@sapphi_snake

Since God controls everything, things have consequences because he makes it so. Also, there are things who genuenly have no negative consequences (homosexuality for example), and the only reason you consider it to be wrong is "because God says so" (in other words you're following someone's whim, not to mention a someone who doesn't even exist, but that's beside the point).

Also, Scoobes accurately described my views better then I did. This whole situation is blackmail. It's no different then someone pointing a gun at you and saying "do what I say or I'll blow your brais out". Sure, you have a choice: submit or die.

Why do you want to see this as control, when it`s really not like that?
First of all, any kind of human relationship has consequences for mistakes/sins. Is it all blackmail too?
Second, seeing it as control doesn`t really speak the truth about the relationship between God and men.
When Jesus died for our sins, when he washed the feet of the apostles, that only showed how God loves us and wants for us nothing but the best: love and salvation.
You don`t like consequences for your actions? Then you probably won`t connect with anyone in your life, since when people fail towards someone they are eventually punished in any shape or form.

I was more talking of the motivations for his death. I also don't see how he died for anyone other than for his own crime (or percieved crime). This whole part of the Christian religion always seemed ridiculous me. If God (who damned humanity in the first place, for the mistake of only two people, the benevolent guy that he is) decided he wanted to forgive them, this whole Juses thing was really unnecessary.

He died because a few people wanted Him dead because he brought a message completely different. He died because His death would bring redemption for men. His death means everything: if you die with Jesus, you ressurrect with Him. Know what this means? It means that those who love God will live with Him for all eternity. And it also shows that God loves us to the point of suffering for our sake. That`s control right?
So, it really was necessary.

Again, he made the rules. He wants people to suffer if they don't want to be under his control.
The day you show a statement with a less pessimistic view of God of the world, i`ll be surprised! J Just kidding.
If he wanted people to suffer He woudn`t have sent His son to die for us.

Unlike taking drugs or drinking alcohol, homosexuality isn't harmful, quite the contrary, a same sex relationship brings happiness to a homosexual. And if no one is hurt "physically or spiritually" then what reason could you popssibly have to deny people happiness and make them hate themselves? This would make your God downright evil and a bully, making people hate themselves and feel ugly (something which his followers do quite often).
So you assume that drugs are harmful. Know why? Because it destroys men. As greed and egostism, etc.
All that is considered sin is, by essence, an opposition to God. The act of homosexuality is seen as perversion of human nature - from a religious point of view.
Like prostitution. No harm done, people enjoy it, so what`s wrong. That`s the problem many people don`t realize because they are seeing through their own eyes and not through God`s eyes.
If it`s not God, than it`s a deviation. It`s like a silent corruption that pushes them away from God.

We're going to have to agree to disagree (as always happens in these debates, lol).

What I will say though, is like Vlad pointed out earlier, you seem to use a circular logic to describe god and the viewpoints of followers. Everything you know of god comes from what you're taught by your religion (people in positions of power). Yet you can't truly "know" anything about god, yet you make claims that he deems x,y,z based on teaching given to you by humans.

I suppose what I'm getting at is that faith and spirituality isn't and shouldn't be about following rules set by religion X, but is entirely personal to each individual. I think it's odd and somewhat arrogant (no offence to you intended- this is a general view of people preaching/lecturing) for anyone to make claims as to what a higher power says you should do or think. Finding what works for you in terms of spirituality should be a personal journey of discovery.

@Scoobes:

We're going to have to agree to disagree (as always happens in these debates, lol).

 What I will say though, is like Vlad pointed out earlier, you seem to use a circular logic to describe god and the viewpoints of followers. Everything you know of god comes from what you're taught by your religion (people in positions of power). Yet you can't truly "know" anything about god, yet you make claims that he deems x,y,z based on teaching given to you by humans.

I suppose what I'm getting at is that faith and spirituality isn't and shouldn't be about following rules set by religion X, but is entirely personal to each individual. I think it's odd and somewhat arrogant (no offence to you intended- this is a general view of people preaching/lecturing) for anyone to make claims as to what a higher power says you should do or think. Finding what works for you in terms of spirituality should be a personal journey of discovery.

Yes we will! :D

Knowing God by religion is one frame of the big picture. But the thing is that God has throughout the times reached humanity through apparitions, for example, and those apparitions had messages that the institution did not have and were embraced from that point onward.
Still, even just considering what the institution says doesn`t make your faith and that same faith does add value to what is said about God and what He is in all It`s significance. Faith is also a source of knowledge.
Faith, “rules”, institution... everything is connected because it has God at it`s center. I could agree that faith is a personnal experience, but when saying that one can´t forget that the belief brings a individual connection to God and with that, people live their lives the best way they can as God connects with every single person aswell. But this is a very simplistic explanation of what faith means to every single person.
With Jesus commandment: “love one another like I loved thee”, you have the basis of God Himself and life in general and of course that in your life you will live it differently than me because our lives are different but doesn`t mean there isn`t a common ground in that personal experience. God may want something from you that He doesn`t want from me, like helping a specific person. But in overall, what He wants from us, is for us to love, we will just live it with differences.
There`s room for a personnal experience and a common ground.
No offence taken!

One of the most ridiculosu statements ever made. What do you base this one? More of your circular logic?

@DélioPT:

Why do you want to see this as control, when it`s really not like that?

Because it is control.

First of all, any kind of human relationship has consequences for mistakes/sins. Is it all blackmail too?
Second, seeing it as control doesn`t really speak the truth about the relationship between God and men.
When Jesus died for our sins, when he washed the feet of the apostles, that only showed how God loves us and wants for us nothing but the best: love and salvation.
You don`t like consequences for your actions? Then you probably won`t connect with anyone in your life, since when people fail towards someone they are eventually punished in any shape or form.

The relationship you talk about is that of a tyrant (God) and his slaves/puppets (humans). Humans have no rights in the relationship you describe, their individuality, desires don't account, all that matters is satisfying the tyrant's whims. Who wants to be part of such a relationship?

He died because a few people wanted Him dead because he brought a message completely different.

This is true.

He died because His death would bring redemption for men. His death means everything: if you die with Jesus, you ressurrect with Him. Know what this means? It means that those who love God will live with Him for all eternity. And it also shows that God loves us to the point of suffering for our sake. That`s control right?
So, it really was necessary.

I don't get the "four our sake part". This is probably one of the most irrational parts of Christianity. Also, you used too much circular logic in this post.

If he wanted people to suffer He woudn`t have sent His son to die for us.

And the point of that was? Considering Jesus was "God" (in your view) no suffering he would've experienced would've been a big deal, and what was the point? What's this whole "dying for us" nonsesne? You're talking as if humanity was in danger and he saved it, however the only thing threatening humanity was, ironically, God.

If he doesn't want people to suffer he should treat them with respect, rather than demanding submission. If he doesn't like it, he should've created mindless drones, rather than being with free will and the ability (so rarely used) to think critically. Just because he created humans doesn't mean he has any right to people's lives.

So you assume that drugs are harmful. Know why? Because it destroys men.

LOL, yes, they can certainly destroy one's health in excess.

As greed and egostism, etc.
All that is considered sin is, by essence, an opposition to God. The act of homosexuality is seen as perversion of human nature - from a religious point of view.

Homosexuality is perfectly normal. And it's funny how you changed your tone (from the above). Homosexuality, unlike drugs and alcohol (which Jesus himself drank BTW) doesn't destroy men (something perfectly obvious), so why is it wrong?
Like prostitution. No harm done, people enjoy it, so what`s wrong. That`s the problem many people don`t realize because they are seeing through their own eyes and not through God`s eyes.
If it`s not God, than it`s a deviation. It`s like a silent corruption that pushes them away from God.

God is subjective (the differences between the Old and New Testament illustrate that perfectly). At the end of the day the relationship between god and man that you describe is one of master and slave.

Very long read, was worth the time though.

I for once believe in God. And not any religion's God, but the God I believe in is the creator of the Universe. I do believe that most religions were born from the innate ideas and preocupations us humans have about our origins and our destinies.

Think about this, Israel, the "chosen people" do not believe that Jesus is the Messiah. So if they are the chosen people they must be correct right? Then Christians are wrong. But if Christians are correct, then Jews couldn't have been the chosen ones since they are rejecting who is God himself. This means that only a select few are correct and that you will be lucky to be among them, it will be by chance that you end up in the "select" group of believers, be it by heritage or by choice, but you will never know until you finally die. Which totally contradicts what these religions profess, that we are all equals in front of God.

That's what bothers me about religion, the "I'm right, you are wrong" attitude. I have my beliefs, and I do believe God exists and that he is a consious being, not a lifeless source of energy. And that he is the judge of us all. I also believe in morals being universal and that what's considered good or bad everywhere is the same. Even the most horrific criminals (discounting the psychopaths, schizophrenics, etc) end up showing regret and pain about their acts. We know what's right or what's wrong, it's perhaps the situation that blinds us, but everyone knows how to differentiate what's good from what's bad, morals ARE NOT SUBJECTIVE.

Proceed.

To respond to your statements, I would argue that whoever was a part of these aggregious activities (KKK, pedophile priests, crazy people, ect ect ect), those people may claim to be christian and say they do these things in the name of Christ, but in actuallity they are not following christianity at all. All of the wars in the name of christianity should have never taken place, but they did. People may commit terrible acts, spew racists remarks, and condemn others, but that is not true christianity. there are some terrible people in the world that claim to be "christian", but they only display a tainted and distorted view for others to see and think thats what being a christian is all about. The difference in a person claiming to be a follower of christianity and a person who really is a follower are two very different people. The bible teaches that all are equal, so racism shares no part of true christianity. people that slander others is wrong, and therefore those that claim to be a christian and do those things are doing things that true christianity teaches against. many people see christians as people with an "Im better than you" attitude. Thats wrong. Everyone is equal with different set of beliefs and values. If a person becomes a christian and then claims they are perfect and everything they do from then on is "in the name of christianity", they are dead wrong. A christian will make as many mistakes as one that is non christian. So being a pedifile, racist, murderer, bigot, slanderer, hate monger, ect is not part of true christian teachings. Those are things that some people just do no matter if they are christian or non christian. So those that go around doing those things are not displaying what true christianity is. And honestly you will not find one person in this world that claims to be a christian that dosn't do bad stuff like that at one some point in their life. The point is christians are not perfect and no one should expect them to be.

No matter what belief system you have, it is a religion. The choice to believe something is a religion. A religion is a set of values to a paticular person or group. So an atheist is religious. also an agnostic is religious. whatever your belief system is that is your religion. So bashing anyone for being "religious" is actually bashing our way of making choices about what we believe.

Thanks =) I like your posts too.

For the most part, I agree. I just want to get a little further out and talk about the 'false by meaning' things you bring up. In our world's rules, I completely agree. I'm going to get a little philosophical here but yes, in our perspective, a square circle cannot exist since the meanings of the terms directly clash with each other. But maybe we don't see the full picture. We perceive 3-4 dimensions (3d time to keep it simple) and yet scientists theorize there may be as many as 11 dimensions. Is it not possible within those other 7 dimensions some sort of 'loophole' that could make a square circle exist logically? We only perceive 3-4 dimensions, so we only see 3-4 dimensions of an object, we don't necessarily see the whole picture. 

Now this idea won't necessarily apply well to the square-circle idea directly, since even with other perceived dimensions, maybe it wouldn't change. Just like how a line is still a line even though we perceive more dimensions than it requires for us to perceive (and I won't even get into cubes and spheres). However, I meant to bring up the idea to apply as a whole to any kind of terms conflict in the manner of the square circle. The square circle is such a good example that I had to use it =)

I know this is the basis for refuting some God theories as well, mostly in terms of the traits given. I've used it myself when people try to say God is omnipotent and omniscient and yet those same people believe in free will. I posit that omniscience and free will cannot co-exist. But it may all lie in semantics and the definitions assigned. To me, free will is more than simply the ability to choose your own course of action, but to explain fully requires adding in omniscience. All knowing. A very powerful word, a being who is omniscient is ALL knowing. I cannot stress that all part enough. If God is all knowing, he knows all of the past, all of the present, and all of the possible futures. Just the mere fact that he knows any future you could possibly act on disproves the concept of free will for me.

I won't leave it at that. Most people think free will just means there is no set future, but I don't believe that to be the case. An omniscient and omnipotent creature would be able to foresee every infinte possibility. Just his or her or its mere knowing and understanding of every possible choice would rule out free will possibility existing. At that point, your not choosing your own path, your still walking along a predetermined path. Rather, one of infinite possible predetermined path, but the true choice is beyond you.

Lastly and most importantly, if God is omniscient and omnipotent, not only does God then see every possibilty, but God will still know EXACTLY which path will be taken. That's still part of the all knowing. If God doesn't know which path will be taken, then God is not all knowing and none of this really matters. It took a while to lead up to this most important part, but I had to lead up to it. Omniscience and free will cannot co-exist. Unless, of course, in those other 7 unknown dimensions, there may lie a loophole. So I'm open to the possibility of such a thing, but at this time, just as I accept there cannot be a square circle, omniscience and free will cannot co-exist. 

I went a little far out there but I brought it back in the end =P

Well, and I knew this would happen, but my actual choice of the word powerless isn't important. I was merely commenting on your idea of atheists believing in any kind of deity. Atheism, in the strictest yet simplest sense, is the rejection of belief of a higher power/celestial being/deity. Regardless of whatever traits any religion wants to add to their deity or choice, atheists simply reject the idea of the deity in the first place. Believing in any deity or any kind is theism.

 fellas can't we just respect(or atleast show tolerance) to other people beliefs an move on...seriously at the end of the day you'll be at the same place where you started....