Why is believing in a God bad?

There is hope for you yet. to say you believe out of fear says you dont honestly believe, yet you convince yourself you do out of fear. Take away the fear and see if you still believe.

I came to the realisation that, if there was a god, so be it, il meet him in the afterlife, if theres not, then who knows what i have to come. The piont is, no matter what you believe, it doesnt matter. what really matters is to make the most of what you have now, not to follow rules or worship some god, but to live life to the fullest like this is your only life, and to respect everyone elses life. If god exists and you didnt believe, so what? God should understand why you wouldnt believe, your only human. Wasnt it you who said humans arnt superior enough to grasp such a concept of god? if we cant, how can we truely beleive?

I hope you realise whats really important in life. Theres no harm in believing in god, just dont let the believe have an effect on your life, dont let it hold you back from living your life.

peace.

 

beleaving in a god is absolutly a good thing.

 

Can you explain how belief in a sky-fairy is a good thing?

 

If he blames us, then why did he send his only and only begotten son, to save us from sin?

 

We do not have direct evidence - we only have hearsay.

 

They have found everything the Bible refers to, from the tomb, to the walk-way he passed up to Golgotha.

(Minus the couple thousand "relics" the Catholics have)
That's all I'm going to say.

 

First, I'd love documentation of them finding the tomb.

Second, books may refer to real places, but smudge a few details.

 

H.P. Lovecraft refers to many real places in England in his short stories. His writings must be true!

 

Sorry, believed they found the tomb.

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/02_03/JesusTomb1R_468x327.jpg

 

Back then they were killed for blasphemy. Now you can write fiction books. Bit of a difference

 

The point is that a book containing some correct details is not necessarily correct on all details that it presents.

 

I kinda figured that out.

 

So his courage to write about a different messiah and god makes it true?

 

You are the most arrogant punk on this site. Honestly. You cant back that up. At all. In fact, considering theists still greatly outnumber atheists, i would say by extension they have as well a bigger share of the smart people.


And dont flatter yourself thinking you're raising the atheist average.


Furthermore, belief in science is just that. You realize for most of the the last 2 milleniums science was secular superstition? You truly have (for example) faith in the field of medicine when currently the greatest biological threat to humankind is a disease we contracted off of monkeys?

I'm not Amish and i'm certainly not against scientific progress, but you may as well blindfold yourself and stick a coat hanger into both your eardrums if you think science is our savior.



And to wrap up, you seem to take the same ignorant approach of racists and bigots and religious zealots. You would reduce the group you are against to the lowest common denominator. Belief in a higher power does not require me to thump a bible and support that crock of bullshit called creationism. It doesnt require me to angrily demand that my school cease teaching evolution.



...


But as I said before, to debate spirituality with rationality is an exercise in futility.

 

Science is backed up with evidence....Is religion? That is the difference and the reason why there are atheists and "theists" if thats even a word. And I'm sure that more people have been saved by modern medicine than by your choosy-god's miracle handouts. And yes, HIV is a very dangerous disease. And it was contracted by a monkey. Why would that shake the validity of medicinal science? If anything, it makes it more valid as it is our best bet for a cure. I'd definently donate money to an HIV Foundation over giving a donation at church and hope the disease is eradicated by theological means.

 

http://jewishatheist.********.com/2007/02/intelligence-and-religion.html

"People who score higher on the vocabulary test are much less likely to believe that the Bible is "the word of God," to be "fundamentalist," to believe "God concerned with human beings personally," to consider church "very important," or to believe that "atheists shouldn't hold public office."

Or perhaps Nature magazine: "A recent survey of members of the National Academy of Sciences showed that 72% are outright atheists, 21% are agnostic and only 7% admit to belief in a personal God."

Maybe Skeptic magazine holds something for you: "
In multiple studies, there is a negative correlation between theism and morality. By Franzblau's 1934 study, there's a negative correlation between religiousity and honesty. Ross 1950 shows atheists and agnostics are more likely to express their willingness to help the poor than the deeply religious. 1969 Hirschi and Stark found no correlation in lawbreaking by churchgoing children and non-churchgoing children.
This same Skeptic published the results of another study that compared professions and likelihood of believing in God. The general public was just over 90% likely to believe in God. Scientists in general were just under 40% likely. Mathematicians were just over 40% likely, biologists just under 30%, and physicists were barely over 20% likely to believe in God."


Ah well. You get the point. Google away, sir.



A greater extension of the intelligent? Well, since they outnumber us 20 to 1, I would assume that to be the case.

The fundamental difference between science and religion is that science delivers where religion fails. Theories of combustion, leverage, and mechanics are nice on paper, but when translated into reality, they equal powerful vehicles that help us to accomplish things.

Well, any rational person would put their faith in medicine given the probability of it being useful. Of course, it's not omnipotent, but what's the alternative?

I don't know about "savior", but it's certainly helping us quite a bit.

Of course not - I know several rational theists.

Then why does it have any place in a place for rational exchange?

 

First of all I'm not a christian.


Secondly, you are taking the matter to the most literal sense. I'm not saying, HIV=science failed.


I'm saying that if this is still the state of science, we have a long way to go. Read 2001: A Space Odyssey. We're so far late by 7 years, and we're not exactly anywhere near that.


I'm just expressing my shock and shame at our eagerness to give up whatever faith we choose in exchange for shiny electronics.




oh, and:

renders me speechless.

 

Wow...Renders me dumbfounded. You're comparing what people in the '60s thought we would have now with what we should have? They also thought we would have flying cars and robot-walking dogs....We don't have those, our computers are teh suck! They can only fit into a manilla folder . And as for the faith to electronics exchange, I think it's that people are exchanging ignorance for rationalism, and we really did that when books became popular.

 

As long as you approach the debate believing atheists are on a level of higher intelligence you are not worth arguing with. Oh, and guess what the most printed bought and read book is?

 

If you're such a student of science you should know the weight of one study (i say one because none occurred together or help fully confirm eachother) is roughly the equivalent of how many people are visiting this site divided by how many people are playing runescape right now:nuts:

As well, i'd venture to say that any study undertaken post 1900 is largely biased by the upswing of people who were atheists as compared to past centuries. Furthermore, science has always been linked with atheism. But the common suburb atheist who finds himself adding the obilgatory 50 IQ points because of his newfound lack-of-faith is neither a scientiest, mathematician, or an up and coming one of them. I'm not debating an educated man who chooses not to believe. But uneducated fucktards have no right to leech off higher thought.

I agree with that. I may have too quickly written you off on this. Nevertheless, my crusade is against as i already mentioned, "suburb atheists" who just arent that smart and just like to think they are (and by extension, the ludicrousness of the belief that lack of belief indicates intelligence).