We've not had a religious debate on here for a while...

[Batch]

Agree with that, althought I think your treatment of the C of E is very harsh.

That was supposed to be light hearted, not insulting! I went to a C of E school, when I was young I went to Sunday School but ultimately religion wasn't for me.

I wouldn't say I was atheist, more slightly agnostic or open to the idea of something after death. If it exists I'm not sure whether it will conform to "god" or science fiction type "ascension" to a higher plain, or most likely there is nothing at all.

Probably the most intelligent person I worked with was religious. I find that fascinating.

[Ardiles]

The last person to post in this thread gets to decide whether God exists or not.  That'll sort it, once and for all.

[Dozno9]

No one can prove there is a God and no one can prove there isn't, that's why it's a 'belief' one has.

There are worse ways to lead your live than according to the Lords teachings and as long as it doesn't affect others then each to their own.

I am a little uncomfortable with some of what the Church talks about because if Jesus and scriptures are correct in what they teach then most of the bigoted and sexist idiots who are heads of the church now would be out on their arse if the big guy was around.

[reeves4england]

Fair enough. Your religion is your business. I respect that - even though I'm the polar opposite.

But I don't understand why you (believers) feel the need to spread the word about something that is purely faith / belief based.

By your own admission, there is no evidence.

Why bother trying to convince people of the crdibility of something that has so many holes in it?

I didn't say there is no evidence. I said there is no conclusive evidence either way.

If somebody earnestly believes that family members, friends, or the woman down the street is facing ultimate judgment, how can they stand by and not explain that? I've known non-Christians to find out what their Christian friend believes and said "If you were my friend and you truly believed that, why didn't you tell me?"

To me as a Christian, hiding your faith from somebody is like hiding the fact they're about to walk in front of a double decker bus. Only worse. I don't go out aggressively to insist people turn to my view, but I share it with them so they know what I believe and can make their own choice.

[Flashheart]

One thing I really don't get about believing in the bible.....

It has been proven to be wrong time and time again.
No, we did not come from Adam and Eve.
No, the Earth was not made in seven days.
No, the Earth is not 5,000 (or whatever) years old.
And so on

These aren't little things. These are bloody great big mahoosive errors and pretty much cornerstones of the whole kit and kaboodle. If I saw a maths text book that said 2+2 = 5, how could I have any faith in the rest of it? If a Thai translation book said the word for Elephant means Brussels Sprouts, why would I use that book for translations? If blatant lies were found in a biography, why believe anything else it says?

So why is it that believers can overlook such massive errors in the bible and choose to have faith in anything else within it? To do so just doesn't make one iota of sense.

[Arriba]

I guess it depends what you mean by flawed. If you mean no religious group know the answer to every question, then yes. But religion isn't supposed to answer every question, it's supposed to tell you who God is and who man is in relation to him. So, for example, the fact that the church (along with society at large) had to accept the earth wasn't the centre of the universe all those years ago didn't change the fundamentals of its teaching. They got something wrong, but that in itself doesn't mean the religion was flawed...

Sorry went to bed without seeing this last night i wasn't ignoring you.
By flawed I meant to me personally. It leaves too many unanswered questions and just isn't logical. To believe in a god i would have to believe the teachings completely (ie the bible). I find them to be at times utterly ridiculous.

[Exiled Bob]

Fair enough. Your religion is your business. I respect that - even though I'm the polar opposite.

But I don't understand why you (believers) feel the need to spread the word about something that is purely faith / belief based.

By your own admission, there is no evidence.

Why bother trying to convince people of the crdibility of something that has so many holes in it?

You can say exactly the same thing about the alternative - evolution.
Incidentally, the "evidence" for Creationism and evolution is exactly the same - it's just the interpretation that differs.

[Exiled Bob]

One thing I really don't get about believing in the bible.....

It has been proven to be wrong time and time again.
No, we did not come from Adam and Eve.
No, the Earth was not made in seven days.
No, the Earth is not 5,000 (or whatever) years old.
And so on

These aren't little things. These are bloody great big mahoosive errors and pretty much cornerstones of the whole kit and kaboodle. If I saw a maths text book that said 2+2 = 5, how could I have any faith in the rest of it? If a Thai translation book said the word for Elephant means Brussels Sprouts, why would I use that book for translations? If blatant lies were found in a biography, why believe anything else it says?

So why is it that believers can overlook such massive errors in the bible and choose to have faith in anything else within it? To do so just doesn't make one iota of sense.

I'd be interested to see the proof that you mention.........unless you are over 5000 years old it'd be pretty difficult to prove anything from that period. What I guess you mean is that modern scientific "evidence" leads you to believe that these events didn't happen. Modern scientific evidence is based on certain suppositions - ie, guesswork - and is not provable because it can't be tested.

[jayohaitchenn]

You can say exactly the same thing about the alternative - evolution.
Incidentally, the "evidence" for Creationism and evolution is exactly the same - it's just the interpretation that differs.

I cannot persuade myself that a beneficent and omnipotent God would have designedly created parasitic wasps with the express intention of their feeding within the living bodies of Caterpillars. - Charles Darwin.

[Flashheart]

I'd be interested to see the proof that you mention.........unless you are over 5000 years old it'd be pretty difficult to prove anything from that period. What I guess you mean is that modern scientific "evidence" leads you to believe that these events didn't happen. Modern scientific evidence is based on certain suppositions - ie, guesswork - and is not provable because it can't be tested.

And what of fossils, geology, DNA sequencing, carbon dating etc?

Are you trying to tell me you believe the world is only 5,000 years old?

[Barry Scott]

Incidentally, the "evidence" for Creationism and evolution is exactly the same - it's just the interpretation that differs.

[url width=407 height=405]http://i.imgur.com/tTY3n.jpg[/url]

[Flashheart]

You can say exactly the same thing about the alternative - evolution.
Incidentally, the "evidence" for Creationism and evolution is exactly the same - it's just the interpretation that differs.

That is just pure and utter bollocks.

And stop putting evidence in quote marks as though to question it's legitimacy. Fossils, for example, are evidence whether you like it or not.

[walcot red]

I find it hard to take seriously when you have a talking snake and a bush that talks when its on fire. Religion does make some sense in the fact that it tells people to be nice to each other be tolerant and respectful, don't steal etc. Other then that I don't buy into it. I respect people who believe in something I don't, but I don't like it when people accost me in town or knock on my door and tell me to repent because I live my life the way I choose. Leave me alone and I'll leave you alone. Religion isn't for everyone.

[Exiled Bob]

And what of fossils, geology, DNA sequencing, carbon dating etc?

What about them?
They are examples of evidence, not proof. It's how you interpret the results from them. And the results can be used to back up either theory.

[Exiled Bob]

Hurling insults around isn't proof of anything either. It's an indication that you don't have any valid points to make.

Try Google..........