Still Thinking

If a person truly believes in the rapture how can they fly a plane which will be left without a pilot at some point when they disappear?

I was actually researching the claim that British Airways must have a non Christian pilot on board in every flight but found this article:

http://www.elroysemporium.com/news/pilots.html

I agree with the FAA. What are your views on this?

For atheists this is a hypothetical scenario.

I have noticed that most atheists are opposed to micro chip technology in humans and they are also a group that has some understanding of the bible. If a one world government would cease control and want to tag humans, will atheists resist? believe? be saved during the tribulation?

I keep hearing that religion was invented to control the masses and to make money from various atheist answers so please help me understand how this applies. You don't give money to church presumably, churches don't get money from the government and clearly you are free not to go so where is all the persecution? Before I was a Christian it had zero effect on me and I didn't care - what are people referring to?

I keep noticing on here references that religion is there to control people but my experience has been nothing of the sort. It could be that my mindset had similar morals and ethics anyway so I am not really constrained from much but is anyone honestly feeling locked down by it?

In Australia hardly anyone would know or care but I get the impression it is more widely discussed everywhere else. Is this true?

During Solomons monologue in Ecclesiastes (1:17-18) there is an interesting statement:

Then I applied myself to the understanding of wisdom, and also of madness and folly, but I learned that this, too, is a chasing after the wind.

For with much wisdom comes much sorrow;

the more knowledge, the more grief.

He seems to have been in a negative mind set when he said it and I guess my lows are lower when I have more to be upset about so it seems true but knowledge often gives me a high as well.

I went through a stage when I first read the bible where I was fairly convinced there was a God but I didn't particularly like the way he did things so I would not submit to his authority...

This would have excluded me from atheism and christianity and even calling me an agnostic would not have been accurate, so what would you call such a person?

If we are to accept that we evolved from a lesser intelligent being and our thoughts are constantly evolving... why did we at some point come up with the god concept if it is so detrimental to our progress as a species?

There is a message in the genealogy .... from Adam to Noah

Adam = Man

Seth = Appointed

Enosh = Mortal

Man appointed mortal... watch to see the rest - it's quite cool

you can skip the first 40 secs...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4elq7XcIb4&feature...

The question:

Spiritually Speaking™ If you believe the world is about to end because the bible says so .... When?

was deleted by the time I posted so read my answer here. Any other views would be interesting too.

My answer was:

When you see a peace treaty signed between Israel and Palestine you will know the 7 year tribulation has just begun. The man who brokers the deal will be the Anti-Christ. You may at that point start counting down 3.5 years to the rapture then a further 3.5 years to the end. Coinciding with the 7 year peace treaty will be the introduction of a global identification system. This will be optional for the first 3.5 years. This is one interpretation of bible prophesy concerning the books of Daniel & Revelation.

Do you think there is a universal law something like equal and opposite force in place that says the good and bad will balance itself out by the time you die or is life survival of the fittest and unfair? (I would expect you to say life is unfair but I better confirm) If you subscibe to an unfair life belief - does this bother you?

If we made an atheist country, a christian one etc... and each was governed by laws relevant to the belief system do you think the people in the hypothetical nations would be in a utopia?

Is it the one area where the atheists and christians will say it is all nonsense or do we have more division?

If so how did you measure the first day? (there was no earth to rotate over 24 hours)

I had assumed it meant the literal interpretation crowd but I haven't found any of them on here so what else is it?

For instance, "The Lord owns the cattle on a thousand hills" - does this mean if I were to stand on hill 1001 the cattle would not be the Lords?

"it is harder for a rich man to get into heaven than for a camel to fit through the eye of a needle" also seems figurative however it isn't. This one is literal. The eye of a needle is the side gate on a walled city designed for night access, so it means they need a bit of a prodding to go through which is quite evident.

Isn't it more logical to accept that some is figurative and some is literal and we have a mind to discern the difference?

http://ygod.web2.onlinenw.com/Dinesh_vs_Dennett.ph...

The atheist debater looks like the angry God stereotype...lol

Whatever your belief system is how long to you take to get there? was it almost self evident from early on or did you struggle and research for a long time?

The intrigue was instant at the age of 14 but it took me about 7 years to research and decide at the age of 21. What about you?

When investigating a possibility it is good to consider the alternative so help me understand this if you can.

It seems most atheists think the bible was designed to trick the masses into submission by having them believe it's all doom and gloom unless they adhere to the cleric instructions. Lets say I went along with this - something would puzzle me about the theory...

Why would you add elements that are near impossible to intellectually conceive? why would you make it difficult for the masses to read it by only allowing the elite a copy? Why would you have such damning commentary on rulers of the land and religion? And the final straw, how could you make the hero sound like a lunatic if you wanted to win people over?

I'm not sure who designed it and for what purpose if it is false - can we be clearer on the theory so I can properly consider it's viability?

I get the feeling that most of us decide what we believe by instinct rather than fact. In the absence of absolute proof which may never come we sway a little according to circumstantial arguments but if the other side produces something profound we haven't thought of, we scramble for the google debunk page rather than truly consider the merits of it. I don't think I ever met anybody who changes position every time a new argument is made, they simply have an expectation that something supporting their side will show up soon.....

What I am getting at, if you were to change sides I doubt it would be an intellectual decision, I think it would be a change of heart. Interested in comments... "I will never change sides - can be assumed - I am interested in the rest of your view"