God didn't create humans, humans created God.

Humans have always theorized unknown causes.  And to be honest before modern developments in science the idea of God or gods creating and influencing the universe was the best theory.  But that time has passed, and religion is now obsolete.  Humans understand that scientific principles explain events in our universe and humans now create our own moral code without regard for higher beings.

I'm using the word sin because it's a religious conversation.  Aside from which, what would be wrong if people lived to help others?  If that's what people lived to do, the world would be a much better place.

Of course, because people are selfish, it's not possible to live like that, hence why things like communism in general are bound to fail, but to suggest that it would be wrong to live that way... I can't see how.  (Well actually, that's the problem with communism, in the cases in which it would succeed, the predisposition of the people would make communism uneeded.)

To live completly for others is what i'd consider a perfect existensce... I can't see how it would be argued otherwise, if what we all wanted to do most was help each other, life would be much better.

Ironically you seem to be argueing for "enlightened selfishness."

Offtopic:

Why are so many Christians still believeing in hell!? >_> I thought that stuff was all made up to scare people into submission...

Ontopic:

While the Westboro Church are just despicable I am all for Free Speach. Even if it means that fanatics, nazis and other scum of the Earth gets to spread their hatred and idiocy.

Hmmm, I might just do that.

Well, since humans are more like wolves then like ants, it's pretty obvious why Communism failed.

Helping others is important, to assure that society's stable (and because it feels nice ), or else conflicts will arise. Still, it's just not human nature to live to help others. If everyone tries to assure their own wellbeing, and of course help others get past situations that are beyond their possibility to solve, I'd say society will do pretty well.

There is no such thing as Hell in Judaism, the idea comes directly from the Roman (pagan) concept of Hades.

So the proper question would be: Why are so many Pageo-Christians still believing in Hell?  What does the festival of fertility, full of rabbits and eggs to symbolize sex, have to do with Jesus being killed by Romans?  Why does the birth of Jesus fall on the winter solistice when the Roman census records show that that year were taken in August?  Did somebody play a practical joke on Joseph and tell him that he had to travel from Nazareth to his home town Bethleham to be counted for the census, when the Romans didn't require people to do so and it would have been a clusterF--- if they did?

Oh wait, the Jewish messiah had to be born in Bethleham (the same city as King David) and followers of Jesus of Nazareth had to put his birth there.  Answered my own question.

Well Sapphi generally when a study is conducted it is always done so with some sort of bias. The organisation funding the study is hoping that it will support their ideologies and their for they do the study. Now I myself don't listen to a thing Focus on the Family says but their studies are probably accuracte, maybe portrayed alittle wrong but still quite accurate (Though I never read the study). I find that Focus on the Family usually tries to sell their products in almost everything they do, however that doesn't mean they are always wrong they just need to be taken with a grain of salt.

But say planned parenthood released a study about the benefits of abortion. You would probably link to it as proof to support your ideology. Yet Planned Parent Hood would have an obvious bias, the study may be legit but it would be slanted to Planned Parent Hood's point of view.

The only organisation which I listen to studies from is the United Nations and even then China, US and Russia mold everything that those studies say. Your never going to find a study without a bias, if you find a study supporting your views their will be another half dozen supporting the opposers views.

Also as for this is driving a car a sin because it causes harm? Well cars didn't exist in the Bible time however I bet if the Bible was written today then driving cars would probably be sinful yes. Note that the Amish and many mennonites believe that driving vehicles is sinful. More moderate Christian's try not to think about it.

But think for a second, you turn the car on you burn fossil fuels damaging the enviroment, air supply and aruably causing global warming. The roads you drive on destroyed forests and pumped thousands of chemicals into the air while being produced from the factory to the pavement. Then you hit animals constantly almost everyone who drives has killed an animal or two for no apparent reason. Then the fact that car's can crash and kill other people is also a factor.

So is driving a sin? Its most definatly a sin against nature and  bad for the majority of people.

I myself don't drive, I try to cut down my carbon foot print. In my city I can walk to most big stores and can take public transit to most others. The few times I do get in a car its in a carpool. I do think the Amish probably are on the right track, however I think it would be another sin just like lieng.

You lied today, statistically speaking we lie all the time, exagerate the truth. We gossip almost daily. Sapphi get the fact in your head, everyone sins a sexual sin should be treated no different then any other sin. You repent and try to do as little as possible but the fact of the matter is we are just human and its human nature to sin.

I find it funny in your post to Kaz you mention that its not in human's nature to help others. Thats because human nature is sinful. This was caused when Adam took a bite from a peice of fruit of the tree of Knowledge, the forbidden fruit in the garden.

You see it yourself your just in denial lol (Sorry if that offends you). But the Bible specifically says those who are against the faith are blinded by their endeavers. You my friend are one of those blinded.

Benefits of abortion? That sounds not very right. Abortion may be a necessity in certain situations, but certainly shouldn't be taken lightly.

Anyways, I don't beleive in the existence of sins, and the fact that there seems to be no logic behind them certainly won't convince me otherwise. The only sex acts I find morally wrong are non-conseted ones (like rape).

And I said that it's human's nature to be selfish, not that it's in human's nature not to help others. Even Christians only help others because they expect a reward for it (going to heaven, sucking up to God etc.).

Selfishness isn't that bad really, as it's the driving force behind human progress. Humans strive to make progress in order to have better lives. If people were totally detached from material things we'd have no desire to help others, we'd all live in absolute poverty and be stupid and ignorant. The only problem is that most people don't realise that living within a society where all people are well off is beneficial to everyone in the long run. The reason why we humans have thrived as a species is because we've lived together and colaborated with eachother.

And the reason why it's not in human's nature to be selfless has nothing to do with mythical stories and superstitions, but simple surival instincts.

You can quote that book whenever you likem, it's essentially written in an ambiguous way so that it can be used in several situations. The only blind person is you Joel.

About gay people raising children...

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2010/august/gay-study-083010.html

http://www.gaylawreport.com/new-research-children-with-gay-parents-end-up-the-same-as-children-of-straight-ones/

(The one above is actually from the Americian Psychological Assosition... which is about as definitive as it gets for American Psychology, which generally is the most advanced psychology.)

Nice studies. Don't know what they have to do with this topic, then again, given my history of derailing topics, I shouldn't talk.