Religion: good and bad - Print Topic

With the current debate on the RU486 abortion pill lighting the pilot light on the abortion debate, again we find our pollies trying to enforce their religious viewpoints onto us.

I thought this was a well written article in The Age a few months ago. Something we should all consider ...

I'm not sure where I stand yet on the issue of teaching religion in school. However, I agree that a single religion should not be taught at state schools, rather a mixture covering some of the more prominant religions in this country would be more appropriate. Having people only consider one religion leads to the bigotry and intolerance towards other religions we are currently seeing in society.

I went to a Catholic school and remember yawning through religion classes. The difference between right and wrong in my opinion should be taught at home. I wonder if the current under 40 year olds - the future leaders of this country - will allow religion to dictate their beliefs as much as the current generation of pollies.

Quoted Text

Religion: good and bad
The Age
August 25, 2005

Governments should not be promoting or favouring religion in schools, writes Pamela Bone.

'Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities," said Voltaire. The books of the major religions contain passages that are absurd and worse than absurd. What are today's kindly Christians to make of this instruction to genocide in the Bible: "Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man." (Numbers 31:17-18 )?

What are modern-thinking Muslim men to make of the list in the Koran of women who are forbidden to them, which includes (quite rightly!) their mothers, daughters, mothers-in-law, daughters-in-law, and also married women, "except those whom you own as slaves"?

It's become obligatory when commenting on Islamic terrorism to say that this is a distortion of Islam, that Islam is a religion of peace. In fact, as some reformist Muslims acknowledge, the Koran also contains what Christian reformers say the Bible contains: "sins of scripture". In the Koran can be found passages that promote peace and passages that urge killing. Like the Bible, it is contradictory and confusing. An impartial reader might wonder why God couldn't have made his intentions more easily understandable.

So, what do most religious believers do about the "sins of scripture"? Fortunately for the rest of us, they politely ignore them. Religious extremists might believe in the absurdities, but most people do not.

Karl Marx described religion as "the sigh of the oppressed creature . . . the opiate of the people". If he was right it would imply that when people were not poor and oppressed they wouldn't need the "opiate" (the painkiller) of religion. Yet while societies grow richer and freer, religion persists. Atheism is dead and belief in God has won, it has been proclaimed.

But what sort of belief? In numerical terms, religious belief is growing because it is strong in highly populated poor countries. But it is weak in most modern democracies. In Britain the proportion of those stating "no religion" has grown from 31 per cent to 44 per cent in the past 20 years and only 5 per cent of young people go to church regularly. In most of northern Europe about 40 per cent of the population belongs to a religion. In Australia about 30 per cent have no religion.

What about America then? One doesn't quite know what to make of America. Only 9 per cent of Americans don't believe in God, while a further 12 per cent are not sure. Forty-five per cent of Americans say they believe in the Book of Genesis. Yet even there, if the sincerity of belief can be judged by church attendance, religion may not be very strong in people's lives. Only 38 per cent of Americans go to a religious service at least once a month and only a quarter go every week, according to a Harris poll.

The same poll showed some other interesting results: religious believers are more likely to be older, to be female, to vote Republican and to live in the Midwest or South. African Americans are more likely to believe in God than Hispanics and whites. Those with no college education are more likely to believe in God than those with postgraduate education. People brought up as Protestants are more likely to believe than Catholics and much more likely than Jews. Only 48 per cent of American Jews believe in God and only 16 per cent go to synagogues at least once a month.

Perhaps then, if we keep working to improve the lives of all the people of the world, educate them and make them prosperous, might religion not quietly, gradually disappear? (I don't mean to imply that religious people are uneducated or unintelligent because this is clearly not true.) And, I was going to say, what a good thing that would be, the end of this force that has caused so much misery and violence throughout the ages.

But then - the other day I saw the new British film Millions, and in it school children were performing a nativity play and singing The Little Drummer Boy. And I thought, no, you can't say this is bad. It is, in fact, lovely. It is part of my culture. And I understand that Muslims, Jews, Hindus and others have religious traditions they find lovely, whether or not they really believe in the religion.

So much art, architecture, music and poetry throughout the ages has been inspired by religion. So much beauty in the name of religion. And it does concern me a little that my grandchildren learn nothing about religion at their state school, because without knowing those old stories they will not be able to see the connections in literature and art.

Without religion there would still be art. Without religion there is still beauty and goodness. And without religion, mankind will find reasons to go to war. Yet it remains the case that the best societies in the world are secular societies. And given that some people's religious certainties are putting everyone in danger, governments have a responsibility to keep religion low-key. Our government should not be promoting and favouring religion in the way it does.

Let religion be taught in schools, but have it taught as "this is what some people believe", not "this is fact". Let education be the way its founders intended - free, compulsory and secular. It remains the best hope there is for the future.

No, religion will probably never disappear; because some people simply believe, and that is their right (some people simply don't believe and that is our right, too; more religious people need to acknowledge that). Let people believe what they want. But be grateful most people don't believe too fiercely.

Pamela Bone is an associate editor.

Well she certainly hates religion. It would have been a more effective argument if she weren't one sided from that perspective, but I agree that if it's to be taught then it should be taught from a perspective of many beliefs... in a public school anyway leaving the requirments of religious private schools for another debate. I actually don't think there is a fair way around teaching religious beleifs of creation if evolution and big bang theory is taught given the lack of agreement on the issue of how things came to be and in the interest of representing the diversity of our society. Creation in 10 religions seems to me to be far less material than the amount of time I spent in high school on evolution. My school system was required to also teach Christian creation which took 5 minutes, possibly less, to read. I thought it was un-necisarry at the time but it was only 5 minutes of my life. If it had meant that I only would have had to learn the general idea behind evolution with a few examples then I would have been a lot less bored in 9th grade history class. We spent weeks learning about this period and that period in which this category of creature developed and the Earth was dominated by this animal ans so on but I thnink we all understood the idea perfectly well on day one. So I see this as a 2 day class. One day on evolution and one day reading the first 2 or 3 pages from various religious books, both days with some homework and then on to something more interesting like the history of swordmaking and how to do one at home in your garage... school never really teaches the practical application behind things does it.

Some people might view politics as a form of religion. People certainly follow it with 'religious ferver'. It causes a rise in passions. . (good and bad) the same way
religions in churches do.

Political promises always fall short of 'true faith' . .as we well remember 'core promises'. ::)

Politics is just another 'act of faith' . . so therefore it too is a form of religion.

( faith = the assured expectation of things yet unseen)

We can't all get what we want with government-funded education...those who shout the loudest or have the most money to offer in bribes donations get what they want to the detriment of everyone else.  We've been through the politically correct phase and now it appears we're coming out of that into the Christian right phase.  To be followed by the ????? phase.

I think we need to get over this idea that one size fits all.  It stands to reason that if you fervently believe in Brand-of-Faith A then you are going to want that taught to your kids along with the three Rs.  But Brand-of-Faith B people are going to want their brand taught to their kids.  And on it goes.  And some of those who want have no brand-of-faith are going to be equally passionate about the type of education they want for their kids...all of these are competing requirements and cannot be accommodated by a single system.

Yes there are private schools and yes some people choose those as an option..but that seems a little unfair given they are also paying taxes for the public schools as well.  They might reasonably argue...you take money from me for education therefore you must educate my children the way I want.  So either we get the government out of education all together or we at least make it so that those who choose private education can not pay that component of their taxes.

I think they can be accomadated as long as it's all taught as being various beleifs and not facts.  It doesn't have to be a detailed course of study... and of course perhaps you are right about that and it should simply be left to be taught at home.

I don't think people should have any tax exemptions if they choose private schooling.  School is a and provided.  Public school is a choice people make.  It's like saying that people who don't own cars shouldn't have to pay taxes toward speed cameras, or that people who do own cars shouldn't have to pay taxes toward public transport.
Taking it further, it goes on and on and then we're at "No one should pay GST because it might end up somewhere that it should'nt be for a particular individual."

That just got me curious though if does actually work or not.  Is there actually a country with a Libertarian model that I can look at for a read?

The fact of the matter is, that if the Government gave no funding to Private and Catholic system schools, nobody would be able to afford the fees, and everyone would lob up at the local public school, which would not be able to handle it.

Calculate how much it would cost to create and run hundreds of new public schools to support everyone. The system would collapse.

Public schools still get more funding than catholic schools ( I don't have figures for Private) and Catholic schools still run P&Fs to raise money to buy the basics like computers and air conditioning that are just given to public schools.

Religion Good and Bad? It's all good as long as you keep it to yourself and don't try to force it down someone else's throat. If everyone just lived up to the first commandment - love one another as yourself, then there would be no conflict. But some religions are just open to interpretation, and believers think this is the law and their right to do whatever they want.

Maybe we should start a thread on does God exist or something...

Quoted from The_Phantom

. . . . .Public schools still get more funding than catholic schools ( I don't have figures for Private) and Catholic schools still run P&Fs to raise money to buy the basics like computers and air conditioning that are just given to public schools.

Religion Good and Bad? It's all good as long as you keep it to yourself and don't try to force it down someone else's throat. . . . . . and believers think this is the law and their right to do whatever they want.

Public schools do the same fundraising as church schools to get airconditioning etc. . .I know 'coz I did it for years to get classrooms comfortable for my kids. No public school gets 'given' anything these days. Parents all have to work hard to give the children the extras.

That term . .'force it down someones throat' . .is disgusting. Everyone has differing views on all things from politics to religion and even favourite shoes and food. .
That term is used to 'put others down' for having a different opinion and to get them to shut up.
Debate and logical argument is often stiffled when the one who has no valid point to add gets annoyed at being 'out-gunned' . . so use that term to end a debate they will probably lose. . .it is the mark of one with no well thought out opinion.

Well perhaps you should try calling Stan Zemanek. There, you are allowed to voice your opinion, but if it isn't the same opinion as Stan, he will talk you down, adnyou will end up losing the argument or getting cut off. That is "forcing your opinion down someone's throat".

You have to be able to understand and listen to both sides of the argument to have a debate. Everyone is entitled to voice their opinion and believe in what they want - and free speech - as long as it is lawful and doesn't offend someone else.

That is MY opinion, but I am not telling you that it is the right and only opinion. You can believe what you want. The phrase that I used is a commonly used one and I don't find it offensive, but I respect your right to.

That is my point.

First I don't believe that religion should be taught in school.

In the past, it was the role of the church to teach religion to children and it should stay that way.

For those who believe that when children are taught about religion, they should be taught about every religion... That is ludicrous. That defeat the purpose of religion. It would be more an examination of what religion is rather than a belief in religion.

You don't have to attend church to believe in GOD.
One billion Christians believe in GOD while most of them never set foot in a church and most of them have never read the bible.
Every Christian knows the 10 commandments and that is about all you need to know. If you abide by them, not only does it make you a good Christian, but it makes you a good citizen.

The role of Christianity is foremost to teach people moral values and decency towards their fellow men/women.
Many Christians are able to believe in The Big Bang Theory while still believing in GOD. Even if you dismiss The Big Bang Theory because it is just a theory, any man with any brain would realise that GOD could not have created everything in 7 days as our evolution shows that.

I think that what people do these days is to believe in what is believable. You will never be able to prove that GOD do not exist. Which is why there will always be people believing in him.

Religion is only bad when it is used by fanatics and extremists to further their cause. This is not the fault of religion. It is a human error which needs to be corrected. It is not Islam which has turned people into terrorists. It is a group of people which is twisting the words of The Koran to justify their actions. A group of extremists and fanatics.

Islam has 800.000 followers and growing. Extremists use religion as a launching pad because it is the biggest club in the world. When you make a statement in the name of Allah, 800.000 people listen to you.

When you make a statement in the name of GOD, one billion people listen to you. This why we have wars of religion. In fact those wars have nothing to do with religion. Religion is just an excuse to enlist members for the cause. The cause is a thirst for killing people, sort of legally in the name of war. Every terrorist is nothing more than a common murderer. His cause is a figment of his imagination. In a civilise world, there is no excuse whatsoever for murdering randomly innocent people.

Quoted from Aussies_Online

First I don't believe that religion should be taught in school. . . . In the past, it was the role of the church to teach religion to children and it should stay that way.

That is so true!.

Quoted from Aussies_Online

For those who believe that when children are taught about religion, they should be taught about every religion... That is ludicrous. That defeat the purpose of religion. It would be more an examination of what religion is rather than a belief in religion.

Another absolute truth . . the teacher would be put on the spot to be teaching accurately . .and that would be impossible.

Quoted from Aussies_Online

You don't have to attend church to believe in GOD.
One billion Christians believe in GOD while most of them never set foot in a church and most of them have never read the bible.

Then they may call themselves Christian but that does not make it true. If they have never read the Bible so as to know what God requires of them as Christians . . then their claim is not valid (in Gods eyes).*just like I can call myself a plumber if I want. . but that does not make it true if I have not learned the trade*

Quoted from Aussies_Online

Every Christian knows the 10 commandments and that is about all you need to know. If you abide by them, not only does it make you a good Christian, but it makes you a good citizen.

Sadly that is not true. There is a lot more to being a Christian than simply knowing the 10 commandments. True Christians study Gods word carefully so as to understand it as best they can and the 10 Commandments are a good start. . but that is not all there is to know.

Quoted from Aussies_Online

The role of Christianity is foremost to teach people moral values and decency towards their fellow men/women.

That is a good point . .so why do so many professed christians join the army to kill others at the governments bidding?

Quoted from Aussies_Online

Many Christians are able to believe in The Big Bang Theory while still believing in GOD. Even if you dismiss The Big Bang Theory because it is just a theory, any man with any brain would realise that GOD could not have created everything in 7 days as our evolution shows that.

Wow!!. . you are on a roll here!. . that is true too. . the Big Bang is only a theory . . and Gods 'creative days' were thousands of years long so the literal 7 days of 24 hrs is ridiculous to believe in. Gods take on time is very different to ours. The term day in the Bible denotes a scheduled time frame. . not a literal day.

Quoted from Aussies_Online

I think that what people do these days is to believe in what is believable. You will never be able to prove that GOD do not exist. Which is why there will always be people believing in him.

Actually it is quite easy to prove God exists. . just look around at the fantastic design in everything from the atom . . to the solar system. It all comes together in a display of intricate design . . and that shows there is a 'designer'.

Quoted from Aussies_Online

Religion is only bad when it is used by fanatics and extremists to further their cause. This is not the fault of religion. It is a human error which needs to be corrected. It is not Islam which has turned people into terrorists. It is a group of people which is twisting the words of The Koran to justify their actions. A group of extremists and fanatics.

Islam has 800.000 followers and growing. Extremists use religion as a launching pad because it is the biggest club in the world. When you make a statement in the name of Allah, 800.000 people listen to you.

When you make a statement in the name of GOD, one billion people listen to you. This why we have wars of religion. In fact those wars have nothing to do with religion. Religion is just an excuse to enlist members for the cause. The cause is a thirst for killing people, sort of legally in the name of war. Every terrorist is nothing more than a common murderer. His cause is a figment of his imagination. In a civilise world, there is no excuse whatsoever for murdering randomly innocent people.

That is all true too . . that is why religion is going to get the blame for most of the killing that has happened .
God tells his people in his word. .The Bible not to hurt (let alone kill) anyone. If they claim to be Christian and are willing to kill . .then they simply are not Christian. Actions speak louder than words.

Some Stats...
Major Religions of the World
Ranked by Number of Adherents
(Sizes shown are approximate estimates, and are here mainly for the purpose of ordering the groups, not providing a definitive number. This list is sociological/statistical in perspective.)

Christianity: 2.1 billion

Islam: 1.3 billion

Secular/Nonreligious/Agnostic/Atheist: 1.1 billion

Hinduism: 900 million

Chinese traditional religion: 394 million

Buddhism: 376 million

primal-indigenous: 300 million

African Traditional & Diasporic: 100 million

Sikhism: 23 million

Juche: 19 million

Spiritism: 15 million

Judaism: 14 million

Baha'i: 7 million

Jainism: 4.2 million

Shinto: 4 million

Cao Dai: 4 million

Zoroastrianism: 2.6 million

Tenrikyo: 2 million

Neo-Paganism: 1 million

Unitarian-Universalism: 800 thousand

Rastafarianism: 600 thousand

Scientology: 500 thousand

Introduction
The adherent counts presented in the list above are current estimates of the number of people who have at least a minimal level of self-identification as adherents of the religion. Levels of participation vary within all groups. These numbers tend toward the high end of reasonable worldwide estimates. Valid arguments can be made for different figures, but if the same criteria are used for all groups, the relative order should be the same. Further details and sources are available below and in the Adherents.com main database.

http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html

When I lived in Tamworth NSW I taught 'Religion' in the Infants school. The Baptist Church drew up the lessons and guidlines. The children in Kindy were wide eyed and full of wonder. One little aboriginal boy was hilarious asking time and time again if I could talk about the 'dibble' and 'Satan'. Time and time again I told him 'Maybe next time Duncan'. His teacher enlightened me that Duncan's granny was a fire and brimstone christian and talked more about the 'Dibble' than 'God'. I taught 'religion' not to brainwash these impressionable little darlings but... so that in years to come when they are figuring out just 'who' they are they can make an informed decision about whether or not they would like to follow the Christian path in life. I am not a religious person, I am however spiritual. I have very ecclectic beliefs. I do nevertheless believe there is a great Creator. I also believe in an 'afterlife' as well as 'reincarnation'. My ideals and beliefs have changed over the past 30 years in general and the past 5 years in particular. I also believe that it is everyone's own choice to make and no-one should ever force their own beliefs and faith on another.

As a teacher of English and Society amd the Environment I am sometimes called upon to teach the basics of religion within the context of the topic being taught. I am a firm believer that it is every teacher's responsibility to learn about every aspect of the topic they are teaching. For example, while teaching Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales to my extremely interested year 12s, I had to teach a bit about the religious conventions of the time. While many students had no idea what Christianity was about, they were nonetheless fascinated by the whole diatribe; so much so that they sat rivetted for 45 minutes.

Quoted from Gizmo

Actually it is quite easy to prove God exists. . just look around at the fantastic design in everything from the atom . . to the solar system. It all comes together in a display of intricate design . . and that shows there is a 'designer'.

Are you serious? Or are you being sarcastic? :O

Quoted from The_Phantom

Public schools still get more funding than catholic schools ( I don't have figures for Private) and Catholic schools still run P&Fs to raise money to buy the basics like computers and air conditioning that are just given to public schools.

:O Not many public schools are given air con, we aren't! The private schools are given a lot more resources eg air cons, and I don't think they should get anything. That's why people pay fees to attend the schools. The public schools go without because the private schools are getting extra money on top of what they already receive.
Public schools should get more funding than private. I think religious private schools are a stupid idea.. academic ones have their place though. How are we supposed to learn to be accepting of other religions and cultures etc when say the muslims go to special muslim schools and same with all other religions. Stupid. Public schools let you experience much more.

Quoted from dara

Are you serious? Or are you being sarcastic? :O

I think you will find Gizmo is being serious and not sarcastic, Dara.
If Giz is ever sarcastic you will know it from how she says it. If that makes any sense, I always know when Gizmo is taking the micky out of something or being tongue in cheek/sarcastic.

Quoted from Gizmo

Then they may call themselves Christian but that does not make it true. If they have never read the Bible so as to know what God requires of them as Christians . . then their claim is not valid (in Gods eyes).*just like I can call myself a plumber if I want. . but that does not make it true if I have not learned the trade*

When you are baptise as an infant in order to become a Christian, you are not required to read the Bible.
By age 10, you are attending some religious classes in order to do your communion by age 12.
So after doing my communion at age 12, I was a full fledged Catholic. Funny thing about it... Is that up to then, nobody ever asked me if I wanted to be one or not. My family made that decision for me.

In my humble opinion, in this day and age, and knowing what I know, religion should not be pushed or taught to children. Religion should be something you choose to take up or not when you become an adult at age 18.

Quoted Text

Sadly that is not true. There is a lot more to being a Christian than simply knowing the 10 commandments. True Christians study Gods word carefully so as to understand it as best they can and the 10 Commandments are a good start. . but that is not all there is to know.

You mean religious people study God's words.
The majority of Christians are like me. The only reason that they are Christian is because their parents did baptise them.

Quoted Text

That is a good point . .so why do so many professed christians join the army to kill others at the governments bidding?

Because most Christian do not mix religion with real life. A very religious person would not enlist in the army... And if forced to, would demand an exemption, which they would get.

Religion is a private thing. You go out for the day and do whatever you have to do to feed your family. Then before going to bed, you make your peace with GOD. GOD is very forgiving. But he won't feed your family.

Very religious people are usually poor and they like to say that "GOD makes the people he loves suffer". In which case I respond "Tell him to leave me alone. I don't want to be loved."

I am a very confused Catholic. I believe in GOD because I was taught to believe in GOD. And I cannot do anything about it.
At the same time, history and science tells me that GOD is a hoax which was created by the Hebrew 5000 years ago.
Before that time, our GOD did not exist, but the planet and man surely did.

Quoted Text

Then they may call themselves Christian but that does not make it true. If they have never read the Bible so as to know what God requires of them as Christians . . then their claim is not valid (in Gods eyes).*just like I can call myself a plumber if I want. . but that does not make it true if I have not learned the trade*

I'm plucking this out, and I know it was already used as an arguing point and plucked in a couner arguement.  That's coincidal to me using it.

I haven't read all the thread.  I've read some, I don't any agree with any one person entirely from what I have read and I emphasise that just to further point out that this doesn't have much to do with the debate Gizmo and AOL have going.
I picked this out because, first becuase I noticed it, and also because I felt that it's very important to emphasise that there isn't a Tom, d**k, Jane, or Jan on this Earth who can be trusted to say with any authority that someone is or is not Christian or saved or worthy... in fact everyone is worthy from what I get out of it.  At times I find myself also playing with the idea of "who the hell am I to even assume that I am saved" but perhaps that's just insecurity or lack of faith at those times.  Anyhow, as hard as it is to keep my head around it (often impossible to do so), I don't think it's our job, nor do I think we're capable, of making God's judgements for Him.

Quoted from Aussies_Online

In my humble opinion, in this day and age, and knowing what I know, religion should not be pushed or taught to children. Religion should be something you choose to take up or not when you become an adult at age 18.

That usually does happen. Some children are raised in a religious environment, but then later stop going to church on Sundays and follow the teachings.

But if religion isn't taught to children, what are the chances of them following a religious life when they are an adult? They would know nothing about religion if it's not taught to them. Some parents, at least, want to give their children an opportunity to learn about God and the teachings of the church, and therefore lead a religious life later on.

Quoted from MeanDean

. . . I picked this out because, first becuase I noticed it, and also because I felt that it's very important to emphasise that there isn't a Tom, d**k, Jane, or Jan on this Earth who can be trusted to say with any authority that someone is or is not Christian or saved or worthy... in fact everyone is worthy from what I get out of it. . . . .

My comment was aimed at stating the absolutely obvious. . if somebody is making a claim about their faith  . . and at the same time acting in a way contrary to Bible teachings . . . then they would not be considered Christian or in an approved state by God.   Humans are not the final arbiters , God is. . but as there are thousands of scriptures that advise Christians to keep watch of themselves, not to 'fall away' from their faith or act in ways that could kill or main other people because they will be held accountable.  . They might decide to stop doing the things that are condemned by God and that would mean they can resume a clean relationship/faith.

There are directions for Christians to not be violent, drunkards, slanderers, murderers or even idol worshippers so if somebody IS acting in those ways. . there are warnings for christians not to be joining them .

It is OK to read the scripture that tells us that God forgives all. . . because He is willing to do just that. . but one must also read the other directions given to be in an approved state  . .   forgiveness is not absolute. . . it is conditional on changing oneself to conform to Gods standards and then maintaining those changes.

Don't be frightened to look sideways at what people do in the name of their faith.
We are all doing it now with radical Muslims.  The population of Muslims of quiet nature and peacefull living standards are appalled by the 'terrorist' radicals . . just like we are.  We are told that the terrorists do not act in the faith of true Islam when they commit their acts of treachery. . . . so a judgement is made about their actions and a very negative conclusion is reached. It is the same for Christians. . . look at their actions and see if they fit the high standards you would expect from ones who claim to follow Holy standards.

Yeah I should have looked and then stated also that it was being applied specifically to a statement that made a lot of sense. Sorry about that.

What I hate about religions is you can never win an argument against someone who is religious as they always revert back to "faith", and you can't logically argue any point when the other side just says they have faith, even if they cannot prove anything. This is even more so for the current crap of "Intelligent Design", which even George Bush believes in. Currently nearly every piece of nature the Intelligent Designers have raised as "proof" of some higher diety's hand has been shot down by scientists.

What makes the Christian religions doubtful as a valid entity is their whole basis for being is founded on one book made up of a new and old part. The book is supposedly a collection of historical facts and real stories handed down through the ages, yet nearly every year more and more errors and matters that never happened or existed are being uncovered. So much so that even the Christian church has come out and stated that much of the Bible is not actually factually based, but is a set of stories told to make a point. The Bible Evangelicals and Christian priests love to quote from the pulpits as absolute proof of something is not even in many cases close to the original scripts as written. The book has been rewritten so many times and whole sections have had meanings completely changed from the original intent.

Even the meaning of the word Bible has been altered. Its literal translation was originally "The Idea of God" and was changed by the Christian church to "The Word of God". So the Bible wasn't originally the word of God at all, but actually an idea of what worshippers thought their God would be like and what that God would most likely bring down as laws and tenets.

Also the bible is only a fraction of the original written scriptures. Most of the original scrolls were burnt as firewood and many others were destroyed by the Christian church in a pogrom as they didn't contain teachings the church liked or they contradicted the teachings of the church. The recently found Gospel according to Judas is one example of that, and this newly discovered gospel talks of a secret pact between Jesus and Judas. This of course went completely against the church's teachings on Judas at the time so the church ordered a pogrom for every copy of the Judas Gospel to be expunged from the Earth.

Also the earlier non-published or destroyed scriptures had a far greater role for women in the religion, this went completely against the all male dominated Christian church so these were either altered to remove references to women or they were also destroyed.

I saw a BBC doco on the scriptures quite a while ago and in it they show some of the very early texts under glass in a museum in Israel. On one page a word has been crossed out from the first paragraph on that page and another word substituted in the margin. The Israeli linguist stated this one alteration completely changed the whole meaning of the paragraph, yet to this day evangelists and priests alike quote this altered text in their sermons as the one true "word of God". No it isn't, it is the altered word of man from a text that was an idea of God.

There is so much more I could convey on this but a good starting point is the recent multi-part documentary series on the historical factual basis of the Bible shown on SBS. A real eye opener.

Quoted from boomslanger

Also the earlier non-published or destroyed scriptures had a far greater role for women in the religion, this went completely against the all male dominated Christian church so these were either altered to remove references to women or they were also destroyed.

If the Bible is truly Gods word. . do you think any man could stop it from being available to any who want/need to read it??. . if there is a God and he has a purpose for men . . then he certainly has the power to protect HIS own word and see it gets through to faithful followers. If books or scrolls were lost. . . then they obviously were not protected in any divine way as the existing 66 boooks were. . . .after 25 years of study into the subject I have found all those supposed 'errors' to be non-existant . . but you have your opinion . .

Quoted from boomslanger

I saw a BBC doco on the scriptures .

Well. . .that is always a good source of information . .you've got me there . :P :P :P ;)

*note: for Dara. . that was Gizmo being cheeky* :D

Quoted Text

What I hate about religions is you can never win an argument against someone who is religious as they always revert back to "faith"

On the other side of that, though, is that people do not want to recognise that their ideas, their theories, are just that... ideas and theories and also can not hold up without faith. We aren't dis-agreeing over mathematic principles or that the sky keeps on going but about a fundamental thing that requires faith from either perspective.

Quoted from MeanDean

On the other side of that, though, is that people do not want to recognise that their ideas, their theories, are just that... ideas and theories and also can not hold up without faith. We aren't dis-agreeing over mathematic principles or that the sky keeps on going but about a fundamental thing that requires faith from either perspective.

We are not talking ideas and theories but scientific and historical fact. One of the most ingrained tenets in the Bible is the Exodus, but archeology and Egyptian historical records have proven this just did not take place. For a starters it is a myth that Egyptians kept armies of slaves to build the pyramids. They used indentured labour, mostly seasonal farmers whose crops were out of season, not only that they looked after these workers extremely well, feeding them the best food and having large medical centres to heal their work related injuries. Many Jews, because of severe drought and crop failures, went to Egypt to seek work, all this is on the Egyptian historical records and they were a race that documented everything. Every plant, every grain, every building and every person down to fine detail was documented in Egypt, yet not one word on a supposed 600,000 Jewish slaves anywhere (the Egyptian population was 3.5 million at the time).

My point in all this is that the Bible is mostly historically and archeologically inaccurate and very little of what it says takes place actually happened at all and many of the time scales for known events are widely inaccurate in the Bible.

Gizmo says he has studied the subject for 25 years then can he explain why Joseph and a pregnant Mary bypassed two census stations that had ample accomodation and were far closer to their home town, yet undertook a very arduous journey, especially for a pregnant woman, to go to Bethlehem where there was a known accomodation shortage. Read the transcripts from the Roman historical documents of the time.

According to your logic this also means that God meant for the Gospel according to Judas to be found in the desert recently. A gospel the church put out a pogrom against and thought every copy destroyed, and I can understand why. It clearly shows that Judas didn't betray Jesus as such but did so as a pact with Jesus and on Jesus's instructions. No wonder the church wanted this scripture destroyed as it was the opposite of the lies they were teaching about Judas.

So Gizmo just because it is the BBC it automatically makes it rubbish?

That is the other thing I hate about religion, it blinkers people and closes their minds.

Quoted Text

According to your logic this also means that God meant for the Gospel according to Judas to be found in the desert recently.

I don't know where you got that from.  According to my logic I'm fairly ignorant by nature when it comes to things like that.

Whether or not historical fact is always very factual is pretty debatalbe but fair enough to state it how you did.
God's will, the unknown, and even just plain improbibilities (although a thin argument, the last one... unless talking about some science fiction jargon it seems) are all valid explanations as much as anything else.  In fact, "We aren't really too sure about what went on 2000 or 5000 years ago," is a way more accurate statement than "Religion is false," which I was more what I was replying to so I'll state it again in that light:

Quoted Text

What I hate about religions is you can never win an argument against someone who is religious as they always revert back to "faith"

Quoted Text

On the other side of that, though, is that people do not want to recognise that their ideas, their theories, are just that... ideas and theories and also can not hold up without faith. We aren't dis-agreeing over mathematic principles or that the sky keeps on going but about a fundamental thing that requires faith from either perspective.

And I'll go on to say that it always will come back to that.

Quoted from boomslanger

What I hate about religions is you can never win an argument against someone who is religious as they always revert back to "faith", and you can't logically argue any point when the other side just says they have faith, even if they cannot prove anything.

I don't have a problem with that, whatever works for them. Some people need to believe in a higher power, others don't.

In response to an earlier question of how will children know to lead a 'good' life without religion, easy, teach them the difference between right and wrong and teach them the importance of respecting others. It's not that hard.

I, much like AO, was baptised at birth but have struggled with the concept of religion in my adult life.

If there was a God, why would he allow so much suffering?

When I ask why a child dies every 3 seconds, or why a child is murdered and raped, or why a baby or young child develops cancer and dies I don't think I am satisfied with the responses of "God works in mysterious ways" or "God has a plan for everyone" that 'believers' tell you.

If life is supposed to be so sacred, why is their so much pain and sufferring in the world? What are the people that are dying from starvation, disease or war supposed to get out of life?

I believe faith is an answer for the "unknown", and that unknown is something that we as humans cannot understand nor are we willing to accept that nothing happens after we die.

I believe we are going through a major shift in religious belief in the western world. Most of us, through education and access to information, are not willing to accept what the church has been telling us. Many people have probably lost respect for the church as an organisation following the sex abuse scandals. Opting for a more "faith" rather than "religion" based approach.

I think you may find that there'll be an increasing number of people ticking "No Religion" on their Census form this year, I know I for one did.

Quoted from music313

That usually does happen. Some children are raised in a religious environment, but then later stop going to church on Sundays and follow the teachings.

But if religion isn't taught to children, what are the chances of them following a religious life when they are an adult? They would know nothing about religion if it's not taught to them. Some parents, at least, want to give their children an opportunity to learn about God and the teachings of the church, and therefore lead a religious life later on.

How is making them believe in god an opportunity?
why do people read the bible it's not like god wrote it?
pfft.. religion is annoying

OMG religion and politics  lol   never the two shall mix

I grew up in a Catholic enviroment  even so far as attended a catholic school.

But freedom of choice was not my option -  I don't agree with the sunday school mentality  I am raising my girl up without any influences about it although she does get a little from school but she can make up her own mind when she is old enough to form her own thoughts about it - its her choice

Quoted from Dara

pfft.. religion is annoying

That's fine if you think that. . then you are in the wrong thread. :P ;D :P

Quoted from Mean_Dean

On the other side of that, though, is that people do not want to recognise that their ideas, their theories, are just that... ideas and theories and also can not hold up without faith. We aren't dis-agreeing over mathematic principles or that the sky keeps on going but about a fundamental thing that requires faith from either perspective.

WOW!!. . I'm impressed. . it is very rare to find somebody who sees that side. . it is an act of faith to believe in many things. . not just religion . . but few people recognise that. . go M-D!! :D :D

Quoted from x452

If life is supposed to be so sacred, why is their so much pain and sufferring in the world? What are the people that are dying from starvation, disease or war supposed to get out of life?

I, much like AO, was baptised at birth but have struggled with the concept of religion in my adult life

First point:  The suffering in the world today is the culmination of mans efforts to rule himself for the past 6,000 years. . but this will not be allowed to continue much longer. . the pain being caused by crooked leaders and even individual criminals will be cut short when God steps in to fix things.
More details when you enquire.  ;)  :D

Second point: . . . Jesus himself set the example for baptism . . he was 30 !! not a babe.  He used his adult, educated faculties to make a decision he awas willing to live up to . . and he did just so.
Babies faith is in the hands of parents until they reach an age of understanding. . so if baptised parents do the right thing . . their children are counted as being of the same standard.

It is not religion per se that perpetrates violence, but a certain mindset that seeks to use an ideology or a religious justification to control people's thinking and restrain the most fundamental freedoms.

You will find some fiery and interesting discussions on religion here:
http://www.ebroadcast.com.au/eblah/b-meetchitchat/m-1129206541/s-0/
and here:
http://www.ebroadcast.com.au/eblah/b-newsissues/m-1128821356/s-0/
and here:
http://www.ebroadcast.com.au/eblah/b-newsissues/m-1128589743/s-0/
enjoy! ??)

You have an amazing memory Suzi. I forgot any of that was there.
I forgot that you had an ebroadcast nemesis back then too. It's funny to look back on now though.

Quoted from dara

How is making them believe in god an opportunity?

This got me thinking about something else kind of unrelated and after seeing people posting that they were brought up religious and found themselves questioning it.  I was brought up sort of anti-religious, to beleive that religious people were a little dumb (more than a little actually), and it was from a young enough age for it stick in my head.
One of my earliest memories, is of my Dad and my Great Grandmother having a pretty loud argument over her trying to tell me and my brother about God and she never did after that so it's fair to guess that she might have been told that if she wanted to visit us that she had to keep it to herself... pretty harsh I think, but that's how my upbringing went.

Anyhow, I had a really difficult time facing life and accepting the injustices of the world and have suffered quite a bit but I reckon that it was no harder than what anyone else raised religious would have faced and I've not (that I can think of right now) heard of anyone raised religious not going through a time in their life when they lost their faith or questioned it to the extent of backing off entirely and asking "Is this really the case or is it a load of crap I've been told?"

I have no point.  I guess I had no reason to type that but I'll still post it.  It doesn't present an argument, back an existing one, or counter anything already said.

God loves all of us.  All of us here.  And elsewhere.  I suppose I can say that.

All people do a 'check' from time to time to see if their values are current.
People who are not religious and put faith in politics etc. do their 'check-up' every election day. :P :D

Football fans do theirs each weekend their team looses. :P :D

You just happen to do yours when topics like this happen.
We should be looking around the world right now and asking those in power. . What the ??' . . because things certainly look bleak recently.

Quoted from Gizmo

First point: The suffering in the world today is the culmination of mans efforts to rule himself for the past 6,000 years. . but this will not be allowed to continue much longer. . the pain being caused by crooked leaders and even individual criminals will be cut short when God steps in to fix things.
More details when you enquire. ;) :D

(clap) Well said (clap)

Quoted from dara

How is making them believe in god an opportunity?
why do people read the bible it's not like god wrote it?
pfft.. religion is annoying

Because, believe it or not, some people believe there is a God, and therefore want to learn more about Him, and what He has in store for us humans.

Dara, I don't understand why you are so against religion? How has religion affected you so dramatically, that you have to hate every aspect of it?? I know everyone has their own opinion, but I just want to know your reasoning..

Quoted from music313

Because, believe it or not, some people believe there is a God, and therefore want to learn more about Him, and what He has in store for us humans.

Dara, I don't understand why you are so against religion? How has religion affected you so dramatically, that you have to hate every aspect of it?? I know everyone has their own opinion, but I just want to know your reasoning..

I'll start by saying I can probably be classed as agnostic and was bought up a strict Catholic going to Salesian College in Chadstone and Holy Redeemers for primary school. It was a few incidents at Salesian that turned me agnostic and turned my mother, who was a practicing Catholic all her life away from the Christian church, though not God per se.

I'll try to be as diplomatic as I can, which is hard for me. What crock.

How do you learn more about a god? They don't come down and say "Hey all this is me and this is what I'm on about". The only ways open to learn anything is to either research it yourself and find that religion is so full of inconsistancies and out right false premises or to unquestionably believe the teachings of the religious leaders for the church you follow. Problem is that their philosophies and historical premises for faith, and thus their teachings are being proven to be factually and scientifically incorrect on an almost monthly basis. How do you learn what God has in store for us humans, you can't?

The way I see it, there was something that took or created a singularity 14 billion years ago and ignited it. From that instance onwards the universe has been on its own to expand forever, and whatever fate befalls the isolated galaxies billions of years in the future is in no way controlled by anything divine or all powerful.

Let's expand this debate. There are an estimated 500 billion galaxies with each containing around 500 billion stars, and if string theory is correct there could be multiple universes. Nearly every few months now, around every star they closely scrutinise, astronomers find planets. The potential for life bearing planets in the universe is immense.

Now if there is an all overseeing God and creator it would be naive and arrogant to think it created the whole universe/mulitverse just for one little planet that in the universal scheme of things has the life of a mayfly. So if there is other intelligent life out there what if they are all agnostic, athiest or religions that are far removed from any of our beliefs?

For somebody who thinks 'scientifically' first, your observations about the size of the universe are valid.
The Bible makes for a fascinating study. . although not a scientific text book . .it does explain where we are in this time of history.
Intelligent life is relatively new in terms of the universe. . but I would ask you to stretch your imagination a bit. . . and wonder if humans are the very start of that intelligent creation. . .If God had/has a purpose and it got sidetracked temporarily (like the Bible suggests) then us humans could be the very start of future intelligent habitation of other planets . We will have to wait and see.

Of all the books of science, medicine, philosophy and every kind of wisdom, the Bible is the only one that tells us why we are here, why it all went wrong but best of all . . how it will be fixed.

BTW. . I might just mention before you scoff too loudly . . that the account of Noah and the flood caused Noahs contemporaries to laugh really had at him . . they had never seen rain before. (the Earth was encircled by a vapour canopy)
In the outback of SA are underground caves that tourist guides will freely tell you, have an illogical mix of dead animal fossils . They say it was from a huge flood event. . then wait for the silence. . .The existance of these fossils cannot be described any other way.

Quoted from boomslanger

I'll start by saying I can probably be classed as agnostic and was bought up a strict Catholic going to Salesian College in Chadstone and Holy Redeemers for primary school. It was a few incidents at Salesian that turned me agnostic and turned my mother, who was a practicing Catholic all her life away from the Christian church, though not God per se.

I'll try to be as diplomatic as I can, which is hard for me. What crock.

How do you learn more about a god? They don't come down and say "Hey all this is me and this is what I'm on about". The only ways open to learn anything is to either research it yourself and find that religion is so full of inconsistancies and out right false premises or to unquestionably believe the teachings of the religious leaders for the church you follow. Problem is that their philosophies and historical premises for faith, and thus their teachings are being proven to be factually and scientifically incorrect on an almost monthly basis. How do you learn what God has in store for us humans, you can't?

The way I see it, there was something that took or created a singularity 14 billion years ago and ignited it. From that instance onwards the universe has been on its own to expand forever, and whatever fate befalls the isolated galaxies billions of years in the future is in no way controlled by anything divine or all powerful.

Let's expand this debate. There are an estimated 500 billion galaxies with each containing around 500 billion stars, and if string theory is correct there could be multiple universes. Nearly every few months now, around every star they closely scrutinise, astronomers find planets. The potential for life bearing planets in the universe is immense.

Now if there is an all overseeing God and creator it would be naive and arrogant to think it created the whole universe/mulitverse just for one little planet that in the universal scheme of things has the life of a mayfly. So if there is other intelligent life out there what if they are all agnostic, athiest or religions that are far removed from any of our beliefs?

Now how are you going to argue that any of that isn't based on faith? It's also pretty much universally accepted that string theory is 100% faith based and by the very nature of it could never be proven and there is no room for 'if' in that part of your reasoning.
Your post doesn't go anywhere that me saying that it was God's design does not. Can you see that it's aggravating for me to hear about your aggravation toward my faith, and then to read further that you want to persue this sort of argument anyway, after understanding that it's a two way street? All you're really doing is offering up things to be taken apart peice by peice, to be shown as faith and with good logic behind saying so without using spiritual text and within decent thought process we would all agree upon. I don't feel like getting into a string of multiquoted posts that aren't going anywhere though... not right now anyway.

On to something else though, whatever your experience was at school, sounds bad enough that I feel a little bad to bring it up and I'm sorry if something ugly happened.

Quoted from music313

Because, believe it or not, some people believe there is a God, and therefore want to learn more about Him, and what He has in store for us humans.

Many people seem to believe God is a He. If there truly is a God I would find it hard to believe God is a he or a she or is of a human form.

Religion, FMBM - For Men By Men. Most major religions seem to sideline women as 2nd class citizens. Which is very wrong. Religion is very paternalistic and sexist, we cannot trust the word of an organisation that embodies these values.

It seems the very people who have committed to spreading the 'word of God' are committing blasphemy through discrimination and manipulation of God's message.

Quoted Text

It seems the very people who have committed to spreading the 'word of God' are committing blasphemy through discrimination and manipulation of God's message.

So you're offering something better then?

Quoted from MeanDean

So you're offering something better then?

Sure am, but we're selective about who we let in ;-)

I wasn't being a smartass. You started out with a normal spiritual opinion, then went on to dismiss almost every religion on the planet (and possibly even your own statement in doing so, which was odd), and then claimed that the majority of the planet, 84% for those of us who understood the pie chart, is hippocritical in a way that you feel you are not which puts you in a position of superiority as you would apparently view it... and you've now reinforced that perception of that's been put out. So I think I'll leave the question out there along with this clarification and hopefully we can do this without being assholes.

Sorry, guess I took your question as a smartass remark.

I'm not saying people are hypocritical, religion itself can be hypocritical, people can be religious but not necessarily hypocritical.

At no point did I say I was superior to anyone else, let's not start making false assumptions.

What I meant was the discrimination that some of the major religions perpetrate against people is hypocritical and goes against their very own teachings of tolerance and acceptance, such as the non-acceptance of gays and branding them as sinners. The ridiculous and out-dated opposition to contraception, intolerance of other religions/lifestyles/races/ethnicities. Some religions consider women having their periods as dirty and therefore prohibit them from entering places of worship or from wearing certain clothing. The list can go on and on.

As I said religion is FMBM.

Quoted from boomslanger

The way I see it, there was something that took or created a singularity 14 billion years ago and ignited it. From that instance onwards the universe has been on its own to expand forever, and whatever fate befalls the isolated galaxies billions of years in the future is in no way controlled by anything divine or all powerful.

Let's expand this debate. There are an estimated 500 billion galaxies with each containing around 500 billion stars, and if string theory is correct there could be multiple universes. Nearly every few months now, around every star they closely scrutinise, astronomers find planets. The potential for life bearing planets in the universe is immense.

We don't even need to go that far...
If there is an all almighty GOD...
Why are there so many different religions?
Why did the Egyptians had so many GODs, except for our own?
It was the Hebrews who saw GOD and wrote the old testament.
Yes I know... The Grecs printed it.
But then Jesus (The son of GOD) comes along... And he don't like the old testament. So he changes it to the new testament. In doing so, he piss off the Hebrews and find himself cruxified for its trouble.
Why GOD did not help his son? Was he piss off at him too?... For changing the old testament?

This thread was about religion.
It was not meant to be used to start selling us GOD.

I respect people's choice of being religious.
But I don't want them to try to convert me to their faith.

If GOD was more powerful than John Howard, he would not let John Howard govern Australia for 10 years. After all, John Howard broke at least one of those 10 commandments. "You should not lie".

If you ask me... For a GOD which is so powerful that he created the whole Universe... He is weak as piss when it comes to deal with us humans.

Tell him to show himself... Because I need to have a talk to him face to face... Starting with "What the...?"

Quoted from Aussies_Online

This thread was about religion.
It was not meant to be used to start selling us GOD.

I respect people's choice of being religious.
But I don't want them to try to convert me to their faith.

I don't think anyone here at eBlah is trying to convert you. It's just open discussion.

Quoted from Aussies_Online

If you ask me... For a GOD which is so powerful that he created the whole Universe... He is weak as piss when it comes to deal with us humans.

Tell him to show himself... Because I need to have a talk to him face to face... Starting with "What the...?"

Wait a minute...who are you to tell God what He should be doing? Is it wise to test God and His motives? What gives you the right to command God to show Himself? It should be His decision, not yours.

Your post yesterday...

Quoted from x452

Many people seem to believe God is a He. If there truly is a God I would find it hard to believe God is a he or a she or is of a human form.

Your post on July 31st...

Quoted from x452

If there was a God, why would he allow so much suffering?

You've just contradicted yourself by assuming that God is a 'He' in your other post. So I guess your one of those 'many' people aswell... ;D

Quoted from x452

Sorry, guess I took your question as a smartass remark.

I'm not saying people are hypocritical, religion itself can be hypocritical, people can be religious but not necessarily hypocritical.

At no point did I say I was superior to anyone else, let's not start making false assumptions.

What I meant was the discrimination that some of the major religions perpetrate against people is hypocritical and goes against their very own teachings of tolerance and acceptance, such as the non-acceptance of gays and branding them as sinners. The ridiculous and out-dated opposition to contraception, intolerance of other religions/lifestyles/races/ethnicities. Some religions consider women having their periods as dirty and therefore prohibit them from entering places of worship or from wearing certain clothing. The list can go on and on.

As I said religion is FMBM.

Sorry I was so harsh with it x452. Fair points you make on it too. The FMBM is the only thing I don't agree with entirely, it's just that we screw everything up I think. That said, there's some Churches and religions I don't have much respect for but it doesn't include everything... so long as I remember that it's because we're screwing it up and not because the thing we're screwing up is screwed up.

Quoted from Aussies_Online

We don't even need to go that far...
If there is an all almighty GOD...
Why are there so many different religions?
Why did the Egyptians had so many GODs, except for our own?
It was the Hebrews who saw GOD and wrote the old testament.
Yes I know... The Grecs printed it.
But then Jesus (The son of GOD) comes along... And he don't like the old testament. So he changes it to the new testament. In doing so, he piss off the Hebrews and find himself cruxified for its trouble.
Why GOD did not help his son? Was he piss off at him too?... For changing the old testament?

This thread was about religion.
It was not meant to be used to start selling us GOD.

I respect people's choice of being religious.
But I don't want them to try to convert me to their faith.

If GOD was more powerful than John Howard, he would not let John Howard govern Australia for 10 years. After all, John Howard broke at least one of those 10 commandments. "You should not lie".

If you ask me... For a GOD which is so powerful that he created the whole Universe... He is weak as piss when it comes to deal with us humans.

Tell him to show himself... Because I need to have a talk to him face to face... Starting with "What the...?"

Hi AOL,
To get it out of the way, the thread is indeed about religion and not evangelism (until it drifts farther I guess), but at the same time isn't a large part of your contribution, when your intention is to disprove God and claim specific scientific theories... isn't that just the other side of the coin of what you're objecting to?

I'll have to quote because it would be hard to follow otherwise. I dislike picking things apart heavily, it's gotten old. I hope you wont take it as me being critical, and also I'll put forth that I'm either not really necisarrlily seeing the relevance of or not agreeing with most of what else your posting against so I don't want to come off as kicking you in the a** or being on a bandwagon in regards to other debates you're having in the thread.
Remember that you've brought Jesus into this though. I know you don't want to be preached to but you've asked questions that require looking at the Bible just a little bit to be able to address.

Quoted Text

If there is an all almighty GOD...
Why are there so many different religions?

When you look at from the perspective of a Big Bang theory and evolution, you might also ask why there are so many religions and you'de draw a conclusion, that it's because people don't want to accept their utter mortality. Assuming there is a God, the same question would still apply and unless He made regular appearances people would not beleive. To take that further, if he DID make regular appearances, people still would not beleive. What would they expect? What would it take for people to beleive if He did make appearances? Wouldn't a huge number of them claim that it was smoke and mirrors? Would we get used to it and say "Oh yeah sure... but that's the same as it was the last time he showed up... draining ocean, floating mountain.. what's the differance, it happens and it doesn't make it God, it just means that these things happen." There would no doubt be scientists coming up with theories that show it's very possible for mountains to float around. It would of course be a completely differant world to live in, but I think if you imagine that world, that you can imagine there would be skepticism. Perhaps God would have to kill a bunch of non-beleivers to prove his point even, if He wanted to be effective. The only other way would be if we were in utter paradise all the time, and that we are not doesn't prove or disprove anything. It does motivate people to be skeptical since our circumstance can be hard to accept, and this will always in any situation I think, be a motivation for skepticism.

Quoted Text

But then Jesus (The son of GOD) comes along... And he don't like the old testament. So he changes it to the new testament. In doing so, he piss off the Hebrews and find himself cruxified for its trouble.
Why GOD did not help his son? Was he piss off at him too?... For changing the old testament?

This is kind of a bizarre summary of events.  The answer to part of that, the "Why did things change?" I can't really say and until I hear better I'd just have to say that it's because it was God's will.  It was part of the plan anyway, according to the text, and the Jews are actually still waiting for the saviour to come and didn't recognise Jesus as being that.  This is a big part on their end of the events that are beleived to have put Jesus on the cross, is that they didn't think he was their guy but lots of other people did and where it didn't undermine (as they would have perceived) their God, it undermined their authority and their pride.
I'm trying to keep this as non-evangelistic as I can and that is pretty much a statement of record from the Bible as a historical book, as I understand it.
Further to this though, is that other people at that time asked sort of the same types of questions to Jesus about "Why the hell this then" and "Why the hell that?... you aren't making any sense." and the one particular case that's poking out at me at the moment, he didn't really answer this other than to be even more obscure and confusing to the guy and tell him that it would be apparent later, refering to his death but there really wasn't any way the guy would have understood anything he'd just heard other than a bunch of nonsense.  He didn't find himself crucified so much in the respect that he knew it was coming.  Not to say it didn't suck a** though.
To finish up where I was going, much of what Jesus said while he was alive would have to have been taken as faith.  He didn't spend, that we know of, all his time walking around shooting miracles out of his fingertips.  The point here is that it probably really wasn't at all clear what the guy was on about to most people, until after he was dead.
This begins to answer that last part of your question but we won't go there without being more evangelistic.
I couldn't really aviod it btw but I did try to aviod it where it wasn't necisarry.  I sort of found AOL, that answering this without being a little religious is as difficult as trying to explain the idea behind string theory without the details of other things like gravity and electromagnetism and that's quite literally a very direct analogy.  String theory also usually requires beleif in Big Bang theory even if that part of it is discounted in string theory itself.

Guess it didn't require that much picking apart of your post (smiley9sp)

Quoted from music313

You've just contradicted yourself by assuming that God is a 'He' in your other post. So I guess your one of those 'many' people aswell... ;D

touch�

Quoted from MeanDean

Sorry I was so harsh with it x452. Fair points you make on it too. The FMBM is the only thing I don't agree with entirely, it's just that we screw everything up I think. That said, there's some Churches and religions I don't have much respect for but it doesn't include everything... so long as I remember that it's because we're screwing it up and not because the thing we're screwing up is screwed up.

Isn't mankind good at screwing everything up! Manking will be known as "The Great Destroyer". We have been like an ever-hungry plague of locusts upon this planet, we have abused and destroyed almost everything we've gotten our grubby little hands on.

I don't disagree that the message Jesus was trying to convey was excellent and a great example of values people should espouse throughout their lives. I have heard that there were people before Jesus who have tried to spread a similar message and there have been people after him (ie. Mohammed).

I sometimes wonder if religion itself has been a conspiracy by men to sideline women and keep them subservient. After all no man can wield the same influence/power over another man that a woman can.

(Do I sound like a certain Germaine Greer?)

I will discriminate against religion then. It's stupid. Now it's said and done. Thank you.

Quoted from dara

I will discriminate against religion then. It's stupid. Now it's said and done. Thank you.

That comment makes me smile. . . you followed the Big Brother show with 'religious devotion'. :P . .watching and waiting for every word and developement . . . the time you spent in watching the show. . commenting here and on other boards was amazing. . you are a 'font of information' on all things BB!!. :D :D

One could call you the BB High Priestess. . . not all religion is church based you know. ;)

Quoted from MeanDean

Now how are you going to argue that any of that isn't based on faith? It's also pretty much universally accepted that string theory is 100% faith based and by the very nature of it could never be proven and there is no room for 'if' in that part of your reasoning.

I deliberately said "if string theory proves correct", which doesn't require any faith whatsover. Already the original string theory has been proven as unworkable but variations of it and new theories along the same lines have come to light. The point is none of these scientific theories require any faith whatsover, as science never does. They put up theories and these are pulled apart and tested until they become fact or are proven wrong or not fully correct.

What science is doing at an ever increasing rate is finding out more of the creation of the universe, from quantum, subatomic particles, forces, waves, heat (an important one that), atoms, gasses, matter/antimatter/dark matter, minerals, rocks, planets, microscopic life, complex life and so on. The more science finds out the less there appears to be a guiding hand of God (of whatever sex or androgyny).

I or nobody else can ever prove what created the very first bit that went bang and what was the catalyst for it to go bang (even if that was a deliberate act or an accident). One thing that is for certain is that for an almighty perfect being that first bit that went bang was very imperfect, just as is everything that has followed on from that instance. Nearly all of nature including us humans are full of flaws and imperfections, which is pretty sloppy for a grand intelligent designer. In fact if current engineers were given the ability to create life with the knowledge they currently have, they could bulid a much better human being than the current model running around ruining this planet. Come to think of it that is not far off from being reality.

Quoted from Mean

Your post doesn't go anywhere that me saying that it was God's design does not. Can you see that it's aggravating for me to hear about your aggravation toward my faith, and then to read further that you want to persue this sort of argument anyway, after understanding that it's a two way street? All you're really doing is offering up things to be taken apart peice by peice, to be shown as faith and with good logic behind saying so without using spiritual text and within decent thought process we would all agree upon. I don't feel like getting into a string of multiquoted posts that aren't going anywhere though... not right now anyway.

True on the last piece as it will get nowhere as you will just quote "faith' based posts as I throw up lots of proven science.

Quoted from MeanDean

On to something else though, whatever your experience was at school, sounds bad enough that I feel a little bad to bring it up and I'm sorry if something ugly happened.

Yes ugly, but not uncommon for the Catholic Church, as I was to find out more and more as time went on.

Quoted from Gizmo

Intelligent life is relatively new in terms of the universe. . but I would ask you to stretch your imagination a bit. . . and wonder if humans are the very start of that intelligent creation. . .If God had/has a purpose and it got sidetracked temporarily (like the Bible suggests) then us humans could be the very start of future intelligent habitation of other planets . We will have to wait and see.

Well you see this is where I have all the trouble of believing that God had any grand design apart from just starting an imperfect big bang and then just letting it run. It did not in anyway design to have a mankind arrive billions of years down the track and then to start worship of it by that intelligent race. That appears to more accidental than anything else, plus leave it with no future.

If man was all of a sudden given the ability to travel around the universe in seconds it could still not explore the merest fraction of it before the end or the expansion became too big to transcend. Even then a huge amount of the unvierse would be beyond the ability of any organic mortal being to even get near to let alone explore, so mankind must ascend to become the God that created it to even know just a part of the universe.

So I just cannot believe that God created this unbelievably massive universe/multiverse (if theory proves correct) for an intelligent life which, even given infinite time, could not explore but the merest fraction of.

Not only that it turns out the universe is expanding forever and most galaxies are getting further and further apart. In several billion years our galaxy will be alone in blackness, so mankind is left to just exploring and colonising it with the rest of the universe now beyond our scope. Surely a God doesn't create all this magnificence just so one rather miniscule very short lived race can only ever set out to expand into but one of 500 billion galaxies, not to mention missing out on the many other wonders of the universe.

There may have been purpose in the creation of the first imperfect piece of the universe and making it go bang, but since that very moment on the universe has been on its own to do whatever randomness and the physical laws of the universe want to do, until by chance and the right mix of ingredients, intelligent beings evolve and after millions of years start manipulating those laws that is?

If you don't understand that most of the things you've referanced in this thread can be pulled apart, then you haven't learned very much scientifically.  If you think that what you've just described is what is accepted as rock solid scientific process, then you haven't learned enough about science... there's more within it's own feild of thought that you just plain haven't learned and honest to God (pardon the pun), it really shows that you ARE taking a not just a general amount, as I thought originally, but a huge amount of faith in science.
If I get motivation later or tommorow or some other time, I'll come back and justify all that.  As for now, based on the end part of your reply to me, it's pretty clear that you don't want to have this conversation on equal ground even when your lack of understanding is accounted for, and I don't feel immediatly... responsible, that I should respond to your post when your intention is only to disrespect me and not to have normal debate.

I'll add by the way, for the sake of adding it although I think the rest of the forum got this, that I was never arguing that science is incorrect, or that it isn't making progress toward this or that.  All I ever said is that it is based in faith.  It's all fine and dandy to say there's enough evidence for this and that that cosmological claims and claims in quantum physics are justifiably recognised as true.  Where faith comes in is with evolution, Big Bang theory, archeology, anthropology... those are places where it clearly comes in as much as religion can.  Further to that though is that at some level everything is based on faith and just where that line begins in science is no longer at the level of a+b=c and much of that BECAUSE of things like quantum mechanics which takes what was once the nonsense of daydreaming philosophers and throws it at us straight in the face.  If you really understood what you were talking about here, you would never rule out the possibility of God unless you were just a plain cynical person.  That is a rock solid statement.  Perhaps persuing science further is the best thing you can do for now.  If I feel like it and have the time, perhaps I will come back and make valid argument against the less complicated issues that you've brought up but as for now your narrowminded and rude post is pissing me off too much

Quoted Text

True on the last piece as it will get nowhere as you will just quote "faith' based posts as I throw up lots of proven science.

I mean dude, "It's something we just can't be sure about" or "I don't know" seem to be things that aren't part of your thought process religion or otherwise I would think. Why would you even waste your time posting here then? Frustrated that people will speak from faith I mean... and too narrowminded to even stop for and look just for a moment that you might be the flipside to the same coin. Did you come here to pick a fight with someone? To waste your time and mine? Is that it... that you're just not a nice person?

The bible said that the earth was flat..... 'nuff said :D

The topic is religion, not the Bible... read before you type... nuff said.
Where does the Bible say that?

Quoted from MeanDean

If you don't understand that most of the things you've referanced in this thread can be pulled apart, then you haven't learned very much scientifically. If you think that what you've just described is what is accepted as rock solid scientific process, then you haven't learned enough about science... there's more within it's own feild of thought that you just plain haven't learned and honest to God (pardon the pun), it really shows that you ARE taking a not just a general amount, as I thought originally, but a huge amount of faith in science.

Sorry no disrespect intended but just what the hell are you on about?

Science is not faith and has never been, this is the irrational line that Intelligent Designers throw up so they can then claim to debate at the same level.

Quoted from Wilipedia

Science in the broadest sense refers to any knowledge or trained skill, especially (but not exclusively) when this is attained by verifiable means.[1] The word science also describes any systematic field of study or the knowledge gained from such study. In a more restricted sense, science refers to a system of acquiring knowledge based on empiricism, experimentation, and methodological naturalism, as well as to the organized body of knowledge humans have gained by such research.

Quoted Text

If I get motivation later or tommorow or some other time, I'll come back and justify all that. As for now, based on the end part of your reply to me, it's pretty clear that you don't want to have this conversation on equal ground even when your lack of understanding is accounted for, and I don't feel immediatly... responsible, that I should respond to your post when your intention is only to disrespect me and not to have normal debate.

What the hell was that about? I have not nor did I have any intention of disrepecting you and of course I want a debate on equal grounds. Reading what you have just written it seems you are attempting to belittle me and claiming I have a "lack of understanding" as if you have some moral and superior high ground to debate from (thus it is you who do not want to debate on equal grounds).

Quoted Text

I'll add by the way, for the sake of adding it although I think the rest of the forum got this, that I was never arguing that science is incorrect, or that it isn't making progress toward this or that. All I ever said is that it is based in faith.

Science is not based on faith and never has been. If you saw the documentary on Intelligent Design recently, they had a piece on the Christian scientist who is working on the answer to everything. He had no problem reconciling his faith in his religion with the evidence based side of his work. He separted them completely as one being faith based and the other fact based. It is only the nonsense of Intelligence Design that wants to put them both on equal footing so they can then claim the right to have their idiocy taught in science classrooms instead of religious ones. Thank God (pun intended) they lost their court case.

Quoted Text

It's all fine and dandy to say there's enough evidence for this and that that cosmological claims and claims in quantum physics are justifiably recognised as true. Where faith comes in is with evolution, Big Bang theory, archeology, anthropology... those are places where it clearly comes in as much as religion can. Further to that though is that at some level everything is based on faith and just where that line begins in science is no longer at the level of a+b=c and much of that BECAUSE of things like quantum mechanics which takes what was once the nonsense of daydreaming philosophers and throws it at us straight in the face. If you really understood what you were talking about here, you would never rule out the possibility of God unless you were just a plain cynical person. That is a rock solid statement. Perhaps persuing science further is the best thing you can do for now. If I feel like it and have the time, perhaps I will come back and make valid argument against the less complicated issues that you've brought up but as for now your narrowminded and rude post is pissing me off too much.

Where was I rude, please? I will immediately apologise and retract that statement in full.

Quoted Text

I mean dude, "It's something we just can't be sure about" or "I don't know" seem to be things that aren't part of your thought process religion or otherwise I would think. Why would you even waste your time posting here then? Frustrated that people will speak from faith I mean... and too narrowminded to even stop for and look just for a moment that you might be the flipside to the same coin. Did you come here to pick a fight with someone? To waste your time and mine? Is that it... that you're just not a nice person?

What a lot of condescending rot that last lot is. I have not once denigrated or stated that I am against people practicing their faith or following what they believe in. I just stated I don't believe in it and am putting forth my belief in the universe.

This was a debate started on religion and that must included the side of athiests and agnostics, but it appears you really only want a debate that conforms to your beliefs and fob off anything that doesn't agree with your view.

It is not me that has the word Mean in my moniker. I just don't know why you decided to start personally attacking me when I have never done likewise to you. This always happens when you put up an opposing view, especially one that questions the existance of a God at all, to someone who is devout.

No sir, you don't have Mean in your username. You named yourself after a snake.

Quoted from boomslanger

Where was I rude, please? I will immediately apologise and retract that statement in full.

My problem is that you've stated that you're annoyed that people argue from faith alone but refuse to consider that everything is based on some sort of faith by implying that your point of view is better for the reason that... I'm speaking from faith... which annoys you.

Quoted Text

What I hate about religions is you can never win an argument against someone who is religious as they always revert back to "faith"

Quoted Text

That is the other thing I hate about religion, it blinkers people and closes their minds.

Quoted from boomslanger

I'll try to be as diplomatic as I can, which is hard for me. What crock.

I'll be back another time, probably tommorow, to go over the rest... sort of like I said before you went picking it apart anyway. I should be in a better mood after getting some sleep :B

Thanks for using the "Wilipedia" for something that's a debatable issue. It would be somewhat of a laugh to look at the revision history of that article I would think.

One should remember that Christianity was founded on the resurection of Jesus.
And how many witnesses were there to that resurection?

The Hebrews worship God.
The Christians worship Jesus.
The Muslims worship Mohamed, the founder of Islam.

Religious people like to talk about "Faith" because that is all they have to go on.

Problem is that we are now living in a world of communication where close to 100% of the information we seek is available for everyone to see.

Faith is for people with no access to information. You take your chance to believe because you have no other choice.

However, people who have access to the information will not take the chance to rely on faith alone. They want proves.

If you go back in history and study the catholic church, you will quickly find that those lover of God had no calms about murdering hundred of thousand of people for not believing in their faith.
When a new group emerged "Protestants" they were either killed or chased from France by the Catholics.
The Catholic church has committed so many atrocities in the name of God that it is not funny.

If there is a God, he has no control over humanity and never had.

If you are in direct contact with God... Fine... I believe you.
If everything you are telling me is from your priest at the local church...
Forget it...

Do you know that the Catholic Church own more Real Estate in the world than anybody else?
And it is the believers who paid for it.
GOD does not own it. He don't need to.
He already own the Universe.
The Vatican owns it.

This is a very good example of how faith can wreck your life.

It is no great secret that Catholics do not like Jews as they have always blamed them for the cruxification of Jesus.

Moral of the story...
People bullshit everyone around them to make a buck.
Give them a few drinks and they start telling you how they really feel.
As far as I know, Mel Gibson has no reason for being anti-Semitic, exept for what his Catholic religion told him. And he is very religious.

Quoted Text

Actor Mel Gibson's alleged anti-Semitic remarks have provoked a strong response from the Hollywood community, with some questioning his future as a film-maker.
"It's incredibly disappointing somebody of his stature would speak out that way at this sensitive time," Sony Pictures' Amy Pascal told the Los Angeles Times.

"I don't think I want to see any more Mel Gibson movies," veteran presenter Barbara Walters told the ABC network.

Producer Peter Bart, meanwhile, said Mr Gibson had "seriously compromised" his career.

"The critics will forever kill him," he wrote in industry newspaper Variety. "Sectors of the audience will shun his work. Through his incoherent tirades he has betrayed his friends and colleagues."

"I am so sad, so hurt and so disappointed," producer Jerry Weintraub told the Los Angeles Times. "I really feel bad for him as a human being."

His sentiments were echoed in the same newspaper by Jeff Berg, head of the International Creative Management (ICM) talent agency, who said Mr Gibson had created "a first-class mess".

"I hate what he said, and so does he," said Mr Berg, whose agency has represented the Braveheart star for 18 years.

"You cannot spin this. This is a question not of how low you can sink, but how you can dig yourself out of this hole."

"To make all of your money from Jews in Hollywood, and then have a few drinks and say you hate Jews, is shocking," said Arnon Milchan, producer of JFK and LA Confidential.

But Mr Gibson has received support from Oren Aviv, president of Buena Vista Pictures Marketing.

"We all make mistakes and I've accepted his apology to what was a regrettable situation," he told Slate magazine.

"I wish him the very best on his path to healing."

Mr Aviv will oversee the US release of Apocalypto, Mr Gibson's latest directorial project, later this year.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/5234698.stm

Quoted from MeanDean

My problem is that you've stated that you're annoyed that people argue from faith alone but refuse to consider that everything is based on some sort of faith by implying that your point of view is better for the reason that... I'm speaking from faith... which annoys you.

You make a good point. . . This is the reason that evolutionists don't enjoy debates.  Evolution is a 'faith' in itself. I have some reasons why I dismissed evolution as a theory 30 years ago.

1. Healthy humans have a sense of smell, taste, hearing all of which are not vital to life. . but do make life enjoyable. Evolution does not go 10 steps ahead of what would be needed purely for survival.

2. Humans have a conscience . . there is NO evolutionary need for that and developing cells could not possibly form with such complicated 'morals nor the undeniable sense of justice we all have..

3. Humans derive great pleasure from listening to and performing music. There is no evolutionary need for that and the arts either.

4. Cell mutation (neccessary for evolution) is ALWAYS a bad thing. I had a lump removed from my back today and the doctor never for one minute suggested I was 'evolving' wings or an extra (very handy) arm. He could not get it off me fast enough . .

5. If evolution caused human life from some sort of primeival soup . . then that event would still be happening . .we would see 1/2 formed swamp creatures in the suburbs and just recognise they are still forming. (that is not a swipe at modern teens).  :P

I noted a comment about the Bible saying the Earth was flat. . . Bible writer Isaiah knew 2,300 years ago that the Earth was a circle Isa 40:22 so he beat Columbus by 2,100 years. . . Columbus now looks pretty foolish.  :D

Quoted from MeanDean

No sir, you don't have Mean in your username. You named yourself after a snake.

One of God's creatures ...sorry, no it isn't according to Biblical teachings it is the devil's so only the Biblical followers would find a snake mean when in fact it is one of evolutions better creations; beautiful, elegant, efficient and very good in the environs they evolved in and adapted to. The Boomslang is a particularly beautiful and elegant snake, not a mean bone in its body.

Quoted Text

My problem is that you've stated that you're annoyed that people argue from faith alone but refuse to consider that everything is based on some sort of faith by implying that your point of view is better for the reason that... I'm speaking from faith... which annoys you.

I just went back through my posts and cannot find anywhere that I said I'm annoyed that people argue from faith alone, and nowhere have I said that my point of view is better. You keep putting meanings into my posts that aren't there. The one thing I have said is that you can never win a religious argument with someone who is devout because as soon as you bring up the inconsistancies and facts that belie their arguments they revert back to faith. I have just stated you cannot argue against faith because it is intangible, not based on any facts and asked you to just blindly believe that something exists without any proof of its existance at all.

That annoys me personally as it immediately cuts off the debate, but that does not make me think any less of the person making the faith based assertion, and I fully respect (and sometimes admire their unwavering belief in something they can't prove exists) their right to their belief.

Quoted Text

I'll be back another time, probably tommorow, to go over the rest... sort of like I said before you went picking it apart anyway. I should be in a better mood after getting some sleep :B

I have a 1000km+ motor bike ride tomorrow but if I'm not too tired when I get home I'll look forward to how you are going to prove science is based on faith.

Quoted Text

Thanks for using the "Wilipedia" for something that's a debatable issue. It would be somewhat of a laugh to look at the revision history of that article I would think.

It was quick and convenient. Do you want me to quote all the other definitions I found, none of which mention science as being based on faith btw, that seems to be yours and the IDers assertion? The documentary on the ID court case in the USA showed why they come at science from this perspective and try to assert that science is faith in hypothesis. Basically they believe it legitimises their hokum as being equal to the true sciences, thus they can debate on equal terms with the true sciences, and if the true sciences attempt to debate in return to debunk ID then the IDers say they are a legitimate science because they are part of the overall scientific debate. They failed on two fronts in that firstly, the true sciences refused to engage them in any form of debate whatsover cutting that avenue off at the knee and secondly, the US court threw out their claim to scientific legitimacy as religious based faith and not scientific based observations, thus cutting them off at the neck.

The meaning of FAITH from Dictionary.com found here:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/faith

noun
Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.
Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. See Synonyms at belief. See Synonyms at trust.
Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters.
often Faith Christianity. The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.
The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith.
A set of principles or beliefs.

Main Entry: faith
Function: noun
1 a : allegiance or loyalty to a duty or a person b : sincerity or honesty of intentions —see also BAD FAITH, GOOD FAITH
2 : fidelity to one's promises and obligations

faith
n 1: a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny; "he lost his faith but not his morality" [syn: religion, religious belief] 2: complete confidence in a person or plan etc; "he cherished the faith of a good woman"; "the doctor-patient relationship is based on trust" [syn: trust] 3: institution to express belief in a divine power; "he was raised in the Baptist religion"; "a member of his own faith contradicted him" [syn: religion] 4: loyalty or allegiance to a cause or a person; "keep the faith"; "they broke faith with their investors"

faith
Faith is in general the persuasion of the mind that a certain statement is true
(Phil. 1:27; 2 Thess. 2:13). Its primary idea is trust. A thing is true, and
therefore worthy of trust. It admits of many degrees up to full assurance of
faith, in accordance with the evidence on which it rests. Faith is the result
of teaching (Rom. 10:14-17). Knowledge is an essential element in all faith,
and is sometimes spoken of as an equivalent to faith (John 10:38; 1 John 2:3).
Yet the two are distinguished in this respect, that faith includes in it
assent, which is an act of the will in addition to the act of the
understanding. Assent to the truth is of the essence of faith, and the ultimate
ground on which our assent to any revealed truth rests is the veracity of God.
Historical faith is the apprehension of and assent to certain statements which
are regarded as mere facts of history. Temporary faith is that state of mind
which is awakened in men (e.g., Felix) by the exhibition of the truth and by
the influence of religious sympathy, or by what is sometimes styled the common
operation of the Holy Spirit. Saving faith is so called because it has eternal
life inseparably connected with it. It cannot be better defined than in the
words of the Assembly's Shorter Catechism: "Faith in Jesus Christ is a saving
grace, whereby we receive and rest upon him alone for salvation, as he is
offered to us in the gospel." The object of saving faith is the whole revealed
Word of God. Faith accepts and believes it as the very truth most sure. But the
special act of faith which unites to Christ has as its object the person and the
work of the Lord Jesus Christ (John 7:38; Acts 16:31). This is the specific act
of faith by which a sinner is justified before God (Rom. 3:22, 25; Gal. 2:16;
Phil. 3:9; John 3:16-36; Acts 10:43; 16:31). In this act of faith the believer
appropriates and rests on Christ alone as Mediator in all his offices. This
assent to or belief in the truth received upon the divine testimony has always
associated with it a deep sense of sin, a distinct view of Christ, a consenting
will, and a loving heart, together with a reliance on, a trusting in, or resting
in Christ. It is that state of mind in which a poor sinner, conscious of his
sin, flees from his guilty self to Christ his Saviour, and rolls over the
burden of all his sins on him. It consists chiefly, not in the assent given to
the testimony of God in his Word, but in embracing with fiducial reliance and
trust the one and only Saviour whom God reveals. This trust and reliance is of
the essence of faith. By faith the believer directly and immediately
appropriates Christ as his own. Faith in its direct act makes Christ ours. It
is not a work which God graciously accepts instead of perfect obedience, but is
only the hand by which we take hold of the person and work of our Redeemer as
the only ground of our salvation. Saving faith is a moral act, as it proceeds
from a renewed will, and a renewed will is necessary to believing assent to the
truth of God (1 Cor. 2:14; 2 Cor. 4:4). Faith, therefore, has its seat in the
moral part of our nature fully as much as in the intellectual. The mind must
first be enlightened by divine teaching (John 6:44; Acts 13:48; 2 Cor. 4:6;
Eph. 1:17, 18) before it can discern the things of the Spirit. Faith is
necessary to our salvation (Mark 16:16), not because there is any merit in it,
but simply because it is the sinner's

Print Topic - Archive