My Letter to Atheists

[QUOTE="tenaka2"]

[QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]I'd think that individual laws/policies are the things that should be studied.

For example, I'm fairly certain both Christians and Atheists agree that murder is wrong. The Catholic might say that it's wrong because of the Ten Commandments while the Atheist might say it is wrong because it takes away the victim's rights/freedom to exist. But at the end of the day, the law stands because everyone agrees with it.

Then there are things like abortion, where a Catholic might not approve because they consider it murder, but many other peopel think that a woman's right to choose supersedes the rights of the fertilized egg. In this case, the law does not stand on the side of the Catholic.

My point is, when a law/policy makes sense, why in the world should it matter where it's roots come from?

Because christians will try underhanded ways to get religion into differernt areas, like the intelligent design movement for example. This was a policical movement specificially designed to undermine science teaching and bring god into the ****oom in an attempt tocircumvent the constitutional rules.

The associated wedge document is conclusive proof of this.

I would argue that our laws should be based upon login and reason and never based on dogma.

[QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]

I'd think that individual laws/policies are the things that should be studied.

For example, I'm fairly certain both Christians and Atheists agree that murder is wrong. The Catholic might say that it's wrong because of the Ten Commandments while the Atheist might say it is wrong because it takes away the victim's rights/freedom to exist. But at the end of the day, the law stands because everyone agrees with it.

Then there are things like abortion, where a Catholic might not approve because they consider it murder, but many other peopel think that a woman's right to choose supersedes the rights of the fertilized egg. In this case, the law does not stand on the side of the Catholic.

My point is, when a law/policy makes sense, why in the world should it matter where it's roots come from?

grape_of_wrath

Because the "roots" of a legal system affects it's content pretty heavily. Analyzing your post would lead me to the conclusion that, to you, that seems less relevant since you perceive a seed of "natural law" that "makes sense" to all logical well-rounded humans (eg murder). that hypothesis is pretty shaky, to say the least.

addendum- I just popped my religious thread cherry. now comes the walk of shame.

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="tenaka2"]

Because christians will try underhanded ways to get religion into differernt areas, like the intelligent design movement for example. This was a policical movement specificially designed to undermine science teaching and bring god into the ****oom in an attempt tocircumvent the constitutional rules.

The associated wedge document is conclusive proof of this.

I would argue that our laws should be based upon login and reason and never based on dogma.

tenaka2

I would suggest that attempting to sneak religion in the back door of science ****ooms in an attempt to corrupt children and ignore the seperation of church and state is worse.

This was not made to offend in any way. Please read all of this before posting.

Hello atheists, agnostics, and theists of Gamespot. Tonight I have come to spread some divine wisdom that suddenly struck me right before I was about to fall asleep. I've known this for awhile, but there are many atheists on Gamespot and the internet in general. No, I am not saying that your beliefs are wrong, but some of your reasons why science can disprove religion are really bogus. I'm not trying to preach or anything, I just want to address these problems and explain why I think that they are wrong.

Many people who choose not to follow any religion say that their reasoning is based on science, whether it be the big bang or evolution. I respect those who aren't religious just because nothing seems to fit with them. Claiming that something totally unrelated to religion can disprove religion just grinds my gears every time I have to read the same excuse.

You might ask me, "How do you know there is a God?" My answer is that I just take a look around myself. Objects can be broken down by what exactly they are made up, whether it be material, element, or even how many protons, electrons, and neutrons there are in it. You might now be asking "Well how does this prove in your belief of a God?" My answer for that is that we don't know how the elements were created, or how atoms came to be. In my own opionion, I would believe that a divine entity created everything in the universe, and that we are slowly understanding what anything is made of through science.

Then there are those that "disprove" religion by pointing at the theory of evolution. To me, evolution and Christianity goes hand in hand. The first book, Genesis, can fit right into evolution. Genesis tells about the birth of our species while mixing in metaphors and mythology. Who knows if the first human male and female were ever named Adam and Eve, but if that's what God wants them to be called, then so be it. Everything before the creation of humans through evolution was never really spoken about in the Bible, because it doesn't have any relevancy towards God's interaction with Humans.

Finally, the last way that atheists try to claim that a religion couldn't possibly be right is by claiming that the big bang created everything in the universe. In my mind, creationism and the big bang fit perfectly together. A God could have started the events that lead to the big bang occuring. After all the elements are done settling down in space, he forms the Earth for a few million or billions of years to make it hospitable for humans to live on.

Then there are those that don't follow a religion, because they say that religions are too restrictive. You don't have to have the Bible or a priest dictate how you must follow your life. Go ahead and live the way you want to live. Sin a little, nobody is perfect. Just don't sin to spite God. I have only read the first two books of the Bible, yet I can say that I believe in Christianity. When I read the Bible, I read it for divine inspiration, not to learn what I am and am not supposed to do.

Well I'm sorry that this was really long, but I had to get this out of my brain and onto paper. Tell me what you think about my thoughts.

NiKva

Wait, so if someone doesn't believe in religion for no reason at all it doesn't bother you, but if they support their beliefs it bothers you?

Science is not unrelated to religion, they're both part of the school of ontology.

You're not proving anything with this statement. Logic deals with the physical, with what can be known. Faith deals with the metaphysical, what is beyond our perception. You can't prove the metaphysical.

I don't think most atheists think the Big Bang and Evolution disprove religion, I think they are unsatisfied with religious answers to how the universe operates and take the total lack of proof for religion as evidence of its falsity. The Big Bang and Evolution are merely scientific explanations for how the world operates, not nexessarily disproofs of religion. In fact, part of the reason a lot of atheists don't believe in religion is because it is impossible to disprove, and so according to rules of formal logic it cannot be taken as true. Should they ever disprove religion with science, the religious could just shift the goal line and manufacture an alternate explanation.

You're using religious standards to judge the actions of non-religious people. Why would they care about sinning if they don't follow the standards of sin set by the Bible? And how would they sin to spite god if they don't believe in him?

[QUOTE="grape_of_wrath"]

[QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]

I'd think that individual laws/policies are the things that should be studied.

For example, I'm fairly certain both Christians and Atheists agree that murder is wrong. The Catholic might say that it's wrong because of the Ten Commandments while the Atheist might say it is wrong because it takes away the victim's rights/freedom to exist. But at the end of the day, the law stands because everyone agrees with it.

Then there are things like abortion, where a Catholic might not approve because they consider it murder, but many other peopel think that a woman's right to choose supersedes the rights of the fertilized egg. In this case, the law does not stand on the side of the Catholic.

My point is, when a law/policy makes sense, why in the world should it matter where it's roots come from?

Planet_Pluto

Because the "roots" of a legal system affects it's content pretty heavily. Analyzing your post would lead me to the conclusion that, to you, that seems less relevant since you perceive a seed of "natural law" that "makes sense" to all logical well-rounded humans (eg murder). that hypothesis is pretty shaky, to say the least.

addendum- I just popped my religious thread cherry. now comes the walk of shame.

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="tenaka2"]

Because christians will try underhanded ways to get religion into differernt areas, like the intelligent design movement for example. This was a policical movement specificially designed to undermine science teaching and bring god into the ****oom in an attempt tocircumvent the constitutional rules.

The associated wedge document is conclusive proof of this.

I would argue that our laws should be based upon login and reason and never based on dogma.

Frame_Dragger

[QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]

[QUOTE="grape_of_wrath"]

Because the "roots" of a legal system affects it's content pretty heavily. Analyzing your post would lead me to the conclusion that, to you, that seems less relevant since you perceive a seed of "natural law" that "makes sense" to all logical well-rounded humans (eg murder). that hypothesis is pretty shaky, to say the least.

addendum- I just popped my religious thread cherry. now comes the walk of shame.

grape_of_wrath

[QUOTE="Frame_Dragger"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] and the progressive left did not use underhanded means to pass a healthcare bill that the majority of the population opposed? how is that kind of unwanted social engineering any better?

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="Frame_Dragger"] Seriously? You're comparing teaching a bit of religion alongside science as though they were in any way similar with the passage of a law? That's not apples and oranges, that's apples and car transmissions... not even RELATED.Frame_Dragger

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]

Christianity is just one of many religions. In time it will die just like tons of others have.

gaming25

But it hasnt, like the tons of others. So that is incorrect.

[QUOTE="grape_of_wrath"][QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]If not by consensus, why exactly is murder illegal?

Planet_Pluto

Well, one- you made it seem like certain rules were innate to human beings, otherwise, disregarding the origins of our rule system makes no sense. When i'm interpreting someone I like to begin with the assumption that he isn't being self-contradictory.

Two, you didn't deny my analysis of your post the first time you responded to me.

Also, I made it pretty clear that I was assuming what you meant.

Hmm nobody willing to answer my question?

[QUOTE="NiKva"][QUOTE="th3warr1or"]Inb4blogthis. Only problem: Christianity isn't the first nor only religion. What makes you think it's right? What if the Norse faith is? Scoob64

I was a devout Christian years ago... been to church all my life, came close to a minor in religion in college, and even use to do some one-one-one evangelism... but heres the problem with the faith...

Christianty stole many of its elements, like the virgin birth from much earlier faiths... Horas is one example that comes to mind.and there an infinite number of Gods you can believe in. why not believe in Thor, Zeus, Islam, Judaism? they all have about as much evidence for their 'truth'... also, the scriptures have been written and rewritten by tons of scribes throughout history, and so many "gospels" were ommited from the scripture... including the gospel of Peter, Mary Magdalene, etc...are youreally going to put all your faith in some men that hand-pickedthe cannon from a gigantic library of old texts?

Horas was not born to a virgin. And just to note, if there is something that has happened in another religion, it doesnt mean that Christianity took something from that religion. But if you think you have something that will catch the eye, then please feel free to post it. The difference between Christianity and the myths of Zeus, Thor, etc are many factors, one of the main ones being that they dont have a text that has been written through history.

[QUOTE="Frame_Dragger"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] they both deal with forcing a standard on people only one would come with a grade and the other is enforced with a gun.

[QUOTE="gaming25"]

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]

Christianity is just one of many religions. In time it will die just like tons of others have.

toast_burner

But it hasnt, like the tons of others. So that is incorrect.

[QUOTE="Frame_Dragger"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] they both deal with forcing a standard on people only one would come with a grade and the other is enforced with a gun.

surrealnumber5

Well, you grew up with social security as a fact of life and you aren't "indoctrinated" by it.

You need to check out Foucault, you might actually like him. Basically, no matter what systems there are in a society, they will always influence us. If we grew up with no social security we'd be influenced by the system that says there shouldn't be social security. Every system in society influences our thinking in some way, from government to pedagogy to parents to church and more. These systems, no matter what their individual stances on specific issues, hold their power through hegemony. They could be producing the most idealized society ever, but they still have a negative effect in that people accept their authority not through reasoned analysis but by merit of hegemonic power.

Of course, Foucault realized this wasn't indoctrination, merely the operation of society. To tear down every system of power would be asinine, not to mention impossible as doing so would simply create a new system of power that would replace it. Rather, he said hegemonic power must be challenged and questioned, which it is in our society of free speech.

As for how schools are different, there are factors within schools that fit into this, but overall schools are supposed to be a way to teach children how to investigate things objectively, how to reason, and how to use scientific analysis. Forcing religion into schools runs counter to that goal, children are now taught that if they do not like the results of a scientific finding they can just ignore them and try to cherrypick tidbits to support their own subjective opinions.

why do you care so much? i can ask you how do you know if he exists. now dont give me the look around you crap.i want full on proof we use science (or just not care) in many ways to disprove. but most people with a religion cant prove or disprove at all. if there is a god then my flying speghetti monster is fake.

athiesm flew us to the moon!

religion flew us into buildings.....

[QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]

[QUOTE="grape_of_wrath"] IMO? (well, obviously) Because the current popular moral perception of society.grape_of_wrath

Well, one- you made it seem like certain rules were innate to human beings, otherwise, disregarding the origins of our rule system makes no sense. When i'm interpreting someone I like to begin with the assumption that he isn't being self-contradictory.

Two, you didn't deny my analysis of your post the first time you responded to me.

Also, I made it pretty clear that I was assuming what you meant.

Let me state my thoughts a little differently.

Murder: A Catholic might be against murder because it goes against the Ten Commandments. A non-religous person might be against murder because it goes against an individual's rights (for lack of a better phrase). Regardless of why both sides agree that murder is wrong, they do in fact agree that it is wrong, and thats why we have laws against it.

Adultery (I'm thinking this is a better example that the complex issue that is abortion): A Catholic might be against it because it goes agains the Ten Commandments. A non-religous person might say it's nobody's business besides the people involved. So, at the end of the day, since religion isn't the end-all, be-all in the US, adultery is NOT illegal. However, if both the religious and non-religous found adultery to be horrible enough, there would be a consensus and it would likely be illegal.

So, basically I was saying that our laws are based ona consensus. At that point (I think) you said that my thoughts on the topic were "shaky." Yet when I asked you where laws come from, you said, "popular moral perception." How is that not pretty much the exact same thing?

Again, not exactly running on all cylinders this morning.

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]

[QUOTE="gaming25"]

But it hasnt, like the tons of others. So that is incorrect.

gaming25

[QUOTE="gaming25"]

But it hasnt, like the tons of others. So that is incorrect.

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]

[QUOTE="gaming25"]

But it hasnt, like the tons of others. So that is incorrect.

gaming25

It was both, and there are plenty of religions that have fallen. They generally fall around the same time that the empire that was using them as a source of power fell. As Bertrand Russell said, "Religion may, in most of its forms, be defined as the belief that the gods are on the side of the Government."

One of the reason i dont beilve in God is because hes an a******

You are a Christian because you are born in a country I assume, who on the majority are Christian themselves. That's fine, you were brought up with Christian parents, probably Christian school, your countries political system probably has traditional underlinings of Christianity built into it. Naturally you've come to the conclusion that God exist through the various influences of your life. That's fine, but you want some debate so I'll give it to you.

How is it fair that some kid was unlucky enough to be born in Thailand will burn in hell because he wasn't influenced the way you were because of his surrounding being primarily Buddist?

There are thousands of religions, would God honestly do that to the billions of other people who don't believe in your religion or someone elses religion for that matter?

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="Frame_Dragger"] That's not a little bit of gross oversimplification, and ignoring the basic issues in each case. One comes with how you view the world for the rest of your life, including what you think science and religion are, and the other is a law. Again, not related at all, except through some of your hyperbole.Frame_Dragger

[QUOTE="gaming25"]

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]The Egyptian empire lasted over 3000 years before being taken over by the Romans, back then I'm sure there was people like you saying that it would never fall.

It was both, and there are plenty of religions that have fallen. They generally fall around the same time that the empire that was using them as a source of power fell. As Bertrand Russell said, "Religion may, in most of its forms, be defined as the belief that the gods are on the side of the Government."

[QUOTE="Frame_Dragger"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] the other also deals with how one will view the world for their life time, see social security, it was designed to be a temporary program and now people see it as a right. indoctrination is indoctrination, i guess it just depends on how much you agree with the message as to how wrong the actual act is.....

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="Frame_Dragger"] That's not a little bit of gross oversimplification, and ignoring the basic issues in each case. One comes with how you view the world for the rest of your life, including what you think science and religion are, and the other is a law. Again, not related at all, except through some of your hyperbole.theone86

Well, you grew up with social security as a fact of life and you aren't "indoctrinated" by it.

You need to check out Foucault, you might actually like him. Basically, no matter what systems there are in a society, they will always influence us. If we grew up with no social security we'd be influenced by the system that says there shouldn't be social security. Every system in society influences our thinking in some way, from government to pedagogy to parents to church and more. These systems, no matter what their individual stances on specific issues, hold their power through hegemony. They could be producing the most idealized society ever, but they still have a negative effect in that people accept their authority not through reasoned analysis but by merit of hegemonic power.

Of course, Foucault realized this wasn't indoctrination, merely the operation of society. To tear down every system of power would be asinine, not to mention impossible as doing so would simply create a new system of power that would replace it. Rather, he said hegemonic power must be challenged and questioned, which it is in our society of free speech.

As for how schools are different, there are factors within schools that fit into this, but overall schools are supposed to be a way to teach children how to investigate things objectively, how to reason, and how to use scientific analysis. Forcing religion into schools runs counter to that goal, children are now taught that if they do not like the results of a scientific finding they can just ignore them and try to cherrypick tidbits to support their own subjective opinions.

One of the reason i dont beilve in God is because hes an a******

spawnassasin

youtube.com/watch?v=iVxc-gL-EnA&NR=1

Add the www., glitchspot won't let me link YT lately.

NSFW

[QUOTE="theone86"]

[QUOTE="gaming25"] But that was an empire, not a religion.

gaming25

It was both, and there are plenty of religions that have fallen. They generally fall around the same time that the empire that was using them as a source of power fell. As Bertrand Russell said, "Religion may, in most of its forms, be defined as the belief that the gods are on the side of the Government."

[QUOTE="gaming25"][QUOTE="toast_burner"]The Egyptian empire lasted over 3000 years before being taken over by the Romans, back then I'm sure there was people like you saying that it would never fall.

Frame_Dragger

And Christianity has the first five books of the Bible, so it would have lasted as long as Judaism due to Genesis.

[QUOTE="theone86"]

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] the other also deals with how one will view the world for their life time, see social security, it was designed to be a temporary program and now people see it as a right. indoctrination is indoctrination, i guess it just depends on how much you agree with the message as to how wrong the actual act is.....

surrealnumber5

Well, you grew up with social security as a fact of life and you aren't "indoctrinated" by it.

You need to check out Foucault, you might actually like him. Basically, no matter what systems there are in a society, they will always influence us. If we grew up with no social security we'd be influenced by the system that says there shouldn't be social security. Every system in society influences our thinking in some way, from government to pedagogy to parents to church and more. These systems, no matter what their individual stances on specific issues, hold their power through hegemony. They could be producing the most idealized society ever, but they still have a negative effect in that people accept their authority not through reasoned analysis but by merit of hegemonic power.

Of course, Foucault realized this wasn't indoctrination, merely the operation of society. To tear down every system of power would be asinine, not to mention impossible as doing so would simply create a new system of power that would replace it. Rather, he said hegemonic power must be challenged and questioned, which it is in our society of free speech.

As for how schools are different, there are factors within schools that fit into this, but overall schools are supposed to be a way to teach children how to investigate things objectively, how to reason, and how to use scientific analysis. Forcing religion into schools runs counter to that goal, children are now taught that if they do not like the results of a scientific finding they can just ignore them and try to cherrypick tidbits to support their own subjective opinions.

You probably have lived a standard life. Though differences do exist, thinking that your life is special and somehow vastly different from everyone else's around you is massively egocentric.

[QUOTE="gaming25"] But that was an empire, not a religion.

It was both, and there are plenty of religions that have fallen. They generally fall around the same time that the empire that was using them as a source of power fell. As Bertrand Russell said, "Religion may, in most of its forms, be defined as the belief that the gods are on the side of the Government."

Add the www., glitchspot won't let me link YT lately.

NSFW

theone86

[QUOTE="Frame_Dragger"][QUOTE="gaming25"] But that was about an empire, not a religion.gaming25

And Christianity has the first five books of the Bible, so it would have lasted as long as Judaism due to Genesis.

Then since Islam consider the Torah and the Bible sacred I guess that has lasted longer than Christianity.

[QUOTE="gaming25"][QUOTE="theone86"]

It was both, and there are plenty of religions that have fallen. They generally fall around the same time that the empire that was using them as a source of power fell. As Bertrand Russell said, "Religion may, in most of its forms, be defined as the belief that the gods are on the side of the Government."

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

i have not lived a standard life, maybe if i had i would be a little communist like the majority of my friends who had standard sheltered lives. people who are nearing 30 and still on momma's tit

theone86

You probably have lived a standard life. Though differences do exist, thinking that your life is special and somehow vastly different from everyone else's around you is massively egocentric.

As an egoist, you should probably take that as a complement.

[QUOTE="gaming25"]

The religion died too, and while some people claim to worship similar gods now, the actual method and traditions have been largely lost. Soooo.. it's both. On the other hand, you could argue that the greeks and romans renamed some, just as the Egyptians renamed Sumerian and Akkadian deities. Still, if you want an example of a religion that has lasted, probably Judaism would be the best example... it's lasted for the vast majority of recorded history. Frame_Dragger

And Christianity has the first five books of the Bible, so it would have lasted as long as Judaism due to Genesis.

Then since Islam consider the Torah and the Bible sacred I guess that has lasted longer than Christianity.

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="Frame_Dragger"] Not liking the law and going through all kinds of logical contortions isn't helping to make your point, beyond the basics that you don't like the law. Once again, you're still not comparing similar things, period. If you want to slag entitlements and all of that, go for it, but in this context it's just not in any way helping to make your point. A law doesn't indoctrinate, it simply lays out how things will be enforced for the duration of that law. Confusing faith with a fundamentally skeptical process is actually mixing opposite ways of thinking. They can co-exist mind you, but not if you fail to teach people the difference between a fundamental leap of faith, and the process of formulating a hypothesis, testing it, and the standards that exist to do so. If you want to argue about policy, start a thread about policy... if you want to make your point here, you're not doing yourself any favors repeating this line; you're just showing a fundamental lack of understanding.Frame_Dragger

[QUOTE="gaming25"][QUOTE="theone86"]

It was both, and there are plenty of religions that have fallen. They generally fall around the same time that the empire that was using them as a source of power fell. As Bertrand Russell said, "Religion may, in most of its forms, be defined as the belief that the gods are on the side of the Government."

[QUOTE="theone86"]

Add the www., glitchspot won't let me link YT lately.

NSFW

cybrcatter

i dont think theres a person that doesnt love louie

[QUOTE="Frame_Dragger"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] i dont want opinion forced on me or my future children be itby the federallies or the state education system. i have not made a single contortion in my argument thus far. i have compared forceful indoctrination of a ideology with the forceful indoctrination of a ideology, only one would come with a grade and the other with pain up to the destruction of ones whole life. the magnitudes are not the same but the action of forcing an ideology on others is. and laws do indoctrinate, are you really going to say you have not seen the majority of people say something is wrong because it is against the law. i am arguing indoctrination and its wrongs on anyposition of the political spectrum, i was not the one that started talking about the dangers of the "religious right."

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="theone86"]

Well, you grew up with social security as a fact of life and you aren't "indoctrinated" by it.

You need to check out Foucault, you might actually like him. Basically, no matter what systems there are in a society, they will always influence us. If we grew up with no social security we'd be influenced by the system that says there shouldn't be social security. Every system in society influences our thinking in some way, from government to pedagogy to parents to church and more. These systems, no matter what their individual stances on specific issues, hold their power through hegemony. They could be producing the most idealized society ever, but they still have a negative effect in that people accept their authority not through reasoned analysis but by merit of hegemonic power.

Of course, Foucault realized this wasn't indoctrination, merely the operation of society. To tear down every system of power would be asinine, not to mention impossible as doing so would simply create a new system of power that would replace it. Rather, he said hegemonic power must be challenged and questioned, which it is in our society of free speech.

As for how schools are different, there are factors within schools that fit into this, but overall schools are supposed to be a way to teach children how to investigate things objectively, how to reason, and how to use scientific analysis. Forcing religion into schools runs counter to that goal, children are now taught that if they do not like the results of a scientific finding they can just ignore them and try to cherrypick tidbits to support their own subjective opinions.

theone86

You probably have lived a standard life. Though differences do exist, thinking that your life is special and somehow vastly different from everyone else's around you is massively egocentric.

[QUOTE="theone86"]

[QUOTE="gaming25"]

And Christianity has the first five books of the Bible, so it would have lasted as long as Judaism due to Genesis.

gaming25

Then since Islam consider the Torah and the Bible sacred I guess that has lasted longer than Christianity.

What do you mean? Everything that Christianity and Judaism consider sacred text Islam does as well, so according to your logic Islam has lasted longer than Christianity.

[QUOTE="greenskittles"]

You are a Christian because you are born in a country I assume, who on the majority are Christian themselves. That's fine, you were brought up with Christian parents, probably Christian school, your countries political system probably has traditional underlinings of Christianity built into it. Naturally you've come to the conclusion that God exist through the various influences of your life. That's fine, but you want some debate so I'll give it to you.

How is it fair that some kid was unlucky enough to be born in Thailand will burn in hell because he wasn't influenced the way you were because of his surrounding being primarily Buddist?

There are thousands of religions, would God honestly do that to the billions of other people who don't believe in your religion or someone elses religion for that matter?

gaming25

I don't know what you mean by this

Anyhow as far as I'm concerned God only makes exceptions of infants and toddlers. That doesn't matter though it doesn't explain what happens to the rest of the worlds population, you are just theorising , everyone else could be going to hell still.

Please answer this question, is this what you think should happen to the rest of the world if you were in God's shoes, would you send every non-believer excluding toddlers and infants to hell? Just answer that question please.

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]

[QUOTE="gaming25"] But Christianity hasnt fallen, despite the empires that have fallen.gaming25

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="Frame_Dragger"] Indoctrination requires that you be made to believe in something, not simply that you be forced to adhere to a law. Your argument dies a quiet death right there... if you bring up something new I"ll respond, otherwise this is just boring.Frame_Dragger

[QUOTE="gaming25"][QUOTE="theone86"]

Then since Islam consider the Torah and the Bible sacred I guess that has lasted longer than Christianity.

What do you mean? Everything that Christianity and Judaism consider sacred text Islam does as well, so according to your logic Islam has lasted longer than Christianity.

[QUOTE="theone86"]

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] i have not lived a standard life, maybe if i had i would be a little communist like the majority of my friends who had standard sheltered lives. people who are nearing 30 and still on momma's tit

surrealnumber5

You probably have lived a standard life. Though differences do exist, thinking that your life is special and somehow vastly different from everyone else's around you is massively egocentric.

As I said there are differences, and who knows maybe you haven't lived a standard life. However, to go around thinking that your experiences are so unique that everyone else around you is some non-thinking drone and you, by a miracle of fate, have gained unique perspective that has allowed you to break free from the indotrination that has enslaved everyone else, is egocentric. You all grew up in the same society, you all had many of the same factors influencing your lives and your choices. There are differences, but there are many similarities as well.

[QUOTE="Frame_Dragger"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] how uncharacteristically shallow of you, i think this might be the first time i have seen you try to character assassinate someone out of an argument, and it is a poor attempt as no indoctrination works 100% of the time, be it by carrot or stick indoctrination has and will be tried, both are effective means of persuasion after all.