Christianity makes sense to me.

Basic Model · Post by **Basic Model** » 2007-10-07 02:05pm

Again, further apologies. I don't mean to clutter up your forum.

The only evidence I can give you is that of my own experience. If I attempt to do what Jesus said and did - love others, forgive, take care of the poor and the marginalised - then my life makes a lot more sense to me.

I've been around a long time. I tried living a hedonistic life. I tried being a good person, under my own steam. I had limited success at both of those! I can't give any scientific evidence - all I can say is that when I handed things over to God - when I started believing, life changed immeasureably.

I'm a normal, well-rounded individual, with a robust sense of humour, and a truly open mind, I believe. I guess my motivation for posting what I did was thinking that maybe someone might be inclined to think again before condemning the whole Christian thing. Was it Gandhi who said 'I love your Christ, but I don't like your Christians'? Heck, I know that people do terrible things in the name of Christianity. But Jesus is deserving of better. I believe God is a loving creator, and we were designed to have a relationship with Him. (yeah, I know, to most of you that must sound silly).

I am passionate about science, by the way. An illustration of my own personal beliefs is via a quote from Harvard astronomer, Owen Gingerich:

'the universe has been created with intention and purpose, and....this belief does not interfere with the scientific enterprise'.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2007-10-07 02:15pm

Basic Model wrote: I am passionate about science, by the way. An illustration of my own personal beliefs is via a quote from Harvard astronomer, Owen Gingerich:

'the universe has been created with intention and purpose, and....this belief does not interfere with the scientific enterprise'.

Stating that the universe is created without an iota of evidence that someone set it in motion is about as non-scientific as you can get.

Drowsong · Post by **Drowsong** » 2007-10-07 02:16pm

Basic Model wrote:[...] I believe God is a loving creator [...]

Just curious: What are your thoughts on Hell?

Basic Model wrote:I am passionate about science, by the way. An illustration of my own personal beliefs is via a quote from Harvard astronomer, Owen Gingerich:

'the universe has been created with intention and purpose, and....this belief does not interfere with the scientific enterprise'.

Not a bad quote. I like it. Especially when taken seriously, meaning not letting a belief (like Creationism) overrule common sense (like Evolutionary Theory).

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2007-10-07 02:16pm

And I like otters, apparently this along with your jabbering can be used as a discussion point for more nonsensical whimsy.

If you aren't going to discuss, but instead bait with your opening post in a topic you made, why are you continuing to post things of essentially trivial nature?

If you want to discuss something, make a point of discussion, not a flat statement that essentially baits the board owner and others to respond with flames.

Drowsong · Post by **Drowsong** » 2007-10-07 02:18pm

General Zod wrote:Stating that the universe is created without an iota of evidence that someone set it in motion is about as non-scientific as you can get.

Yes, but it says that "this belief" doesn't get in the way of science. It's acknowledging that it's a belief.

It's saying that a non-scientific belief need not get in the way of science, as far as I can tell.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2007-10-07 02:20pm

Drowsong wrote:
General Zod wrote:Stating that the universe is created without an iota of evidence that someone set it in motion is about as non-scientific as you can get.
Yes, but it says that "this belief" doesn't get in the way of science. It's acknowledging that it's a belief.

It's saying that a non-scientific belief need not get in the way of science, as far as I can tell.

And in the end it's a pointless platitude. It's not discussing other then her stating her beliefs.

I guess then I should make an inane amount of topics about my likes and dislikes because I'm so ignorant of how a discussion works.

In the end, I let this back because Mike had a point, idiots like this don't want discussion, they want to be martyred. She's just spamming because she cannot or will not coherently try to for a point to have any discussion over.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2007-10-07 02:20pm

Drowsong wrote:
Yes, but it says that "this belief" doesn't get in the way of science. It's acknowledging that it's a belief.

It's saying that a non-scientific belief need not get in the way of science, as far as I can tell.

Claiming that one believes in something then attempting to justify it by quoting some scientist sounds like the person quoting the scientist doesn't know the difference between "belief" and "science".

Not a bad quote. I like it. Especially when taken seriously, meaning not letting a belief (like Creationism) overrule common sense (like Evolutionary Theory).

Common sense says that common sense is usually a retarded way to judge something's validity.

Drowsong · Post by **Drowsong** » 2007-10-07 02:28pm

Ghost Rider wrote:And in the end it's a pointless platitude. It's not discussing other then her stating her beliefs.

I guess then I should make an inane amount of topics about my likes and dislikes because I'm so ignorant of how a discussion works.

In the end, I let this back because Mike had a point, idiots like this don't want discussion, they want to be martyred. She's just spamming because she cannot or will not coherently try to for a point to have any discussion over.

Point taken.

General Zod wrote:Claiming that one believes in something then attempting to justify it by quoting some scientist sounds like the person quoting the scientist doesn't know the difference between "belief" and "science".

True. Some people probably think that because it was said by a scientist, it must be scientific.

General Zod wrote:Common sense says that common sense is usually a retarded way to judge something's validity.

Not sure what your point here is, honestly. Are you saying that I think Evolutionary Theory is validated because it’s common sense? Sorry, I'm a bit confused here.

SpacedTeddyBear · Post by **SpacedTeddyBear** » 2007-10-07 02:29pm

Well, the mistake you made was expressing an opinion without any kind of discussion, nor justification whatever, than openly challenge our ability to remain open minded. There is a place for those posts, and it's in the Venting thread in the Hall of Shame. There are many Christians on this thread, but when they start a thread on religion or Christianity, they do so with the intent of having a rational discussion, not testing the attitudes or " open mindedness" of the members and the mods here.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2007-10-07 02:33pm

Drowsong wrote: Not sure what your point here is, honestly. Are you saying that I think Evolutionary Theory is validated because it’s common sense? Sorry, I'm a bit confused here.

My point is that common sense is a piss poor way of judging something's validity as opposed to reason. Fundies claim that belief in God being real is only common sense as well.

darthbob88 · Post by **darthbob88** » 2007-10-07 02:33pm

Drowsong wrote:
General Zod wrote:Common sense says that common sense is usually a retarded way to judge something's validity.
Not sure what your point here is, honestly. Are you saying that I think Evolutionary Theory is validated because it’s common sense? Sorry, I'm a bit confused here.

The problem is that "Common Sense" is an incredibly poor method of validating something, since common sense leads to the ideas that the world is flat, heavier things fall faster than lighter ones, etc. If you can prove something by logic, mathematics, whatever, good on ye, but common sense is not an accepted method of proof.

SpacedTeddyBear · Post by **SpacedTeddyBear** » 2007-10-07 02:39pm

Drowsong wrote: Are you saying that I think Evolutionary Theory is validated because it’s common sense? Sorry, I'm a bit confused here.

I think he means the opposite. I can say that it's common sense that a flowing current induces a magnetic field (for physicists and engineers anyways). But it took years of experimentation and mathematical modeling to produce these "obvious" results.

Drowsong · Post by **Drowsong** » 2007-10-07 02:40pm

So would it be better to change this:

“meaning not letting a belief (like Creationism) overrule common sense (like Evolutionary Theory).”

To this?:

“meaning not letting a belief (like Creationism) overrule tried and tested scientific theories (like Evolutionary Theory).”

I referred to Evo Theory as common sense because the evidence for it is overwhelming to the point where it seems like common sense to me. I wasn’t trying to say it’s valid because of common sense. I probably should have worded it differently (like in this post) right off that bat though.

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 2007-10-07 02:50pm

Basic Model wrote: Oh - I don't hate gays. Might be a cliché to say it, but honestly 'some of my best friends' etc...

Whether you hate gays or not is rather inconsequential as to whether Christianity at large logically concludes in homophobic behaviour, and that homophobia does indeed "make sense" in a religion based on a religion that had homosexuality as a capital crime. The notion of vicarious atonement is something that sincerely doesn't make sense to me; why does hurting an innocent person do any good? If I steal something, kicking a kitten to death doesn't seem too resolve a karmic balance, not that there is such a thing. Why would the death of Jesus make anything better? If your answer is essentially "because God said so" that's not going to convince anyone.

So, I wonder, why, if you were omnipotent and you wanted everyone to be happy forever, would you make it conditional on accepting Jesus during your lifetime? Surely the sane thing to do if you for some bizarre reason had to become your own son and sacrifice yourself to appease a rule that you made, yourself, would be to let people accept Jesus after they die when they have the evidence in front of them? This is, of course, just one of many problems, nobody has ever had any sort of proper reason to accept the notion of vicarious atonement, or original sin (after all, it's not like Adam and Eve were even real), or the blatant carrot and stick threats from beyond the grave that is the concept of heaven and hell.

Jesus couldn't even satisfy messianic prophecy, why would you think christianity was true, at all? It's like a house of cards and 90% of the cards are invisible and intangible.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2007-10-07 03:12pm

Drowsong wrote: I referred to Evo Theory as common sense because the evidence for it is overwhelming to the point where it seems like common sense to me. I wasn’t trying to say it’s valid because of common sense. I probably should have worded it differently (like in this post) right off that bat though.

To put it another way, common sense is nothing more than "gut instinct".

Drowsong · Post by **Drowsong** » 2007-10-07 03:18pm

General Zod wrote:To put it another way, common sense is nothing more than "gut instinct".

I think I may be saying common sense, and thinking "common knowledge" or something similar. oops

[R_H] · Post by **[R_H]** » 2007-10-07 03:31pm

Basic Model wrote:snip

I believe God is a loving creator, and we were designed to have a relationship with Him. (yeah, I know, to most of you that must sound silly).

I am passionate about science, by the way. An illustration of my own personal beliefs is via a quote from Harvard astronomer, Owen Gingerich:

'the universe has been created with intention and purpose, and....this belief does not interfere with the scientific enterprise'.

Have you read the Bible. The Christian God is anything but loving.

Let's start with Genesis

4.2-8 : God's arbitrary preference of Abel's offering to that of Cain's provokes Cain to commit the first biblically recorded murder and kill his brother Abel.

6.11-17 & 7.11-24 : God is unhappy with the wickedness of man and decides to do something about it. He kills every living thing on the face of the earth other than Noah's family and thereby makes himself the greatest mass murderer in history.

From Infidels.org Bible Atrocities

He who sacrifices to any god, other than to the Lord alone, shall be
utterly destroyed. - Exodus 22:20

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them,
bring them hither, and slay them before me. - Mark 9:34

From Skeptic Files

Yeah, loving...I'd rather worship the God Emperor of Man, he's at least got the interests of mankind at heart.

Flagg · Post by **Flagg** » 2007-10-07 04:46pm

Is there a point to this, other than "Jesus is teh awesumzez!!!"?

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2007-10-07 04:47pm

Basic Model wrote: I've been around a long time. I tried living a hedonistic life. I tried being a good person, under my own steam. I had limited success at both of those! I can't give any scientific evidence - all I can say is that when I handed things over to God - when I started believing, life changed immeasureably.

How exactly are you able to "be a good person" in ways that you couldn't before coming to faith?

bilateralrope · Post by **bilateralrope** » 2007-10-07 04:58pm

Basic Model wrote:I believe God is a loving creator

Then why does God create evil ?

Don't bring up the free choice argument because, as god is all knowing, he knows what choice you will make. So while each person is free to chose good or evil, when God creates them he knows which way they will go.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2007-10-07 05:03pm

Sorry, I couldn't get past the passive-aggressive persecution bullshit. Oh noes, don't clutter up our forum for like-minded people only! You're making a series of ignorant, cowardly attacks on the board in general, but you THINK you're being POLITE so it's ALL FUCKING OKAY.

To add to some of what Rye said (or Zuul or whatever he calls himself these days), who CARES what anyone thinks of Jesus? Morally there are many other ethical paragons throughout history, as the 'Son of the Greatest Mass Murderer in History' he's not worthy of respect, and his 'sacrifice' is nothing of the fucking sort since it was all his destiny to rise again ANYWAY. Further, Jesus is arguably peripheral to Christian teachings anyway, since the Church was set up by Paul, and most of the New Testament is Paulian.

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » 2007-10-07 05:08pm

Not to interrupt your pushing god but you'd have better luck if you just applied to the Christian usergroup. Go to the upper-left corner of the screen, click on usergroups and scroll down to Knights Astrum Clades. LadyTevar moderates it.

Your obviously just flailing around here and if you'd rather talk about god with like minded people that's a better place to do it.

Covenant · Post by **Covenant** » 2007-10-07 05:17pm

Cpl Kendall wrote:Not to interrupt your pushing god but you'd have better luck if you just applied to the Christian usergroup. Go to the upper-left corner of the screen, click on usergroups and scroll down to Knights Astrum Clades. LadyTevar moderates it.

Your obviously just flailing around here and if you'd rather talk about god with like minded people that's a better place to do it.

I was going to say that, so I'm glad someone did. Thing is bub, we don't care if it makes sense to you. If you aren't willing to debate your faith, ie, put for evidence or be looked upon as a crazyperson then you should move to the forum where people of faith are encouraged to speak freely. It has nothing to do with free speech or open-mindedness or anything. Letting this post stay up is perfectly fine--but what for? If you don't want to see the responses, then it's just wasted space. And if you're doing it just to hear the people flame you, that's trolling (even if it isn't mean-spirited).

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2007-10-07 05:22pm

The closest thing to justification so far is inane 'when I invited god into my life my life got better' stuff. Clearly 'makes sense to me' = 'profits me', which is hardly laudable. They even know they can't prove it. I hear if someone THINKS something works, it obviously does, right? I mean, there's no sort of placebo effect possible, so what else could it be?

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2007-10-07 05:26pm

Once I found out about those mini-doughnuts they make at Sainsbury's, my life improved in satisfaction greatly too.

But it'd be silly to worship a baked product. That'd be like worshipping something that doesn't exist, like a doughnut's hole.