgot to say this, but there may be other ways for faith to not be blind than what I said, just I don't know of them, or have not thought of them. If there are let me know.

 

5. Honor thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.

-I can understand the notion behind this commandment, respect of those that brought you life, but isn't it necessary for parents to earn that honour and respect? It implies that even bad parents who beat their kids should be honoured by their children. Good or bad show tehm respect. learn form them. Learm how not to be like them if they are bad. In other words respect them because they gave you life and they are giving you a place to live.

6. Thou shalt not kill.

-The most important of them all, yet why is it at number 6!?! How could any compassionate and benevolent god mention this so far down the line? The commandments that promote God's power and control over people come before the most basic of human laws. So if your father tells you to kill, then that can be justified... It does not matter where this is at on the list. No one seems to care one why or another. We still have people killing other people. This is something far better to ask. How do we stop people form killing each other?

7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.

- Fair enough. Should be higher up the list though. Same with the last one. How do we get people stop doing this?

8. Thou shalt not steal.

- Another important one, but it's at #8? Again same as the last two

9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

- Do not lie. Why the fancy words and explicit denounciation of perjury? What it's saying is this. Don't tell roumrs aobut people when they are not true. Don't go around saying things about your neighbor if you don't have all the facts and so on.

Why so specific? Because at times it's neighbors that seem to lie about each other.

Why are #6, 7 and 8 acceptable but not a general one for lying? I don't know what your asking here.


Anyway the point is that one of my main complaints about Christianity is that it places the most important factor of human existence in the 5th commandment (6 in the Protestant faith!). I find that any organisation that promotes good will but relegates Do Not Kill at #5 cannot be trusted - and as a result millions of people have died throughout history because religious people understood the 4 commandments above it to be more important, people killing in the name of god those who worshipped other 'idols'. Also, another important law, Do not Steal, is at number 7.

Thing is it would not matter what you put those Do no Steal, etc, etc commandments because people kill, steal, lie, and chet all the time. So how do we get them to stop. How do you get ready of the killing? Can you get ready of it?

 

"but hey, nothing on earth is perfectly good"

I beg to differ, Chocolate Fudge Brownie Ben and Jerry's is perfectly good.

You've made a good point I feel about the quality of gods themselves. It's fine punishing us for our sins, but do gods themselves do bad things? And is blind faith to deny any such possibility? Or is blind faith merely a term used by atheists to smear Christian devotion?

 

Or is blind faith merely a term used by atheists to smear Christian devotion?

I don't like what side uses that Atheists or Christian. Look in my sig Mara-Jade-Skywalker does not have the same religion as I do. But I really don't care for me it's not about. What she believes in it's about who she is and the things she does. To me That group of people who are Christian, Atheists, Jewish, etc who do nothng but bad mouth each other need help and big time. Instead of trying to learn form one another they fight with one another. Why what's the point?

Ok right know on Fox they are showing X-Men. I'm sure we know the story. But in it you have mutents and humans. Both fight each other. But really all ProfesserX want's is for them to live together in peace. To learn form one another. It makes me think can we in the real world ever learn to do that so that there will no longer be wars.

 

I appreciate your response Anidami-

"It does not matter where this is at on the list. No one seems to care one why or another. We still have people killing other people. This is something far better to ask. How do we stop people form killing each other?"

My point is that because the killing, stealing and lying commandments are so far down the list, people don't take them as seriously as they should. For instance, the sabbath and no other gods rules, because they are numbers 1 and 2, have been the most rigidly and strictly enforced throughout the centuries. So what I'm saying is that the Ten Commandments should be more explicit in labelling those three important commandments before all others, clearly indicating that God will not tolerate killing, stealing and lying. So it does matter where they are placed on the list, the lower the number the higher the priority in the eyes of god.

Now I'm well aware that perhaps the 10 commandments were not intended to be a top ten list, but many people would have interpreted it that way, and therein lies the danger of using such a system.

As for preventing such acts in the first place, perhaps if people knew that God didn't tolerate them, they'd approach it with the same fervor that they do with the other commandments, but if it's at #6 then it's hardly worth considering seriously. It doesn't even reach the top five.

"Why are #6, 7 and 8 acceptable but not a general one for lying?
-I don't know what your asking here"

If one's prohibiting killing, stealing and committing adultery using general terms that allow for no leeway or misunderstanding, why then was the same not done for lying? Is then lying to my boss, my siblings and the people of another country perfectly acceptable then?

Language is a very important consideration, especially if you're talking about things that people shouldn't do. That's why legal speak is complicated and a reason that helps explain why government bodies take so long in formulating new policies, legislature and UN resolutions.

And I would argue that it is the lack of strong language and clarity condemning killing and stealing that has allowed so many Christians to get away with it.

 

By the way, what religion is MaraJade? And what religion do you yourself consider yourself?

 

If one's prohibiting killing, stealing and committing adultery using general terms that allow for no leeway or misunderstanding, why then was the same not done for lying? Ok I see what your asking. With a nieghbor it's better not to lie about them because if you think about it the live right next door to you. Let's say you make up some lie about them. Well they could very well do something to and it could be far worse then lieing.

Is then lying to my boss, my siblings and the people of another country perfectly acceptable then? This part has more to do with ethces(spelling) and what you yrou self believe then your religion. It also has a lot do with let's say you have a family and your boss told you to lie to some one you work with. Do you:

a) Lie to that person knowing that if you don't you could be fried and you need the job to feed and support your family?

or

b) Do you just lie to the person?

No religion will really be of any help there. You have to go more by hwo you feel about it then any thing.

By the way, what religion is MaraJade? I believe she said she was in Atheists. I could be wrong. We had talked about it on IM so.

And what religion do you yourself consider yourself? I all ready posted but here it goes. I'm a Catholic.

 

This is an interesting thread.

1) Religion is untrue because:

(a) There is no empirical evidence for God's existence

--And there is no empirical evidence for disproving the existance of God.

(b) The presence of evil in the world disproves the existence of a God who is both benevolent and omnipotent

--Not true, if you are of the Christian Faith. This is what I believe. God gives man choice. If everything was meant to be good, than there would be no choice in doing wrong/evil. The fact is, we were given the knowledge of right and wrong/good and evil. What we do with that knowledge is our choice. God is not going to force us to love him. He wants us to be free to make the choice on our own. So, God is good and loving, but the concept of evil had to be there, as well. God chooses not to be evil.

(c) Science has shown that many historical events are extremely unlikely to have happened in the manner they're described in the Bible

PPOR. Nothing in the Bible historically has been proven to have not occurred. What science can tell us is that their C14 dating, and other datings as well are NOT exact, in fact they tend to be off. Science books will always be changing to adapt to new evidence.

2) Religion is useless because:

(a) Religious people don't behave any better (or perhaps behave worse) than non-religious people

--That, I agree with. Not everyone will choose to follow one's beliefs to the exact letter. Again, it all comes down to the choices of the individual. Freedom to do what one wills.

(b) Since God is presumed non-existent, any supernatural benefits of believing in him are also non-existent

--Only athiests will presume God/or gods to be non-existent. There is no place on the Earth that is void of the belief in the supernatural. Even on an island isolated from all outside contact will believe in some deity or supernatural. And again, science cannot prove everything. For instance, an athiest might believe that the Universe was not created but always was there, which means there was always a beginning-- can science deal with that? Or they believe that the Universe was created by nothing--meaning if you break down the Big Bang to the very root, you still end up with something being created by nothing. Both a conflict of interest, I believe.

3) Religion is destructive because:

(a) It acts as a social stabilizer, thus reinforcing the traditional distribution (or misdistribution) of power

--Again, what occurs is based not on religion but the choices of the individuals.

(b) It provides justification for crimes of prejudice and xenophobia

--I know this is just an opinion, as this statement pockets every religion in the world into one category of prejudice and xenophobic. But as this is an opinion, I would also like an elaboration of this.

All in all, this is what I believe. You do not have to accept it and you do not have to agree with it. I'm not changing my mind, and I am not concerned about changing anybody else's. There it is. If anyone would like to ask me questions on any of my statements, I would be happy to consider them and reply.

 

"And there is no empirical evidence for disproving the existance of God."

There isn't much logical weight in arguing that you can't disprove a thing. It may be true that you can't conclusively disprove it, but that doesn't suggest that it exists.

Carl Sagan's favorite example was this: Imagine that a friend calls you up, inviting you to come see the dragon that just moved into his garage. You arrive, he leads you into the garage and shows you... his car, some old paint cans, and some tools, but no dragon.

"Where's the dragon?" you ask.

"Oh, you can't see him," he answers. "He's invisible."

"Can you hear him?"

"Nope. He doesn't make any noise."

"Well, point to him, and I'll go tap him or something."

"He's intangible," your friend says. "You can't touch him."

"But he is there."

"Well, yeah, of course."

"...Okay, so show me his tracks. We'll find him that way."

"He doesn't leave any tracks."

"Uh huh. So, uh, does he breathe fire?"

"Well, yeah. He's a dragon, isn't he?"

"So if we get close enough, can we feel the heat?"

"Nope. It's heatless fire."

"There's no dragon here," you conclude.

"Can you prove it?" asks your friend.

Now, Sagan contends, although you can't conclusively disprove the presence of an invisible, inaudible, intangible, trackless, heatless dragon, what's the difference between that and no dragon at all?

On a related note, my five-year-old brother has a fear of monsters. They hide in his closet, he says, and when you open the door to show him that they're not there, they hide in the walls. Nothing anyone could possibly do could disprove his theory (he also maintains that the Grinch once came out of the TV and tried to eat him); all we can do is play into it (Dad now sprays the walls with Monster Spray every night at bedtime).

Does the lack of disproof suggest that his monsters are real? Not in the slightest, and that's why "You can't disprove it" doesn't hold any logical weight.

 

"And there is no empirical evidence for disproving the existance of God."

And there is no empirical evidence that disproves the existence of vampires, goblins, unicorns, demons, aliens and so on. Where does one draw the line?

"The fact is, we were given the knowledge of right and wrong/good and evil. What we do with that knowledge is our choice. God is not going to force us to love him. He wants us to be free to make the choice on our own"

Yet the Ten Commandments, as I posted above, contradict that notion. The first being that you will only give your love and devotion to him and no one else. Then there's the Old Testament God, fire and brimstone, throwing them Adam and Eve out of Eden, banishing Cain.

If you create a being with the potential to do wrong, why then do you set about punishing it for doing wrong? And why make a list of things he does not want you to do?
There's no logic in the whole thing.

And how can it be a free choice if certain options are forbidden? That's not free will.

 

"The fact is, we were given the knowledge of right and wrong/good and evil. What we do with that knowledge is our choice. God is not going to force us to love him. He wants us to be free to make the choice on our own"

Yet the Ten Commandments, as I posted above, contradict that notion. The first being that you will only give your love and devotion to him and no one else. Then there's the Old Testament God, fire and brimstone, throwing them Adam and Eve out of Eden, banishing Cain.

Yet God forced no one to do anything. He can present you with what you are supposed to do, but it's your choice whether you follow it or not.

If you create a being with the potential to do wrong, why then do you set about punishing it for doing wrong?

Becuase the being may know better and also it can always choose NOT to do wrong.

 

But why instill into a being that you're creating the ability to do wrong in the first place?

To give them a choice? What's the point of that? To watch people suffer as they try to do the right things?

You understand what I'm saying right? It seems we might be on a different page.

 

But why instill into a being that you're creating the ability to do wrong in the first place?

I don't think I have to ask if you saw the Matrix. But the AI in that movie tried to make the perfct world for humans it did not work. What I'm I tyring to get at? Well it's this even those who are really good will at times do wrong. Adam and Eve were were said to be prefect. All they had to do was not eat that apple. Well they did so God thought well humans are not prefect. But I will let them choose you can be good or evil. You just have to choose which you want to be.

To give them a choice? Let's say God is real. (For me he is.) But let's say he's really don't you like that fact that even though he has all that power he is going to let you choose what you want to do.

What's the point of that? So that people have free will. So that people can do what they want to do. So that people are not being controled. So that you can choose what to believe in. But you still need some rules. If you do bad you are not going to join God. If you do good well you will. But God is giving you that chance.

To watch people suffer as they try to do the right things? Believe it does not matter if you believe in God you not. People will always suffer in trying to do the right thing.

You understand what I'm saying right? I see what your saying. I also see why it is hard for some people to understand why God would let evil be in the world. But think about it woudl you really wnat someone like God coming down and contorling ever part of your life. Would you want to always be told what to do? Or would you like to choose what to do?

It seems we might be on a different page. I don't think you are. You aer asking things that many people even thoughs that believe in God ask at times. Ever one asks those things all the time. Heck people ask if there is life in outer space. Just be glad there are people who will be happy enough to answer these things with out shoving there religion on you. They will give you the answers. But in the end it's up to you to choose if you want to believe it or not.

Note: I also don't have all the answers. No one really does.

 

And there is no empirical evidence that disproves the existence of vampires, goblins, unicorns, demons, aliens and so on. Where does one draw the line?

--That is true. We do not know how to prove everything and some things must be taken on faith. I believe that my faith will save me, for instance.

"The fact is, we were given the knowledge of right and wrong/good and evil. What we do with that knowledge is our choice. God is not going to force us to love him. He wants us to be free to make the choice on our own"

Yet the Ten Commandments, as I posted above, contradict that notion. The first being that you will only give your love and devotion to him and no one else. Then there's the Old Testament God, fire and brimstone, throwing them Adam and Eve out of Eden, banishing Cain.

--The Ten Commandments were given to the Jews as laws to live by--a guide, if you will. This shock you? The Jews are treated differently for the Jews are God's covenant people.
The first commandment says, "You shall have no other gods before me." This is true. If you believe in God, you will not have any other gods before him or behind him. You will pour your faith and love into Him. If you didn't follow this law, then you didn't believe the word of God, nor God himself.
All of this takes place in the old Testament, of course. As for the punishment of Adam and Eve, well, God told them specifically that if they eat the fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden that they would die. The fruit was forbidden to them. They ate the fruit. If God did not keep his promise that the consequences would be death, then that would make Him a liar. So Adam and Eve lose their paradise because they disobeyed God. But he does not foresake them. He provides food, shelter, and clothing for them. They lived long lives and had many children.
As for Cain, well, he murdered his brother out of jealously. Do you think he should have gone unpunished? And you forget what Cain cries out. "My punishment is more than I can bear. Today you are driving me from the land and I will be hidden from your presence; I will be a restless wanderer on the earth and whoever finds me will kill me." But God replies to him, "Not so; if anyone kills Cain, he will suffer vengeance seven times over." Furthermore, God places a mark on Cain so that anyone who finds him will not kill him. If Cain had asked for forgiveness, let alone feel sorry for killing his brother, God would have forgiven him.

If you create a being with the potential to do wrong, why then do you set about punishing it for doing wrong? And why make a list of things he does not want you to do?
There's no logic in the whole thing.

God gives man the freedom to choose between good and evil, right and wrong. He does not say that there will be no consequences for those choices. Every man has the power to overcome evil and doing wrong, but if we choose to do the opposite, then there will be consequences. I believe there is much logic in the ten commandments, as well. God commands those who accept him to follow his law. This comes back to the faithful, you see. If you believe him and you love him, you will want to obey.

And how can it be a free choice if certain options are forbidden? That's not free will.

Just because God forbids certain things does not mean that people will be forbidden to choose whether or not to obey Him. Adam and Eve were forbidden to eat that fruit, but they chose to eat it. They made a mistake and they had to pay the consequences.

It's all up to you.

 

But why instill into a being that you're creating the ability to do wrong in the first place? To give them a choice? What's the point of that? To watch people suffer as they try to do the right things? You understand what I'm saying right? It seems we might be on a different page.

Yeah. You are asking the same questions that I once asked. Why? It is human to ask these questions. We do not have the ability to know everything and what we lack in knowledge eats away at us--plagues us with questions such as "why" and "for what purpose?"

I believe that the pain and suffering that we feel is part of the price we paid for the knowledge of good and evil. It started with Adam and Eve. We are born not into paradise but into this world. And God sent his Son to this world to die for our sins so that we may live. No more sacrificing animals. Just ask, and you will be forgiven. He went through the pain. He suffered as we suffer or even worse.

But with pain and suffering comes relief and happiness. We are not foresaken and our trials here are only for but a time. Temporary. God has greater things planned for us when it is time--no one mind is able to imagine how great it will be.

 

Sorry for the sort of hodge podge of replies here.

Or is blind faith merely a term used by atheists to smear Christian devotion?

That is not what I am trying to do. It is just I think of these questions, but I have a harder time coming up with answers. As such, I ask them. Blinding believing that something is perfectly good is bad because you would allow whatever to take advantage of you if you are wrong, so explain how that part of faith in god is not blind?

(a) It acts as a social stabilizer, thus reinforcing the traditional distribution (or misdistribution) of power

It also has made many people live in a stable happy communities. Can you imagine how many uncounted billions of people have lived and died in relative comfort following morals and not worrying about general things that are undeniably bad? Yes, people take advantage of religion and religious people, but we never think of the many that didn't.

And there is no empirical evidence for disproving the existance of God.

There could be some 'evidence' disproving specific god or gods. Lets say some religion said that if you sacrifice something, you WILL have good weather, and you sacrifice whatever and you still have bad weather, then you have just disproved that god.

There is also a difference between disproving a religion and a god. Proving that the universe is older than 6k years old is rather easy (look at a picture from the Hubble, that is one big camera that has to focus on things perfectly to have a good image come out), which in my mind disproves a completely literal creationism account (different debate though). However, that does not disprove God at all. God still could have worked through the big bang and what ever, and the story of Genesis is just that; a story.

What's the point of that? So that people have free will.

That is rather circular logic. God gave us a choice so we can have free will which gives us the ability to chose.

But do we really have free will? Lets say you know that if you walk out onto a street at a specific time, you WILL get hit by a car. You would choose not to do so. However, we do not have that information, so we cannot make the choice we would want to make, and therefore don't have free will.

Probably, the way I am defining free will is different from what is accepted, but hey, it is a good question.

Does God have free will, assuming He is all powerful and has at least some concept of time? Ah never mind, I have been told He does not have a concept of time, so it is a moot point I guess (but being all powerful, he could?).

Note: I also don't have all the answers. No one really does.

I don't mean this in a belittling way, but by that logic, no religion has given us answers that can be explained and can convince everyone(if any one did, we would have the answers). You might say that religion would answer all the questions if we think of the correct way to think about things, but we have not come up with those ways yet, if they are even possible. As such, should we think with and beyond religion to get the answers to all those questions that we ask?

And just an odd ball question. Can God make a triangle with 4 corners? Explain and give 3 examples .

 

Redxavier:

First, the Ten Commandments aren't in order of decreasing importance. The only obvious order is that the first four involve our relationship with God and the last six involve our relationships with our fellow man.

If you want an order of priority look to what Jesus says in Matthew 22:34-40:

1. Love God with all that you are.
2. Love your neighbor as you love yourself.


Onto specifics.

Commandment I:

Surely this should be changed as it inhibits the freedom of choice. Why must all your love be given to one supreme being?

Not all our love. We can and should love each other, but we should love God first. He created us and has given us everything, and He created us so that we are fulfilled in loving Him.


II:

Lots of spooky language that's merely saying the same thing as #1. Jealous god? Why is he so insecure? Why does he need total obedience?

He's not jealous in that He's insecure: He merely expects what He deserves. Our wives deserve our faithfulness; our God deserves our worship.


III:

I can see this one is an attempt to prevent foul language, or at least to prevent blasphemy, but considering that most swear words aren't related to God, it's a pretty null commandment. How about simply - Do not swear or use foul/coarse/vulgar language.

While vulgar language isn't that good, in that it may upset and offend others, this commandment has been misapplied to vulgarity. It really means, "Don't take an oath in the name of God without meaning it." Or, in more general terms (and as Jesus interpreted this verse in Matthew 5:33-37), it means that we should not lie.

Honesty. That's what the third commandment is all about.


IV:

People now work regardless of the sabbath, and what about those from other religions that do not adhere to this Judeo-Christian belief? Also, why should one not work on this day? Because it's god's day? Isn't every day God's day?

As Jesus explained in Mark 2:27, the Sabbath was made for man; man was not made for the Sabbath. We humans need rest; we're designed to need rest and time to reflect. God understands that some people will work incessantly if given the chance, so He commanded us to rest for our own sakes.


V:

I can understand the notion behind this commandment, respect of those that brought you life, but isn't it necessary for parents to earn that honour and respect? It implies that even bad parents who beat their kids should be honoured by their children.

There's sometimes a difference between honor and obedience. It's a difficult thing to determine, but one's parents can be honored if you respectfully disobey them to do the right thing.


VI:

The most important of them all, yet why is it at number 6!?! How could any compassionate and benevolent god mention this so far down the line? The commandments that promote God's power and control over people come before the most basic of human laws. So if your father tells you to kill, then that can be justified...

As I said, the Commandments are not in order of decreasing importance -- and I believe this covers your comments for VII and VIII.


IX:

Do not lie. Why the fancy words and explicit denounciation of perjury? Why so specific? Why are #6, 7 and 8 acceptable but not a general one for lying?

I'm not sure why the original wording was so, well, succinct for the previous commandments and not here, but it doesn't matter all that much. In Matthew 5, Jesus provided the full implication of the commandments:

- Murder is wrong, but so are insults and even hateful thoughts.

- Adultery is wrong, but so are lustful looks and imaginations.

- Swearing falsely by God is wrong, but so too is swearing falsely by any of God's creations, or swearing falsely to begin with.

The clear implication is that we should extend the commandments about purjory to this simple principle: we should be honest in all things.


X:

In the words of George Carlin, 'this one is just plain stupid'. Coveting

 

However, that does not disprove God at all. God still could have worked through the big bang and what ever, and the story of Genesis is just that; a story.

--God could have coughed up the universe for all we know. The Big Bang could have been a tool, yes. However, Genesis is not just a story. I believe is to be true. Nothing about it is a story. Of course, you don't have to believe it yourself, but if you are discussing the Christian faith, then the truth of the matter is the Christian God and the Book of Genesis is fact and not a story. It is documentation of our beginnings.

What's the point of that? So that people have free will.

That is rather circular logic. God gave us a choice so we can have free will which gives us the ability to chose.

--God gives man free will so that he can choose either to love and obey him. Is that circular?

But do we really have free will? Lets say you know that if you walk out onto a street at a specific time, you WILL get hit by a car. You would choose not to do so. However, we do not have that information, so we cannot make the choice we would want to make, and therefore don't have free will.
--Even if you had no faith in God, choice in how you will die is not given to you. Still, you raise an interesting point that God gave us free will to make choices in our lives, but we cannot make choices when it is time to move on with our lives (meaning the spirit leaving the body and joining God). We do not know when we are going to die, nor how we are going to die. That is not in our hands. I have faith in God's decisions.

Does God have free will, assuming He is all powerful and has at least some concept of time? Ah never mind, I have been told He does not have a concept of time, so it is a moot point I guess (but being all powerful, he could?).

--And we little humans are the only ones who have a concept of time? I believe that the concept of time is well known to God, but he is beyond it. Time means nothing to him in that he can be anywhere anytime.

Meh, anyway, this is my belief.

 

I feel bad posting twice in a few minutes, but it would make no sense to edit something that someone said after/during my last post.

Bubba

I have a hard time following your logic and agreeing with it. I do not see evil as always being a corruption of good. One, why must it be? Two, could you say that good is a corruption of evil? Also I am not saying that God may be evil, just that His motivations for actions may not be for moral reasons. Why wouldn?t He conceder something else, like another persons well being? We think of situations where there is no moral solution, but can we think of one where God would have to make a choice that is not fully moral? I can?t think of one off the top of my head, but that would be an interesting question (especially since assuming a perfectly good God in that thought experiment, He makes the rules, so?).

Just because God is unchanging does not mean He is fully good or bad. He always could have been/will be/is/tense is meaningless half and half (or what ever percentage). Partially good need not mean that He was good at one time, and not at another, or why must it? Being partially good/bad to me means that you are motivated by something other than morals. As such, you may by chance (in terms of the action) do moral things. That does not mean you are perfectly good or not.

God also made Hitler, Microsoft and food that is not chocolate.

One thing that is confusing me is just how exactly does God perceive time? He interacts with us (or directly did) in such a way that we perceive as a 1D timeline, yet how can He not have some perception of time while doing that? Yes, being all powerful, it is possible, but I still ask how?

Edit: You are all posting too fast.

Nord In some way, you missed both points I was talking about. With Genesis, I was just saying that even if a part of a religion is disproven, that does not mean God is disproven. Looking back, I should not have tried to offer any proof/disproof. It may also be worth saying that proving some parts of the Bible would not prove that there is a God. Other things, like Genesis, if proven would pretty much prove the Christian God.

The free will argument also need not be limited to life and death situations. It can be something as simple as wanting to buy girl scout cookies, but since you don't know they are being sold, you can't go buy them. (But some how, I felt a need to go to a comic book store, didn't know why. But when I went, didn't find anything, but I walked back home diffrently, passing by a table of Girl Scouts that I didn't know was there! So I got my own box of thin mints . You may say that that is God trying to help me out, but I don't know why He would).

The time part though you hit on the head. I should have said a perception of time, but my mistake.

 

I have a question for the Bible huggers:

At several different places within the first three pages of genesis, "God" is referred to in the plural, e.g. "And WE created man in our image", etc.

Can anyone explain why?