Answerer

Hi guys,no hard feelings as what I going to say is my personal views. After so many religious wars , conflicts and debate in the past centuries. It is time for us to consider all the past events and ask ourselves this question: Is the need of man that create God? As all of you know, it is quite impossible to prove God throught science. Furthermore, no one has ever truly see God and althought holy books have claimed that some ancient people have seen God, the credibility of the holy books have been questioned as time goes by.
Another logic question is that since God wants everybody to believe in Him, why is He refusing to manifest or appear in our presence or even just to let one of his angels show his presence in front of us? Obvious several people ignore this iogic doubt, choose to believe that this is a test set by the all-compassionate God to see who is truly worthy of His 'eternal reward'.
Ever since man walked earth , they often questions about their purpose of existence and the creating process of the world. So the conception of God or gods gives them a simple explanation. As time goes by, the conception of God was 'improved upon' to include and satisfy other emotional , moral and spiritual needs of man. Nevertheless, as time goes , the conception of God was corrupted and instead of satisfy the needs in Man , it creates fear and prejudice in the hearts of Man. The worse thing was, it become a tool for the politicians to satisfy their selfish needs by controlling the emotions and beliefs of the people.
Now it is time for us, people of the modern age, to consider our own faith and religious views. It is important to know that whether our needs are truly satisfy by the presence of God and that have we been always a victim of corrupted views set by our forbearers since so long ago?

Blu

Your first question was if God exists why doesn't he show himself to us...and another was something about people who have claimed to see God.

First I will address the word "see". "See" in a literal sense means you see with your eyes. I think people who say they have "seen" God actually are saying that they "realized" God in a more mental/emotional sense than through the physical sense of sight.

"God" or however you choose to name it, does not have to show itself to us because everything is God if you think of God as being Energy. The evergy behind all physical matter.

Some people, especially children, think of God in a physical sense which starts the confusion. They invision this manly-God figure living in the clouds. God usually has a white beard as well. And God is usually referred to as a "He" or a "Father" which creates further confusion.

Humans created their idea of God. They created the religions to seek to define God. They have given "God" a variety of names. They have tried to give "god" a face so they can relate better to "God." So in a sense, yes humans have created "God".

It seems you have really focused on the negative aspects of religion which I think is a common Atheist thing to do. The glass is always half empty. As in all things religious or otherwise, (medicine, technology etc) human being will find negative and positive ways to use them.

Does the fact some human beings in our history have decided to use religion in a negative and selfish way discount religion? Does the fact there are hackers who have used computers to create havok mean that computers are also a completely negative device?

No.

Human minds can do anything they want with whatever they want in this world. Some people who have almost drowned in a pool suddenly experience an irrational fear of water, does that make water a "bad" thing for everyone or is it negative only in that person's mind and in like minds?

When trying to discount something, people often focus on the negative aspects so they have something to backup their theories. In reality, a lot of positive things have come out of religion. Or maybe because of religion people were able to find in themselves something they would have missed otherwise. Does religion create or do human minds attributing things to religion create?

So to say religion made certain people do horrible things is like saying the knife made me stab my mother. Was it the knife's (religion's) fault or was it the individual's fault?

Just my two cents

Amos

Hi Answerer, you seem to have thing backwards. Man does not create God but God creates man and it probably is because you have this backwards that you do not know where to look for God. In fact, you remind me of the warrior who was looking for the horse he came riding in on.

Answerer

Ok, I shall reply starting from Mr Amos first, you said that I don't know where to look for God, well as a matter of fact, thats is only your assumption for you know nothing about me. Next, you mention that God create man but do you have anything to prove this and not the fact that man create God. Furthermore, you avoid mentioning things about religion,so it makes me wonder are you following any religion or just some new belief.
Coming to Mr Blu, you mentioned that everything has its good and bad sides, well, I know about this already. The point is that most religions cause more damage than good to the society. First, you have muslims beating up with the christians in the past and even up to now their differences are not yet resolved. Then, next, we have those cultists who can find their origins back to one of those major religions. Besides all this, religions only stop man's progess and are the main cause for dividing them up, thus preventing them from unite as one. What I have said here is just a few examples. One thing I am sure of is that religions have given man more bad than good.
Next, you said that God could not be seen by our eyes, so thanks for proving my point that God could be seen physically. After all you mentioned that the people who 'see' God, actually mean that they experienced 'Him'. Well, thats only from your point of views, from what I know(with facts)these people declared that they really saw God and can describe his form quite precise. So, if you mean to say they saw God from mediation or something like that, you are unmistakenly wrong.

Blu

Hello

You would have to give me an example in the Chrisitan Bible where it says that people have described God. Jesus is supposed to be the physical manifestation of God so people describe Jesus in the Bible... However, I am not referring to Jesus as God... I am talking about the supposed pre-New Testament God....

I was raised in a Christian church and yes Pastors actually say that when people in the Bible say they 'see' God they actually meant that they have mentally/emotionally experienced God.

Bible is sometimes ( a hell of a lot) taken too literally.

Like everything religious, it is always wide open to interpretation so interpret as you will.

To say that I am wrong is rather subjective.



Human beings create negativity in the world by their choices. Religion alone had nothing to do with Muslims attacking people neither did a religion have a hand at the Irish Catholic and Irist Protestant war in Ireland. It is the human mind and human actions that do such things. Religion can be a scapegoat for anyone who chooses to kill. But that doesn't mean Religion is the culprit. This is just my point. Instead of blaming religion why don't you blame the human being?

Do you think if there wasn't religion there wouldn't be any war? That is a crock. If there wasn't religion, people would choose another scapegoat in order to murder. McDonalds is everywhere... maybe people would kill for the mightly Golden Arches if religion didn't exist.

People can try to justify their actions using a variety of scapegoats to try to escape blame. And in your mind they have already escaped blame because you are blaming religion instead of the indivudual.

So please try to think of the nice aspect we all share and its called "FREE WILL" How about this? Free will made the Muslim kill...

What a concept.

Atheist also use the 'religion makes people kill' routine to try and make excuses to why they believe religion is such a horrible thing that insights people to kill left and right...

Sound familiar? Anyone? Anyone?


Just my two cents

ju'iblex

For Blu:

you start off by telling us your image of God and then go on to say that Humans have created the image of God.
then you say we have created the idea of God and religion, seeing as you havent laid out any restrictions this can lead to the conclusion that we have created God. If we can impose our physical ideals on a deity, then why not any/all other values?


No, the fact that people believe in an omnibenevolent god, commit themselves to a badly translated book, and then justify their actions by it.

This most certainly also applies to outside the physical world as well, as you have already stated.

this analogy implies atheism <without belief>should be timeretheism <to fear belief> instead. Atheism is neither irrational, or a fear. However it could be argued that both those qualities apply to theism.

For example?

For example?

So you deny religionisnt linked to war, discrimination and genocide?

its the individuals fault for taking up the knife.

For Amos

You do not have anything to back up this sentence, and it hardly classifies as an argument.
You remind me of the warrior who really needs to find his horse and leave.

For Blu:
interesting theory, tell me about it.

it can be a scapegoat, i'd agree with that, however that does not mean religion cannot be a culprit.

Nobody said that. But if there was no religion, perhaps there would be less war. But hypotheticals generally dont make for very good debating tools.

Not only is this an assumption but it also hasnt been said. So im not sure why you've even bothered to say it.

Actually the Bible has a couple of quotes which say free will doesnt exist, if we really want to bring it back to Christianity.

Your pre-occupation with Muslims disturbs me, why do you insist on repeatedly connecting Muslims with killing?

Just as Christians use the 'religion isnt at fault, humans are' to excuse away all the atrocities that have been commited in the name of God.

Answerer

I mean if the bible is taken too literally, then people will think that the ancient do see God, but too bad bible was wrong itself.
Well, you say that people will choose other scapegoat to kill other people. Yeah maybe, but compared to religion, there is a large difference. People are easily controlled by religions and thats why killings by religious wars is so much more when compared to other causes? I don't think there will be a millions willing to die for MCdonalds, you are overstating things man. So religion is still the main culprit. Without it, the killings of the past will not be so high in the past.

[ March 01, 2002: Message edited by: Answerer ]</p>

Megatron

Seemed rather forward to me.

<strong> Prove it.

<strong> No one "knows" where to look for God, and anyone who claims they do is only deluding themselves.

Unless, of course, you think you're going to find him in your mashed potatoes, or in a tree stump somewhere... Then you need psychiatric treatment.

<strong> And you remind me of the creature who was looking for the most annoying time to come out from under its bridge.

Blu

Juiblex,

I am slightly disturbed by the fact you have been following what I have been writing.

Anyway, I keep mentioning Muslims who kill because some believe that it is written in their religious books that Allah "wants" them to. I am not talking about all Muslims or even the Muslim religion which clearly states we should not kill our fellow human.

I hope you realize that I was replying to the comments of "Answerer" whose argument was that religion was bad because it insights people to kill. They like to use it as justification for murder...Plain and simple.

Religion is like a tool. Tools can be used for a variety of things. Computer is a tool. A knife is a tool. So in that sense, is the tool responsible for an act of violence or is it the hand that decided to take up this tool and turn it around and use it for purposes it was not intended for?

This is what I hear from people at College who do not believe in God. So maybe I linked Answerers message with also the comments I have heard that were made by other students.

Who can deny that human beings are responsible for there actions and not the tool? The tool is just an inanimate object. Religion is inanimate as well because they are only ideas and philosophies. Then we get a human being who is angry at a group of people (IRish Protestant and Irish Catholic or the Muslim and the Jew) they take up this tool (religion) and decide to use it as a scapegoat.. they twist its ideas and theories so it bends and melds to their anger and their murderous hatred. They even put a little propaganda and a little politics into the mix, so that their ideas of the religious writings are so twisted that you cannot even say that it is religion anymore.

In this sense, how can a person blame religion (an inanimate object) as being the culprit behind terrorist attacks or war?

Human beings have free will as I mentioned before. So religion is not some sort of mind control device that programmed terrorist bombers to commit genecide. The person's hatred is more likely to be the culprit behind murderous actions etc. Religion was twisted and the ideas of their religion were so mutilated in the minds of terrorists that it doesn't even resemble the main doctrine of that religion.

So let us irradicate hate and stop blaming inanimate objects as being the culprits behind horrible things that go on. An atheist once said "once we irradicate religion we will be at peace." Very interesting. Humans will still have hatred and we will still be aggressive without religion. It is programmed into our brains and some are more aggressive then others because of a variety of cultural, social, economic, as well as biological factors. So religion is NOT the cause. It is very clear and obvious.

DarkBronzePlant

Certainly people are ultimately to blame for their actions. I firmly adhere to that notion. But just as certainly, it behooves us to discover what motivates people to commit horrible deeds. Take the Yates incident. I think the woman is ultimately responsible for killing her children. Yet it may very well be her post-partum (sp?) depression or other mental condition which led her, or motivated her if you will, to commit the killings. Thus, while Andrea Yates herself needs to be held responsible, we should also look at the mental condition that may have led her to kill her kids, and try to prevent such actions from occurring in the future.

By your analogy, however, we should just write off depression as synonomous with a computer or a knife. It's not the knife or computer--or the depression--that caused the killing, it was Andrea Yates. So let's not blame the depression, nor consider it to be a cause. Let's solely focus on Andrea Yates... and the next person who kills their kids... and the next... and the next...