How can you not be christian?

[The Alma Mater]

I've pointed out that I have little problem with people believing in invisible sky fairies. My problem is when they publicly claim that they do exist, and that they have documentation on how we should live our lives because of that belief. Without verifiable evidence, I'm allowed to challenge their beliefs if I am so moved to do so. You can't tell me I shouldn't challenge them simply because they believe, because belief is not sacred. Any idea should be subject to challenge, be it scientific, philosophic, cultural or religious.

They have a problem with you publicly claiming that god doesn't exist as well, they have a problem with you treating them like idiots for believing in it and mocking them for it (using "invisible sky fairies" to describe god, obviously showing you have absolutely no sense of respect for their belief)

But must respect not be earned ?
Surely someone who worships a genocidal monster like the Christian god is not worthy of any respect ?

[Soniere]

What's the difference between a god that allows no evidence of its existence and no god at all?

Objectively, that deity would exist.

So, you can't prove that deity exists, since said deity doesn't allow it. The workings of this deity are indistinguishable from the natural workings of the universe, and has no impact that can't be explained by random chance. But somehow this allows for the deity to objectively exist just because the deity exists?

You see, my understanding of something that objectively exists is that it is possible to verify that it exists. Its existence does not depend on whether or not we look for it, but its existence is called into doubt if its existence cannot be verified when we do look.

In the situation you proposed, you verified that a deity exists. Following the guidelines of the context you provided, we have a deity who objectively exists, that allows to no evidence of its existence, because you verified that said deity exists, and doesn't allow for the evidence of its existence.

That doesn't apply to actual reality, however, no- we cannot objectively view the "laws" of the universe, and, as such, we cannot declare with any kind of certitude that a deity exists who does not allow for evidence of it's existence.

[Farnhamia]

I've pointed out that I have little problem with people believing in invisible sky fairies. My problem is when they publicly claim that they do exist, and that they have documentation on how we should live our lives because of that belief. Without verifiable evidence, I'm allowed to challenge their beliefs if I am so moved to do so. You can't tell me I shouldn't challenge them simply because they believe, because belief is not sacred. Any idea should be subject to challenge, be it scientific, philosophic, cultural or religious.

They have a problem with you publicly claiming that god doesn't exist as well, they have a problem with you treating them like idiots for believing in it and mocking them for it (using "invisible sky fairies" to describe god, obviously showing you have absolutely no sense of respect for their belief)

I know Trez can and will reply, but why am I, as an atheist, required to be kind and respectful to the beliefs of theists when many of them damn me to their hell, call me immoral, say that atheism is a destructive force in the country, etc? I'm tired of being nice. If they can't take the heat, they should get out of the kitchen.

[Station 12]

I've pointed out that I have little problem with people believing in invisible sky fairies. My problem is when they publicly claim that they do exist, and that they have documentation on how we should live our lives because of that belief. Without verifiable evidence, I'm allowed to challenge their beliefs if I am so moved to do so. You can't tell me I shouldn't challenge them simply because they believe, because belief is not sacred. Any idea should be subject to challenge, be it scientific, philosophic, cultural or religious.

They have a problem with you publicly claiming that god doesn't exist as well, they have a problem with you treating them like idiots for believing in it and mocking them for it (using "invisible sky fairies" to describe god, obviously showing you have absolutely no sense of respect for their belief)

But must respect not be earned ?
Surely someone who worships a genocidal monster like the Christian god is not worthy of any respect ?

He's a genocidal monster from your point of view, but he's not from the Christian point of view, and you need to be able to respect that they have reasons for believing that, not just "because the bible says so", or at least most of them do. If you can't do that, then there isn't a good reason to debate with you unless they want to bang their head against a wall.

...Like I said, I'm trying to be neutral so I'm going to stop here until I get to yell at a Christian for being unfair.

[The Alma Mater]

He's a genocidal monster from your point of view, but he's not from the Christian point of view

God killed almost all of humanity (as well as almost all animals) except the people on the Ark.
He is by definition genocidal.

What Christians and I disagree on if that is a bad thing or not.

and you need to be able to respect that they have reasons for believing that

Why ?

[Prevania]

From what possible point of view can a being who killed many in a little flood he decided to have not be a 'genocidal monster'?

[The Alma Mater]

From what possible point of view can a being who killed many in a little flood he decided to have not be a 'genocidal monster'?

Perspective perhaps. If I throw away all my sims and start anew with a new family in a new game, am I a monster ?
Not from my view. But perhaps those Sims think differently.

And aren't we humans but Sims to God ?

[Station 12]

Please continue ignoring all of the nice things god did like the creation of all existence and free will.

[Willenburg]

I think the real question will be is how not can you have unable love some speak English.

Come again? I am seriously having trouble reading this. If you are using a translator, have you tried using Google Translate? I find that that usually produces an accurate translation.

This was a parody of some confusing syntax I found in the OP. A wee bit of harmless trolling, if you will.

And yeah, Google Translate OWNS.

[The Alma Mater]

Please continue ignoring all of the nice things god did like the creation of all existence and free will.

The Bible makes it extremely clear that God does not care about free will.

Creation ? Yes. God deserves a nod of thanks for that, despite his questionable motives.

[Farnhamia]

Please continue ignoring all of the nice things god did like the creation of all existence and free will.

God who? Supernatural intervention is not required for either of those. Unless you're joking, in which case, as Miss Emily Litella says, never mind.

[Willenburg]

Does no one get that the Bible is a masterful combination of mythology and a surprising quantity of history for that time period? All of the Easternisms were lost in translation, which is why we read it and think some lady turned into a pillar of salt for looking at a city. [In fact, what we translate as a 'pillar of salt' is meant to refer to a statue, and is an Eastern metaphor for being an example, and turning back was actually more like lagging waaay behind and being killed by a volcano or whatever.]

The original intent of the writers isn't conveyed at all in many translated passages, so literalists are off base, but people who decry it as being full of contradictions would do well to sit down a book of Greek mythology or the English records of battles vs. their enemies' records, and put things in perspective.

Also, it was written by a LOT of different people, you think they agreed on EVERYTHING? That would explain contradictions lol. The Bible is just what books the high poobahs decided to bind together as the core doctrine at such and such time.

[Prevania]

From what possible point of view can a being who killed many in a little flood he decided to have not be a 'genocidal monster'?

Perspective perhaps. If I throw away all my sims and start anew with a new family in a new game, am I a monster ?
Not from my view. But perhaps those Sims think differently.

And aren't we humans but Sims to God ?

Sims have no free will; humans do (except when god intervenes)

[Farnhamia]

Does no one get that the Bible is a masterful combination of mythology and a surprising quantity of history for that time period? All of the Easternisms were lost in translation, which is why we read it and think some lady turned into a pillar of salt for looking at a city. [In fact, what we translate as a 'pillar of salt' is meant to refer to a statue, and is an Eastern metaphor for being an example, and turning back was actually more like lagging waaay behind and being killed by a volcano or whatever.]

The original intent of the writers isn't conveyed at all in many translated passages, so literalists are off base, but people who decry it as being full of contradictions would do well to sit down a book of Greek mythology or the English records of battles vs. their enemies' records, and put things in perspective.

Also, it was written by a LOT of different people, you think they agreed on EVERYTHING? That would explain contradictions lol. The Bible is just what books the high poobahs decided to bind together as the core doctrine at such and such time.

Except people sitting down with a book of Greek mythology or English history don't go around saying that everyone should follow the principles (if any) in those books.

[Willenburg]

Does no one get that the Bible is a masterful combination of mythology and a surprising quantity of history for that time period? All of the Easternisms were lost in translation, which is why we read it and think some lady turned into a pillar of salt for looking at a city. [In fact, what we translate as a 'pillar of salt' is meant to refer to a statue, and is an Eastern metaphor for being an example, and turning back was actually more like lagging waaay behind and being killed by a volcano or whatever.]

The original intent of the writers isn't conveyed at all in many translated passages, so literalists are off base, but people who decry it as being full of contradictions would do well to sit down a book of Greek mythology or the English records of battles vs. their enemies' records, and put things in perspective.

Also, it was written by a LOT of different people, you think they agreed on EVERYTHING? That would explain contradictions lol. The Bible is just what books the high poobahs decided to bind together as the core doctrine at such and such time.

Except people sitting down with a book of Greek mythology or English history don't go around saying that everyone should follow the principles (if any) in those books.

They don't really offer any advice or moral grounding that I was able to see. Oh, except the Greeks were like "lol drink wine and fornicate, and regret it later looool"

[Treznor]

I've pointed out that I have little problem with people believing in invisible sky fairies. My problem is when they publicly claim that they do exist, and that they have documentation on how we should live our lives because of that belief. Without verifiable evidence, I'm allowed to challenge their beliefs if I am so moved to do so. You can't tell me I shouldn't challenge them simply because they believe, because belief is not sacred. Any idea should be subject to challenge, be it scientific, philosophic, cultural or religious.

They have a problem with you publicly claiming that god doesn't exist as well, they have a problem with you treating them like idiots for believing in it and mocking them for it (using "invisible sky fairies" to describe god, obviously showing you have absolutely no sense of respect for their belief)

That's fine. They can have a problem with it all they like. Nothing about their belief in invisible sky fairies requires me to respect the belief itself. I respect that they believe it, but that's as far as my respect goes. I'm not going to try to say they can't believe it, the way so many believers try to say I must believe (even to the point of attempting to influence secular law according to their religious beliefs). But I hold to my last sentence:

Any idea should be subject to challenge, be it scientific, philosophic, cultural or religious.

[Willenburg]

Any idea should be subject to challenge, be it scientific, philosophic, cultural or religious.

God bless you, sir! I mean...um...Darwin...bless? 'Karma' bless? Just bless you then. XD

[The Alma Mater]

From what possible point of view can a being who killed many in a little flood he decided to have not be a 'genocidal monster'?

Perspective perhaps. If I throw away all my sims and start anew with a new family in a new game, am I a monster ?
Not from my view. But perhaps those Sims think differently.

And aren't we humans but Sims to God ?

Sims have no free will; humans do (except when god intervenes)

And there we have the difference between Christians and, for instance, me.
They think God cares about humanity because he sees us as persons. Individuals with hopes and dreams that have some meaning, some worth.

I think God cares about humanity because he sees us as sims. Something he put a lot of work in, something he wrote biographies for - but characters on a metaphorical computerscreen nevertheless. Which can be deleted and stated anew without a twinge of guilt - merely some regret about all the wasted work. But caring about the characters as if they were real persons ? HAH ! What a quaint notion.

And hence the little stairs into the swimming pool sometimes disappear while we are swimming.

[EvilDarkMagicians]

From what possible point of view can a being who killed many in a little flood he decided to have not be a 'genocidal monster'?

Perspective perhaps. If I throw away all my sims and start anew with a new family in a new game, am I a monster ?
Not from my view. But perhaps those Sims think differently.

And aren't we humans but Sims to God ?

Sims have no free will; humans do (except when god intervenes)

My sims have free will.....

[Farnhamia]

Does no one get that the Bible is a masterful combination of mythology and a surprising quantity of history for that time period? All of the Easternisms were lost in translation, which is why we read it and think some lady turned into a pillar of salt for looking at a city. [In fact, what we translate as a 'pillar of salt' is meant to refer to a statue, and is an Eastern metaphor for being an example, and turning back was actually more like lagging waaay behind and being killed by a volcano or whatever.]

The original intent of the writers isn't conveyed at all in many translated passages, so literalists are off base, but people who decry it as being full of contradictions would do well to sit down a book of Greek mythology or the English records of battles vs. their enemies' records, and put things in perspective.

Also, it was written by a LOT of different people, you think they agreed on EVERYTHING? That would explain contradictions lol. The Bible is just what books the high poobahs decided to bind together as the core doctrine at such and such time.

Except people sitting down with a book of Greek mythology or English history don't go around saying that everyone should follow the principles (if any) in those books.

They don't really offer any advice or moral grounding that I was able to see. Oh, except the Greeks were like "lol drink wine and fornicate, and regret it later looool"

Ah, so you see the falseness of your comparison of the Bible and Greek mythology, good. The Bible is two things, a collection of mythology, poetry, and histories from the ancient Hebrews, describing, as many ancient peoples did, how their ancestors came to dwell where they did and how they were beloved of some deity. The Egyptians had such stories, the Assyrians and Babylonians did, it's not uncommon. The Bible is also a collection of biographies of Jesus of Nazareth, allegedly put to death in the principate of Tiberius Augustus for causing public disturbances, and the writings about this Jesus by his followers, who claimed that he was the Jewish Messiah.

Greek mythology is much the same, without the whole Messiah thing. Neither is any more true than the other.

[Willenburg]

Does no one get that the Bible is a masterful combination of mythology and a surprising quantity of history for that time period? All of the Easternisms were lost in translation, which is why we read it and think some lady turned into a pillar of salt for looking at a city. [In fact, what we translate as a 'pillar of salt' is meant to refer to a statue, and is an Eastern metaphor for being an example, and turning back was actually more like lagging waaay behind and being killed by a volcano or whatever.]

The original intent of the writers isn't conveyed at all in many translated passages, so literalists are off base, but people who decry it as being full of contradictions would do well to sit down a book of Greek mythology or the English records of battles vs. their enemies' records, and put things in perspective.

Also, it was written by a LOT of different people, you think they agreed on EVERYTHING? That would explain contradictions lol. The Bible is just what books the high poobahs decided to bind together as the core doctrine at such and such time.

Except people sitting down with a book of Greek mythology or English history don't go around saying that everyone should follow the principles (if any) in those books.

They don't really offer any advice or moral grounding that I was able to see. Oh, except the Greeks were like "lol drink wine and fornicate, and regret it later looool"

Ah, so you see the falseness of your comparison of the Bible and Greek mythology, good. The Bible is two things, a collection of mythology, poetry, and histories from the ancient Hebrews, describing, as many ancient peoples did, how their ancestors came to dwell where they did and how they were beloved of some deity. The Egyptians had such stories, the Assyrians and Babylonians did, it's not uncommon. The Bible is also a collection of biographies of Jesus of Nazareth, allegedly put to death in the principate of Tiberius Augustus for causing public disturbances, and the writings about this Jesus by his followers, who claimed that he was the Jewish Messiah.

Greek mythology is much the same, without the whole Messiah thing. Neither is any more true than the other.

Ummm...yeah that's pretty much what I was saying. Only I hold that the Bible has more wisdom put into it, more valid history, and more truth. Like if the Greeks had mashed their mythology and their philosophy together, stirred it in a pot, and picked at quasi-random from it a certain number of books, then bound them up.

Only it would be Greekier.

[Farnhamia]

Does no one get that the Bible is a masterful combination of mythology and a surprising quantity of history for that time period? All of the Easternisms were lost in translation, which is why we read it and think some lady turned into a pillar of salt for looking at a city. [In fact, what we translate as a 'pillar of salt' is meant to refer to a statue, and is an Eastern metaphor for being an example, and turning back was actually more like lagging waaay behind and being killed by a volcano or whatever.]

The original intent of the writers isn't conveyed at all in many translated passages, so literalists are off base, but people who decry it as being full of contradictions would do well to sit down a book of Greek mythology or the English records of battles vs. their enemies' records, and put things in perspective.

Also, it was written by a LOT of different people, you think they agreed on EVERYTHING? That would explain contradictions lol. The Bible is just what books the high poobahs decided to bind together as the core doctrine at such and such time.

Except people sitting down with a book of Greek mythology or English history don't go around saying that everyone should follow the principles (if any) in those books.

They don't really offer any advice or moral grounding that I was able to see. Oh, except the Greeks were like "lol drink wine and fornicate, and regret it later looool"

Ah, so you see the falseness of your comparison of the Bible and Greek mythology, good. The Bible is two things, a collection of mythology, poetry, and histories from the ancient Hebrews, describing, as many ancient peoples did, how their ancestors came to dwell where they did and how they were beloved of some deity. The Egyptians had such stories, the Assyrians and Babylonians did, it's not uncommon. The Bible is also a collection of biographies of Jesus of Nazareth, allegedly put to death in the principate of Tiberius Augustus for causing public disturbances, and the writings about this Jesus by his followers, who claimed that he was the Jewish Messiah.

Greek mythology is much the same, without the whole Messiah thing. Neither is any more true than the other.

Ummm...yeah that's pretty much what I was saying. Only I hold that the Bible has more wisdom put into it, more valid history, and more truth. Like if the Greeks had mashed their mythology and their philosophy together, stirred it in a pot, and picked at quasi-random from it a certain number of books, then bound them up.

Only it would be Greekier.

Well, never mind then.

[Saint Abbra]

I only read first and last page, so I might be butting in here.

I can "not be Christian" because it simply doesn't make sense to me. If people wish to be religious, then I won't hinder them. But if they start to force their religion or spirituality down my throat, I get aggressive. I know plenty of religious or spiritual people with whom I can have a civilized debate. I know a priest with whom I can talk really good, I can debate family, politics, feelings... or religion. No forcing down my throat, no pointing fingers and no "you'll burn in hell".

When people try to force their religion on me, however, I get really aggressive.

I haven't seen proof of any miracles. I haven't seen any references to Jesus outside the bible. And I don't think any of the Catholic Church's alleged saints have performed any miracles either. To sum it up, I don't think the Jesus presented in the Bible have ever existed. Likewise with the Christian God - the holes and outright untruths (I don't think it's lies since they weren't deliberate) in the Bible are simply too massive.

I don't normally tell my Christian friends this, because there's no reason for me to force it down their throat either. I see no reason to hurt their belief, because I find their interpretation of their bible pretty beautiful. Wishing better for people - I could sign that as well.

The fundamental interpretation of the bible, however... it's simply horrible. Belief in the Old Testament, the flood, the curses upon people, the plagues etc. The worst, I think, is what he brought on his own followers, though. His treatment of Job, who was a devout Jew, just to test his faith? I find it all appalling. Wishing people to join this interpretation is even more horrible. Why wish so much hurt and death upon people? Why force it down upon people?
And for me more important: Why do it in such an ignorant way? It seems to me as if fundamentalists in general wish the rest of the population to view them as fools or clowns (I could probably pull a decent lot of examples from this thread alone). I can't see how that can be efficient in getting converts.

[Jaunty tunes]

Yes, How can I not join a corrupt religious institution that has seriously questionable morals by following a book in blind faith that we can not be certain of the origins, and much meaning of the book has been lost in translation when it describes a force beyond all known science, with such a psychological change from chapter to chapter that if God did exist we would be lucky to be alive now?

Hmmm I will need to think about that

Seriously does anyone believe they have the ability to convert people over the internet. If so I don’t think you need education in science or religious enlightenment. Instead you need a good dose of humility.

[Manahakatouki]

After the first couple of hookers...you know there's no god.......