Does God exist? (3 Viewers)

[Not-That-Bright]

You're so quick to attack these guys, yet you have never stepped foot in this church. Of course, we really do have independent opinions here dont we? But heck, if you regard Hillsong in that light, then you obviously never will get to see it first hand.

I've read a fair bit about them, I haven't step inside the church or anything tho. You seem to require so much justification for any opinion but your own. It's really easy to attack opinions by saying "don't judge you don't know everything", I try to be a bit more tactful tho.

What exactly do you mean by lunatic fringe minority?

Well most people whom honestly believe God is telling them to do stuff... imo are lunatics.

Why yes of course not. Please do tell me, knowing my capabilities, what I am not doing enough of. After all, that is what I was referring to, my capabilities. If I were referring to my wants and plans, then heck no im not doing anything near what I want to be doing. But right now...realistically.

Quit university now and become a missionary spreading the word of God. I already explained this.

Can you explain that to me in a bit more detail? Its not a personal attack, yet you say IM not doing enough, and im being (greedy?) because I dont follow the path that you expect me to follow?

I say you're not doing enough of what I would expect someone whom truly believes in your 'god' would do. As for greedy, I'm talking about you caring about your own wants before others... As I explained in the bit you omitted:

I really find it amazing that you're feigning anger when I claim that you're not doing everything you can to help the needy... I'm not, most people aren't.

Humans are greedy, so it's not exactly a personal attack when I call you it.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

So we'd agree that all you're actually saying is 'some people may or may not be doing what I think they should be doing if they believed in God, therefore God doesn't exist'?

Lol This is not an argument about the existance of God. My argument is just that whether or not God does exist, I don't think many people truly believe in him (in the form they imagine a God would be).

It does not disprove the existance of God, it was just an interesting thing to add to the discourse.

 

[davin]

either you believe in God or you don't. the thing is, that believers don't need proof, they have their faith. and even if a believer could show proof to a agnostic person, how would he know that it is valid?

for example can you really prove how the world was created? both religious theories and science have their flaus and it is up to you what you want to believe in.

however, generally speaking, religion reaches its views by looking at texts. science is constantly evolving to become more accurate though. theres not an element of blind faith involved. look at string theory.... it would be very nice to adapt it because its convienient, but there's no proof yet. or look at how astronomers were one of the last to accept the older age of the earth because until there was a better understanding of how stars work, an older earth wasn't feasible. they didn't change just because science said to, astronomers changed views once they had evidence to substantiate it.

if it was real proof, its validity would be clear to an unbiased observer

 

[Not-That-Bright]

for example can you really prove how the world was created? both religious theories and science have their flaus and it is up to you what you want to believe in.

Well one is the current best natural explanation and the other is a supernatural one... think about it.

 

[transcendent]

they can't, it's against their religion. it's sacreligious just to consider the non-existence of god.

 

[blue_chameleon]

I've read a fair bit about them, I haven't step inside the church or anything tho.

Well with that in mind, shouldnt you think about making a judgement based on your own experience and first hand knowledge, rather than making a judgement from reading "a fair bit about them?" One would think that if you are to make such bold statements, which for all you know could be completely misinformed, about the running of such an organistation, you would at least do a bit more research than simply reading (as far as I have seen being) largely regurgitated opinions.

Quit university now and become a missionary spreading the word of God. I already explained this.

You seem to be of the belief that being a missionary is the only way of reaching people. Although, this just serves to illustrate the fact that you lack the insight to see the broader picture. Missions are largely seen as long term (by most churches), but nonetheless they are still successful, and have been for many many years now, although the vision is being expanded.

I say you're not doing enough of what I would expect someone whom truly believes in your 'god' would do. As for greedy, I'm talking about you caring about your own wants before others...

Well for you to have expectations as to how anybody whom truly believed in God should lead their life, you would need to be in a position that your expectations would be warranted. For example, what right do I have to tell a mother how to raise her new born baby, and what I am to expect from her? I wouldnt have much chance of being taken seriously would I? Because essentially, I have never been a mother myself so my words would carry no weight.

Humans are greedy, so it's not exactly a personal attack when I call you it.

Yeah buddy, if you think all humans are greedy, then im not going to try and convince you otherwise. Id say that there are definately more people out there that are greedy rather than generous, but I wont ever make the assumption that everybody is greedy.
IMO I think you're out of touch with reality if you believe that even the "lunatic fringe minority" of Christians are doing everything they are called to do. Nobody ever is, and nobody ever will. You're only capable of using whats in your hand, I know ive said that before, but you must have brushed it off. I dont use that as an excuse, im simply facing the reality of right now. The fact is that for a large majority of Christians who seek to have an impact with what they do, it is never as much as they want.

I dont know anybody that is comfortable with where they are in regards to helping people and making an impact. Big Exo Day @ Olympic Park, Hillsong Conference @ the Superdome and Phenomena Youth Conference are just a few of the many events that take place in well known public places, yet they are only in their infancy. I dont think you can understand the amount of energy and hours that go into getting these events running year after year, but they are just getting bigger and more exciting.

Taking the above notion further, if it wasnt me going to university, it would be the other kid doing his apprenticeship to become a mechanic, or the nice girl working five days a week in telemarketing, saving to go overseas to do missions. Can you not see how unrealistic and illogical it is to expect every Christian to follow the one path and become a missionary worker? That doesnt mean that those who dont become missionaries wont have just as much of an impact.

Id say go and get more of an understanding of what you would really be expected to do with your life if you had relationship with God, and then come back and share with everyone your credible insight into what you think God is expecting from you. It wont take you long to realise that you wont ever be able to understand what God is expecting from your friend, your uncle, the guy you sat next to in Year 10 science..etc etc etc, so theres no point in offering your opinion on what you rhink they should be doing. If you're not willing to take that path, nobody is going to argue with your decision, but your comments in regards to Christians not doing what they are supposed to be doing, cant have much substance to them.
With all due respect, you cant really expect your concise and narrow opinions of the above discussion to be viewed with having any significant influence when you're not anywhere near being in a credible position to be making such claims.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Well with that in mind, shouldnt you think about making a judgement based on your own experience and first hand knowledge, rather than making a judgement from reading "a fair bit about them?" One would think that if you are to make such bold statements, which for all you know could be completely misinformed, about the running of such an organistation, you would at least do a bit more research than simply reading largely regurgitated opinions.

First hand experience is anecdotal evidence.. and really not that good. I think I have a good feel for the organisation and don't need to 'experience' it to pass judgement.

You seem to be of the belief that being a missionary is the only way of reaching people. Although, this just serves to illustrate the fact that you lack the insight to see the broader picture. Missions are successful, and have been for many many years now, but the vision is being expanded.

Care to elaborate on how going to university studying Bcom/Law is doing better for the world at large (if you believe in your God) than becomming a missionary? Maybe I "lack vision" but I see nothing in this response that tells me my initial assessment was wrong.

Well for you to have expectations as to how anybody whom truly believed in God, you would need to be in a position that your expectations would be warranted.

Erm... ok

For example, what right do I have to tell a mother how to raise her new born baby, and what I expected from her?

I am not telling you what to do, I am just saying what I would expect you WOULD do if you believed in God. There are more problems with this analogy, but I'll just give you that one.

Yeah man, if you think all humans are greedy, then im not going to try and convince you otherwise. Id say that there are definately more people out there that are greedy rather than generous, but I wont ever make the assumption that everybody is greedy.

It is impossible to not be greedy. Even if you do something for other people, you are doing it for some sense of personal satisfaction, the only way to not be greedy would be to not be human.

With all due respect, you cant really expect your concise and narrow opinions of the above discussion to be viewed with having any significant influence when you're not anywhere near being in a credible position to be making such claims.

What position do I have to be in?

 

[blue_chameleon]

they can't, it's against their religion. it's sacreligious just to consider the non-existence of god.

Just as it is against your non-religion to consider the existence of God. Speaking for myself, you miss one important fact though...

I havent always believed in God. *Shock Horror*

But wait, wouldnt that mean that ive been in the same position as you?

 

[360flip]

There's no such thing as god because chuck norris said so! *roundhouse kick to the face to all the believers*

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Alot of christians claim to used to be atheist, I put them into these categories.

People who didn't care: Alot of people, for a large segment of their life simply do not care about issues of whether or not God exists. Thus when later they come to say God exists, they point out that they haven't always believed in God.

People who are lying: I think alot of Christians like to lie and claim they 'used to not believe' in order to further their arguments.

People whom were what I call 'minor-atheists': For some people, being an Atheist is not out of an assessment of different arguments. These people, I call minor atheists, and thus their conversion to Christianity isn't all that amazing.

and finally, a very small group.

People whom have given in to their desires: These are people whom have wanted to believe in an afterlife so much, that they've put their rationality aside for the sake of the comforting belief.


Personally, I strongly doubt you've been an atheist whom looked at the arguments in the same way as I, or most of the other atheists/agnostics in this thread have.

It would be like me claiming I 'used to be catholic' because I was baptised, most of my family was officially 'catholic' and I went to a christian school. The truth is, I never bought into catholicism the way a catholic priest has. If you're claiming you used to be an 'atheist', then I'm saying you didn't use to 'buy atheism' in the way in which I do.

 

[blue_chameleon]

First hand experience is anecdotal evidence.. and really not that good. I think I have a good feel for the organisation and don't need to 'experience' it to pass judgement.

So you are more willing to base your own opinion and views off someone elses, rather than exploring it for yourself? You must have a lot of trust in your sources. Good luck with that. Though I really dont think you have a "good enough feel" for Hillsong or the people who attend it and work there to make the comment that you did.
But if you're the type to pass judgement on something/someone after trusting someone elses words over you own, knowing that you are fully capable of finding out the truth yourself, then I can totally understand you making the comment.

Care to elaborate on how going to university studying Bcom/Law is doing better for the world at large (if you believe in your God) than becomming a missionary? Maybe I "lack vision" but I see nothing in this response that tells me my initial assessment was wrong.

Think about it for the moment. Missionary workers themself dont organise absolutely everything from scratch do they? Ok, so maybe you dont know, but I can tell you they dont. Do you even know what missionarys do?
In terms of what possibilities my qualifications will open up for me, there are a large number of areas that in, even in the business realm I feel I can use to have significant impact on peoples lives.
Things cost money. Thats just a fact. Heres an idea. How about reaching out to people through the development of a business into a multinational corporation with adequate funding to see multiple goals reached and funding secured to be able to sustain commitments for years to come. Eg. Remember how I told you I currently sponsor two children @$50/week. $50 for one person, $500 for 10 people, $5000 for 100 people etc etc.
You know the founders of Gloria Jeans...? Research.

I also enjoy what im doing at university, and its a golden rule that to be successful in anything, you have to enjoy what you do. So if I can take enjoyment from what im doing at uni, its probable that there's a fair chance of going on and being successful in what I want to accomplish.

...what I would expect you WOULD do if you believed in God.

Ive addressed this in my last point in the reply. Quite simply, you dont believe in God, so how can your opinion of what you would expect somebody who does believe in God, have any influence or substance?

It is impossible to not be greedy. Even if you do something for other people, you are doing it for some sense of personal satisfaction, the only way to not be greedy would be to not be human.

Of course, but when has 'personal satisfaction' meant greediness? There is a difference.

What position do I have to be in?

Umm, well you would have to believe in God, for a start.

 

[blue_chameleon]

Well one is the current best natural explanation and the other is a supernatural one... think about it.

The big bang theory is just as controversial as that of the theory of the universe being created by a supernatural being. None will ever be proved. It all comes down to what you feel most comfortable with believing.

 

[blue_chameleon]

People who didn't care: Alot of people, for a large segment of their life simply do not care about issues of whether or not God exists. Thus when later they come to say God exists, they point out that they haven't always believed in God.

People who are lying: I think alot of Christians like to lie and claim they 'used to not believe' in order to further their arguments.

People whom were what I call 'minor-atheists': For some people, being an Atheist is not out of an assessment of different arguments. These people, I call minor atheists, and thus their conversion to Christianity isn't all that amazing.

and finally, a very small group.

People whom have given in to their desires: These are people whom have wanted to believe in an afterlife so much, that they've put their rationality aside for the sake of the comforting belief.


Personally, I strongly doubt you've been an atheist whom looked at the arguments in the same way as I, or most of the other atheists/agnostics in this thread have.

It would be like me claiming I 'used to be catholic' because I was baptised, most of my family was officially 'catholic' and I went to a christian school. The truth is, I never bought into catholicism the way a catholic priest has. If you're claiming you used to be an 'atheist', then I'm saying you didn't use to 'buy atheism' in the way in which I do.

Im impressed. Thats a pretty nice job!

In regards to 'what I was', I dont think revealing that serves any purpose. Although it seems you're so doubtful and have already formed your opinion of me that you wouldnt believe me anyway.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

So you are more willing to base your own opinion and views off someone elses, rather than exploring it for yourself?

It's impossible for me to 'explore' everything for myself. There are many things about the world where I have to make a judgment based off someone elses reporting of something.

Anyway, your opinion of the organisation, if you are a member of the organisation is something we call 'biased'.

You must have a lot of trust in your sources.

The claims about their public funding and their political agenda seem fairly solid to me.

Though I really dont think you have a "good enough feel" for Hillsong or the people who attend it and work there to make the comment that you did.

I don't think I've made any comment about the people who attend it, or all of the people who work there - don't put words in my mouth to feign outrage over.

Missionary workers themself dont organise absolutely everything from scratch do they? Ok, so maybe you dont know, but I can tell you they dont. Do you even know what missionarys do?

Oh well when I said for you to be a missionary worker, that didn't mean field work. You can work in their logistics department or whatever.

In terms of what possibilities my qualifications will open up for me, there are a large number of areas that in, even in the business realm I feel I can use to have significant impact on peoples lives.

Those impacts are meaningless numbers. "Our company donated $1million to charity!"... but where are the on the ground workers? where are the people actually DOING things? Your basically telling me that you think your mission is to get as much money as you can in life, and by doing that you'll be able to help others - Right? I've heard that is talked about at the hillsong church, so I must ask - are you an attendee, or is this just a coincidence?

It's tripe.

I also enjoy what im doing at university, and its a golden rule that to be successful in anything, you have to enjoy what you do. So if I can take enjoyment from what im doing at uni, its probable that there's a fair chance of going on and being successful in what I want to accomplish.

Lets think about this... you enjoy what you're doing at university - now isn't that why you continue to do it? It has nothing to do with giving to others.

Of course, but when has 'personal satisfaction' meant greediness? There is a difference.

What is the difference?

Umm, well you would have to believe in God, for a start.

Well that's a bias position. No one whom believes in God will say that God does not exist.

Essentially you're trying to break down my argument by saying I'm in no position to make it, and the only people that are in a position will never come up with it. That doesn't work.

Although it seems you're so doubtful and have already formed your opinion of me that you wouldnt believe me anyway.

Of course I've formed an opinion about you already... as you have done me.

If you were once an atheist such as myself, then how did you deal with well... every single illogicality associated with the existance of a God by the nature you now profess to believe in?

The big bang theory is just as controversial as that of the theory of the universe being created by a supernatural being. None will ever be proved. It all comes down to what you feel most comfortable with believing.

Just as controversial? Probably. But what is that? That's a measure of how debated a theory is, that does nothing to bolster or hurt its credibility really.

As far as a comparison of the two theories, one of them is attempting to show how natural forces which we have discovered (or discovered the effects of) could have began the universe, with some gaps... but it's at least an attempt at a natural explanation.

The other, is a theory in the colloquial sense... and basically just claims that something supernatural created it.

Now, lets do a test. I'll have two theories, side by side, you tell me which one you think is better!

A The sun 'rises' each day because as the earth spins around the sun.
B The sun 'rises' each day because Zeus commands it to!

A Your computer turns on when you press the button because electricity begins to flow.
B When you press the button it signals magical leprehauns inside your computer to get to work!

A The rivers were created by rain.
B The rivers were created by a magical gigantic snake!

A The sun is a firey ball of gas.
B The sun is a magical fairy that shines upon us!

Now, every 'a' is a naturalistic explanation for the phenomenon, every 'b' is a supernatural one.
Now.. what were your answers? Were there alot of A's (they may be wrong, but I only asked for you to choose which one was better)? Now why is it that you can "feel more comfortable" with the naturalistic explanations above, but not for the God question?

It has nothing to do with which one makes me feel most comfortable, the one which makes me feel most comfortable is the idea of an after life... man I'd love that, more than anything. The one which I think is right tho, is the one I probably feel less comfortable about

 

[transcendent]

Just as it is against your non-religion to consider the existence of God. Speaking for myself, you miss one important fact though...

I havent always believed in God. *Shock Horror*

But wait, wouldnt that mean that ive been in the same position as you?

*buzzer
I'm sorry, that was an incorrect answer. I 'was' Anglican, and did you know how they taught things? By indoctrination, by fear. I spent 3 years in primary school terrified of weejee boards and didn't even know what the fuck they were. 'They are the work of the devil I tells ye!' You know how potentially damaging that is to a child?
No, I spent a long time throughout high school trying and searching for God and guess what? He's done jack all for me. He doesn't solve my problems, he doesn't give me hope, he doesn't make me feel all warm and fuzzy or whatever it is that you religious types feel when you thinking about him. He limits my understanding of the world. When I embraced science, I found passion, I found wonder and amazement at the world that is so large. It gave me ANSWERS that are actually credible that explain the world and even though it didn't give me answers to solve everyday complications I realised that it was up to ME to learn through experience and deal with things and not mindlessly and stupid pray and hope things will just get better cause guess what? In the end it's up to the individual to confront their problems cause that's the only way it will be dealt with.
So you think that just because you were once non-religious that you in some way understand how I think? The path you choose now says more about you than what you were before.

 

[blue_chameleon]

It's impossible for me to 'explore' everything for myself. There are many things about the world where I have to make a judgment based off someone elses reporting of something.

Agreed. But you are able to explore and get a greater understanding on the facts and fiction of the mentioned organisation.

Anyway, your opinion of the organisation, if you are a member of the organisation is something we call 'biased'.

Sorry to burst your bubble dude, but no, I dont actually go to Hillsong, im not a 'member'. To you, my opinion might be skewed or biased, but theres actually nothing solid to support this claim, you might somehow, maybe draw a line between me being a Christian, and Hillsong.....but I really dont think you're that stupid.

The claims about their public funding and their political agenda seem fairly solid to me.

I think its a pretty well known fact that they get public funding through "offerings". Im not sure if thats where the issue was, or whether it was further than that?
You will have to fill me in on the political agenda issues though, im not familiar with those.

I don't think I've made any comment about the people who attend it, or all of the people who work there - don't put words in my mouth to feign outrage over.

Meh, must I get started on the problems with members of hillsong?

I think its right there *points in direction*

Oh well when I said for you to be a missionary worker, that didn't mean field work. You can work in their logistics department or whatever.

Im glad thats cleared up.

Those impacts are meaningless numbers. "Our company donated $1million to charity!"... but where are the on the ground workers? where are the people actually DOING things? Your basically telling me that you think your mission is to get as much money as you can in life, and by doing that you'll be able to help others - Right? I've heard that is talked about at the hillsong church, so I must ask - are you an attendee, or is this just a coincidence?

I cant quite understand your reasoning with making such comments. We both agree everything costs money right? The "people on the ground doing things" dont actually get there in the first place if they cant finance it. So you cant have one without the other. Its not really that hard to understand.
To clear up some things, no...im definately not saying "I think my mission is to get as much money in life, and by doing that...". Not that at all. Money plays a major part in determining what is capable of being done, but as I said previously, they both work together. You need money to get the events and plans off the ground, but you also JUST AS EQUALLY need the people to put into action the plans.
For every person who is contributing to missions programs financially, there are two people wanting to go. I just thought you'd be interested to know that.

Yeah as I said early, no I dont attend Hillsong church. I mean, I can accept criticism, as im sure Hillsong Church (or any other church for that matter), although I will draw the line at people 'jumping on the bandwagon' so to speak, and forming their opinions off second hand, third hand fourth hand...information, and then passing it onto others as though it is credible information when really its not that different to chinese whispers.

Essentially you're trying to break down my argument by saying I'm in no position to make it, and the only people that are in a position will never come up with it. That doesn't work.

Yeah, im breaking down your argument by saying your not in the position to make such an opinion that is worthy of having any influence.You opinion still stands, I cant take that away from you, but I dont see the point in you putting forward your opinion in the way that you did, simply because you cant offer an informed opinion. It is still your opinion nonetheless and it still stands, but its not strong.

Of course I've formed an opinion about you already... as you have done me.

I wouldnt say that ive formed an opinion of you that i would rest on. There's no point trying to figure out what sort of person to put you down as, because ive never met you. Just to clear things up though, I dont see this thread as an arguement, rather a discussion. Well at least thats the way I intend it to be.

If you were once an atheist such as myself, then how did you deal with well... every single illogicality associated with the existance of a God by the nature you now profess to believe in?

Thats exactly why I cant answer that. Basically, what happened cant be explained logically, but it happened and as hard as I tried to discard it as being a coincidence, I couldnt. It was big, and it shook me. It pointless me trying to explain this, even though I was pretty much as anti-God/anti-religion as you can find, because I know what your thoughts will be.

As far as a comparison of the two theories, one of them is attempting to show how natural forces which we have discovered (or discovered the effects of) could have began the universe, with some gaps... but it's at least an attempt at a natural explanation.

There are some pretty hefty gaps though, wouldnt you say? I mean, the whole idea of an explosion being created from absolutely nothing (not even a vacuum), is pretty mind-boggling to say the least. Heck, dont get me wrong, I mean taking a hold of the concept of a higher being having made everything as though it was his play set is also pretty hard to comprehend for a lot of people.

Now, lets do a test. I'll have two theories, side by side, you tell me which one you think is better!

A The sun 'rises' each day because as the earth spins around the sun.
B The sun 'rises' each day because Zeus commands it to!

A Your computer turns on when you press the button because electricity begins to flow.
B When you press the button it signals magical leprehauns inside your computer to get to work!

A The rivers were created by rain.
B The rivers were created by a magical gigantic snake!

A The sun is a firey ball of gas.
B The sun is a magical fairy that shines upon us!

Yeah, haha good job with the leprechauns, the giant snake, and the magical fairy, and also Mr Zeus. Although seeing those sections wrote off any intent to treat the test as serious. All of the A answers make perfect sense, im not doubting that for a second. BUT, could it be possible that, instead of Zeus "commanding" the sun to spin, could he not have combined certain things to create certain events which cause the sun to rise and set each day, as follows with the rivers being created by rain, and the sun being a firey ball of gas (and a big one at that), and the polar ice caps etc etc.
It would at least make the B sections less negatively biased, and maybe might provide more of an insight into evening up the two theories.

...Were there alot of A's? Now why is it that you can "feel more comfortable" with the naturalistic explanations above, but not for the God question?

Whats to say that when I did the test, I chose "a lot of A's"? And whats to say that I dont feel more comfortable with the God, Magical Fairies, Giant Snake, and magical Leprechauns answers? Unless of course, that section of the answers werent taken seriously.

It has nothing to do with which one makes me feel most comfortable, the one which makes me feel most comfortable is the idea of an after life... man I'd love that, more than anything. The one which I think is right tho, is the one I probably feel less comfortable about

Yeah, totally agree with the after life idea. Is a pretty awesome, yet blurry concept yeah? We will just have to wait and see I guess...but either way, I wont be thinking that I have "wasted my life being good".

 

[blue_chameleon]

*buzzer
I'm sorry, that was an incorrect answer. I 'was' Anglican, and did you know how they taught things? By indoctrination, by fear. I spent 3 years in primary school terrified of weejee boards and didn't even know what the fuck they were. 'They are the work of the devil I tells ye!' You know how potentially damaging that is to a child?
No, I spent a long time throughout high school trying and searching for God and guess what? He's done jack all for me. He doesn't solve my problems, he doesn't give me hope, he doesn't make me feel all warm and fuzzy or whatever it is that you religious types feel when you thinking about him. He limits my understanding of the world. When I embraced science, I found passion, I found wonder and amazement at the world that is so large. It gave me ANSWERS that are actually credible that explain the world and even though it didn't give me answers to solve everyday complications I realised that it was up to ME to learn through experience and deal with things and not mindlessly and stupid pray and hope things will just get better cause guess what? In the end it's up to the individual to confront their problems cause that's the only way it will be dealt with.
So you think that just because you were once non-religious that you in some way understand how I think? The path you choose now says more about you than what you were before.

Whoa dude, thats intense.

Im not going start on a whole blurb about you having a bad experience, or that ramble. But I know one thing for sure, you're right about putting fear into people in order to somehow make them believe God is real and all that...is WRONG!

I would have to say that im lucky to have avoided that kind of thing. I mean, I dont really understand at all how priests or whoever can justify bringing fear into the lives of young children so as to make them better Anglicans, or whatever. Maybe there is more to it, maybe there's not, I dont know.

One thing is for sure. As hard as it might be, you cant go around painting all churches with the same brush, because they are all so different. Like, I know a couple of anglican guys, and they are pretty cool, they arent really into religion and dont follow it much and I go out with them when im free, but they way they "do things" was totally different to the way the church I go to does things.

Anyway, probably the most important part of what im saying is that, no im not pretending to understand what you think. I was simply saying that ive looked at the key issues of what makes Christianity and God so hard to follow, from both perspectives.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Agreed. But you are able to explore and get a greater understanding on the facts and fiction of the mentioned organisation.

Meh why would I want to? It's not that big a deal to me.

Sorry to burst your bubble dude, but no, I dont actually go to Hillsong, im not a 'member'. To you, my opinion might be skewed or biased, but theres actually nothing solid to support this claim, you might somehow, maybe draw a line between me being a Christian, and Hillsong.....but I really dont think you're that stupid.

Oh ok, it's just you use their language and mentioned gloria jeans etc.

I think its a pretty well known fact that they get public funding through "offerings". Im not sure if thats where the issue was, or whether it was further than that?

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/11/06/1099547435083.html
http://www.democracyandjustice.org/lobby/index.php?title=The_Hillsong

I think its right there *points in direction*

I'm sorry I was meaning specifically a few people at the helm of the organisation, and the organisation its self. Didn't mean for it to sound like all the people whom attend the meetings.

I cant quite understand your reasoning with making such comments. We both agree everything costs money right? The "people on the ground doing things" dont actually get there in the first place if they cant finance it. So you cant have one without the other. Its not really that hard to understand.
To clear up some things, no...im definately not saying "I think my mission is to get as much money in life, and by doing that...". Not that at all. Money plays a major part in determining what is capable of being done, but as I said previously, they both work together. You need money to get the events and plans off the ground, but you also JUST AS EQUALLY need the people to put into action the plans.
For every person who is contributing to missions programs financially, there are two people wanting to go. I just thought you'd be interested to know that.

So you're going to sell your excess possessions and everything you get will be focused towards others? I mean, we can all do the little bit of charity etc... but I think if I thought THE MORAL AUTHORITY had told me to give to the poor etc, I'd be doing more than you. The argument about what is "better" charity is an avenue I didn't really want to go down, it's a very subjective area, I'd rather you just accept that you're not doing or working towards doing everything in your power to appease your God.

I will draw the line at people 'jumping on the bandwagon' so to speak, and forming their opinions off second hand, third hand fourth hand...information, and then passing it onto others as though it is credible information when really its not that different to chinese whispers.

Where do you get your information from?

BUT, could it be possible that, instead of Zeus "commanding" the sun to spin, could he not have combined certain things to create certain events which cause the sun to rise and set each day, as follows with the rivers being created by rain, and the sun being a firey ball of gas (and a big one at that), and the polar ice caps etc etc.
It would at least make the B sections less negatively biased, and maybe might provide more of an insight into evening up the two theories.

Whats the difference? Either way you're putting forward a supernatural explanation. Hows bout this...

A) A magic leprechaun put everything in place to make the sun rise.

Anyway, so you believe God put all the things into place that created the universe, you don't know how he did this or any sort of natural mechanics of how he did this, and you think thats any better than my 'A' explanations? Why is that so?

Whats to say that when I did the test, I chose "a lot of A's"?

If you chose alot of B's then you are not worth my time to talk to.

And whats to say that I dont feel more comfortable with the God, Magical Fairies, Giant Snake, and magical Leprechauns answers? Unless of course, that section of the answers werent taken seriously.

I can't seriously provide a supernatural explanation. The only one people would consider serious would be if I used the word 'God' instead of Zeus/Magical Fairies/etc.

wasted my life being good

Would you feel you missed out on alot you could have understood about the world?

Yeah, im breaking down your argument by saying your not in the position to make such an opinion that is worthy of having any influence.You opinion still stands, I cant take that away from you, but I dont see the point in you putting forward your opinion in the way that you did, simply because you cant offer an informed opinion. It is still your opinion nonetheless and it still stands, but its not strong.

My opinion about whether or not people believe in God can only be made by myself, as can any others.... What do you mean informed opinion? What would I have to do to be informed? I can't know the beliefs of every single person on Earth, I can just say 'If people believe X, I think I would expect Z, I don't see Z, so I don't think they believe X'... that's the best I can do. If you disagree on one of the points of my chain of reasoning then attack it. You have somewhat done that when you've said that you do see Z, but by saying that I'm in no position it's just a moot point...

 

[Skill over Dril]

Thought i'd give my two cents worth. The truth of the matter, relfecting to any of this is that we can and never can be 100% sure about anything. I back this up with the "Insane" theory. That being of a person who is possibly psycsophrenic and experiences hallunciations who could have no knowledge of experiencing these hallunciations and think them to be completly real. So by that i mean we can never be sure that the reality we are experiencing is the true reality or if there is even one. I guess what im trying to say is sure believe what you want to, but just be aware that is always room for error, always room for misunderstanding and certainling room for any possibility. Freaky aint it, thats why i live my life on the available evidence that I have now and however at the same time am willing to acknowledge i may be wrong (its all about percentages of sureness). Through scientific research ,experiments and technology we base our lifestyles today, so why do we dissmiss the same basic and "universal" rules of science and maths that help explain the creation and evolution of the Universe, galaxy, solar system and earth. It also would seem arrogant to hold humanity in such high regard, when it comes down to it, its all about perspective of our surroundings and lifestyles.

So I an obvious Agnostic who by the religious and scientific evidence available to himself right now would call himself an Atheist, have just one thing to say; "Ever had a dream you could swear was real".

 

[jcnme]

hey guys im just a cling on at the end of the thread but id thought id voice my opinion anyway...

i'l confess that i didnt read any posts in this thread so from an impartial point of view i'd just like to say that I am a Christian and i do beleive in the existence of God...

HOWEVER, i whole-heartedly beleive that you can not possibly and logically prove or disprove the existence of God... hence why beleivin in God is also called having FAITH in him... i.e there is no solid evidence... so you have to trust that it is true...

anyhoo i hope you all have a fantastic day

oxo

H