there Is No God?

[TheHate]

Hi everyone i am ashley, i am a senior in high school age 17
i just wanted to discuss the matter of religon
my mom has always gone to church and what-not
and tried getting me to go.
I agreed but did not like it...
i felt in my mind
how can you bealive some invisable man up in the sky, he gives you 10 things not to do, and if you do them you go to a fiery world?
does that should like love to you?
personally me it did not
and then to think, i get a person on my game messaging me daily saying "God loves you' EVERY DAY! i usually curse at him and not speak to him for a bit. But we had a heated debate on religion and i said"Tell me how you bealive something that has no proven facts NON" and he replys "because i have faith" , In retaliation i said "what if you are wrong?, what if there is nothing and you wasted your whole life"? and he replyed "i would have done it out of love"
Mind you, he is about 13 , but how are you going to waste your entiere life on something that may not exist . Then i relized, i am Atheists because i have had so many discustions on this that it is entierlly to confusing so Atheists is the way to go in my opinion.
But if anyone has anything to say otherwise i gues...enlighten me
but also my mind may not be changed easly
my mind is not easly corrupted

[carolineislands]

Yes, it brings up the problem that Jesus was a less than perfect teacher. In some cases he was literal, at other times he wasn't.

GASP. No wonder they crucified him!

The thing is, you agree that following the teachings of Jesus make you Xian. Have you given away all your possessions? If not, you aren't following the teachings of Jesus - ...The funny thing is, I haven't met ONE Xian who has heeded the advice of Jesus. And they all use the same excuse: "well, I'm not perfect I just try, and Jesus forgives."

I know several people who have done this. I did it myself for several years. The first time I went to live and work in a Third World humanitarian project I gave away a house, a car, and everything I owned except one box of pictures a friend kept in a box for me under her staircase. I had a backpack with a couple of changes of clothes, toothbrush, hairbrush, etc., a passport and airline tickets. I lived in an orphanage for several years and although I own some things now, its still my life's work.

Not that it means anything, other than the fact that some people do take these things to heart. And that, in my work I met up with quite a few people who owned nothing but what fit in their backpack or less. Several hundred of the Sisters of Charity, Mother Theresa's hospital in one of the poorest cities on Planet Earth took it pretty seriously - more seriously than I! One man who lived in a village in the mountains and worked organizing unions for social justice - I think he probably owned a couple of pairs of pants and t-shirts, shoes, hat, etc..

Yeah, they're out there. But that doesn't mean that everyone who follows Jesus message has to live like that. Jesus didn't call every human being to that life. Those were specific people if I remember right.

Point is, you can't say these people don't exist just because you haven't met them. Maybe you could spend some time with the Sisters of Charity in Calcutta? Or maybe volunteer at an orphanage in Port-au-Prince, Haiti. Maybe you'd run into a few people like the ones you're imagining.

[Jester]

My impression is that you are a good guy, whether you are Xian or not. That is, given a decent upbringing, you would have been a good guy despite any religion.

Thanks, I try to be.
I personally feel that my behavior has been aided by my religious beliefs, but do realize that that is my opinion, and not any more or less valid than any other. Research seems to indicate that it's not much of an influence either way.

I often see this: the way you interpret the Bible is always towards your idea of Goodness, not the other way around: that is, you don't go to the Bible to find out what is Good. This is Liberal Xianity. It is a mixture of Humanism, New Ageism, good old-fashioned common sense and the general Zeitgeist of our age.

This, I disagree with. I do believe in applying logic to my concepts of ethics, and I will admit that I am influenced by my culture (though I try to minimize that). I don't, however, believe that it makes sense to remove as an influence the thing I check most often for moral advice. I personally believe that certain forms of liberal Christianity are more accurate interpretations of the Bible than more conservative interpretations. While I admit that social influence plays a role, I don't think we can assume that there it is not also born of looking at the Bible in a more reasonable manner without first establishing that the conservative interpretaion is more accurate.

I simply disagree with your interpretation of the Bible, but not really your conclusion. That is, I could read Moby Dick and tell you it shows that we should be Environmentally friendly, whereas you would say its more about taming the rashness in your soul. We'd both be right (until we read another book and see that sometimes ordering Nature is important, and being brash is a good ideas sometimes).

I think I understand your main point here. I, of course, still believe that my interpretation of the Bible, though imperfect, is reasonably accurate. I personally feel that we all have a tendency to automatically assume that the conservative interpretation is somehow more accurate or "Christian" when Christ himself was vehemently opposed to unquestioned traditionalism.

This is the complexity of mythology: it is always right in some measure, no matter the source. As they say, even Hitler was right sometimes.

Fair enough. But I think I can establish that the Bible was right quite a bit more often than Hitler.

So, what to do? We both see different things in the Bible but agree tha, e.g., slavery and even servitude are to be limited if not avoided; that radical generosity isn't wise all the time, but is some of the time; that we take care of our loved ones; - and to throw in some more Universals: that we should try not to decieve our friends; that searching truth is preferable; that we should not torture people for no reason; etc.

That is definitely a good place to start. In fact, I suspect that it is always best to start with the points of agreement. I definitely side with you on these things, though I cannot help but point out that it is precisely because of my religious beliefs that I will agree. Otherwise, I would argue that (however distasteful) nihilism seems more logical to me. Thus, I'll more than happilly work with you to achieve a more peaceful society in spite of our points of disagreement, while at the same time be eager to discuss them. I'd imagine this is your position as well

All of these ideas did not originate with the Bible,

I agree. I only maintain that they are supported by and logically established by Christianity.

or, frankly, were addressed very well in Jesus's words,

Obviously, I'll disagree, but I suppose that's a tangent.

but when you have a prediliction to find these kinds of things, you can find them anywhere. For example, there are wonderful themes in Gilgamesh, the bhagavad gita, the saying of Confucious and even The Prince or the Art of War.

Absolutely there are. I'd point out that those are all works of genius, however. They are considered great for hitting on these themes. At the very least, the Bible should be considered no different. At the very most, it logically establishes that these things are inherently good, rather than simply things that people find pleasant. Either way, I tend to think that the fact that these ideas are found in many books lends credibility to the Bible, rather than detracts from it. I don't think I'm reading too much into it with the things I've said due to the fact that I cannot find any better defense of an alternate interpretation. Appeal to tradition is usually all I get from Christians who disagree with me; in which case, I continue to feel that my interpretation is valid.

Especially when you consider sometimes the most horrible story is meant to be a cautionary tale.

A caution often includes a very unpleasant thought if we are considering something horrible. Beyond that, I'm not sure what you're getting at here.

As I have said before, religion just seems to an Extreme Book Club. like those people who feel "War and Peace" has every theme every needed in life, and once you crack it, it opens your eyes to truth and beauty. Hell, I know people who feel that way about certain Directors, Artists and Musicians.

These people do exist, agreed. If you catch me appealing to the truth of the Bible on the grounds that some people think that it's true and perfect, feel free to remind me of this. If we are going to understant religion fully, however, we need to look more critically at it. One significant point is the fact that the existence of a deity could logically establish an inherent morality in the universe. This is something quite different (more logical) than an appeal to the "bandwagon" that some people have deep emotional experiences with the Bible akin to being obsessed with War and Peace.
Of course, there is a great deal more than that, but I suppose that's the most pertinent fact regarding the point.

We all have something in common: we look for what we want to see.

Agreed.
My basic response, however, is that this is not a logical refutation of my interpretation of the Bible. The fact that I am human, and therefore subject to biases, does not refute my claim. Nor does it hurt the credibility of my position any more than any other. That said, I'm open to hearing about why you believe that my interpretations are, in fact less realistic and logical than any particular alternative.

[daedalus 2.0]

Thanks for your thoughtful responses. This is a quick note to explain my "cautionary tale" comment.

It was a nod to some of the brutality in the Bible that is often pointed out by atheists as promoting violence, when it may be more of a cautionary tale. That is, sometimes it is interpretted unfairly.

That said, I also see the promoting of violence, and the justification for religious violence in the Bible.