The non-thinking that is Religion.

[Thee Alex]

Originally Posted by : : Scott : :

Belief in the rapture isn't some American new religion concept, it's one of the fundamental tenets of vanilla Christianity; that Jesus who died will rise again and rule the earth.

Scott's right, 'the rapture' is a 'proper' old school belief. All fundamentalist christians believe in it.

[Jeebus]

Originally Posted by Thee Alex

Not in the slightest, and I would never dream of forcing my opinion on religious types... I'd like to see the cold hard light of rational thought change their minds.

That's never going to happen though. Some people seem to need faith, no amount of logic and reason is ever gonna change that.

[Thee Alex]

Originally Posted by Jeebus

That's never going to happen though. Some people seem to need faith, no amount of logic and reason is ever gonna change that.

If only they could put their 'faith' in *real* things.

[Severed666]

Originally Posted by Thee Alex

If only they could put their 'faith' in *real* things.

Totally agree, i've never understood how you can have so much faith or believe in something when there is no proof whatsoever of it even existing and yet alot of people base their whole lives around it and live totally within its rules. Always seemed totally bizarre to me like

[gabrillowise]

Yet you're called 'severed666'?

[Severed666]

Originally Posted by gabrillowise

Yet you're called 'severed666'?

its the name of a band. nothing to do with my religion or beliefs

[humndislocation]

Originally Posted by : : Scott : :

Belief in the rapture isn't some American new religion concept, it's one of the fundamental tenets of vanilla Christianity; that Jesus who died will rise again and rule the earth.

Actually, if I recall correctly, while the rapture is a rather old belief in christian mythology, it isn't supported at all by the Bible .

The rapture isn't the same as Jesus rising from the dead to rule the earth again. People who believe in the rapture, believe that one day, all the believers will be hoovered up into heaven, and the earth will pretty much become hell on earth until judgement day.

[Thee Alex]

Originally Posted by humndislocation

Actually, if I recall correctly, while the rapture is a rather old belief in christian mythology, it isn't supported at all by the Bible .

If only that were the case.

1 Thessalonians 4:15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
1 Thess 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
1 Thess 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
1 Thess 4:18 Therefore comfort one another with these words.

And this, from Luke 17

[30] "It will be just like this on the day the Son of Man is revealed. [31] On that day no one who is on the roof of his house, with his goods inside, should go down to get them. Likewise, no one in the field should go back for anything. [32] Remember Lot's wife! [33] Whoever tries to keep his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life will preserve it. [34] I tell you, on that night two people will be in one bed; one will be taken and the other left. [35] Two women will be grinding grain together; one will be taken and the other left."

Sadly this nonsense is VERY Biblical

[Thee Alex]

Originally Posted by gabrillowise

Yet you're called 'severed666'?

Another fantastic post, up there with the Earmuffin one, contributing useful debate to this thread.

[AlanG]

great thread, that I've missed with being offline.

Originally Posted by humndislocation

Agnosticism and atheism are not mutually exclusive. Alan G on here, for example, considers himself an agnostic atheist (or he did at one point), for example.

Atheism is the lack of belief in a god.
Agnosticism is the position that the existence of a god is inherently unknowable.

If you don't believe in a god, then you are an atheist.

exactly, it's a duel axis graph. One axis is knowledge of Gods existence. You can know he/she/it/they exists, know they do not exist or not know either way. I don't know and don't think anyone can know either way although plenty of people say they know that God does or does not exist.

On the other axis is belief in God. This varies from belief, to non-belief with indifference in the middle.

I don't know if there are Gods or not, but I suspect they are not. There is no evidence for their existence or at least none which I have been presented with so therefore I don't believe they exist, but I acknowledge that I don't know. I am therefore perfectly open to examining any such evidence contrary to my beliefs and am willing to change them should the need arise although I highly suspect that will not be necessary.

I am a bit busy right now catching up on mail etc but I will reply to some of the "religion as cause of war" stuff in more depth later. Wars are caused by small groups of people wanting to consolodate power. The vast majority of governments/country leaders who have existed have existed in states where there was little to no seperation between state and religion so it's easy to blame one for the other. Religion or religious difference may a reason used to justify war but is probably very rarely the "cause" of it.

[AlanG]

Originally Posted by johnny?

Also, Alex.. it's fairly childish pointing out contradictions in a book translated several times, where many different versions exist and a book that a majority of free-thinking 'morons' (as you nicely put it) do not take literally, whatsoever.

Although most do not take it literally, the vast majority I have discussed it with believe it to be the "infallible word of God". It is 100% accurate and correct. Once you highlight one error it becomes 99% accurate and open to interpretation, from there on it is a downward spiral of percentages. I think Alex put it in the thread too early and I haven't spotted anyone making that argument but it is worth referencing as one of the argument patterns used by devout believers, that of shifting goalposts once they realise they are losing ground.

Its is the most obvious example of it too as "its in X Holy Book" is the standard response to many questions you may have so to have them give ground on its accuracy during a discussion then leaves an open path to return to the previous questions which were brushed aside with this answer.

[Thee Alex]

I watched 'The God Who Wasn't There' again last night, it really is excellent and I'd recommend it to anyone reading this thread - it's only an hour long so what have you to lose?