Beliefs which knowingly contradict established fact are self-delusion and people with such opinions aren’t worth engaging with on those matters. I can’t be bothered to discuss with anyone whether e.g. the earth is flat, life’s too short.
But in this sense, belief in gods is not self-delusional because there is no established fact that there are no gods. So our debate here is not a waste of time.
Even if that’s true, it doesn’t take away the fact that people have believed in something like God or scientific knowledge, but have also gone against what they believed in.
No, the correct answer is GOVERNMENT!
If true, that would mean there are 14 men richer than the whole Catholic Church, do you think they just might have a small role in the corruption of the world?
We live in a fallen world with much evil, but what kind of world would it be if God stepped in every time someone did something bad? You say you do not believe in God or fear him, yet you choose to obey his laws and not do any of those horrible things you listed above.
It would be a much better place to live in and everyone would believe in the god because he would be transparent and upfront. The point is there needn’t even be a possibility to do bad in the first place! What possible purpose does that serve? God apparently “made us in his image” and yet he built us with a corruptible nature and a desire to do bad - and, in fact with an incapability to not do bad! We even enjoy watching murders, crime, serial kllers etc on Netflix, etc.
It doesn’t really have much to do with the virtues of freewill and learning via our mistakes. We actually have very limited choice in our lives and we don’t need to experience bad in order to know it is wrong.
And while we are on the point of doing wrong, why should the entire globe and all living on it suffer because of one “original sin”. That is not justice even in a human world let alone the god’s kingdom…
I didn’t quite say I don’t believe in god. I said that I have an open mind to the possibility of a god (but that need not necessarily be the Christian God). I did say I am not a Christian and the reason is that I have not, at least yet, been granted that faith which the bible states is only found when god draws people to Christ.
Why wouldn’t I want to obey the rules and advice for good living as put forward in the bible? They are not copyrighted material exclusively for use by Christians. Most governments and communities have similar laws. For me, these rules have evolved over time hand in hand with the elevated consciousness of societies in general. They are things that we agree are for the mutual benefit of the community as a whole.
But assuming and obeying these rules as a way of life does not require a belief in the Christian God. It is commonsense and a sense of duty and caring for one another.
Christians are no better at obeying these laws than anyone else. We cannot walk down the street and spot the Christians by the way they are doing good all the time. Nor does the New Testament demand obedience of the law. Salvation is by faith alone. However, the bible also warns that this faith must be genuine and its authenticity will be manifested by deeds, as confirmed by James: “Faith without deeds is dead” and Jesus himself in his story of the goats and the lambs.
Good is not the sole right of Christians. It is just that everyone else’s “good” is ultimately worthless if there is no faith prompting it…
These institutions, specifically churches, have used their god for hundred of year to collect money from billions of people every week with the promise of something that cannot be seen, felt or even proven. It is the perfect business. Not to mention that it’s all tax-free. It all runs downhill, the perfect pyramid scheme.
I have never known a government that doesn’t claim to be religious, they wouldn’t get the votes.
Are these 14 men not selling something physical, and not just the fear of god and the promise of a better afterlife?
Hi @Dennis3450, I know this response was addressed to @MattyMoney but I would like to ask you a question related to this and our talk about god’s laws.
There are several references in the New Testament that urge Christians to obey their governments because they are appointed by God. As in, for example:
" Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God." Romans 13:1
In the light of your views on government I would be genuinely interested in how you see this issue…
To be fair, that is not all that they do. At least in my area of the globe, the church is very active in helping those in difficulties. Sometimes it is money, sometimes, health, sometimes family issues and sometimes spiritual or mental issues such as some of the things being discussed here.
They do a great deal of work behind the scenes helpng others. They also specialise in helping those that fall through the social services safety net - but they do not shout about it from the rooftops and few people actually see what they do (but they would see the end result if they didn’t do this work).
Yes, fair enough.
Around my area are a lot of Mennonite communities. Mennonites don’t buy insurance because “the bible teaches them that Christians should help take care of one another”. I believe most Mennonites (and Amish) give 10% of their earnings to their church (tithing), who as a result pay for certain things that would normally be covered by insurance.
yes indeed - and the same can be true of pubs
the Rev. Richard Coles (former keyboards player of ‘The Communards,’ former vicar of Finedon, excellent writer, recent less-than-happy retiree from the Church of England) recently wrote a long article in a British newspaper expressing some dissatisfaction with his Church and a great deal of dissatisfaction that the pandemic saw so many rural pubs close down, with resultant loss of such “churchy” community facilities
(wow, didn’t really think i’d find myself posting in this thread!) 
Same here. I usually stay away from sensitive topics such as politics and religion because they inevitably devolve into nonsense. But so far, this one has been interesting and we have managed to avoid trolling. Well, depending on who you ask, I guess. I suppose some could see me as a troll.
same …
(sometimes i still let myself get drawn in to “politics” because a post angers or particularly frustrates me, and i always regret doing so!)
Neither did I. These types of discussion usually just go round and round in circles with everyone getting more and more irate and always ending up where they began anyway!
I usually end up in some kind of trouble with someone on any thread I contribute to and I try to stay within the boundaries of my own single thread! 
But it was a hot, lazy Sunday, and I was curious about what was written here and off it went…
Certainly not a topic that we have discussed on before! 
So welcome to the meltdown! I think we have just about covered the last two thousand years’ of debate here and still no major riots or crusades so that is a result in itself! 
But now its Monday and its back to the “other” business. But I will leave you all with a little intriguing story:
"But a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law, who was honored by all the people, stood up in the Sanhedrin and ordered that the men be put outside for a little while. Then he addressed the Sanhedrin: “Men of Israel, consider carefully what you intend to do to these men. Some time ago Theudas appeared, claiming to be somebody, and about four hundred men rallied to him. He was killed, all his followers were dispersed, and it all came to nothing. After him, Judas the Galilean appeared in the days of the census and led a band of people in revolt. He too was killed, and all his followers were scattered. Therefore, in the present case I advise you: Leave these men alone! Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God…” Acts 5:34-39
The existence and crucifixion of a man named Jesus, who was called Christ by his followers, is mentioned in other reliable non-biblical sources. The main two are the Jewish historian Josephus and the Roman Emperor Tacitus.
Now, we could logically state three possibilities about the bible Jesus:
He was not the son of God but thought he was.
He was not the son of God and knew he was not.
He was the Son of God and knew he was.
Now, in the light of the words from Gamaliel (who was a very learned and important person), we can say that the Jesus of alternative (1) was just a mentally deranged lunatic and he would certainly not have been remembered for every long. Equally, we can say that the Jesus of alternative (2) was just a scam and a conman, and his fate would certainly have come quick and memories of him very short-lived. Neither of these alternatives would have ended up with a book being written about them and a religion based on them existing and expanding for at least 2,000 years…
So that leaves us with alternative 3… 
Now its time to get back to trading!
Enjoy your trading and may you make a lot of money 
Good points, here in the US the government has tried to replace the church and as a result, we have more poverty and homelessness than ever before
Maybe a better title might have been “The problem is Religion yes or no?”
Most of the gripes I am reading have less to do with God and more to do with the institutions of religion. On that I agree with you, religion is a mess and the selling of religion goes against all of God’s teachings. Jesus called out the corruption of the religious leaders of his day and they put him to death for it.
When there is large amounts of money to be made, corruption is sure to follow
As I’m not a member of a religion I’m never going to get excited by the wealth of that religion. I do suppose that the members might not be very interested in what happens to their money, but its their money, not mine.
I also suppose that if these religions can’t get enough money one ay they will get it another. Like in England in the Middle Ages we used to have tithes for about 700 years - a compulsory “donation” of one-tenth of everyone’s income to the church.
I would criticise a religion which collected money under false pretences though. A donation is a donation but a lie is a lie.
Mega Churches is a Money Machine.
I certainly think Martin Luther would agree with you when he started the Prostestant movement and nailed his theses to the church door.
The bible itself is not shy of telling about this. Even in the very beginnings of the formation of the church we are given two examples:
Ananias and Sapphire (this is a summary of the story in Acts Ch 5 from Wikipedia)
" Ananias and Sapphira, following Barnabas’ example, also sold their land but secretly withheld a portion of the proceeds. Ananias presented his donation to Peter. Peter replied, “Why is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit?” Peter pointed out that Ananias was in control of the money and could give or keep it as he saw fit, but had withheld a portion of it. Peter stated that Ananias had lied not to men, but to God. Because of his actions Ananias died on the spot and was carried out. Everyone who heard about the incident feared the Lord. Three hours after Ananias’ death his wife arrived, unaware of what had happened. Peter asked her the price of the land that she and Ananias had sold, and she stated the same untruthful price that Ananias had given. She too, fell dead."
Irregularities in the distribution of aid
“In those days when the number of disciples was increasing, the Hellenistic Jews among them complained against the Hebraic Jews because their widows were being overlooked in the daily distribution of food.” Acts 6:1
Let’s take a more earthly parallel situation. There are many occurances of killings with guns. In some cases mass killings. So we can ask, “who is responsible?” Is it the person who pulls the trigger? Or is it the arms vendor who provides the means knowing that in some cases people will die? Or is it the arms manufacturer who willingly provides the weapons? Or is it ultimately the government who determines who can/can’t make/distribute/obtain/use weapons?
Similarly, we have corruption in the structure of law and order. Is this just the fault of the individual concerned? or is fault in the way it is monitored and structured? Or is it better not to have police and courts and just rely on the public to know what is right and simply comply accordingly?
So is this actually, ultimately, a question of “the greater good”? overriding the isolated problems?
There are many problems relating to both religion and the churches. Some minor and some extremely major. But is there something above all that which is serving the “greater good”?
One of the prime functions of the churches in all religions is to protect the accuracy and endurance of the beliefs on which it is based. E.g. much research and effort is put into the accuracy of translations of the bible and this responsibility flows through even to the sermons and acts of church priests and employees.
So when we criticise the activities within the church we should also consider what kind of wild west mish-mash of sects and communities we would have if we did not have structured churches. In the same way, we can ponder what kind of society we might have if we did not have a law enforcement network?
But can we talk of a “greater good” in Christian churches? Well, I guess that just depends on whether one has a god at the top of it all? SO we come back to, ultimately, is god the problem? Yep, I think so! In the final analysis…
Yes indeed - except the issue of human suffering…
Yes, I doubt anyone will argue with that. The strange thing about money is why is it never enough!
M Scott Peck in one of his books told a story of a rich businessman he was acquainted with.
That man started business with not a great deal of capital - for him in those start up days the “wolf was always at the door” as Scott Peck put it.
Many years later and worth millions for that man the wolf was still at the door.
For business ppl who started with little I can equate with that.
Seems we are hard wired to money.
You can make the same argument with Automobiles, Twice more people are killed on American highways than from the business end of a gun. Is the driver responsible, how about the car salesman or the car manufacturer. What if the driver was drunk, is the person serving the drink responsible, how about the maker of the drink, should the state that issued the liquor license also be held accountable
anyway, I am all about personal responsibility
I don’t buy the “devil made me do it” argument