Discussing Atheism and atheistic beliefs

[Hazard]

If there were a global flood and everyone died, how would all of society have a record of it?

Lol..... Made me laugh. Good point

Still tho..... There'd be some kind evidence no? When a giant chunk of ice broke off a cliff in Alaska and created a giant wave - it killed off all the trees below a certain elevation. 50 years later the tree are growing back but they are a lighter shade of green. You can see the evidence of what happened. It's still a very clear cut straight line.

It seems like everything that can be questioned has some sort of shady answer. There's not a stitch of proof. It's just all very hard to believe..... Guess that's why it's called faith

[Times Roman]

ok ladies....

....I'm outta here. enough gnashing of the teeth by me for one night

See you all on the flip side

---Roman

[thisAngelBites]

The chart is fine but where is a tangible piece of evidence there was a catastrophic flood. If it was a real event that took place..... There has to be some kind of evidence right? A global flood is a huge deal..... It's not just a tsunami

Can I ask what the significance is of the evidence for the global flood idea? I could write a book full of things I made up, but if it includes one factual statement, would that then be evidence that everything else in the book is true?

I've never read anything remotely persuasive about any evidence for a "global" flood, but it seems to be this misguided journey. Even if there was a flood, there are still loads of other pieces of evidence required for the thousand or so additional claims to get from "once there was a flood" to "there are paternalistic gods who love me and I'm going to live forever."

Supposing some real evidence came to light for a more reasonable claim, such as there being a "large" flood at approximately the right time in history. Would that be evidence of the existence of gods for you?

[Hazard]

Can I ask what the significance is of the evidence for the global flood idea? I could write a book full of things I made up, but if it includes one factual statement, would that then be evidence that everything else in the book is true?

I've never read anything remotely persuasive about any evidence for a "global" flood, but it seems to be this misguided journey. Even if there was a flood, there is still loads of other pieces of evidence required for the thousand or so additional claims to get from "once there was a flood" to "there are paternalistic gods who love me and I'm going to live forever."

Supposing some real evidence came to light for a more reasonable claim, such as there being a "large" flood at approximately the right time in history. Would that be evidence of the existence of gods for you?

Not a chance.....

It was mentioned so I was sticking to it. Everything is presented with such confidence but very little certainty. The flood is just one example of the many that can't be proved IMO.

[thisAngelBites]

Not a chance.....

It was mentioned so I was sticking to it. Everything is presented with such confidence but very little certainty. The flood is just one example of the many that can't be proved IMO.

I didn't think that your thought process would work that way, but you really seemed to be staying with the argument, so I thought I would just ask.

[Times Roman]

some shit I ripped off from wiki:

(don't want any one to accuse me of plagiarism)

The geography of the Mesopotamian area was considerably changed by the filling of the Persian Gulf after sea waters rose following the last ice age. Global sea levels were about 120m lower around 18,000 BP and rose until 8,000 BP when they reached current levels, which are now an average 40m above the floor of the Gulf, which was a huge (800 km (500 mi) x 200 km (120 mi)) low-lying and fertile region in Mesopotamia, in which human habitation is thought to have been strong around the Gulf Oasis for 100,000 years. A sudden increase in settlements above the present water level is recorded at around 7,500 BP.[15][16]

Adrienne Mayor promoted the hypothesis that global flood stories were inspired by ancient observations of seashells and fish fossils in inland and mountain areas. The ancient Greeks, Egyptians, and Romans all documented the discovery of such remains in these locations; the Greeks hypothesized that Earth had been covered by water on several occasions, citing the seashells and fish fossils found on mountain tops as evidence of this history.[17]

Speculation regarding the Deucalion myth has also been introduced, whereby a large tsunami in the Mediterranean Sea, caused by the Thera eruption (with an approximate geological date of 1630–1600 BC), is the myth's historical basis. Although the tsunami hit the South Aegean Sea and Crete, it did not affect cities in the mainland of Greece, such as Mycenae, Athens, and Thebes, which continued to prosper, indicating that it had a local rather than a regionwide effect.[18]

[thisAngelBites]

some shit I ripped off from wiki:

(don't want any one to accuse me of plagiarism)

Sounds like you disagree with my view, Roman, which is cool, of course. But notice it only took one sentence to make it all clear. There is also a difference between conveying some factual information, and googling to find someone to make an argument you can't make on your own, but leaving out the fact that you're just regurgitating someone else's capacity to reason.

I've seen lots of other posts on this forum about people ripping off other people's write-ups about supplements, or medical advice. What honest reason would anyone have for posting other people's thinking verbatim as their own? Too lazy to type one sentence?


edited----> Hey Roman, I should read the comments all the way to the end before I reply, eh? Sorry.

[Times Roman]

Sounds like you disagree with my view, Roman, which is cool, of course. But notice it only took one sentence to make it all clear. There is also a difference between conveying some factual information, and googling to find someone to make an argument you can't make on your own, but leaving out the fact that you're just regurgitating someone else's capacity to reason.

I've seen lots of other posts on this forum about people ripping off other people's write-ups about supplements, or medical advice. What honest reason would anyone have for posting other people's thinking verbatim as their own? Too lazy to type one sentence?


edited----> Hey Roman, I should read the comments all the way to the end before I reply, eh? Sorry.

I'm not so sure where we are disagreeing, other than I'm trying to finesse the idea of factual vs. emotional beliefs in a non judgmental way. I think we are dancing around the definition of atheist. I'm trying to say that being an atheist is cool, but one cannot say from a factual position that there is not a metaphysical entity I refer to as a prime mover. I don't know how one could prove it. And it's a very fine detail. But the reason I continue to hammer on this fine point is to illustrate that no one can know with absolute 100% certainty that one belief is right and the other wrong. THIS I feel strongly about. And you know I'm not referring to the KJ version of the metaphysical being. To be utterly frank, I'm pretty certain King James got it wrong on most of it.

I'm really trying to see if anyone that is passionate in their beliefs, if they are enlightened and willing to admit they could be wrong.

Anyone that is truly enlightened will always entertain the idea that the possibility of being wrong certainly exists.

And apparently, very few here seemed to have crossed that threshold yet.

[thisAngelBites]

I'm not so sure where we are disagreeing, other than I'm trying to finesse the idea of factual vs. emotional beliefs in a non judgmental way. I think we are dancing around the definition of atheist. I'm trying to say that being an atheist is cool, but one cannot say from a factual position that there is not a metaphysical entity I refer to as a prime mover. I don't know how one could prove it. And it's a very fine detail. But the reason I continue to hammer on this fine point is to illustrate that no one can know with absolute 100% certainty that one belief is right and the other wrong. THIS I feel strongly about. And you know I'm not referring to the KJ version of the metaphysical being. To be utterly frank, I'm pretty certain King James got it wrong on most of it.

I'm really trying to see if anyone that is passionate in their beliefs, if they are enlightened and willing to admit they could be wrong.

Anyone that is truly enlightened will always entertain the idea that the possibility of being wrong certainly exists.

And apparently, very few here seemed to have crossed that threshold yet.

I was being sorry for misunderstanding (and not reading through all the posts when I replied to you) - I thought you were being critical about my having a problem with cutting and pasting those arguments, but after I read on, it seemed you didn't have a problem with it. I think people's default understanding, when we speak or write, is that we speak for ourselves in our own words. If we are not doing that, it just really isn't onerous to say so.

There is NO way to prove some thing does not exist in the entirety of the world. It's not just that you can't think of how to do it - like I might be able to do it for one thing, but that I cannot find a way to do it for a group of gods in the universe - there is no way to do it, period. However, one can prove that things do exist, and typically the burden of proof relies on the proposer. That's why I don't bother to respond to people who think they are throwing down some kind of genius gauntlet by saying "you prove there isn't a god". It cannot be done, it is functionally impossible, just as it is functionally impossible to prove that there is no such thing as a purple apple.

[thisAngelBites]

I'm not so sure where we are disagreeing, other than I'm trying to finesse the idea of factual vs. emotional beliefs in a non judgmental way. I think we are dancing around the definition of atheist. I'm trying to say that being an atheist is cool, but one cannot say from a factual position that there is not a metaphysical entity I refer to as a prime mover. I don't know how one could prove it. And it's a very fine detail. But the reason I continue to hammer on this fine point is to illustrate that no one can know with absolute 100% certainty that one belief is right and the other wrong. THIS I feel strongly about. And you know I'm not referring to the KJ version of the metaphysical being. To be utterly frank, I'm pretty certain King James got it wrong on most of it.

I'm really trying to see if anyone that is passionate in their beliefs, if they are enlightened and willing to admit they could be wrong.

Anyone that is truly enlightened will always entertain the idea that the possibility of being wrong certainly exists.

And apparently, very few here seemed to have crossed that threshold yet.

I have said this a couple of times, but I will say it again more plainly, because what you wrote makes me think you missed my point. One cannot prove that there is no santa claus, and one cannot prove their are no gods, one cannot prove there are no unicorns. There are lots of things we don't have proof of non-existence of that we do not think exists - this is an absolutely ordinary state of affairs, and I see no reason to consider gods any differently. If proving things don't exist is the standard by which someone argues we ought to function, then we must believe in gods since we don't know, we must also believe in unicorns and santa claus. The reasoning is exactly the same. If I don't believe in santa claus, then it makes sense that I also do not believe in gods. There is no proving either.

Further, I have already said that I am open to evidence of gods. Should something persuasive come to light, I would certainly consider change my mind.

As far as I can tell, trying to find evidence of gods involves a lifetime of learning and then reading other languages, arguing about what word meant what to which translator and in which context, trying to find proof of anything factual arising out of governing texts, grasping at straws of physical evidence, trying to peel away cultural layers from writings, etc.. The only reason I can think of that someone would choose to spend their life trying to prove that gods exist is a very desperate desire for there to be gods that exist. For myself, I am indifferent to whether there are gods. If there are that's fine, if there are not, fine too.

[Bonaparte]

I have said this a couple of times, but I will say it again more plainly, because what you wrote makes me think you missed my point. One cannot prove that there is no santa claus, and one cannot prove their are no gods, one cannot prove there are no unicorns. There are lots of things we don't have proof of non-existence of that we do not think exists - this is an absolutely ordinary state of affairs, and I see no reason to consider gods any differently. If proving things don't exist is the standard by which someone argues we ought to function, then we must believe in gods since we don't know, we must also believe in unicorns and santa claus. The reasoning is exactly the same. If I don't believe in santa claus, then it makes sense that I also do not believe in gods. There is no proving either.

Further, I have already said that I am open to evidence of gods. Should something persuasive come to light, I would certainly consider change my mind.

As far as I can tell, trying to find evidence of gods involves a lifetime of learning and then reading other languages, arguing about what word meant what to which translator and in which context, trying to find proof of anything factual arising out of governing texts, grasping at straws of physical evidence, trying to peel away cultural layers from writings, etc.. The only reason I can think of that someone would choose to spend their life trying to prove that gods exist is a very desperate desire for there to be gods that exist. For myself, I am indifferent to whether there are gods. If there are that's fine, if there are not, fine too.

That was amazing. Thank you!

[Hazard]

I have said this a couple of times, but I will say it again more plainly, because what you wrote makes me think you missed my point. One cannot prove that there is no santa claus, and one cannot prove their are no gods, one cannot prove there are no unicorns. There are lots of things we don't have proof of non-existence of that we do not think exists - this is an absolutely ordinary state of affairs, and I see no reason to consider gods any differently. If proving things don't exist is the standard by which someone argues we ought to function, then we must believe in gods since we don't know, we must also believe in unicorns and santa claus. The reasoning is exactly the same. If I don't believe in santa claus, then it makes sense that I also do not believe in gods. There is no proving either.

Further, I have already said that I am open to evidence of gods. Should something persuasive come to light, I would certainly consider change my mind.

As far as I can tell, trying to find evidence of gods involves a lifetime of learning and then reading other languages, arguing about what word meant what to which translator and in which context, trying to find proof of anything factual arising out of governing texts, grasping at straws of physical evidence, trying to peel away cultural layers from writings, etc.. The only reason I can think of that someone would choose to spend their life trying to prove that gods exist is a very desperate desire for there to be gods that exist. For myself, I am indifferent to whether there are gods. If there are that's fine, if there are not, fine too.

AMEN! Lol

[Times Roman]

I have said this a couple of times, but I will say it again more plainly, because what you wrote makes me think you missed my point. One cannot prove that there is no santa claus, and one cannot prove their are no gods, one cannot prove there are no unicorns. There are lots of things we don't have proof of non-existence of that we do not think exists - this is an absolutely ordinary state of affairs, and I see no reason to consider gods any differently. If proving things don't exist is the standard by which someone argues we ought to function, then we must believe in gods since we don't know, we must also believe in unicorns and santa claus. The reasoning is exactly the same. If I don't believe in santa claus, then it makes sense that I also do not believe in gods. There is no proving either.

Further, I have already said that I am open to evidence of gods. Should something persuasive come to light, I would certainly consider change my mind.

As far as I can tell, trying to find evidence of gods involves a lifetime of learning and then reading other languages, arguing about what word meant what to which translator and in which context, trying to find proof of anything factual arising out of governing texts, grasping at straws of physical evidence, trying to peel away cultural layers from writings, etc.. The only reason I can think of that someone would choose to spend their life trying to prove that gods exist is a very desperate desire for there to be gods that exist. For myself, I am indifferent to whether there are gods. If there are that's fine, if there are not, fine too.

ok, I think we are in total agreement, and the only point left to hammer on, in my view, is that I'm saying you don't need to prove something to believe in it. BUT, I am also saying that because one's own side cannot be proven, then it would be bad form to say the other side is wrong, especially if one cannot entertain the idea that at some level, their own belief could be wrong too.

One of the tenants of enlightenment, is knowing that one really cannot know with any certainty. At some level, one should be able to admit they could be wrong. Only when you "absolutely" know a thing, is when you close your eyes on the subject and are no longer open to learning.

To say that another is wrong, one should also accept the idea they too could be wrong.

This is the only way out of our cultural stalemate. This concept of one's superior position, to the other's detriment. There is nothing but agony and death down that path. And this is the path we find ourselves on in all corners of the world. And this is why I am against any institution, religious or otherwise, that claims to have a unique and exclusive path to a better "place" than we currently find ourselves. Some call it heaven, others nirvana and still others enlightenment. By claiming superiority, it sets up an adversarial and destructive game that many are willing to fight to the death for.

Cause and effect

By saying my way is better than your way, and with many saying it from opposing view points, the result is death.

How can death be a better way?

[Tomtay79]

This is the oldest argument on earth and in this day of age it should be quashed but some ppl need to believe in something.
I think theres more chance in little green men than a god or perhaps the little green men are god.....thats another story.

[Times Roman]

This is the oldest argument on earth and in this day of age it should be quashed but some ppl need to believe in something.
I think theres more chance in little green men than a god or perhaps the little green men are god.....thats another story.

you may be right about the odds....

....but then again, imho, unless you can PROVE there is not a god, then we as a society, should allow all individuals their own personal beliefs. Unless it involves human sacrifice or involves illegal activity. And yes, again imho, inciting a riot is an illegal act.

[Hazard]

Here's me in a nutshell.....


If you goto church and pray because you believe there may be an afterlife..... So be it. If it brings you comfort - more power to you.

If you believe the crazy bible stories and try to tell me dinosaurs aren't real..... I have no time for that. That's ludicrous to me.

If you don't believe in god or an afterlife..... So be it.

[Times Roman]

most define god to be

1) all powerful
2) all present
3) all knowing
4) prime mover

anything less would need to be redefined.

most evoke a god to explain how the universe has come to be. if god had no hand in it, then

does that mean he is a part of this universe, or
he is greater than this universe?

now, if there be gods that did not create this universe, then are they really gods?

if they are a part of this universe, then the universe must have came first, right?

and if so, then did these gods spring forth from nothing, or did they evolve and eventually become gods?

and if they evolved and eventually became gods, then are they really gods?

by what definition would we describe these gods?

1) They are finite beings
2) If they have a beginning, they could also have an end
3) They are not supreme since the universe is a greater force than they


are we really describing gods, or very advanced life forms?

[jolter604]

Scientific Evidence for a Worldwide Flood

[Times Roman]

Scientific Evidence for a Worldwide Flood

so? what's your point?

nice article that quotes scripture

anything else?

[jolter604]

its in the dirt.

[Times Roman]

| Creation Education Center

its in the dirt.

still waiting for some kind of point. instead of giving me a link, just tell me what's on your mind. We are discussing here on this website, not some other website.

ok?

[jolter604]

| Creation Education Center

[jolter604]

I think if there is a God and he created us we would have been created without the ability to define or fully understand it.Not being able to write the explanation on a chalk board does not mean it is not true.Not being to explain something makes it hard to comprehend witch usually makes people think it is not true.Just like people say there is no other life out there,like we are the only mixture of minerals and energy that some how became a living organism.There are so many stories that never made it to the bible that are even more crazy than the ones in the bible.I am a Christian and I believe in God.I would never tell someone that evolution is wrong or write I just go by my instincts.I have my own life experiences that brought me to what i believe,to each his own.

[Times Roman]

I think if there is a God and he created us we would have been created without the ability to define or fully understand it.Not being able to write the explanation on a chalk board does not mean it is not true.Not being to explain something makes it hard to comprehend witch usually makes people think it is not true.Just like people say there is no other life out there,like we are the only mixture of minerals and energy that some how became a living organism.There are so many stories that never made it to the bible that are even more crazy than the ones in the bible.I am a Christian and I believe in God.I would never tell someone that evolution is wrong or write I just go by my instincts.I have my own life experiences that brought me to what i believe,to each his own.

so you are saying god made us dumb so that we cannot challenge him? why would he do such a thing? do you have any proof that there is something intrinsically wrong with our brain that prevents us from understanding complex ideas? or the scientific principle is flawed some how? or the accumulation of knowledge over time is some how constrained?

that statement is definitely a "glass is half empty" comment, and it also means you do not have much "faith" in mankind.

See, I believe differently. Our grasp and understanding of the universe around us has been "exploding" over the last generation. The next big event will be the singularity, and from then, all bets are off.

Maybe this is why so many people of faith do not grow intellectually. They accept we are too dumb to understand things around us and when bad things happen, it's god's will.

Please....

[jolter604]

He did not make us dumb,he gave us all the knowledge needed for his plan.I watch science channel and history channel because it is interesting.Do not think I have no faith in mankind,I plenty of faith in man kind that is why i do steroids,lol.So if a little kid gets shot by a cop and a bunch of little thugs go around and steal shoes and riot is that part of evolution too.Or do you think they are just wired wrong?I think God is much more than a equation,that is why we can not figure it out.Not that we are stuipid or something bro,maybe we are trying to figure it out the wrong way.

[Times Roman]

He did not make us dumb,he gave us all the knowledge needed for his plan.I watch science channel and history channel because it is interesting.Do not think I have no faith in mankind,I plenty of faith in man kind that is why i do steroids,lol.So if a little kid gets shot by a cop and a bunch of little thugs go around and steal shoes and riot is that part of evolution too.Or do you think they are just wired wrong?I think God is much more than a equation,that is why we can not figure it out.Not that we are stuipid or something bro,maybe we are trying to figure it out the wrong way.

do you know what an equation is? what it represents? and why we use equations in the first place?

the nature of scientific inquiry is much more than equations. it is a process of learning and understanding. it is the backbone of all our recent modern advances. the process is not wrong. it is replicable and duplicable by others, meaning it is verifiable, regardless who the experimenter is or where located or when conducted. if this process were the "wrong way" then all these advances we have, even this bulletin board, would not exist. no, that statement of yours isn't well thought out.

[Times Roman]

HIS plan?

....and what plan might that be?

he only gave us all the knowledge for his plan?

see, everything I've heard/read about religion is that we have a choice. Not "all the knowledge needed for his plan". Your statement implies there is other knowledge available but since not needed for his plan, we don't have that knowledge. and how does excluding certain knowledge from us come to terms with the other thought "we have a choice"? because if he had given us all the knowledge, then maybe we don't "choose" his plan, and then what kind of free will would that be?

[jolter604]

I also believe if you truly have a good heart and live in some hut in africa and never heard of God but you help other so are going to make it.I also believe in all religions I am not saying mine is the only one.Each minority has been given there own compatible beliefs.Its is all in your heart.If you nock some guys teeth out and he chokes to death on his teeth do you feel bad?Or r u like hell yeah I can kill.If you went to his funeral and seen his mom on her knees crying you should feel some compassion.We all have a inner voice that tells us what is wrong or write,we do not need the bible to tell us just like reminder.Its not all about knowledge.When I look at my kids and i know life is more than just eating,fawking,and sleeping.There is more knowledge because the universe is never ending.Maybe we need to invent a brain steroid.....

[Times Roman]

I also believe if you truly have a good heart and live in some hut in africa and never heard of God but you help other so are going to make it.I also believe in all religions I am not saying mine is the only one.Each minority has been given there own compatible beliefs.Its is all in your heart.If you nock some guys teeth out and he chokes to death on his teeth do you feel bad?Or r u like hell yeah I can kill.If you went to his funeral and seen his mom on her knees crying you should feel some compassion.We all have a inner voice that tells us what is wrong or write,we do not need the bible to tell us just like reminder.Its not all about knowledge.When I look at my kids and i know life is more than just eating,fawking,and sleeping.There is more knowledge because the universe is never ending.Maybe we need to invent a brain steroid.....

ok, i'll go easy on you, since you are saying the right things. and i'll let the reference to minorities having different beliefs go too.

at least you are saying, in your own way, that other religions besides yours may be valid too. not so sure about all the "teeth knocking" thing, but I'm sure of your sincerity.

and brain steroids are called nootropics, even though their effectiveness is debatable.

[Hazard]

I also believe if you truly have a good heart and live in some hut in africa and never heard of God but you help other so are going to make it.I also believe in all religions I am not saying mine is the only one.Each minority has been given there own compatible beliefs.Its is all in your heart.If you nock some guys teeth out and he chokes to death on his teeth do you feel bad?Or r u like hell yeah I can kill.If you went to his funeral and seen his mom on her knees crying you should feel some compassion.We all have a inner voice that tells us what is wrong or write,we do not need the bible to tell us just like reminder.Its not all about knowledge.When I look at my kids and i know life is more than just eating,fawking,and sleeping.There is more knowledge because the universe is never ending.Maybe we need to invent a brain steroid.....

Having a good heart and being a good person have nothing to do with religion or god. I help people whenever I can. I have compassion for others and I try to do the best I can every single day. This doesn't mean I don't have a few moments of anger but I live my life to its fullest while trying to be a better person.

I don't need a bible or a god to tell me what's right and wrong. I just do things because it feels right. I don't want to be an asshole.

[Times Roman]

a quick aside for some that try to fit in culturally.

my neighbor is I believe Indian, possibly from Pakistan maybe. Either way, they have groups of others with a similar persuasion come over, and very quiet, so we're cool. His son's inside car light was on one night when I was putting the trash cans by the street. So I knock on the door, around 9 or so. They were a little tentative when answering, but I just mentioned that their light is on and it will drain the battery over night unless they turn it off. Still a little tentative, the son, probably in his thirties, comes outside and turns off the light.

Tonight, there was a knock at the door. I go to answer it, and there's my neighbor, with a gift. Very quietly he just said Happy Thanksgiving and gave me a bag. So I shook his hand and thanked him, asking his name, then offering mine. He quietly leaves and inside the bag I see a rather "expensive" candy apple and a candy turkey.

This is the point of my thread. Tolerance. Even though some can be very different, we can still get a long. No one has to be right or wrong with what they believe or how they live. I believe everyone has a basic right to live as they please, so long as they don't bother others.

[Rwy]

I am going to share something.

I do not believe in god. I started questioning religion at a young age. Which made me sad because the thought of Heaven is such a wonderful thing. I believe you get one life and this is it. So you really need to make the most of it. Its so cliche but people waste time now believing that something better is coming and their shorting this life now.

When I was younger I was envious of people with faith and now I wonder how they can be so naive. However I am not here to figure out their life's journey just mine. It took me time to wrap my head around the belief that the universe came from nothing.

I am getting married in two weeks. My fiancees's parents are super religious and would disown their daughter if she didnt get married in a church with a full mass. I agreed to get married in a church out of respect for them but they do not know how I truly feel. I have to admit over the past couple of weeks I have become bothered that I agreed to this.

Our priest is 100% gay and there is nothing wrong with him if he is gay. He is from Colombia and probably going the priest route to get citizen ship. My "sacrament" of marriage is being done by a gay priest. I cant help but laugh yet I am feeling a little bitter. Not towards my fiancee but towards my fiancees parents. I love my girl and I am doing this for her but its really been hard putting on the act as we come down to crunch time.

Part of me feels like I am doing the right thing but the other part of me feels like such a fraud.

[lovbyts]

I am going to share something.

I do not believe in god. I started questioning religion at a young age. Which made me sad because the thought of Heaven is such a wonderful thing. I believe you get one life and this is it. So you really need to make the most of it. Its so cliche but people waste time now believing that something better is coming and their shorting this life now.

When I was younger I was envious of people with faith and now I wonder how they can be so naive. However I am not here to figure out their life's journey just mine. It took me time to wrap my head around the belief that the universe came from nothing.

I am getting married in two weeks. My fiancees's parents are super religious and would disown their daughter if she didnt get married in a church with a full mass. I agreed to get married in a church out of respect for them but they do not know how I truly feel. I have to admit over the past couple of weeks I have become bothered that I agreed to this.

Our priest is 100% gay and there is nothing wrong with him if he is gay. He is from Colombia and probably going the priest route to get citizen ship. My "sacrament" of marriage is being done by a gay priest. I cant help but laugh yet I am feeling a little bitter. Not towards my fiancee but towards my fiancees parents. I love my girl and I am doing this for her but its really been hard putting on the act as we come down to crunch time.

Part of me feels like I am doing the right thing but the other part of me feels like such a fraud.

Just think of it the same as the wedding ring. It's only a symbol or tradition. Dont put to much religious thought into it.

[Times Roman]

I am going to share something.

I do not believe in god. I started questioning religion at a young age. Which made me sad because the thought of Heaven is such a wonderful thing. I believe you get one life and this is it. So you really need to make the most of it. Its so cliche but people waste time now believing that something better is coming and their shorting this life now.

When I was younger I was envious of people with faith and now I wonder how they can be so naive. However I am not here to figure out their life's journey just mine. It took me time to wrap my head around the belief that the universe came from nothing.

I am getting married in two weeks. My fiancees's parents are super religious and would disown their daughter if she didnt get married in a church with a full mass. I agreed to get married in a church out of respect for them but they do not know how I truly feel. I have to admit over the past couple of weeks I have become bothered that I agreed to this.

Our priest is 100% gay and there is nothing wrong with him if he is gay. He is from Colombia and probably going the priest route to get citizen ship. My "sacrament" of marriage is being done by a gay priest. I cant help but laugh yet I am feeling a little bitter. Not towards my fiancee but towards my fiancees parents. I love my girl and I am doing this for her but its really been hard putting on the act as we come down to crunch time.

Part of me feels like I am doing the right thing but the other part of me feels like such a fraud.

Two points:

1) A purpose of religion: To take the minds of the miserable off of their current misery with a promise of better days. This was a great control device used through out the ages by those fortunate few that controlled, via religion, the masses. It allowed those that rule to do so in such a way so as to minimize revolts and insurgency. And religion, in this context, allowed greater control over the masses as opposed to without the tool called religion.

2) I got married at a church too. So what? if it makes your fiancé's family and her comfortable, then you are the better man for it. There is more to religion than the belief system. There is also the ceremony, which can be a beautiful thing. And there is also tradition. Many take comfort in the tradition of wedding, as apparently your future in-laws seem to find. I see absolutely nothing contradictory in your getting married in a church.

[Metalject]

I am going to share something.

I do not believe in god. I started questioning religion at a young age. Which made me sad because the thought of Heaven is such a wonderful thing. I believe you get one life and this is it. So you really need to make the most of it. Its so cliche but people waste time now believing that something better is coming and their shorting this life now.

When I was younger I was envious of people with faith and now I wonder how they can be so naive. However I am not here to figure out their life's journey just mine. It took me time to wrap my head around the belief that the universe came from nothing.

I am getting married in two weeks. My fiancees's parents are super religious and would disown their daughter if she didnt get married in a church with a full mass. I agreed to get married in a church out of respect for them but they do not know how I truly feel. I have to admit over the past couple of weeks I have become bothered that I agreed to this.

Our priest is 100% gay and there is nothing wrong with him if he is gay. He is from Colombia and probably going the priest route to get citizen ship. My "sacrament" of marriage is being done by a gay priest. I cant help but laugh yet I am feeling a little bitter. Not towards my fiancee but towards my fiancees parents. I love my girl and I am doing this for her but its really been hard putting on the act as we come down to crunch time.

Part of me feels like I am doing the right thing but the other part of me feels like such a fraud.

This reminds me of a funny story. My father is a homebuilder and once had a customer who was pretty adamant and vocal about his atheistic beliefs. They had never talked about anything other than the work at hand but as the customer learned more about my father he became distressed. What troubled him was my father being a christian and he wasn't sure if this was someone he wanted building his home. Again, my father had never said anything about this topic to him, never once brought it up. The customer had simply learned more about my dad, found out where he went to church, which is an odd thing to look into IMO. Anyway, the customer confronted my father about what was bothering him and I thought my dad's response was pretty good, he simply said "I'm not going to force you to go to church with me. Do you want a house or not?"

I think people worry far too much about the beliefs of others being thrust upon them. People tend to act as if their beliefs are so sacred, anything that contradicts them is a travesty. This goes for religious and non-religious people. As for your situation here, regardless of how religious your girl is or not, it's important to her to do it this way. You are going through it this way because it's important to her - that's not putting on an act, that's simply going through something with someone because you love them and what's important to them is important to you. This is a much better path to follow than the standard yet increasingly common attitude of "yeah I'll do this or that but what do I get out of it?"

[lovbyts]

There are also people who NEED religion otherwise they would run a muck more than they do already.

[Metalject]

Start a thread on this and we will debate it. I've never heard of an atheist committing mass murder in the name of "there isn't a god". I've never heard of an atheist movement like the Christian crusaides responsible for killing.

You are confusing atheists murdering in the name of "there isn't a god" with an atheist murdering in general. Different.

And without reading your article, since I'm drinking wine and don't want to go over the intellectual cliff with you right now, if you are referring to Hitler, he believed in the metaphyhsical world. He was a huge occultist. A true atheist only believes in those senses you can quantify, and nothing in the spiritual realm. Because of this, Hitler does not qualify as a true atheist, regardless what came out of his mouth.

Start the thread, and we can debate.

Could be an interesting thread. I'll try to muster one up.

Having a good heart and being a good person have nothing to do with religion or god. I help people whenever I can. I have compassion for others and I try to do the best I can every single day. This doesn't mean I don't have a few moments of anger but I live my life to its fullest while trying to be a better person.

I don't need a bible or a god to tell me what's right and wrong. I just do things because it feels right. I don't want to be an asshole.

How do you measure what is right? How do you decide? I'm not trying to be an ass here, not at all. But if you're going by what feels good, what if my feelings tell me something different? I know the obvious answer would be if the actions aren't hurting anyone else then they're OK but if they did hurt someone why would it matter? What's the basis of right and wrong?

Is it all based on what a particular society decides is right and wrong? Is right and wrong then defined by what the majority perceive it to be? What if right and wrong are not agreed upon by a majority but the rules of right and wrong are thrust on the whole of society by only one or a few individuals? In either case, by majority or a few, what determines right and wrong?

[Hazard]

How do you measure what is right? How do you decide? I'm not trying to be an ass here, not at all. But if you're going by what feels good, what if my feelings tell me something different? I know the obvious answer would be if the actions aren't hurting anyone else then they're OK but if they did hurt someone why would it matter? What's the basis of right and wrong?

Is it all based on what a particular society decides is right and wrong? Is right and wrong then defined by what the majority perceive it to be? What if right and wrong are not agreed upon by a majority but the rules of right and wrong are thrust on the whole of society by only one or a few individuals? In either case, by majority or a few, what determines right and wrong?

I'm talking about holding doors and helping old people carry groceries. I work in bad neighborhoods so if someone can use my help I lend it.

There is no set "right or wrong" criteria. I couldn't decide that..... I just try to be a decent human being. This world needs a little more good in it.

[Metalject]

I'm talking about holding doors and helping old people carry groceries. I work in bad neighborhoods so if someone can use my help I lend it.

There is no set "right or wrong" criteria. I couldn't decide that..... I just try to be a decent human being. This world needs a little more good in it.

I'm not disagreeing with anything you just said, in fact, I agree with all of it. I'm simply saying there has to be something that determines what's right or wrong, good or evil beyond what we determine ourselves. Because if it is merely self-determined, it only takes a few "selfs" out there to decide some horrible things are in fact right. We've seen that play out countless times throughout history.

[Times Roman]

I'm not disagreeing with anything you just said, in fact, I agree with all of it. I'm simply saying there has to be something that determines what's right or wrong, good or evil beyond what we determine ourselves. Because if it is merely self-determined, it only takes a few "selfs" out there to decide some horrible things are in fact right. We've seen that play out countless times throughout history.

let me take a crack at this and let's see how I do.........

doing what is right is a positive constructive process.

Doing what is wrong is a negative destructive process.

Doing the right thing enhances and compliments not only yourself, but others around you. And conversely, wrong things detracts and minimizes from your environment.

Evil is taking from others what does not belong to you.

Good is freely giving to others what does belong to you.

So when you hold a door open for others, you are giving of yourself. What you are giving is courtesy and respect. You are also acknowledging them as someone worthy of your respect. In psychology, this is referred to as "stroking". We all need to be stroked, to have others acknowledge us, else we wither and die. It is known that unless we are stroked sufficiently as children, we develop behavioral conditions such as autism.

So, to wrap it up.

Taking what doesn't belong to you is wrong/evil. Most of the sins revolve around this principle. Murder is the taking of a life. Adultery is the taking of another's spouse.

Make sense?