hahaha Bush says he doesn't believe in the Bible, does believe in evolution

[BrianFromWA]

http://pewforum.org/news/display.php?NewsID=15907

All that shows is that they aren't "evangelical Christians".

Christianity is actually quite hard to be equivocal about. You are a Christian (believing the Bible and that Jesus is who He says He was) or you don't. It's easy.

I'm not saying you're dumb if you don't believe it...I'm saying you're mistaken/lying if you don't believe it but call yourself a Christian. You can make up your own name for what you do (hence things like "Reformed", "Arminian", "Gnostic", etc), but if you don't believe that Jesus is the One and Only Way to Heaven, you're not a Christian. That's what He said.

 

[crowTrobot]

Christianity is actually quite hard to be equivocal about. You are a Christian (believing the Bible and that Jesus is who He says He was) or you don't. It's easy.

it's easy for people to make themselves believe jesus was god. but it's very hard for semi-rational people to believe a loving god would reject non-christians and/or send them to hell. so many are forced to equivocate and selectively interpret the bible using their own personally-derived sense of modern logic and morality.

 

[barfo]

Christianity is actually quite hard to be equivocal about. You are a Christian (believing the Bible and that Jesus is who He says He was) or you don't. It's easy.

Well, I think there are tens of millions of people who call themselves Christian but are not by your definition. Not that that concerns me, or should concern you - just pointing out that yours is not the only definition in common use.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

Religion, like all things human, reflects human nature. Religion has different aspects, like charity on one hand and exclusion/prejudice on the other. But those things are simply a part of human nature. If religion didn't exist, humans would still be those things, they would simply express them through other avenues. Religion hasn't changed what people are; it's simply been a vehicle for people to express who they are, like everything else people do, including secular governance through the eras.

Sorry, but I gotta call BS on this one.

Man's natural state is to invent the tool to hit someone over the head with it. Every animal is violent by nature.

Maybe you've read Machiavelli - well that's what things would be like.

 

[Minstrel]

Man's natural state is to invent the tool to hit someone over the head with it. Every animal is violent by nature.

Animals are violent, but they also demonstrate altruism. Humans also have a capacity for abstract thought, which allows for understanding that societies are better for all involved than isolated living and societies require restraint and following rules.

Religion isn't necessary for progress, either scientific or ethical.

 

[MARIS61]

Sorry, but I gotta call BS on this one.

Man's natural state is to invent the tool to hit someone over the head with it. Every animal is violent by nature.

Couldn't be farther from the truth.

I have known many animals in my life and I have never known one of any species to be violent EXCEPT WHEN FEELING THREATENED.

 

[barfo]

Man's natural state is to invent the tool to hit someone over the head with it. Every animal is violent by nature.

I dunno about that. How violent is a chipmunk? A cow? A field mouse?

Maybe you've read Machiavelli - well that's what things would be like.

Without religion, things would be more like Machiavelli than they already are? I'm not convinced of that, myself.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

I dunno about that. How violent is a chipmunk? A cow? A field mouse?

Cows aren't "natural" animals - they've been slectively bred for centuries for certain traits. But there is a saying about a Bull in a china shop.

Without religion, things would be more like Machiavelli than they already are? I'm not convinced of that, myself.
barfo

Do tell what you know Machiavelli thought about religion

 

[Denny Crane]

Couldn't be farther from the truth.

I have known many animals in my life and I have never known one of any species to be violent EXCEPT WHEN FEELING THREATENED.

Good kitty.

 

[BrianFromWA]

it's easy for people to make themselves believe jesus was god. but it's very hard for semi-rational people to believe a loving god would reject non-christians and/or send them to hell. so many are forced to equivocate and selectively interpret the bible using their own personally-derived sense of modern logic and morality.

I understand the difficulty you're speaking about. But you're only taking one of the attributes of God into account.

Yes, God is perfectly loving. But he's also perfectly just. And He considers a lie the same as murder -- both acts of unholiness that must be avenged. It's not that non-Christians get "sent to hell"...it's that they don't "make it into heaven".

It's not something I (or anyone else) can convince you (or anyone else) of, and those that try are not really grounded in the understanding of who God is, even if their hearts are in the right place. Jesus Himself tells those that follow Him are that they are just supposed to tell people about Him, not try to convince of anything or set themselves up as examples.

I would submit that the "crazies", "wackos", "murderers in God's name" that people on the board are talking about aren't really believers....they're actually "using selective interpretation of the bible" to further justify what they want to do. That doesn't make it a) right, or b) a correct representation of God. Religion is man-made. Theology is "knowledge of God".

The thing I pray for sometimes is that people try giving "theology" a chance. If you have and it's not for you, no worries. Looking at human doctrine, patterning your life after a televangelist, etc. isn't going to do anything for you other than make you look like a hypocrite to others and potentially confuse you. But I don't think that a concerted effort to know and understand God is really bad, since it's trying to get to know Someone who is perfectly honest, just, loving and unequivocal.

Regardless, I like the discussions here and hope that it doesn't seem as if I'm trying to convince. If anything, I'm trying to convince you that not everyone who calls themselves a Christian is a wacked-out hypocrite intent on burning, killing, pillaging in their name or any god's (little g) name.

 

[Shooter]

I would submit that the "crazies", "wackos", "murderers in God's name" that people on the board are talking about aren't really believers....they're actually "using selective interpretation of the bible" to further justify what they want to do.

Have you ever noticed that when a noted atheist (or Godless person) commits a heinous crime, you don't hear people say, "Geez, look at that horrible atheist. I don't want to be one of those!" But when a "Christian" does something horrible, the same people say, "Christians are all hypocrites. I want nothing to do with that religion."

The fact is, many people are looking for an excuse NOT to be a Christian, because they don't like the idea of having to follow the moral and ethical guidelines presented in the Bible, or to change their life in any way.

 

[barfo]

Have you ever noticed that when a noted atheist (or Godless person) commits a heinous crime, you don't hear people say, "Geez, look at that horrible atheist. I don't want to be one of those!"

That's because atheist criminals rarely, if ever, list their lack of religion as an excuse or cause of their crime.

Whereas you frequently hear people list "teachings" of their religion as the reason they did what they did.

barfo

 

[barfo]

Cows aren't "natural" animals - they've been slectively bred for centuries for certain traits. But there is a saying about a Bull in a china shop.

A completely "natural" environment for a bull, certainly.

Do tell what you know Machiavelli thought about religion

Quiz time! Oh boy!

But wait, what does that have to do with the point you were making? Unless I misunderstood you, you were saying that life would be more "Machiavellian" without religion. What do his thoughts on religion have to do with whether your point is or isn't valid, unless you are just defining the absence of religion as Machiavellian.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

A completely "natural" environment for a bull, certainly.



Quiz time! Oh boy!

But wait, what does that have to do with the point you were making? Unless I misunderstood you, you were saying that life would be more "Machiavellian" without religion. What do his thoughts on religion have to do with whether your point is or isn't valid, unless you are just defining the absence of religion as Machiavellian.

barfo

I think what Machiavelli believed about religion is important, because guys like him would have been the major influence on things without it. Actually, that IS what he believed about religion

But maybe there is some proof in the proverbial pudding. As the influence of the Church has declined over the past 500 years, society has become more Machiavellian - or am I misreading your own post?

 

[Denny Crane]

To back up Shooter's point and to counter one of Maris' (about the church being filled with sex offenders):

Fugitive sex offender from Plano arrested in New Mexico
[SIZE=-1]Dallas Morning News, TX - <nobr>6 hours ago</nobr>[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]By WENDY HUNDLEY / The Dallas Morning News A convicted sex offender and former Plano school district teacher of the year has been arrested in New Mexico ...
[/SIZE]

Former teacher pleads guilty to sex with student
[SIZE=-1]Austin American-Statesman, TX - <nobr>11 hours ago</nobr>[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]... and a fine of up to $10000 for a school employee to have sex with a student attending his or her school if the student is not the teacher's spouse. ...

[/SIZE]Denver teacher caught in sex sting
[SIZE=-1]Denver Post, CO - <nobr>13 hours ago</nobr>[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]By Tom McGhee An elementary and middle school music teacher was arrested after attempting a crude Internet seduction of a detective who posed as a young ...

[/SIZE]Clinton band teacher arrested in sex sting
[SIZE=-1]Chicago Tribune, United States - <nobr>Dec 16, 2008</nobr>[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]AP DAVENPORT, Iowa - A Clinton High School band teacher has been arrested on federal charges of attempting to entice a minor to engage in illicit sexual ...[/SIZE]

Former Teacher Indicted On Sex Charges
[SIZE=-1]WYMT, KY - <nobr>Dec 16, 2008</nobr>[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]A former Lexington junior high school teacher now faces sodomy and rape charges stemming from the 1970's. The Lexington Herald leader reports a grand jury ...

[/SIZE]Grievance Commission appeals Gorcyca's clearance in sex assault case
[SIZE=-1]DetNews.com, MI - <nobr>Dec 16, 2008</nobr>[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]Gorcyca had described the teacher, James Norman Perry, as a pedophile in a radio interview after Perry had been convicted and was awaiting sentencing. ...

I could post dozens of these from the past few days. There's a real epidemic of this kind of thing going on with the separation of church and state and all.
[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][/SIZE]

 

[crowTrobot]

Have you ever noticed that when a noted atheist (or Godless person) commits a heinous crime, you don't hear people say, "Geez, look at that horrible atheist. I don't want to be one of those!" But when a "Christian" does something horrible, the same people say, "Christians are all hypocrites. I want nothing to do with that religion."

christians frequently say non-christians do bad things because of lack of christian moral standards. i hear that all the time.

The fact is, many people are looking for an excuse NOT to be a Christian, because they don't like the idea of having to follow the moral and ethical guidelines presented in the Bible, or to change their life in any way.

the number of people who secretly believe the bible is true but reject it anyway is relatively small. the vast majority on non-christians don't believe because they either were raised in another religion that teaches the bible is false, or because they've come to that conclusions based on a rational view of evidence.

 

[crowTrobot]

But I don't think that a concerted effort to know and understand God is really bad, since it's trying to get to know Someone who is perfectly honest, just, loving and unequivocal.

have you read the OT? your god is described as a patently unjust sadistic genocidal megalomaniac who takes every opportunity to slaughter innocent children.

 

[BrianFromWA]

have you read the OT? your god is described as a patently unjust sadistic genocidal megalomaniac who takes every opportunity to slaughter innocent children.

I've read the Bible cover to cover multiple times. He's not "described" as anything; it's His history given to His chosen to write down. I don't pretend to know what God's up to, other than what He's told me in the Bible. If God doesn't meet with your standards of fairness, nothing I'm going to say can change that.

(BTW: He didn't take "every opportunity" to slaughter innocent children. First, there isn't any such thing as "innocent". We can thank Adam and Eve for that. And if you'd like me to go through the Bible and talk about the Egyptian firstborn, or the Amalekites and Philistines vs. the Moabites, or how the Judaic/Samaric split was dealt with by the Egyptians, Babylonians and Persians, we can do that offline. Your description above is not rooted in truth, but distortion.)

And what that is is that 1) He created the universe and everything in it. 2) There was rebellion. 3) As a wholly perfect and wholly just God, He could not stand the rebellion or sin that came with it. 4) He was about to wipe everything out and start over a few times, but out of mercy saved some and made a covenant that He wouldn't ever wipe out Abraham's line -- physically (Jews, read Genesis) or spiritually (Gentiles; multiple places in the NT). That's why Jesus is foretold throughout the OT and proclaimed throughout the NT. It's all one history.

 

[Shooter]

the number of people who secretly believe the bible is true but reject it anyway is relatively small.

How could you possibly know that?

I personally know many, many people who were raised Christian and still believe in the Bible, but are choosing to live their lives in a totally different way just because it's more pleasurable, convenient, and easy . . . I bet you do, too.

 

[barfo]

But maybe there is some proof in the proverbial pudding. As the influence of the Church has declined over the past 500 years, society has become more Machiavellian - or am I misreading your own post?

But is there cause and effect here? Technology advanced over the past 500 years - is that due to the decline of the Church? People are taller now - is that due to the decline of the Church?

I think I'll give up now, I'm not quite sure what we are arguing about, or which side I'm on...

barfo

 

[Shooter]

That's because atheist criminals rarely, if ever, list their lack of religion as an excuse or cause of their crime.

Whereas you frequently hear people list "teachings" of their religion as the reason they did what they did.

That happens occasionally, but far more often the offender just happens to be a Christian, and the press and others jump all over it as if it proves something. What's absurd is the idea that because a member of a group turns out to be a hypocrite, that therefore all members of that group are hypocrites. Or, even worse, that the teachings of the group somehow lead people to commit crimes or act irresponsibly--when in fact just the opposite is true.

There is overwhelming evidence that becoming a Christian more often than not improves one's moral standards and awareness of right and wrong, while abandoning God and any form of spirituality ultimately degrades one's moral sensitivity.

 

[crowTrobot]

If God doesn't meet with your standards of fairness

he doesn't meet my standards of being likely to exist. he is described as a cruel jealous vindictive tyrant by the authors of OT books because that was how gods in general were viewed in those times.

(BTW: He didn't take "every opportunity" to slaughter innocent children. First, there isn't any such thing as "innocent". We can thank Adam and Eve for that. And if you'd like me to go through the Bible and talk about the Egyptian firstborn, or the Amalekites and Philistines vs. the Moabites, or how the Judaic/Samaric split was dealt with by the Egyptians, Babylonians and Persians, we can do that offline. Your description above is not rooted in truth, but distortion.)

my description of the nature of god in OT stories is accurate. of course it's not rooted in "truth", though, because straightforward archeological/anthropological evidence shows that most of it never happened.

 

[crowTrobot]

I personally know many, many people who were raised Christian and still believe in the Bible, but are choosing to live their lives in a totally different way just because it's more pleasurable, convenient, and easy . . . I bet you do, too.

yes, but those people generally still consider themselves christians - either christians gone bad, or christians that have chosen not to take the basic traditional tenets of christianity seriously, but still christians of some sort.

the way your previous post was worded implied that many people who say they don't believe the bible are secretly compelled by it, which is what i was disputing. sorry if that's not what you meant.

 

[MARIS61]

To back up Shooter's point and to counter one of Maris' (about the church being filled with sex offenders):

I don't remember making such a point, but I don't see how this counters it at all anyway.

Now that you bring it up, the Church has long been a haven and a sanctuary for despicable criminals of all walks of life, and an opponent of the enforcement of man-made laws in general.

 

[MARIS61]

(BTW: He didn't take "every opportunity" to slaughter innocent children. First, there isn't any such thing as "innocent". We can thank Adam and Eve for that.

Most absurd assumption ever promoted by Christianity.

I know many innocent people, and obviously most children are innocent.

The idea of inheriting guilt through heredity would be laughable if so many had not been hurt by the notion.

Applied in our legal system, all relatives of a murderer would be put to death along with the murderer.

It fails in every application possible. I am not responsible for those who have murdered before me, those who have had slaves, those who have attacked countries for profit.

Guilt lies on the guilty, "Gods" are the guiltiest of all, and the innocent children are far greater than any "God".

 

[BrianFromWA]

Your definition of "innocent" is different than that of God's. That's fine. Doesn't make it absurd. It points out the need for everyone to have someone save them from the eternal repercussions of their actions. If you believe that, of course.

You are responsible for your own actions, true. So are children. Just because they're cute doesn't mean they aren't selfish, don't lie, don't attack others to get what they want, etc. All of those are actions which warrant "hell" (which Biblically is defined as "eternal separation from God", not some fiery pit manned by an overseer with horns and a pitchfork: Thanks, Milton), unless you believe that someone else paid the price for you. That's Christianity, in a nutshell.

You aren't guilty by association (though many countries and the OT would disagree with you), but you're incapable of being perfect. And if you're not perfect, you don't get to hang out eternally with the Imaginary Friend. Unless you believe someone else paid the price for you.

And of all the ideas "assumed' by Christianity (the Triune God, the Immaculate Conception, the Resurrection, Pentecost, the Transferrance of Grace, the Revelation Result), you think that "all have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God" is the most laughable? Really?

 

[DaRizzle]

It's not that non-Christians get "sent to hell"...it's that they don't "make it into heaven".

This cracked me up....now THAT glass is half full...lol geez

 

[crowTrobot]

Your definition of "innocent" is different than that of God's. That's fine. Doesn't make it absurd. It points out the need for everyone to have someone save them from the eternal repercussions of their actions. If you believe that, of course.

You are responsible for your own actions, true. So are children. Just because they're cute doesn't mean they aren't selfish, don't lie, don't attack others to get what they want, etc. All of those are actions which warrant "hell" (which Biblically is defined as "eternal separation from God", not some fiery pit manned by an overseer with horns and a pitchfork: Thanks, Milton), unless you believe that someone else paid the price for you. That's Christianity, in a nutshell.

You aren't guilty by association (though many countries and the OT would disagree with you), but you're incapable of being perfect. And if you're not perfect, you don't get to hang out eternally with the Imaginary Friend. Unless you believe someone else paid the price for you.

And of all the ideas "assumed' by Christianity (the Triune God, the Immaculate Conception, the Resurrection, Pentecost, the Transferrance of Grace, the Revelation Result), you think that "all have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God" is the most laughable? Really?

the concept of original sin and the biblical plan of salvation are logically and morally ludicrous. they make absolutely no sense on any level, and christians have to constantly make silly excuses to defend them as you are doing. it's the type of superstitious nonsense you would expect from primitive humans, and far from what you would logically expect from a supposedly morally transcendent beneficent creator.

 

[Drink Your Milkshake]

Have you ever noticed that when a noted atheist (or Godless person) commits a heinous crime, you don't hear people say, "Geez, look at that horrible atheist. I don't want to be one of those!" But when a "Christian" does something horrible, the same people say, "Christians are all hypocrites. I want nothing to do with that religion."

The fact is, many people are looking for an excuse NOT to be a Christian, because they don't like the idea of having to follow the moral and ethical guidelines presented in the Bible, or to change their life in any way.

Christians always claim people not having Jesus is the reason for their problems. It's their favorite past time and it makes them feel better about themselves.

 

[Drink Your Milkshake]

Yep, that's why Bush is doing it. There's a secret clause in his contract as President that says he gets an extra $100,000 per year for pretending to study the Bible and pray. This is a little-known fact, but I thought I'd share it with you.

$100,000? Are you kidding? Christianity has been very profitable for Bush. Without the Christian vote (which oddly is still the only group of people in America still supporting the terrorist) Bush doesn't get elected. He fooled you *edited* to get what he wanted.

The fortunes he's made from you Christian *edited* is uncountable.