Skye

Based on the story of Adam and Eve, of course.

But if we really know the difference deep down, why does the Bible bother to tell us what is wrong and why do we teach that to others? Even if you could show that everyone inherently knows it is "evil" to murder or steal, what about the less obvious "sins" that are mentioned in the Bible?

That is, within your Christian religion, i.e. the Trinity concept, the validity of the Creation stories, the relevance of the Old Testament, etc.

I became an atheist before I began to use Yahoo! Answers, but I have learned some things about Christianity here that contradict the fundamentalist system I was raised to believe. Of course, I still don't accept it, but it certainly seems a lot better to me than it did before.

For entertainment purposes only.

I'm asking this because so many of you like to say, "Oh, I'm not judging, I'm...!"

It seems this excuse is used for everything.

Keep in mind that, unless you can cite specific passages of the Bible to define 'judgment' as it is always used, you cannot just make up your own definition. If you cannot fall back on the Bible, you must use the dictionary.

What would have happened if, from the beginning, no one had questioned what the given religion in power said? What would have happened if everything with which one book, one group, or one authority figure disagreed was thrown out the window?

To lead humanity to progress in this life, or to keep it hoping desperately for another life...

(This includes the non-religious.)

How are your children raised in terms of religion? How do you feel about it?

This question is targeted at those who believe that people not exposed to the Bible are not accountable for actions that defy the Bible's teachings. If you don't believe this, then please tell me how someone can be accountable to something of which he has no knowledge.

If you make someone immediately accountable simply by exposing him to the Bible, why WOULD you expose him to it? That's an incredible risk. Besides, civilizations have flourished without the Bible's help, so you can't really say that the Bible is the only source of morality and love.

Are we not the result of preceding causes that either limit or free us? I was once very closed-minded, staunchly opposing anything not of my beliefs and using weak arguments that convinced few but myself; but then, suddenly, with a little push (a cause), I escaped it and became more open-minded. If I had not been exposed to that cause or something similar to it, I would not have escaped my ignorance then.

If you're caught inside something, it is very difficult to see it objectively. However, if you come to suspect or truly know that something you believe in is false, yet persist in that belief, you become accountable to yourself, others, and God, whether it exists or not. Not before you suspect/know - but after. Is it fair to judge another if he has not been exposed to a cause that gets through to him? We each have our own experiences (causes) that inhibit the effectiveness of other causes.

This is why we should try to love and understand everyone but not support hypocrisy...

"Even if you are an agnostic, you still lean towards theism or atheism."

I'm not "bashing" agnostics; I'm one of them. Just answer.

If so, what? And more importantly, why?

I'm trying to get more of a feel for how so-called followers of the Bible approach the questionable areas...

The Anger-Eating Demon

http://www.buddhistinformation.com/anger_eating_de...

Before you criticize me for attempting to call you all hateful individuals, know that it is not my wish to generalize. However, much of Christianity does allow for equal retaliation and the belief that there is eternal torment for the non-Christians, and there are many who hate others who seem to be deep in "sin." This is so bad at times that some will even take delight in the thought that non-Christians will go to Hell.

What good is this thinking? This is not what Jesus taught. Should you not learn from his example and the example of other peaceful individuals, i.e. Buddha, Gandhi, etc?

Retaliation only begets more suffering, and your mind itself may do harm to you and others.

I asked something similar before, but I guess I have to get specific. I'm not talking about Old Testament rules obviously - this is 1 Corinthians.

So, my question is, in the cases of chapters 11 and 14 especially, why were those rules encouraged? Yes, culture; yes, law; etc. But why would the Bible approve of any of it just because it's part of culture? I would think that it would instead try to encourage a revolution of thought and action... a liberation.

I'm seriously looking for answers here, so no criticism, please. I'm not Christian anymore (and hopefully no one this time around will be rude enough to tell me I never was, as if a stranger can know my life); I'm now agnostic. I'm basically asking so I can fully understand the Christian side of the argument when non-Christians bring up all of the sexism, violence, suppression, etc.

Following the Bible

or

Following what the people say?

You can't always have both, and it cannot be denied that many Christians are concerned with Bush's religion/spirituality. But isn't the job of our elected officials to serve the people regardless of their personal thoughts and feelings?

Where should the legitimate concern lie?

Let's face it. Most of us don't have any experience of real persecution. Do you honestly think that having someone laugh at your beliefs dislike you for them is persecution? When was the last time you were executed (ha) or beaten for your beliefs?

That's what I thought.

Recognize how good you have it - after all, you're using a computer right now - and GET OVER THIS PETTINESS.

Recognize that more than just your own little group is being persecuted in this world. You think you can single your ideas out as being the most disrespected? I don't think so.

And for you Christians SPECIFICALLY, recognize that, when Jesus spoke of persecution, he didn't mean people who just disagree with you. Recognize that he and those like him didn't waste time whining: they were too busy loving. Recognize that their suffering and persecution stemmed from their choice to live among the dejected, the impoverished, the ones who really suffer.

And if you could only choose one sense to have (yes, this would be very strange), what would it be, and why?

My last question received this response:

"I searched for God and found only myself;

I searched for myself and found only God."

Thoughts?

If not, then at what point can one accept that his experiences are true and come to conclusions through them? How do we know anything? Isn't causality itself grasped through our experiences? If this is not the best way of knowing, then what is, and why?

If so, then shouldn't we be open to something seemingly beyond science and logic? From what I've read and seen, most of us (not all) haven't had any experiences that were convincingly "supernatural." We like to poke fun at the theists for accepting something that cannot be perceived, but many of them say they have experienced "God" themselves. I don't want to get into a discussion about which Gods/gods, if any, could exist, but can we truly say for certain that they are wrong? Yes, we can come up with a scientific explanation for it in most cases, but does that mean the scientific explanation is the only real one?

I see that throwing strict empiricism out the door opens up problems, but are there problems if we don't, at times?

If you were not under the influence of drugs, drowsiness, etc, would you accept an experience of your own that defied logic and reason?

Why or why not?

Also, are you exploring other options, or are you fully satisfied with what you have now?

I am an agnostic myself, so there shouldn't be anyone trying to accuse me of persecution (even though I didn't say anything remotely resembling persecution). People are too sensitive.

Also, Christians and atheists: if you're going to quote scripture at us or tell us we're fence-sitters, don't bother. We've heard it all and none of it matters.

I'm talking about stuff like this:

"You don't like homosexuality... so you must be homosexual!"

"You spent all of your time trying to disprove God... so you must believe in God!"

etc.

I'm not going to take sides on these issues as that's not the point of the question. It's just that some people are arrogant enough to think they can tell others what they think and feel.

It seems like, ever since reverse psychology became a part of popular culture, everyone and his dog thinks they can apply it to everything, thinking they're intelligent.

They're not.

Thoughts?