Does God exist? (7 Viewers)

[bshoc]

Christianity is a totally European idea.

Did all the aboriginals who hadn't even heard the term jesus all go to hell for 39 750 years because they didn't prey to god?

And the Indians?

And Asians?

And Papua New Guineans, Tongans, Maurise, New Caledonians and Balinese?

Did all the Africans all go to hell before Europeans had educated them?

Or were they they all supposed to just "know" that your god exists? Supposed to have guessed the bible?

They didn't believe in your god, so tell me, did they all go to hell?

Well an educated guess would be people existed before the time Jesus, and the whole point of christianity is to spread Jesus' word. I trust you can self-elaborate from there.

Also if you want to go down the nation/racial path, christianity would be a "totally early middle eastern" idea, seeing as how jesus was in no way European. Maybe the Catholic church and the pope are European products, but christianity on the whole certainly is not.

 

[ElGronko]

Modern christianity is a European construct.

And you ignored my question.

Did all those people who didn't believe in god for 39 750 years before Europeans told them about christianity go to hell?

And the ones after who for 1500 years after jesus was born never prayed a day in their life, because they hadn't heard of this christian god, did they all go to hell for not believing in him?

 

[bshoc]

Modern christianity is a European construct.

No, its not.

And you ignored my question.

No, I gave you more than enough info. to derive an answer.

Did all those people who didn't believe in god for 39 750 years before Europeans told them about christianity go to hell?

Stupid question, seeing as how the bible acknowledges human existence thousands of years before the time of Jesus. If you're really curious my guess would be to read that part of the Bible or Torah that deals with that part specifically, instead of bashing something you don't know and thus making yourself look like a complete moron.

And the ones after who for 1500 years after jesus was born never prayed a day in their life, because they hadn't heard of this christian god, did they all go to hell for not believing in him?

Go back to the part where I talked about the purpose or supposed purpose of Christianity, and actually read and think about what was said.

 

[ur_inner_child]

Sounds like some sort of east Asian perversion of christian beliefs, either that of some extremist American baptist organisation, I'll bet the former.

I don't think you're far from the truth. But hey. To an extent, one can always slot in values of their own choosing, and hold the bible as their proof. Nevertheless, I still think its more reactionary. I have a hunch that the main reason why people might feel a wee tad annoyed with anyone religious is because of past experiences where they have invaded their personal space (ie religion was rammed down their throat)

Lol yeah right ...

Got secularism?


...could you elabourate?

 

[ElGronko]

Did all those people who didn't believe in god for 39 750 years before Europeans told them about christianity go to hell?

Stupid question, seeing as how the bible aknowledges human existance thousands of years before the time of Jesus.

That is totally irrelevant. Nice attempt to dodge the question you don't want to answer. So go on, answer the question. Did they all go to hell?

Yes or No?

And the ones after who for 1500 years after jesus was born never prayed a day in their life, because they hadn't heard of this christian god, did they all go to hell for not believing in him?

Go back to the part where I talked about the purpose or supposed purpose of Christianity, and actually read and think about what was said.

Yes, but regardless, does your religion not preach that those who do not believe in their god are punished by going to hell?

Thus those who don't believe through unintentional ignorance of your religions existence, are they not sent to hell?

They don't believe in your god, or jesus, are they burning in hell?

Answer yes or no.

 

[bshoc]

That is totally irrelevant. Nice attempt to dodge the question you don't want to answer. So go on, answer the question. Did they all go to hell?

Yes or No?

Stupid question, seeing as how the bible acknowledges human existence thousands of years before the time of Jesus. If you're really curious my guess would be to read that part of the Bible or Torah that deals with that part specifically, instead of bashing something you don't know and thus making yourself look like a complete moron.

Now I've never read the bible outide of quotation, but saying that is like asking did adam, eve or abraham go to hell because Jesus came before them.

An intelligent guess would be: no.

Yes, but regardless, does your religion not preach that those who do not believe in their god are punished by going to hell?

My religion, since when are you able to inference anything about me derived from argument.

The fact that I call out your retarded statements does not give you the ability to derive what I am.

Thus those who don't believe through unintentional ignorance of your religions existence, are they not sent to hell?

They don't believe in your god, or jesus, are they burning in hell?

Answer yes or no.

A good idea would be to ask a christian who has read the bible, but from what should be general knowledge about the most prominant religion in Australia, the answer would be no, even most atheists on the board would know that. You're just stupid.

 

[ElGronko]

So it is only when someone denies god exists after being told that he exists by someone else that they go to hell?

 

[S1M0]

Well in the case you're refering to it probably not only has to do with his belief in the non-existance of God but also his desire for people to appreciate his perspective on the matter.

Thats also likely, but its probably more to do with the fact that he's just hated by the school year.

I pity him sometimes. Annoying though.

 

[bshoc]

So it is only when someone denies god exists after being told that he exists by someone else that they go to hell?

I'm a little rusty on christian theological principle, but my guess would be something like that, although it would probably have more to do with concepts like sin and virtue.

 

[ur_inner_child]

As far as I learnt in my severely catholic and christian upbringings, those who were unexposed to Christianity must have at one stage in their life had God expose himself to them, apparently usually at the time of death, where they must convert.

If this is the case, the institutional aspect of religion might be pointless.

 

[ElGronko]

If you don't see how stupid that principle is I feel sorry for you.

*edit- aimed at bshoc's principle

 

[Not-That-Bright]

I do believe there is some christian apologetics on the topic as to explain what about those whom never learn of jesus's prophesy, unfortunately I cannot remember even the gist of some off the top of my head. Perhaps everyone knew jesus before the time of his existance/crucifixion (which makes the crucifixion quite odd, then again perhaps you could argue it transcended time)? Some christians seem fine with accepting that some people went to hell without knowing jesus though. Others (perhaps those more true to the original hebrew) simply don't believe there is a hell... Then the roman catholics believe they're in limbo, this is where some roman catholics also assert aborted babies, unbaptised young etc are at.

 

[bshoc]

If you don't see how stupid that principle is I feel sorry for you.

*edit- aimed at bshoc's principle

Stupid is only perspective, if we qualify stupid as "without definite proof," then atheists are just as stupid as any christian. Its a question of belief and faith.

That and - Pascals Wager is one fine piece of logic.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Stupid is only perspective, if we qualify stupid as "without definite proof," then atheists are just as stupid as any christian. Its a question of belief and faith.

I wouldn't define someone as stupid for believing something 'without definitie proof', I'd merely call them a hypocrit for applying a different standard of acceptable proof to one thing and not to another.

That and - Pascals Wager is one fine piece of logic.

Before I properly respond... are you serious?

 

[bshoc]

I do believe there is some christian apologetics

And what exactly do christians need to apologize for?

on the topic as to explain what about those whom never learn of jesus's prophesy, unfortunately I cannot remember even the gist of some off the top of my head. Perhaps everyone knew jesus before the time of his existance/crucifixion (which makes the crucifixion quite odd, then again perhaps you could argue it transcended time)?

Why? The whole point is that Jesus was a messenger, like Abraham and others, and he was created for the purpose of bringing the message of god back to those who had strayed from it (ie. jews).

Some christians seem fine with accepting that some people went to hell without knowing jesus though.

I would assume these are a specific sect of christians who have never read a word of the bible?

Others (perhaps those more true to the original hebrew) simply don't believe there is a hell... Then the roman catholics believe they're in limbo, this is where some roman catholics also assert aborted babies, unbaptised young etc are at.

Actually the concept of purgatory exists in all manner of christian faith, why you associate it with catholics only is beyond me.

 

[bshoc]

I wouldn't define someone as stupid for believing something 'without definitie proof', I'd merely call them a hypocrit for applying a different standard of acceptable proof to one thing and not to another.

So most if not all atheists are hypocrites then, by your logic only the agnostic and "pascal christians" get off unscathed.

Before I properly respond... are you serious?

Make sure you close that wikipedia page before you do

 

[Not-That-Bright]

And what exactly do christians need to apologize for?

You misunderstand what apologetics means.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apologetics

I could easily be described as an atheist apologetic when my beliefs are comming under scrutiny.

Why? The whole point is that Jesus was a messenger, like Abraham and others, and he was created for the purpose of bringing the message of god back to those who had strayed from it (ie. jews).

I'd only do their arguments injustice as I don't favor them.

I would assume these are a specific sect of christians who have never read a word of the bible?

Read about it yourself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell_in_Christianity They all have their strong points... take which perspective you think is nicest.

Actually the concept of purgatory exists in all manner of christian faith, why you associate it with catholics only is beyond me.

Purgatory is different from limbo.

So most if not all atheists are hypocrites then, by your logic only the agnostic and "pascal christians" get off unscathed.

No, sorry my language probably wasn't very good there. My point is that of course christians (and everyone but the nonexistant, outside of philosophy, 'perfect' agnostic) generally believe things without definite proof. The question is though, if you deny the existance of pixies but accept the existance of God, on what basis do you do so? You have applied a different burden of proof thus making you a hypocrit.

I reject the existance of all things outside of my knowledge that I can't even begin to percieve due to their supernatural nature, thus removing myself from such hypocracy.

I may still be a hypocrit in a way as I do accept truths such as 'tomorrow the sun will come up' and they also have no basis, but that seems to me to be a different level of questioning your reality to not only doubt those things which you can't test/experience but those which you can aswell... I'm willing to accept provision truths based off inductive reasoning using the facts of reality as best we understand them, even though philisophically I'm forced to accept agnosticism.

Make sure you close that wikipedia page before you do

I've already read it enough (as well as participating in the argument many, many times with many, many people on both sides) if you really feel the internet gives me some sort of an advantage I'd be fine to debate this with you at a BOS meetup if you'd care to show.

 

[lengy]

It's easier to debate for religion when you don't have evidence to back it up. That's why I don't debate it outside, can't be bothered remembering all those long well researched facts that science has and the bible doesn't.

 

[paktorikku]

This topic has, as you all know, been debated by many people. It is impossible to prove either possibilities. Hence, us christians litterally do live "by faith". Without going into any detail why I chose to believe "by faith", I can tell u Athiests are pretty much also living "by faith". With the athiesm mentality, it is self contradticting for them to claim the validity of their own logic which no "higher being" has designed. Which also really self placing themself in a position of a god. I've tried to prove my own logic. Using various sources the furthest i can get is "I think therefore I am" (quote from some dude back in the days).

Also, no-god = believe in no salvation, God = believe in some sort of salvation.

Now imagine urself in a death bed. The existance of god will remain independant of ones beliefs. soo lets go through the 2 scenarios when u die.

#1 : Aethiest scenario

Possibility (a): There is no god.
Ending: Game over, ur nothing.

Possiblity (b): There is a god but no afterlife
Ending: game over, ur nothing again.

Possibility (c): There is a god and afterlife and god is not generous coz u didn't meet the requirements.
Ending : Either game over again, or eternal pain in hell.

Possibility (d): There is a god and afterlife and god enjoys watching peopel suffer.
Ending : Eternal pain in hell.

Possibility (e): There is a god and afterlife and god is generous.
Ending : welcome to heaven.

If we take the possibilities of each being the same. chances of a good ending will be 20%.

#2 Believer

Possibility (a): There is no god.
Ending: Game over, ur nothing.

Possiblity (b): There is a god but no afterlife
Ending: game over, ur nothing again.

Possibility (c): There is a god and afterlife and god is not generous coz u didn't meet the requirements or wrong religion.
Ending : Either game over again, or eternal pain in hell.

Possibility (d): There is a god and afterlife and god enjoys watching people suffer regardless of religion.
Ending : Eternal pain in hell.

Possibility (e): There is a god and afterlife and god is generous.
Ending : welcome to heaven.

Possibility (g): There is a god and afterlife and ur in the right religion and met the requirements.
Ending : welcome to heaven.

now... happy ending is 2/6 which simplifies to 1/3. a nice 13.33(repeating) percentage boost in happy ending.

Now tell me with our common logic, Which path will be the safer path.

hell, heaven and god are just images and doesn't hold any christian or muslim allusions.

Ofcourse the whole %age thing is completely inaccurate, taking each possibility with the same weighting and didn't consider the amount of religion that exists. Also ofcourse theres numerous ways to counter this, and i can think of about 3 ways by now but does ur heart really tell u to not take a chance.

P.S btw there aren't many "real" religions out there. some pretty big ones that make no sense is this ten-do-5-way thingy. Basically saying. buhdism, christian, muslim, hindu, (someother religion). are all real and path ways to heaven, but u see muslim, christian claims there is only ONE god and hindu is like god for everything. Self contraditory religions has no credibility and can be ignored. Religions with definate bad endings which hold true for all isn't worth believing (if its the truth, then bad luck its the same for the believers anyway). I would say theres not more than 5 Reliable religions (grouping similar ones together e.g Catholic/christian, YES i know they are heaps different but they still believe in teh same God).

I also found logic is very dynamic. factors effecting include education, country and age. A 5 year old doesn't give the crap whether or not its possible to be goku, they try thinking it is when they grow they will stop trying. things that might be convincing to some is as worthy as a skadi on a drow.

I see there are alof of arguments in thsi thread (271 pages =.=) about stuff like.... "soo if I've never had the opportunity, heard of or believe in Suzumiya harhuri then ill be in hell, isn't that unfair!" well these statements are already on assumption that Hell, heaven, God is existing. so maybe a god isn't really concerned with whats unfair, evil, or absurd from a sane human.

As far as I learnt in my severely catholic and christian upbringings, those who were unexposed to Christianity must have at one stage in their life had God expose himself to them, apparently usually at the time of death, where they must convert.

If this is the case, the institutional aspect of religion might be pointless.

Im not trying to be rude or anything but I dont think theres a single line in the bible that supports this (bible says we will all be judged in front of him but not some time where u convert. Besides if u see jesus after ur dead, I dont think any sane human will reject his existance.). If there isn't then what on earth are ur religion teachers teaching.

 

[lengy]

You could've saved yourself the trouble and just said Pascal's Wager. Fail.

I see your Pascal's Wager and raise you Atheist's Wager. Oh snap. Back to square one.

By the way, what you're asking us to gamble is logic and rationality with fairytails and delusion.