So how many believe in God?

[Lostsoul]

I've really enjoyed reading everyones thoughts on this subject, i've had a lot of discussions with people before who are christian and who think its their duty to push their beliefs onto other people, and i'm glad to be part of a conversation that no one tries to do this.

My beliefs have always been that there is NOT a God, i spent 4 years of highschool in a catholic school and i have seen nothing to convince me that there is a god, i think God is just an excuse for people not to have control of their own lives and take responsibilities for their actions, i dont believe in surrendering control of my life to something that doesnt exist, and even if it did exist why would i want to place control of MY life in someone elses hands.

I have a question for all the believers out there, if God was sitting next to you on a park bench, how would you recognise him/her? Everyone talks about God as being a person or living being of some sort, so if it appeared to you, how would you know? For all you know the person you sat next to in the park the other day was God.

Dont get me wrong i respect everyone that believes or doesnt believes, but i have always had a hard time understanding why, but this thread has been a really good read, i've read every post.

Jason - i'll send you a PM bro, i'm very interested to see whats changed your mind about your beliefs, because from what you've said about your life previously about having control and making things happen, that sounds exactly like me.

Takara - I hope you can find someone who you can be happy with, i feel the exact same way as you, the only person i can trust in this life is me, and its me who has to make things happen, and not wait for someone to do it for me.

[bornbad71]

I believe that Christ was sent here to die for our sins that however believes in him and asks for forgiveness, shall have eternal life. So yes I believe in GOD.

[hoss827]

I agree...I would have made a thread like this, but there was one or two awhile back I think..I've loved this thread. I had an amazing conversation on AIM today, we both shared our experiences, and were both in shock. This thread has been a great experience for everyone, i've read nearly every post...Its' always great to here everyones views, and experiences...Jason, I say you should make this thread a sticky bro, it's been great.

[syd]

I simply beleive that there is a god....who and what he is not known. I think it is a mixture of all relegions. I find it hard to beleive a good, decent person that dies and is say islamic, but meets Jesus and he is going to say sorry, your islamic...to hell you go.

[Kärnfysikern]

Quantum theory allowes something to get created from nothing(atleast partialy, dont quote me on it though I dont know much about it ).
And to be honest I find the thought that this all is just a big random event to be almost more fascinating then the thought of a supreme beeing creating it all.

I do belive in a higher power, but I do think that beeing(beeing's maby, why should there be just one?)cares for us about as much as we care for ants. It is probably so superior to us that we cant even begin to understand its actions anymore then a ant can understand why that big foot just crushed his pal.

I belive that for every advancement we make, for every scientific breakthrough we get one step closer to that beeing and sometime in the distante future we will be the gods. Maby in a billion years a human(or what we humans have developed to in that time)will go and create life on a planet and be a god over that life.

One thing that would almost convince me that there is no god is if scientists manages to create life out of non living material. Then the chanses that all this is just a random event seems alot more plausible then a invisible guy snapping his fingers and creating everything.

I belive something happens after death, but what I have no clue about. I am a firm beliver in ghosts atleast.
The thought of eternal life seems horrible, I mean even if a heaven exists, even if it is truly wonderfull. Would it not become boring after a million years??
I would much rather be a spirit free to roam the universe as I se fit, because the beauty of the universe is simply breathtaking.

[Kärnfysikern]

one of my physics proffesors wrote a thing in one of his books that stuck in my mind.

Basicly he has come to terms that the univers will keep on expanding and that entropy will rule and that in the end the universe will be one big frozen lifeless picture. But he wrote "maby that picture will be beautifull and maby we can make a difference on how that picture will look".

Cant realy express myself the correct way on english and cant translate his thoughts in a good way but thats basicly it. It sounded like he thought the whole meaning of creation and our lifes will be to shape that picture. Its a nice way of looking at things. It kind of makes god(if he exists) into an artist I guess

sorry if I strayed a bit from the topic

[Terinox]

The thought of eternal life seems horrible, I mean even if a heaven exists, even if it is truly wonderfull. Would it not become boring after a million years??
I would much rather be a spirit free to roam the universe as I se fit, because the beauty of the universe is simply breathtaking.

Oh man, dude, I've thought about this so much too. It would be just so amazing to be able to travel the universe, and I mean going ANYWHERE in it, in a matter of seconds. Something I know only exists in Star Trek worlds, LOL!! But being able to do that, say after death, would be one hell of a bonus

[Kärnfysikern]

Oh man, dude, I've thought about this so much too. It would be just so amazing to be able to travel the universe, and I mean going ANYWHERE in it, in a matter of seconds. Something I know only exists in Star Trek worlds, LOL!! But being able to do that, say after death, would be one hell of a bonus

Seeing everything there is to se and then eternal rest. What a glorious peacefull ending it would be.
We can only hope thats what happens after death

[Dude-Man]

I believe in the big bang theory.

i just wonder where that huge ball of matter and energy came from.

[Dude-Man]

one of my physics proffesors wrote a thing in one of his books that stuck in my mind.

Basicly he has come to terms that the univers will keep on expanding and that entropy will rule and that in the end the universe will be one big frozen lifeless picture. But he wrote "maby that picture will be beautifull and maby we can make a difference on how that picture will look".

Cant realy express myself the correct way on english and cant translate his thoughts in a good way but thats basicly it. It sounded like he thought the whole meaning of creation and our lifes will be to shape that picture. Its a nice way of looking at things. It kind of makes god(if he exists) into an artist I guess

sorry if I strayed a bit from the topic

johan, i've read that instead, the universe is accelerating at an increasing rate, being pulled ever faster outwards with all matter and energy having a near equal momentum. Everything will continue to accelerate faster and faster until an ultimate end, where all atoms themselves are ripped apart within an instant. There will be a finite end, when the smallest subatomic particles are destroyed as well.

It's essentially the same idea as a ****ty car falling apart as it goes faster.

[hoss827]

johan, i've read that instead, the universe is accelerating at an increasing rate, being pulled ever faster outwards with all matter and energy having a near equal momentum. Everything will continue to accelerate faster and faster until an ultimate end, where all atoms themselves are ripped apart within an instant. There will be a finite end, when the smallest subatomic particles are destroyed as well.

It's essentially the same idea as a ****ty car falling apart as it goes faster.

Good way of putting it, lol.

[Kärnfysikern]

johan, i've read that instead, the universe is accelerating at an increasing rate, being pulled ever faster outwards with all matter and energy having a near equal momentum. Everything will continue to accelerate faster and faster until an ultimate end, where all atoms themselves are ripped apart within an instant. There will be a finite end, when the smallest subatomic particles are destroyed as well.

It's essentially the same idea as a ****ty car falling apart as it goes faster.

Ive read about the acceleration but never thought it would go as far as even ripping apart matter in that way I guess we wont have an complete answere to this until some egghead figures out what is causing the acceleration(would be cool if that egghead was me 8 years into the future )

[50%Natural]

Insightful posts fellas.
Pheedno, I was doubting your logic until you were called out on it.
Pt, pm me with your experinces. I'd love to read them.
Mr. Sparkle, I agree with you 100%
Cycleon, great posts as usual
I didn't read everyone's posts but I did most. I am with everyone who said they don't believe in the church. I know when the church was created it wasn't suppose to be like this. I find the avid church goers very hypicritical and snobby. They wouldn't give a dying bum a nickel.
I totally believe in christ, and it goes to the morals that cycleon mentioned. Growing up in a good family setting and normal conditions, one will grow up to realize morals. I say normal becuase there have been many situations and studies done that show without proper care and attention from a parent, a child can't develope naturally. So, if you grow up and you are shown love and attention, most everyone develops a sense of right and wrong. You just know something is wrong when you do it. Ever stolen baseball cards or gum as a kid and felt bad about it? I have. Anyway, I don't ever force my beliefs on anyone because I know people don't want to hear that but I am always interested in discussing religion and its origin.
BTW, cycelon, they have found noahs ark. It is located on mt....crap, can't remember, in turkey. Just look it up on the net. There are satelite photos of it. The turkish govt. won't let any one go and look at it though. Its a shame.
Anyway, that would match up correctly with the old testament flood. After the flood, noah had three sons it said, one went south and it says became the father to the the dark(africa). BTW, I'm not quoting, but recalling. Another went east (settled china) and one went west (settled europe). From that story and the fact that the arc is located I'd believe the stories of the old testament.
Sorry, I know I got a little off track but since the arc was mentioned, i'd thought i'd share.
Anyway, great discussion fellas.

[CutieFace]

Yes, I do believe in God, and must say that w/ what I've dealt with the past 2 years it definetly helped to sit quietly and pray....I truly do beieve that you're dealt out what you can handle and what you're dealt with will make you a stronger person......

Cutie

[PTbyJason]

Below are a few paraphrases, as well as some examples from one book I've studied named the Hiram Key. Written my two freemasons by the name of Christopher Night, and Dr. Thomas Lomas. In their research, they were trying to figure out if Jesus himself was a Freemason, and ran across some unexpected findings
Their is a fundemental flaw for Christianity, in that the Christian myth predates Jesus Christ. The outline of Christs story is as ancient as man, from virgin birth, to sacraficial death that saved his people. It has all been written down, time after time, for religious figureheads in many cultures. Not a case of similarities, total interchangability. Mithra(or mithras), a cult(as their refered to now) which was popular in the Roman Empire, that the Church Fathers indentified as the work of the devil, intended deliberately to parody the story of Christ. Fact of the matter is the Mithra existed long before the Christian Messiah. Church Fathers simply claimed the devil travled back in time to plant a man who would discredit the 'obvious' originality of the story of Christ. This was indentified as the Satanic Time Travel Theory.
Mithraisms devotees recognised the divinity of the Emperor and were relaxed about coexisting alongside other cults, but it was absorbed by the Christians. But for a tiny twist of fate in the later years of the Roman empire, nice families would today be driving off to Sunday worship with 'Mithra loves you' stickers in their car windows

Some examples of predated myth:
Mithra as previously mentioned, was born of a virgin in a stable on Dec. 25 in 600BC which is a Syrian offshoot of the more ancient Persian cult of Zoroaster.
1. Mithraism's doctrines included baptism,
2. a sacramental meal,
3. belief in immortality,
4. a savior god who died and rose again to act as mediator between man and god,
5. a resurection,
6. a last judgment, and
7. a heaven and hell.
8. Candles, incense, and bells used in ceremonies.
9. Born of a virgin in a stable on Dec 25th.

I'm hitting this a little at a time bro. These are all new aspect of religious objections that you have presented here, so I am slowly exploring each part. Remember also that the Old Testament told/predicted some of the things that you are talking about here. So essentially you could have someone coming forth claiming things in relation to other people before Jesus came and it would appear that Jesus was just a copycat of these other people. Also, we need to find out what was "fact" about Mithra, and how the story of Mithra has evolved over time. Source for my info as well as here.

1. Baptism.

Very short but, "The Mithraist baptism is a simple ablution in no way different from any other"

2. I assume this is in reference to the Last Supper. So the rumor is that, "Mithra religion had a eucharist or "Lord's Supper," at which Mithra said, "He who shall not eat of my body nor drink of my blood so that he may be one with me and I with him, shall not be saved." "

This saying is appealed to also by Freke and Gandy [Frek.JM, 49], and it took me some digging to discover it's actual origin. Godwin says that the reference is from a "Persian Mithraic text," but does not give the dating of this text, nor say where it was found, nor offer any documentation; that I found finally in Vermaseren [Verm.MSG, 103] -- the source of this saying is a medieval text; and the speaker is not Mithras, but Zarathustra! Although Vermaseren suggested that this might be the formula that Justin referred to (but did not describe at all) as being part of the Mithraic "Eucharist," there is no evidence for the saying prior to this medieval text. (Freke and Gandy, and now Acharya, try to give the rite some ancestry by claiming that it derives from an Iranian Mithraic ceremony using a psychadelic plant called Haoma, but they are clearly grasping at straws and adding speculations of meaning in order to make this rite seem similar to the Eucharist.) This piece of "evidence" is far, far too late to be useful -- except as possible proof that Mithraism borrowed from Christianity! (Christianity of course was in Persia far earlier than this medieval text; see Martin Palmer's Jesus Sutras for details.)

The closest thing that Mithraism had to a "Last Supper" was the taking of staples (bread, water, wine and meat) by the Mithraic initiates, which was perhaps a celebreation of the meal that Mithra had with the sun deity after slaying the bull. However, the meal of the initiates is usually seen as no more than a general fellowship meal of the sort that was practiced by groups all over the Roman world -- from religious groups to funereal societies. [MS.348]

3. As far as the belief in immortality goes, I am assuming you are referring to "Mithra's followers were promised immortality. "

On this one, Acharya is making no more than a guess, although probably a good one: As one Mithraic scholar put it, Mithraism "surely offered its initiates deliverance from some awful fate to which all other men were doomed, and a privileged passage to some ultimate state of well-being." [MS.470] Why is this a good guess? Not because Mithraism borrowed from Christianity, or Christianity borrowed from Mithraism, or anyone borrowed from anyone, but because if you don't promise your adherents something that secures their eternity, you may as well give up running a religion and go and sell timeshares in Alaska! In practical terms, however, the only hard evidence of a "salvational" ideology is a piece of graffitti found in the Santa Prisca Mithraeum (a Mithraist "church" building, if you will), dated no earlier than 200 AD, that reads, "And us, too, you saved by spilling the eternal blood." [Spie.MO, 45; Gor.IV, 114n; Verm.MSG, 172] Note that this refers to Mithra spilling the blood of the bull -- not his own -- and that (according to the modern Mithraic "astrological" interpretation) this does not mean "salvation" in a Christian sense (involving freedom from sin) but an ascent through levels of initiation into immortality.

4. As the "great bull of the Sun," Mithra sacrificed himself for world peace.

This description is rather spun out into a sound-alike of Christian belief, but behind the vagueness lies a different story. Mithra did not "sacrifice himself" in the sense that he died; he was not the "great bull of the Sun", but rather, he killed the bull (attempts to somehow identify Mithra with the very bull he slayed, although popular with outdated non-Mithraists like Loisy and Bunsen, were rejected by Vermaseren, who said that "neither the temples nor the inscriptions give any definite evidence to support this view and only future finds can confirm it" [Verm.MSG, 103]; it was not for the sake of "world peace" (except, perhaps, in the sense that Cumont interpreted the bull-slaying as a creation myth [Cum.MM, 193], in which he was entirely wrong). Mithra could only be said to have "sacrificed himself" in the sense that he went out and took a risk to do a heroic deed; the rest finds no justification at all in modern Mithraic studies literature -- much less does it entail a parallel to Christ, who sacrificed himself for atonement from personal sin (not "world peace").

Punkish has added this: ...[T]he footnote [in Christ Conspiracy] reads O'Hara, which in the bibliography is Gwydion O'Hara, Sun Lore. Now if you look this guy up on Amazon.com you find his book reviews are not very positive, in fact he's the sort of person, like Barbara Walker, who makes things up. What kind of authority is he? He isn't: he's a writer on pagan practices and he was once a high priest of the Wiccan Church of Canada at a time when it was an ideal rather than a reality (!)...sounds like another nut. What's Acharya doing using this guy instead of a Mithraic scholar?

5. He was buried in a tomb and after three days rose again. His resurrection was celebrated every year.

I have to classify these two as "ringers" -- I see no references anywhere in the Mithraic studies literature to Mithra being buried, or even dying, for that matter [Gordon says directly, that there is "no death of Mithras" -- Gor.IV, 96] and so of course no rising again and no "resurrection" (in a Jewish sense?!) to celebrate. Freke and Gandy [Frek.JM, 56] claim that the Mithraic initiates "enacted a similar resurrection scene", but their only reference is to a comment by Tertullian, significantly after New Testament times! Tekton Research Assistant Punkish adds: The footnote is for Tertullian's Prescription Against Heretics, chapter 40 which says, "if my memory still serves me, Mithra there, (in the kingdom of Satan, ) sets his marks on the foreheads of his soldiers; celebrates also the oblation of bread, and introduces an image of a resurrection, and before a sword wreathes a crown" ...so their argument relies on Tertullian's memory, and it isn't the initiates but Mithra who does the celebrating and introduces an *image* of a resurrection?! How is that at all related to initiates acting out a scene? Wynne-Tyson [Wyn.MFC, 24; cf. Ver.MSG, 38] also refers to a church writer of the fourth century, Firmicus, who says that the Mithraists mourn the image of a dead Mithras -- still way too late, guys! -- but after reading the work of Firmicus, I find no such reference at all!) Acharya adds the assertion of Dupuis that Mithras was killed by crucifixion, but from the description, either Dupuis or Acharya are mixing up Mithra with Attis!

6 & 7. I need to research this some more, but I am almost positive that it was mentioned in the Old Testament even before Mithra's time.

8. I'm not sure what this is in reference to.

9. Mithra was born of a virgin on December 25th in a cave, and his birth was attended by shepherds.

This claim, which I have seen repeated in part by the Secular Web's James Still, is a mix of truth and obfuscations. Let's begin with the December 25th part by noting Glenn Miller's reply, which is more than sufficient: "...the Dec 25 issue is of no relevance to us--nowhere does the NT associate this date with Jesus' birth at all." This is something the later church did, wherever they got the idea from -- not the apostolic church, and if there was any borrowing at all, everyone did it, for Dec. 25th was "universally distinguished by sacred festivities" [Cum.MM, 196] being that it was (at the time) the winter solstice.

Next, the cave part. First of all, Mithra was not born of a virgin in a cave; he was born out of solid rock, which presumably left a cave behind -- and I suppose technically the rock he was born out of could have been classified as a virgin! Here is how one Mithraic scholar describes the scene on Mithraic depictions: Mithra "wearing his Phrygian cap, issues forth from the rocky mass. As yet only his bare torso is visible. In each hand he raises aloft a lighted torch and, as an unusual detail, red flames shoot out all around him from the petra genetrix." [MS.173] Mithra was born a grown-up, but you won't hear the copycatters mention this! (The rock-birth scene itself was a likely carryover from Perseus, who experienced a similar birth in an underground cavern; Ulan.OMM, 36.)

That leaves the shepherds, and this is one that is entirely true; although the shepherds did more than "attend" (unlike Luke's shepherds, they were witnesses to the birth; there was no angelic mediator), they also helped Mithra out of the rock, and offered him the first-fruits of their flock -- quite a feat for these guys in any event, considering that Mithra's birth took place at a time when (oops!) men had supposedly not been created on earth yet. [Cum.MM, 132] But the clincher here is that this scene, like nearly all Roman Mithraic evidence, dates at least a century after the time of the New Testament. It is too late to say that any "borrowing" was done by the Christian church -- if there was any, it was the other way around; but there probably was not. (It is fair to note also that the Iranian Mithra didn't have a "born out of rock" story...his conception was attributed, variously, to an incestuous relationship between Ahura-Mazda and his mother, or to the plain doings of an ordinary mortal woman...but there is no virgin conception/birth story to speak of. [Cum.MM, 16] Acharya says that the Indian Mitra, "was born of a female, Aditi, the 'mother of the gods,' the inviolable or virgin dawn; this is simply yet another case of her applying terminology [a "dawn" as "virgin" -- so when does the dawn start "having sex" and how?] illicitly. So likewise this word game: "It could be suggested that Mithra was born of 'Prima Materia,' or 'Primordial Matter,' which could also be considered 'First Mother,' 'Virgin Matter,' 'Virgin Mother,' etc..." -- it can be "considered" no such thing except by vivid imagination; merely playing on the psycho-linguistic similarity of sound in the English words "matter" and "mother" and trying to equare "first" with "virgin" isn't going to do the job. Research Assistant Punkish adds: ADITI (according to an astrological website) means Free unbound. Boundless heaven as compared with the finite earth. A Vedic goddess representing the primeval generator of all that emanated. The eternal space of boundless whole, the unfathomable depth signifying the veil over the unknown. (Note, not matter/mother but generator of matter!) The Rig Veda describes it as the father and mother of all gods; it is named Devamatri, mother of all gods, or Swabhavat, that which exists by itself. She is frequently implored for blessing children and cattle, for protection and forgiveness. In the Yajur Veda, Aditi is addressed as the support of the sky, the sustainer of the earth, the sovereign of this world, and the wife of Vishnu. The Vishnu Purana describes Aditi, the daughter of Daksha and the wife of Kashyapa, to be the mother of 8 Adityas (q.v.) (wife of Vishnu or Kashyapa? bit unlikely to be virginal then!!!) Then we have this website Dialogueonline.net - Magazine (comparative research on major religions) where we find: "According to the Rigveda (10/72/2) Brahmanaspati, like a craftsman, created the gods, and the gods in turn created ‘Sat’ from ‘Asat’. The Rigveda (10/72/4-5) further says, “Daksha was born of Aditi and Aditi was born of Daksha, the gods were born of Aditi and Aditi gave birth to eight sons”. This mantra suggests mainly two things - first, Aditi and Daksha took birth of each other, which proposition is never possible; second, the Creator of this universe was Aditi because she gave birth to the gods. But it ridicules more brazenly when refuting such points Rigveda (8/90/15) says: “Aditi was daughter of Adityas”. In this connection, Rigveda produces more than one controversy as Rigveda tots up that Aditi was mother of Vishnu and so Rigveda (4/55/3 8/27/5) clarifies, “Aditi mothered Vishnu”. But repudiating the same verse Vajasaney Samhita (20/60) and Taitirya Samhita (7/5/14) consolidates that Aditi was wife of Vishnu. The goddess, who herself is found in various controversies is considered creator of this universe. Thus, these mantras fail to shed any meaningful light on the basic issue of the birth, motherhood and even creation of the universe by Aditi.", Creator And Creation In Hindu Perspective)

Acharya now adds in her work iconographic evidence allegedly showing "the babe Mithra seated in the lap of his virgin mother, with the gift-bearing Magi genuflecting in front of them." One is constrained to ask how an icon reflects that Mithra's mother was a virgin, since it is obviously not stated. One also wants to know if any of this evidence is pre-Christian (it is not). Quoting others who merely say it is indicating a virgin birth, yet offer no more evidence, is not an argument. Finally, we are told of the "largest near-eastern Mithraeum [which] was built in western Persia at Kangavar, dedicated to 'Anahita, the Immaculate Virgin Mother of the Lord Mithras'." This is a very curious claim which is repeated around the Internet, but no source is given for it, and Acharya attributes it to a "writer" with no name or source. I believe, however, that I have found the terminal source, and it is a paper written in 1993 by a then-high school student, David Fingrut, who made this claim without any documentation whatsoever himself. His paper is now posted on the Net as a text file. That said, it is inaccurate to start with, since the building at Kanagvar is not a Mithraeum at all, but a temple to Anahita (dated 200 BC), and although I have found one source of untested value that affirms that Anahita was depicted as a virgin (in spite of being a fertility goddess!), she is regarded not at Mithra's mother, but as his consort (though it does offer other contradictory info) -- and it knows nothing of such an inscription as described; and the mere existence of the goddess Anahita before the Roman era proves nothing. Acharya appears to be throwing ringers again.

***************
Another text I found to add to this in regards to your general statement, I will quote what someone else said, not you. I don't feel like going back to look at everything you wrote right now.

Fr. Martindale summarises the position very fairly, setting side by side M. Salomon Reinach's neatly phrased thesis and the no less skillfully worded examination of Pere Lagrange. "M. Salomon Reinach thus sums it up: 'Mithra is the mediator between God and man; he secures salvation to mankind by a sacrifice; the cult includes baptism, communion, fasts; his disciples call themselves brothers; in the Mithraist clergy there are men and women vowed to celibacy; there is a moral code which is of obligation and which is identical with that of Christianity.’

We have here a series of scornful affirmations to which Pere Lagrange can oppose another series of flat denials. 'The fasts and the brotherhood we can admit -- and they are found in every religion that ever was. Everything else is incorrect. Mithra is called 'mediator' once -- in Plutarch, and he is mediator between the God of Goodness and the God of Evil. We have no knowledge of any direct relation between the sacrifice of the bull and salvation. Nor is Mithra ever sacrificed, as was Jesus. The Mithraist baptism is a simple ablution in no way different from any other; the communion is nothing more than an offering of bread and water, nor can anyone say it was even intended to represent Mithra; women, usually, had no part in the mysteries of Mithra and could not, therefore, have been there dedicated to celibacy ... as to men, in that respect, we know nothing except for a single text of Tertullian ... a text which has been misinterpreted. Every moral code sets out to be obligatory, more or less, and if that of Mithra was identical with the Christian code why did Julian the Apostate -- himself a devotee of Mithra -- recommend the Christian code as a model to Pagans?’”

[50%Natural]

jason, that hurt my eyes, pm me dude

[M PWR]

I don't believe in God.

-Sean

[50%Natural]

if you want to discuss this matter, then please do it an intellegent fashion, thanks
it is thoughtless if you just make a response with no backing

[hoss827]

I don't believe in God.

-Sean

Back up your statements with facts why you don't believe in Him.

[PTbyJason]

It's cleaned up now.

I had a feeling this would happen eventually. I know this is the lounge, but some of us take this subject very seriously. If you don't care to discuss this seriously, please just move on and don't bother posting.

[mass junkie]

Anyone who has children knows that their are both a god and a devil

[ripsid]

Anyone who has children knows that their are both a god and a devil

Mass bro, you must spend time at my house! Because you'd see!
I have 3 beautiful kids! and they all have a change in personality at anytime!

SID

EAGLES SUCK!

[Mart651]

Back up your statements with facts why you don't believe in Him.

Hey Hoss. The thread is do you believe in god. He answered no need to back it up with facts. It's there belief right or wrong. You all know I believe in God and Jesus, can I not just believe with out explaining facts. The fact is I was saved by grace and not religion. So you can be saved with out religion. Religions have done a lot of damage in the past to Christianity but it has become a crutch for people not to believe. If you wonder if you can be saved without religion? yes you can. It is a gift from god called grace.

[PTbyJason]

Hey Hoss. The thread is do you believe in god. He answered no need to back it up with facts. It's there belief right or wrong. You all know I believe in God and Jesus, can I not just believe with out explaining facts. The fact is I was saved by grace and not religion. So you can be saved with out religion. Religions have done a lot of damage in the past to Christianity but it has become a crutch for people not to believe. If you wonder if you can be saved without religion? yes you can. It is a gift from god called grace.

In hoss's defense, I kind of made his statement look bad. There were a couple of comments that were IMO childish and playing around and I edited/deleted things that did not apply to this thread. There was more to Hoss's post (such as a response to the playing around) followed by the statement you see from him, but in my cleaning up of the thread I changed the way the tone his post looked originally. My apologies.

[PTbyJason]

I've really enjoyed reading everyones thoughts on this subject, i've had a lot of discussions with people before who are christian and who think its their duty to push their beliefs onto other people, and i'm glad to be part of a conversation that no one tries to do this.

First off, I apologize for those trying to push things on you. It should never be that way. I know Christians who do this, and it's embarrasing for me to watch. They should never behave that way.

My beliefs have always been that there is NOT a God, i spent 4 years of highschool in a catholic school and i have seen nothing to convince me that there is a god, i think God is just an excuse for people not to have control of their own lives and take responsibilities for their actions, i dont believe in surrendering control of my life to something that doesnt exist, and even if it did exist why would i want to place control of MY life in someone elses hands.

Ok, as far as your question on people giving control of their life to someone else so they don't have to take responsibility for their actions. I can tell you this. When I let God take control, my actions are much better than when I try to run my own life. I wish I could take claim for my actions when God has control, but I know it's not me that chose the path, I just followed it. And why would I want to let someone control my life? Because when I am in control of my life, I have literally run around in circles. My life went nowhere.

I have a question for all the believers out there, if God was sitting next to you on a park bench, how would you recognise him/her? Everyone talks about God as being a person or living being of some sort, so if it appeared to you, how would you know? For all you know the person you sat next to in the park the other day was God.

God isn't walking around today. That was Jesus 2,000 years ago. Now have angels appeared as people, I don't know. I can't even begin to discuss that because I know nothing about it, in favor or against. God isn't like that. He doesn't just walk around like in Bruce Almighty. Have people had visions of Him, yep, but it was a vision, it wasn't a physical being that you could touch.

Dont get me wrong i respect everyone that believes or doesnt believes, but i have always had a hard time understanding why, but this thread has been a really good read, i've read every post.

Jason - i'll send you a PM bro, i'm very interested to see whats changed your mind about your beliefs, because from what you've said about your life previously about having control and making things happen, that sounds exactly like me.

I responded to your PM now, so I thought I would answer the other questions on the thread too.

[50%Natural]

Hey, pt, hit me up on the pms bro.

[PTbyJason]

Hey, pt, hit me up on the pms bro.

I know bro, I'm sorry about the delay. I owe one or two other people my story too. I will hit you up either later today or tomorrow. I have you on my list of people to PM about it.

[hoss827]

Dont worry about the editing you did Jason, it's all good bro.

[echobeach]

I believe in God.

Johan - Eternity will never, ever get boring mate, you see it's just like the mathematical concept of Infinity - our limited, Earth bound minds cannot actually fully grasp the concept of something that goes on without end.

I don't think I should get all philosophical here but just for a moment think about the number 3.14159265.....or 22/7, which is PI.

This little bugger is a number that as far as we can tell has no end - and we've had some pretty big computers have a shot at it - something like a 'gazillion' decimal places without any sign of repitition.

So PI by itself can 'for now' at least be used to prove infinity - which is nice.

Because again without in depth discussion - a Universe with theoretical infinte bounds could only come about from creation by an Infinite God - that is a really big conceptual step and it would take heaps and heaps of quotes/discussion etc to back it up...it's just what I beleive.

But as far as what this has to do with God and how you percieve Him - I have to agree with most of the Athiests/Agnositcs - over time there has been an incredibly huge amount of injustice, atrocities, and just plain wrong behaviour committed in the name of God.

I don't think anyone can say for sure why He lets it happen, and I also know it's real hard to beleive in Him at times...

When you see a little child dying in hospital from some disease or car accident, or hear about the latest terrorist attack and how ever many hundreds have died from it, I know - it's REAL hard to accept that a loving God would allow such things...

There are precious few certainties in this life and for me one of em' is that someday we'll all have the answers to all our own little questions - of this I am sure.

Peace.

[Mr. Sparkle]

Have you ever talked to those little kids with cancer? Man some of those kids have more faith that I do. They encourage me. They know where they are going when they die, and they know its not too long off. Some cant wait to get to heaven. They know that their pain will go away. God has a greater plan that we cant see, so that gives me hope for those people who randomly die. But dont get me wrong it is still sad and tragic

-MS

[magicstick2003]

well im definitly not the most religious person in the world.... usually my fam and i only go to church on holidays but i do still believe in god. I mean there's got to be something out there that can be used to help explain the unexplainable....

[tryingtogetbig]

well im definitly not the most religious person in the world.... usually my fam and i only go to church on holidays but i do still believe in god. I mean there's got to be something out there that can be used to help explain the unexplainable....

I believe in God and worship him...and I don't go to church. Everytime I do...I get turned off by religion.

peace,

ttgb

[Vidooch]

I totally believe in God - the highest being, Jesus Christ, and all the Bible's teachings including life after death. My main reasoning for this isn't because of a sense of personal comfort for one's mortality, but rather that.....well lets just say that i might not even be here today and i definitely would not be the same person if it wasn't for God's blessing and guidance. My only worry is that I hope I reach heaven when its all said and done because I do have a great deal of sins on my soul. Sorry for blabbing too long.

[TheSevnthWarrior]

Actually every "Scientist" that has set out to disprove the existance in God has finished thier bodies of work believing not only in God, but in the truth that Jesus was indeed the "Christ, or Messiah" (they are one in the same)..

Do you believe in the sun coming up in the morning?? of course you do.. you have seen it every day.. but you might not know of the reaction that takes place for that to occure.. you just believe...

What is worse a person who is presented with the evidence, and does not believe, or a person that believes without full understanding of how something happens..

or to loosely quote..

which is better... am man who is given all the proof in the world, and believes, or a man who believes out of pure love.. not ignorance, but out of a desire that is felt from within...

I understand if you don't get it.. but you might someday.. and if that day doens't come before you die.... and only on judgement day .....i pray the God of Isreal, the creator of heaven and earth has enough mercy, and love for you to forgive you.. even though he already sent his only son to die at mankinds hands in atonement for your sins, agains man, God, and yourself...

I'm done, sorry if i preached alittle there..

Bingo, there IS a God, Father Son, and Holy Spirit.
PERIOD...Thanks for your time, have a graceful day

[PTbyJason]

I believe in God and worship him...and I don't go to church. Everytime I do...I get turned off by religion.

peace,

ttgb

Bro, church seems to be so dead sometimes. There are churches so that are so caught up in routine that they no longer cry out for God. It is very unfortunate. I really think that churches are finally starting to be broken down and changed slowly but surely. People go to traditional services because it is comfortable and makes them feel good, but they aren't Experiencing God. If they experience God just 1 time, everything in their life will change, and I mean everything.

Find a nontraditional church. There was a time I use to love the traditional church because it was comfortable and easy, but when I changed and truly began to feel God's presence in a church that didn't follow a laid out guideline for how the service was suppose to go, my life changed forever. I never want to be comfortable again.

I still owe you a phone call bro, don't worry I haven't forgotten, just been insanely busy.

[PTbyJason]

My only worry is that I hope I reach heaven when its all said and done because I do have a great deal of sins on my soul. Sorry for blabbing too long.

Bro once you are forgiven, you are forgiven. Let it go. The past is in the past, don't live in it today. God forgave you for it; now forgive yourself.

[TheSevnthWarrior]

Right on Jason, I never knew you felt that way.
And Everything you said is SPOT ON!
I used to go to a "Traditional" church, Now I go to the Coolest Church, "CC" if you are familiar with that you'll know...Non-Denomenational, not a bunch of rules and regulations and Man Built Doctrines - Just Jesus man....no judging, no stares, no whispers, no guilt...Just Jesus. Everybody at my church has been there, and they know it...That Self Righteous Crap is better left at the Door...It's all paid for, and you didn't pay for it, he did. There are about 15 Gear AND Spirit filled guys at my Church...and nobody questions it.
TSW

[Kärnfysikern]

I believe in God.

Johan - Eternity will never, ever get boring mate, you see it's just like the mathematical concept of Infinity - our limited, Earth bound minds cannot actually fully grasp the concept of something that goes on without end.

I don't think I should get all philosophical here but just for a moment think about the number 3.14159265.....or 22/7, which is PI.

This little bugger is a number that as far as we can tell has no end - and we've had some pretty big computers have a shot at it - something like a 'gazillion' decimal places without any sign of repitition.

So PI by itself can 'for now' at least be used to prove infinity - which is nice.

Because again without in depth discussion - a Universe with theoretical infinte bounds could only come about from creation by an Infinite God - that is a really big conceptual step and it would take heaps and heaps of quotes/discussion etc to back it up...it's just what I beleive.

I guess black holes are also something infinite.
One thought I have often played around with is that I would just before I am about do die plunge down into a black hole. The closer I would get to the event horizon the slower time would get. It would be like watching the entire universe evolve into its final stages right before ones eye. Theoreticly a inifintly long time would pass before my eyes before I have droped below the event horizon then I would be in for the ride of my life

One scientific argument I can come upp with against the thought of a god is that considering latest research indicates there are a infinite amount of dimensions created for every choise made covering all possible outcomes. Countless amounts of parallel dimensions. Considering all those options then no matter how unlikely something is to happen it will happen. So no matter how unlikely it is for a universe to be created that can harbor life it will happen(us for instance and probably infinite ammounts of other universe that harbor life)just because of probability laws. All we have to figure out is if life can be created by itself randomly or if it is impossible to create life from lifeless matter.
If it can happen randomly then we are probably just a "accident".
No matter how unlikely something is ,it WILL happen sooner or later given enough time.

[TheSevnthWarrior]

Mindless inanimate objects, matter, anti-matter, primortial Soup, whatever, did not, ever, at anytime, "Decide" to become "Organic" and "Create" "life"....it's simply preposturous, I'm not trying to offend anyone, it just is. You look at a Machine, even a simple one, and it's painfully obvious that someONE created it, and yet, usually out of convenience to set ourselves free from absolutes, choose to believe that something as infinately more complex in absolutely every way as the Universe, just randomly happen??? Please.
This board isn't big enough, nor is any platform, to actually, efficently discuss such a topic that has survived the ages, so I leave you with this:
If random, what, where, how, is the beggining? If "Big Bang"...What went "Bang"...If self deciding, self "Creating" Primortial soup "Colided" with matter...What Primortial Soup? What Matter?
Even if you clean the slate of what took placec, or even when, where, and how, (forget the why, which is THE most important) and leave it open to just a Clean Slate Universe....What Universe did these "Happenings" take place in??
Answer=Creator, it's up to you to choose to be brave enough to accept it. I never wanted to, but I now do, and Freedom was my reward.
BTW, you're All Friends regardless, please know that if nothing else.

[TheSevnthWarrior]

Bro once you are forgiven, you are forgiven. Let it go. The past is in the past, don't live in it today. God forgave you for it; now forgive yourself.

"I will NEVER leave you nor forsake you"
Hebrews 13:5
You're paid for Brother, and the reciept is written in Blood, and the Demons Tremble at the site of it. Let it go.