Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Are you receiving an "error" mesage when posting?

    Chances are it went through, so check before douible posting.

    We hope to have the situtaion resolved soon, and Happy Thanksgiving to those in the US!

  • Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?

    Join For His Glory for a discussion on how

    https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/

  • Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need

    https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/

  • Ever read the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ?

    Read through this brief blog, and receive eternal salvation as the free gift of God

    /blog/the-gospel

  • Have questions about the Christian faith?

    Come ask us what's on your mind in Questions and Answers

    https://christianforums.net/forums/questions-and-answers/

  • How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?

    Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject

    https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

What if God didn't exist?

If you became convinced that God didn't exist, would you continue to practice?


  • Total voters
    7
CatholicXian wrote:


I'm not going by faith here. If God did not exist, then I wouldn't exist. Nothing would exist. It's not about being pious, it's about being practical. I don't think we need a Bible to prove that God exists.




This is my point as well, CatholicXian.


Orion, with all due respect, I do not find postulation about the impossible to be productive.
I understand the intent of this discussion. I just do not see any possible good which might come of it.



We are instructed by scripture to think on those things which are productive and which are utilitarian for elevating the quaility of life. To do otherwise is to go against holy scripture. I see no reason to pretend scripture, and the God Who inspired it, do not exist for the purpose of pondering what I would do if they did not.



The bible warns us:

"The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God." -Psalm 14:1

...and momma didn't raise no fool! :D






I truly wish you well in your endeavors, and...








May the love and peace of Jesus Christ be yours ( I mean this sincerely!!),
Paul W.
 
I'm with Orion on this one--this is a purely hypothetical question--and most of the answers are just dodging.
 
Free said:
I'm with Orion on this one--this is a purely hypothetical question--and most of the answers are just dodging.
But it's inconceivable (not said like the guy from Princess Bride...)! How am I supposed to exist if God doesn't exist? What are the bounds of this hypothetical world? What holds it together?
 
Orion said:
I'm afraid that I haven't been exposed to either of them.
Sad! Anselm is my favorite. His Proslogion is where you can find his ontological argument for the existence of God.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/an ... ogium.html
God cannot be conceived not to exist. --God is that, than which nothing greater can be conceived. --That which can be conceived not to exist is not God.

AND it assuredly exists so truly, that it cannot be conceived not to exist. For, it is possible to conceive of a being which cannot be conceived not to exist; and this is greater than one which can be conceived not to exist. Hence, if that, than which nothing greater can be conceived, can be conceived not to exist, it is not that, than which nothing greater can be conceived. But this is an irreconcilable contradiction. There is, then, so truly a being than which nothing greater can be conceived to exist, that it cannot even be conceived not to exist;. and this being you are, O Lord, our God.

So truly, therefore, do you exist, O Lord, my God, that you can not be conceived not to exist; and rightly. For, if a mind could conceive of a being better than you, the creature would rise above the Creator; and this is most absurd. And, indeed, whatever else there is, except you alone, can be conceived not to exist. To you alone, therefore, it belongs to exist more truly than all other beings, and hence in a higher degree than all others. For, whatever else exists does not exist so truly, and hence in a less degree it belongs to it to exist. Why, then, has the fool said in his heart, there is no God (Psalms xiv. 1), since it is so evident, to a rational mind, that you do exist in the highest degree of all? Why, except that he is dull and a fool?

http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1002.htm
Thomas Aquinas has "Five Ways" or five "proofs" for God's existence. All of which are pretty convincing, but the one I'm partial to is argument regarding efficient causes.
The second way is from the nature of the efficient cause. In the world of sense we find there is an order of efficient causes. There is no case known (neither is it, indeed, possible) in which a thing is found to be the efficient cause of itself; for so it would be prior to itself, which is impossible. Now in efficient causes it is not possible to go on to infinity, because in all efficient causes following in order, the first is the cause of the intermediate cause, and the intermediate is the cause of the ultimate cause, whether the intermediate cause be several, or only one. Now to take away the cause is to take away the effect. Therefore, if there be no first cause among efficient causes, there will be no ultimate, nor any intermediate cause. But if in efficient causes it is possible to go on to infinity, there will be no first efficient cause, neither will there be an ultimate effect, nor any intermediate efficient causes; all of which is plainly false. Therefore it is necessary to admit a first efficient cause, to which everyone gives the name of God.
 
CatholicXian said:
But it's inconceivable (not said like the guy from Princess Bride...)! How am I supposed to exist if God doesn't exist? What are the bounds of this hypothetical world? What holds it together?
In the world of hypothetical the question is conceivable. But you are not addressing the question anyway. The question was as follows:

"If you became convinced that God didn't exist, would you continue to practice?"

The question is "if you became convinced that God didn't exist, would you continue to practice?". The question is not "if God didn't exist would you exist?" or "if God didn't exist would you continue to exist?" Completely different questions.
 
Free wrote:

I'm with Orion on this one--this is a purely hypothetical question--and most of the answers are just dodging.


And:

In the world of hypothetical the question is conceivable. But you are not addressing the question anyway. The question was as follows:






And I am with CatholicXian on the matter. Hypothetical or not, the question is not worth considering. Still, for the sake of satisfying you and Orion I will say this; even though I have already said it in so many words, There would be nothing to motivate anyone to any sort of decent or moral living other than the paltry few random positive feedbacks one might get from others. I say "paltry few random positive feedbacks" because even knowing as we do God does exist it is still difficult to find many positive people in America today. Most people are negative in their thinking, and most of it comes from dwelling on the hypothetical scenario of the nonexistence of God.



There are enough people already pretending God does not exist. It is abominable at worst, and odious at least, in my opinion, that Christians who know better should join with them in pondering such folly. It is disgraceful , disobedient, and a disservice to God Who has bestowed upon us such grace.







Hypothetical or not, the question is unproductive.



I wish you much joy and happiness, and...







May the love and peace of Jesus Christ be yours,
Paul W.
 
.

Oh yes, the devil works in some rather sly/crafty ways... trickery is what he has mastered. The devil inflicts confusion into the mind of man, then doubt is firmly planted and firmly rooted in the mind of man, he then conjures up many many thoughts questioning The Truth of God into the mind of man, hoping to inflict a denial of God, rather than a Belief in God. Questioning the Truth of God AS IF IT WASN'T TRUTH, the devil asks his subject to taste the fruit of denial of Truth, to go against that Truth given to them by the GOD OF TRUTH, assuring them they will not die if they do so.
Now what part of them will not die... the physical body, the spirit? What type of spirit is of light and life? What type of spirit is of darkness and death? The devil wants to instill the spirit that is of himself, that type of spirit that comes to kill steal and destroy all that is OF a HOLY GOD OF TRUTH, to reject the truth of the Holy Spirit by posing that which is opposed to Him. And of all things, the "hypothetical" posture is surely a "safe" ground from which to operate. 8-)


I think that some hypothetical questions such as this one, "If you became convinced that God didn't exist, would you continue to practice?" are of the devil and are a blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. Some hypothetical questions are no different than witches brew that intoxicates in order to give control over to the trickery behind the spell! Not much different than drinking booze and getting drunk on the potion!

It's just an excuse of the spirit of the devil to plant the seed of confusion and doubt against the Holy Spirit into the minds of people who are not yet established or yet well fed on the meat of the HOLY Word. Babes who are given alcohol with their milk will be as a drunken fool no different than an adult who drinks alcohol to swallow down the meat he's been chewing on. The alcohol confuses the mind and changes the behavior! Your so called "hypothetical" questions are loaded with toxins which can poison the mind and alter behavior no different than would be the mixing alcohol into the milk of a baby! These types of "hypothetical" questions are nothing but a bait of confusion placed on a hook of doubt to present as a feed of denial to those who are not well established in the Word of the Holy Spirit of God.

Since when is "hypothetically" speaking against the holy spirit, to meditate on thoughts against the Holy Sprit, deemed as acceptable from any Christian, and why would any "Christian" present such anti-Holy Spirit questions, anyway?
If God didn't exist IS an atheistic type loaded question and is total NONSENSE to present to any Christian who believes in the HOLY SPIRIT OF GOD! GOD IS SPIRIT! HOLY SPIRIT, and you pose hypothetical questions that are purely ANTI-SPIRIT OF GOD? Why do you even ask such nonsense questions?

The devil loves to baited the mind with nonsense and doubt against the Holy Spirit. Your posting is anti-Holy Spirit, full of doubt and basically blasphemous. Rather than expose those things that are against the Holy Spirit to bring them to the light, here, you pose questions that entice an atheistic posture, a question that is shrouded in a blanket of hypothesis.

Matthew 12:31-32,
"Therefore I say to you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven men. Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come" (NKJV, emphasis added).

If you truly seek to be in relationship with the HOLY SPIRIT OF GOD, then you are called to Repent from committing to speaking against the Holy Spirit!

Hypothetical questions such as the one you posed here is rubbish thrown in the path of the Christian babes as a stumble stone! Total nonsense!

There is NO "what IF" God didn't exist!

What if your god of doubt, confusion and denial of GOD didn't exist? That is a totally acceptable question!

The first commandment, Thou shalt have no other God before me.
The third commandment, Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.


To doubt or to pose questions such as "What if God didn't exist" is no different than asking one to doubt the existence of God for one small second so to answer your 'hypothetical" question! Bow down to your 'hypothetical" god of denial and doubt? NEVER!

I'm with Paul W and CatholicXian in that it is nonsense!

It is an abomination to even pose such a question! It’s preposterous! A set up of the spirit of the devil! REPENT! and change your mind away from the inlfuences of anti-HOLY SPIRIT ramblings!

.
 
The question, "What if God didn't exist?" is the question that one will engage, whether it is spoken or not, when one witnesses to atheists. The atheists have asked this question of themselves and have come to the conclusion that God doesn't exist, therefore why bother with religion.

Now an atheist (perhaps, for the OPoster doesn't give any particular reason as to why the question was asked) has asked this question of Christians.

While the original question was posed in a hypothetical way, we can answer in totally practical ways. This now becomes an opportunity to give reason for the faith we have. For some, the opportunity becomes one of sharing the hopelessness and uselessness of a life without God. For myself and presumably one other person, the opportunity has been one of showing what a blessed, superior, and abundant life that God gives us. And for some, it has become an opportunity to point out the very ridiculousness of even pondering God's existance, rather like a computer pondering the existence of Bill Gates.

I think all these answers are 'good' answers. Paul did say that without the resurrection we are to be the most pitiable. But, nonetheless, there is something to be said about the practical aspects of the life God calls us to, that His ways are better than ours. However, I don't disagree for one moment with Paul W. (I can't think of when I've ever disagreed with Paul W. :wink: ), CatholicXian or Relic, that the question itself is pointless, because we need to deal in reality and reality is that not only does God exist, but we will all give answer to Him.

When I look over this thread what I see is this: While the Christian life has some very great advantages, ultimately it is hopeless with out God. But, the very idea that there is no God is ridiculous, because here we are pondering this question. God exists, all that was, is and is to be comes from Him, and it's both unproductive and even counter-productive to hypothesize otherwise.

To boil this all down, there is really only one very short conversation that can take place:

"What if God didn't exist?"
"God does exist. How are you going to answer to Him."

The thing is, for most people this is not enough. This is why we are exhorted to have answers for the hope that is within us. I know that there is at least one participant in this thread who is struggling with this very question. To just say, "He does exist, the question is pointless" probably won't help him in his struggle. But, Relic has hit the nail on the head! This question is ultimately posed by none other than the devil. To ask it in earnest, (and I've no doubt this question was asked in earnest) is to be denying the Spirit and one must repent and turn back to God.

The question might be asked in the hypothetical. The answer is most assuredly real.
 
Free said:
In the world of hypothetical the question is conceivable. But you are not addressing the question anyway. The question was as follows:

"If you became convinced that God didn't exist, would you continue to practice?"
I became convinced God does exist, therefore I worship Him in accordance to His word. So in this hypothetical scenario, the opposite would apply.

But what of morality and it's source? Would humans have any sense of morality if God didn't exist? If no, then Man would have been the cause of his own extinction and we wouldn't be having this conversation. 8-)


Relic, this is a very important issue and one many of us who witness may or have faced in one form or another. As to it's source being of the adversary, maybe, maybe not... we still have to be ready with an answer, as per Peter in 1 Peter 3:15.
 
vic C. said:
Relic, this is a very important issue and one many of us who witness may or have faced in one form or another. As to it's source being of the adversary, maybe, maybe not... we still have to be ready with an answer, as per Peter in 1 Peter 3:15.

Yes vic, forgive me, I tend toward being too much like Peter when he darted toward the Roman soldier to cut off his ear. Peter cut the ear off of a Roman soldier. But it was the mercy of Jesus that healed him. Peter denied Christ thrice, but it was Jesus who afterward asked Peter thrice if he loved Him, Christ forgave Peter for his denial of him.

When a person comes saying, "Suppose God doesn't exist", I cannot consider that at all. To any Christian, it IS NONSENSE and IS clearly a devilish Anti-Holy Spirit question. Speaking against the Holy Spirit is blasphemy.

God is a miracle worker ONLY for those who want a miracle! :-D God will not give a miracle to anyone who does not want His truth but only seeks to doubt and debate the truth of His Holy Word.

So sorry if you thought I was too crass or is an issue here. I can't hold back when I see an abomination or blasphemy against His Holy Spirit If you think I should lighten up, pray for me that I learn to be used by the Lord in a more gentile manner when He deems it necessary. . . And pray the Lord uses me for applying that swift kick in the behind when He deems it necessary to do so, also. I'd much appreciate a postitive prayer if you think I need it. :wink:


And I pray for those who think things against the Holy Spirit to seek the Truth of the Holy Spirit.

May the revelation of His Truth be a blessing to the willing. :fadein:

.
 
So sorry if you thought I was too crass or is an issue here. I can't hold back when I see an abomination or blasphemy against His Holy Spirit If you think I should lighten up, pray for me that I learn to be used by the Lord in a more gentile manner when He deems it necessary. . . And pray the Lord uses me for applying that swift kick in the behind when He deems it necessary to do so, also. I'd much appreciate a postitive prayer if you think I need it. :wink:

And I pray for those who think things against the Holy Spirit to seek the Truth of the Holy Spirit.

May the revelation of His Truth be a blessing to the willing.
As always, the Truth will prevail. :angel:

As for being crass, no, that wasn't my impression. It's just that I encounter this on a daily basis at work and to and from work and have learned (the hard way) that my legs get tired from swift kicking so much. I take out my frustrations by lamenting about the amount of gray hairs on my head. :lol: j/k
 
vic C said:
As always, the Truth will prevail.

As for being crass, no, that wasn't my impression. It's just that I encounter this on a daily basis at work and to and from work and have learned (the hard way) that my legs get tired from swift kicking so much. I take out my frustrations by lamenting about the amount of gray hairs on my head. j/k

As I am still able to do, at least you can still count the gray hairs on your head. :lol:

Don't know if this was co-incidence or what, but today I was surfing a blog site and came across this comment made by a fellow blogger named Rodney, and I thought it could be applied to this topic in that it is an excellent piece which provides an excellent example of why it is absurd to think of such a thing as a non-existant God.

Rodney said:
Meaning of Life?.. The answer to this question cannot come from our own human intelligence or reason, but only from the God the Creator himself who transcends our material world. As we see in today’s naturalistic society, once we remove God from the equation, we start to lose all sense of purpose for life. But, if God exists, we really do have a transcendent purpose, and really do have meaning for our lives. Not only do we find day-to-day significance in our lives, but an ultimate significance through our hope in eternal life. If God exists, we remove the moral relativism that pervades today’s society, and we replace it with a standard of absolute right and wrong residing in the character of God Himself. This gives our day-to-day choices significance too. God gave us the ability to choose whether we live by His moral laws or by whatever values we assign to ourselves through our own reason. As we find, we are not mere robots placed on this earth by God. Rather, we have absolute free will to follow what He says or not. We can either recognize God as the Creator of the universe, or we can deny that He exists. We can choose to live a meaningless life or a life with absolute and eternal purpose.

~ Rodney ~

.
 
If you decided that your chosen deity did not exist then what would be the point in preying to him or her? Would it not be absurd to attend church for something that did not exist...oh wait...thinking about it Star Trek is not real and I have seen people who act as it it was real...scary people who wear uniforms and wear Jar Jar Binks back packs. Anyway, I digress...

I think about it this way, as long as you still act "Christian" then so what of you don't prey? Is not being good and nice and thoughtful the basic end result? I think that if a deity did exist and it was all loving and all knowing then he would know you just wanted to be a good and honest person. Indeed, it's only men that demand you worship your deity every day. For example, Jesus did not want people drooling all over him in sycophantic worship hoping their creeping would get them into heaven, he wanted people to follow the basic ideas of the social contract, to love and be loved, to abandon cycnicism and help others, to follow him, not bow down to him as some sort of invisible dictator. I think the Vatican has it utterly wrong and I truly think that if Jesus were alive today he would not be happy with them at all.

You can still be a good and moral person without a belief in a deity, in fact, I would say more so because you would have the knowledge that you are good for the right reasons, because you are a naturally good person, and not for any hope of reward or fear of punishment after death.

But preying and going to church? The question is...even if you have a god belief, why would you do that anyway? Do you think your deity wants that? Or is it not more likely the organised religions want you to do that so the donation trays stay full.
 
But preying and going to church? The question is...even if you have a god belief, why would you do that anyway? Do you think your deity wants that? Or is it not more likely the organised religions want you to do that so the donation trays stay full.
It's Pray, not prey.

... and yes, He desires us to pray and worship corporately.

As for the donation trays; someone has to pay for the expenses required to run a church build, not to mention help foot the bill for the mission field and the various charities. Organizations like the RCC, SBC, Salvation Army, Habitat for Humanity and others, rely heavily on donations and gifts to operate. They will accept government partnership, but that is not their primary source of income.
 
motile said:
Indeed, it's only men that demand you worship your deity every day.
On the contrary, if the Judeo-Christian God exists, then his very existence demands our continual worship because of who he is.

motile said:
For example, Jesus did not want people drooling all over him in sycophantic worship hoping their creeping would get them into heaven, he wanted people to follow the basic ideas of the social contract, to love and be loved, to abandon cycnicism and help others, to follow him, not bow down to him as some sort of invisible dictator.
Three things: (1) Jesus accepted the worship of his followers, (2) Jesus' teachings went far beyond any mere social contract theory, and (3) worship of a being does not mean that that being is "some sort of invisible dictator".

motile said:
You can still be a good and moral person without a belief in a deity, in fact, I would say more so because you would have the knowledge that you are good for the right reasons, because you are a naturally good person, and not for any hope of reward or fear of punishment after death.
First problem is, morality is difficult, and I would argue impossible, to explain without the existence of the Judeo-Christian God.

Second problem is the assumption that people are "naturally good". I think a study of human behaviour would prove otherwise.

Third problem is the assumption that those who believe in a deity act morally out of hope or fear.
 
vic C. said:
But preying and going to church? The question is...even if you have a god belief, why would you do that anyway? Do you think your deity wants that? Or is it not more likely the organised religions want you to do that so the donation trays stay full.
It's Pray, not prey.

Thanks for that, I type so quick sometimes things come out wrong. And words that sound the same slip through the spell check because they are not actually incorrect spellings. :lol:

... and yes, He desires us to pray and worship corporately.

But Jesus never says that.

As for the donation trays; someone has to pay for the expenses required to run a church build, not to mention help foot the bill for the mission field and the various charities. Organizations like the RCC, SBC, Salvation Army, Habitat for Humanity and others, rely heavily on donations and gifts to operate. They will accept government partnership, but that is not their primary source of income.

Quite right, but other none religious charities still do well with plain old donations and fund raising techniques, I don't see how the running of a church is applicable to any of the above. With that said, I made no comment of the reason for the donations, whatever they use the money for it irrelevant, my point was that the reason you are told you must go to church and worship regularly might be to ensure a regular income to keep the church going, the 'purpose of the church' being a very circular 'to keep the church going'.

Please don't read too much into my comments, they were just a musing in regards to the OP. I meant no disrespect.

EDIT for spelling :lol:
 
Free said:
motile said:
Indeed, it's only men that demand you worship your deity every day.
On the contrary, if the Judeo-Christian God exists, then his very existence demands our continual worship because of who he is.

Why?

motile said:
For example, Jesus did not want people drooling all over him in sycophantic worship hoping their creeping would get them into heaven, he wanted people to follow the basic ideas of the social contract, to love and be loved, to abandon cynicism and help others, to follow him, not bow down to him as some sort of invisible dictator.
Three things: (1) Jesus accepted the worship of his followers,

But he did not demand it. As for the worship of his followers, would he reject the very people he wanted to teach?

(2) Jesus' teachings went far beyond any mere social contract theory, and

In what way?

(3) worship of a being does not mean that that being is "some sort of invisible dictator".

With respect, I never said it did. I said a invisible being that demands constant thanks and worship is by definition an invisible dictator.

motile said:
You can still be a good and moral person without a belief in a deity, in fact, I would say more so because you would have the knowledge that you are good for the right reasons, because you are a naturally good person, and not for any hope of reward or fear of punishment after death.
First problem is, morality is difficult, and I would argue impossible, to explain without the existence of the Judeo-Christian God.

Why though? The Judeo-Christian God hates homosexuals, is it moral to hate a human being for their sexual preference? There are many on this very forum who probably hate homosexuals with all their heart for the sole reason that they think they have to as good moral Christians. Is it moral to slice off the end of a child penis, drawing blood of a child, purely because of a religions belief? Again I could go on about al the bad things people do for their faith but I won't, instead I will try and explain how we get morals in a society without the need for a deity.
Morals are indeed guidelines for making decisions. Presented with similar situations, a person's actions will be identical every time. For example, say you're leaving a restaurant and you spot a five pound tip passing by a table. The temptation of increased wealth without much effort sure is enticing. By simply extending your arm and inconspicuously grabbing the cash, you will be five quid richer. Since no one is looking, you won't get into trouble. Plus, the waiter probably wasn't expecting such a large tip anyway. Where's the harm in that?
In this case, a Christian or a Jew would point to the Ten Commandments: "Thou shalt not steal." According to the Christian/Jewish point-of-view, this alone will restrain a religiously devout individual from snatching the money off the table. This follows the rules of deontological ethics: Something is either always right or always wrong. For example, stealing the money off the table would be morally wrong because stealing is always wrong.
However, what if the commandment said "Thou shalt steal?" Would stealing be an absolute right then? Is all that is required is a recommendation from a centuries-old text? How about the sixth commandment: "thou shalt not kill?" Does this rule apply with self-defense? Or war? What about working on the Sabbath? In this modern era when working on a Sunday is common and normal how can we still apply that rule? How is it actually immoral to work on a Sunday?
Here is the fundamental problem with static morals: the inability to judge every action we humans make with reason and free will. Shouldn't morals stand on their own merits? Humans are fantastic beings because of their ability to examine the consequences of their actions and make appropriate choices, as opposed to wild animals that act on instinct alone.
Therefore, morals do not come from religious tomes. Morals would exist nicely without them.
Stealing the cash off the table would be immoral because we can feel empathy, we can understand that we would not want to be stolen from ourselves. By virtue of living in a working society we have developed moral rules that allow us to work in that society. Stealing would also degrade your self-worth. If you are unable to earn five pounds on your own merit, then what good are you to yourself? You are then no better than an animal fighting for its survival in the wilderness. Taking the waiter's tip would thus prove your worthlessness.
Also, one can also reason that stealing is not good because if everyone committed robbery all the time, then what would be the reason of owning property or working? People with no belief in a deity can have superb have morals because humans learn moral lessons based on observation and an understanding of human nature. The scriptures of a religious tome are not necessary and in some cases are harmful (genital mutilation, for instance). An person with no belief in a deity reasons and considers the consequences of his actions and for all his actions. Morality is one of the features of all of humanity, so therefore morals don't just exist in the religious realm. A person with no belief in a deity can realize the beauty of humanity, and learn not to battle with it.
What it all comes down in the end is the Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Words to live by.

Second problem is the assumption that people are "naturally good". I think a study of human behaviour would prove otherwise.

Hypothetically if you were shown evidence, for example if you were taken back in time 2000 or 6000 years so you could see for yourself, that the Judeo-Christian faith was utterly wrong and that the Judeo-Christian God did not exist would you then go out and murder and steal and rape...? Or, as I suspect would you remain the good and moral person that you obviously are?
Also, with respect, I never said people in general are naturally good. People can be naturally bad as well as good.

Third problem is the assumption that those who believe in a deity act morally out of hope or fear.

With respect, I never made that assumption. I actually believe strongly that most of those who believe in a deity act morally because they are moral people, but they are told to give credit for that morality to their chosen deity. They are told, mostly from birth that they could not be moral without their deity and the various forms of coercion. This was my point.
 
Thanks for that, I type so quick sometimes things come out wrong. And words that sound the same slip through the spell check because they are not actually incorrect spellings.
No prob with the typo. I make mistakes too, but I use Firefox, which lets me see my spelling errors. I will admit, prey wouldn't technically be an "error". 8-)

[quote:0cfee]... and yes, He desires us to pray and worship corporately.

But Jesus never says that. [/quote:0cfee]
Actually, though we may not find those very words, Jesus did teach on Sabbath in the Synagogues. So did the Apostles. Paul does teach the importance of corporate worship too.

[quote:0cfee]As for the donation trays; someone has to pay for the expenses required to run a church build, not to mention help foot the bill for the mission field and the various charities. Organizations like the RCC, SBC, Salvation Army, Habitat for Humanity and others, rely heavily on donations and gifts to operate. They will accept government partnership, but that is not their primary source of income.
Quite right, but other none religious charities still do well with plain old donations and fund raising techniques, I don't see how the running of a church is applicable to any of the above. With that said, I made no comment of the reason for the donations, whatever they use the money for it irrelevant, my point was that the reason you are told you must go to church and worship regularly might be to ensure a regular income to keep the church going, the 'purpose of the church' being a very circular 'to keep the church going'.[/quote:0cfee]
A typical example of how giving in church benefits charities; our church gives 10% of it's total income to the SBC. All SBC churches do this. In turn, the SBC distributes the funds to various missions and charities they endorse. No SBC churches, no $$$; no $$$, no way for the SBC to aid the missions and charities... No need for the SBC either. You see, it's not circular. None of the funds are returned to the church at all. :)

Please don't read too much into my comments, they were just a musing in regards to the OP. I meant no disrespect.
It's ok, I wasn't bothered by it, just moved to respond with some info, fyi. 8-)
 
The Judeo-Christian God hates homosexuals, is it moral to hate a human being for their sexual preference? There are many on this very forum who probably hate homosexuals with all their heart for the sole reason that they think they have to as good moral Christians. Is it moral to slice off the end of a child penis, drawing blood of a child, purely because of a religions belief?
Hello, I would like to comment on two things.

Nowhere is it said God hates homosexuals and you won't find a good Christian saying these things either. So please don't assume we hate homosexuals. What God hates is sin and the act of homosexuality is sin.

Circumcision; yes, it was a covenant sign between God and His chosen, but we must look at this from a historical and cultural point of view. These were desert people and desert people aren't well... very hygienic. Removing the foreskin of a child reduced the risk of infections and diseases and reduces the mortality rate of infants. There are also benefits to the women who would eventually marry these males.

I believe God gave them dietary codes for similar reasons. Imagine the death rate for those who ate many foods which were improperly prepared or cooked properly, not to add the total rack of refrigeration (there was no ice in the desert :lol: ).
 
Back
Top