doing rituals trying to make the creator happy is the same thing as buying a gift for your mother with her money

I second that

I think you misunderstood my post. What I linked was a wikipedia article on the Cambrian explosion, not the big bang. (I talked about the big bang seperately.) This, if true, puts a rather large hole in the theory of evolution. It may or may not be true. 

I'm not debating that. 

A religion that is without contradiction could very well be true. And a contradiction could be acceptable if the science behind it is shaky, as in the case of the theory of the formation of the moon. 

I'm not saying that religion is science, or that its provable. I'm saying that I can't think of a way to prove what came before the big bang, and so intelligent design seems as valid as any other theory. I'm also saying that if a religion is not contradictory, its credibility is certainly higher than another religion that is full of contradictions. The reason I mentioned what I did is because many people think of those as contradictions between Christianity and science when they might not actually be.

I'm not sure where I stand on religion. It's very different than what I expected going in, but as I said, I still struggle with a lot of things. I'm intrigued by it, but I'm skeptical. I am studying the Bible in the hopes of understanding it better, because I don't get why in my life I've seen Christianity change people for the better. I do talk with many Christians as I study, and they have offered many of the arguments I have presented in this thread, including that one. This argument is one that I'm not convinced by, but I believe that's because I haven't experienced whatever change these others have had. 

One nagging issue I have is that all these people have felt this transformation... but I don't know if they actually experienced it, or if they just deluded themselves into thinking they experienced it. Aside from the science/religion issues, this is probably my biggest sticking point. 

I can't blame you. You won't ever get anything better though, because religion is ultimately based on faith. You have to take the facts of the world around you, and if you believe that they point towards a religion, I suppose that faith becomes a natural step. What I'm trying to see is if there is actually a factual and logically consistent basis for why people believe in Christianity. Many Christians seem to think there is, and I'd like to know why.

A bit off topic: Faith is actually a component of most Christianity that contributes to my disbelief. Under the Christian philosophy, you have to believe that Jesus is the son of the Lord in order to be saved. And to believe that, then you need faith. But what if someone finds faith in another religion. If believing in something is based ultimately on faith, then what factor is there to encourage someone to one religion over another? If faith is a person's only means of believing, how can they ever hope to find faith in the 'correct' religion? With that said, how is it fair that God punishes people for finding faith in the 'wrong' religion? If there was a just and loving god, he would prove Himself. He wouldn't make a person's eternal life rely upon accurate guesses.

Great question. I've wondered this myself. 

If someone finds faith in another religion, but knows about Christianity and refused it, I would assume that they would not be saved. The reason for this would be the second commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before Me." The God of Judaism is the same God as in Christianity (Jesus was a Jew), but they have refused Jesus' sacrifice. The God of Islam is not the God of Christianity, because they do not believe in the Trinity. They have also refused Jesus' sacrifice and relegated him to a prophet, rather than the son of God. 

The factor that should encourage someone to choose one religion over another is whether or not logic points you there. I believe that only one religion can be logically consistent, as to have multiple religions being logically correct is a contradiction. That's not to say that there must be a logically correct religion, though... and obviously many people don't come to their faith this way. However, in Christianity God is the truth and so if your logic is sound, it will lead you to him.

What seems most unfair to me is a person who was never exposed to Christianity, and so had no chance to accept Jesus' sacrifice. I can't answer how this is resolved, but I would guess that since they have not had the chance to accept or reject the sacrifice, they would be given that chance somehow. 

Lastly, why doesn't God prove himself? First, Luke 4:12. Jesus answered, "It is said: 'Do not put the Lord your God to the test.'" So to ask God to prove himself is against the word of God. That's obviously only going to matter to someone who takes the Bible seriously. The answer you're looking for is again probably one you won't like. If God came down to Earth and started to show off his powers so that no one had any doubt, of course people would believe him. Perhaps some would rebel, but most would likely bow down in fear, or forced love. God wants us to choose to love him, not be forced into it. 

Ah, the cambrian explosion. That's an interresting period ^^

You have to remember, that the cambrian explosion is only an explosion relative to how life developed before it. It still took place over millions of years. I think when a biologist was asked what would make him give up on evolution, his answer was "Fossils of bunnies in the cambrian"

1.) I was moreso interested in your opinion of the matter. I already have a pretty decent understanding on why Islams are punished by the Christian's God.

2.) If logic is the factor that determines someone beliefs, then that still wouldn't be fair to the person. If a person has weak reasoning skills, then they are liable to place faith in the correct religion. Without an objective way to determine which religion is logically consistent, then people have to rely on their own subjective forms of logic. So, if a person bases their beliefs on what seems logically sound to them and they end up choosing Islam over Christianity, then why should they punished?

3.) If God's existence is proven to a person, that person would not necessarily be forced to love him. Example: Satan

In any case though, you've agreed that there is no proof that Christianity is the true religion. According to Christianity, people pretty much have to guess between Christianity, Islam and every other religion. Do you think it's fair that people are punished for making incorrect guesses, as a result of no proof? What makes a person who guesses incorrectly any more worthy than someone who guesses correctly? It seems like a purely arbitrary and flat out unfair way to judge someone's eternal life.

Of course. However, the point that Christians tend to mention is that if this happened faster than evolution beforehand, what caused that sudden change? 

Here's the source from that wikipedia article that mentions this question having not yet been answered. Is that still the case? Well, I don't know. I'm certainly not an expert on evolution. But if it hasn't, then evolution has a serious problem that needs to be addressed, or a new theory needs to be found that can account for this. 

Humans benefit when they have things bigger and better than themselves, that they can speak praise of, that inspires and motivates.  Such things end up help curbing people from being self-absored and developing tunnel vision.

I would suggest the original poster stop positioning his personal beliefs in contrast with the Christian religion.  The concepts of God are huge, and while the Christian God is major in the west, to keep referencing an anti-view of such, looks more like rebellion against a concept than a seeking of truth.

As far as Christian ethics go, I am curious who would speak against forgiveness, mercy and compassion, and love and charity.  Would one prefer an Objectivist's view of things?