Past couple days i've been on youtube exploring the atheist/christian war that has been going on for who knows. The videos i have watch gave me some insight onto the views of each side, that got me wondering. Is Christianity really worth it?
I recently converted to atheism so i guess my opinions would be biased of course but i've notice some flaws in christianity as a whole when i myself was a christian. Flaws that include
-different sects
-creationism
-morality (stem cell research/gay marriage)
-interpretation of the bible
-problems with the bible itself (contradictions, etc)
The one good thing about Christianity so i've been told is that it fosters community and so forth. But there arguements against that such as the existence of different sects and exclusivism.
So my question is, what are the benefits of Christianity and do those benefits outweigh the consequence?
I'm trying to stay out of this and letting other people chip in with their own opinions. Lets just say that at one point i had a relationship, was devout and did not question god or christ for that matter but a chain of events made me look the other way which included me doubting the church and god as per the flaws i've noticed
And the first response is "No true Scotsman, I can go on believing people don't 'really' convert."
Welcome to the light of reason, and congratulations. One of the main things I've heard cited as a benefit of Christianity is that it gives people hope and inspires them. I'd honestly like to hear some theists expand on this. I can tell you right now I don't buy it, but I'd like to hear the other side before saying why.
Past couple days i've been on youtube exploring the atheist/christian war that has been going on for who knows. The videos i have watch gave me some insight onto the views of each side, that got me wondering. Is Christianity really worth it?
I recently converted to atheism so i guess my opinions would be biased of course but i've notice some flaws in christianity as a whole when i myself was a christian. Flaws that include
-different sects
-creationism
-morality (stem cell research/gay marriage)
-interpretation of the bible
-problems with the bible itself (contradictions, etc)
The one good thing about Christianity so i've been told is that it fosters community and so forth. But there arguements against that such as the existence of different sects and exclusivism.
So my question is, what are the benefits of Christianity and do those benefits outweigh the consequence?
Well, if the Christian god does in fact exist, then there happens to be a pretty large benefit, namely, the fact that less people would be going to hell. I think that would probably outweigh the concerns (notice, I don't use the word "flaws") you describe.
Well, if the Christian god does in fact exist, then there happens to be a pretty large benefit, namely, the fact that less people would be going to hell. I think that would probably outweigh the concerns (notice, I don't use the word "flaws") you describe.
Hell is impossibly compatible with a manifest omnibenevolence.
There is no way that our existence could be such that it is ever achieving (or actuating) perfect good, and also satisfy that sometimes, for some "souls", it is good for them to be condemned to suffering and torment for eternity.
EDIT: Since (I claim): If there is some way that our existence, as we see it, and its apparent 'local evils' (immature deaths, psychosis, natural disasters etc.) is, in fact, one of maximal good, then that says something about the sort of thing which experience (consciousness) is. On no view, then, could putting some souls (experiencing-vantage-points) through Hell be superior to a reality in which that does not happen.
The benefit would be more beings reaching heavenly bliss, though, so it's just a flipside.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Epic banner by Erasmus of æтђєг.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
Oddly none of the items you mention makes you a Christian. Belief on the Christ makes you a Christian.
Did you believe on Christ? Did you have a relationship with God?
If not, you never converted to Aethism, you just quit wearing a name badge.
They do, however, cast great doubt on the reliability of the bible, and if the bible is unreliable, than the only evidence for you to believe on christ just falls apart.
Quote from Godel1 »
Well, if the Christian god does in fact exist, then there happens to be a pretty large benefit, namely, the fact that less people would be going to hell. I think that would probably outweigh the concerns (notice, I don't use the word "flaws") you describe.
So?
What if the muslim god exists? Or what if buddhism is true? Or the native american religions? Or asatru? Or Wicca? Or Or Or Or?
While I doubt you intended it as such, comments like this are just pascals wager.
If a benevolent God existed, and he was not only benevolent but omnipotent, then why has he not yet defeated Satan, his direct opposite? I don't personally see any religion as having gotten it right, but I do believe in a higher power.
An eternity of feasting on pork and fighting each other sounds a lot less boring than the Xian heaven, that's for sure.
It's unfortunate that a religion's worth isn't solely represented by its musical output, because viking metal beats anything Christianity has to offer.
Hell is impossibly compatible with a manifest omnibenevolence.
There is no way that our existence could be such that it is ever achieving (or actuating) perfect good, and also satisfy that sometimes, for some "souls", it is good for them to be condemned to suffering and torment for eternity.
EDIT: Since (I claim): If there is some way that our existence, as we see it, and its apparent 'local evils' (immature deaths, psychosis, natural disasters etc.) is, in fact, one of maximal good, then that says something about the sort of thing which experience (consciousness) is. On no view, then, could putting some souls (experiencing-vantage-points) through Hell be superior to a reality in which that does not happen.
The benefit would be more beings reaching heavenly bliss, though, so it's just a flipside.
This argument does not work. I know I have shown this once, and perhaps twice on various threads on here. If you don't want to take my word for it, find my arguments. But yes, this argument doesn't run though.
They do, however, cast great doubt on the reliability of the bible, and if the bible is unreliable, than the only evidence for you to believe on christ just falls apart.
So?
What if the muslim god exists? Or what if buddhism is true? Or the native american religions? Or asatru? Or Wicca? Or Or Or Or?
While I doubt you intended it as such, comments like this are just pascals wager.
Argument from consequence is no argument at all.
Actually, no. The OP asked what the advantages would be to being a Christian or having Christianity around or whatever. My answer is that, in that event, if the Christian god does exist, less people would go to hell (if we want to be super technical, one cannot be entirely certain about this, but very strong reasoning could be used to support this).
Pascal's wager is completely different. Pascal's wager doesn't merely talk about the benefits of a position; it is the argument that one should take a certain religious position because it has such advantages and no disadvantages. This sort of thing runs into the problems you were hinting at. I am making no such argument. I am just bringing out the advantages.
The OP didn't ask for good reasons to be a Christian, the OP asked for the advantages of being a Christian. The OP specifically asked "is Christianity really worth it?"
Important comment: I noticed, in writing this response, that, in my previous post, there is a scope ambiguity in one of the statements I made. I said:
"Well, if the Christian god does in fact exist, then there happens to be a pretty large benefit, namely, the fact that less people would be going to hell. I think that would probably outweigh the concerns (notice, I don't use the word "flaws") you describe."
The "that" in the second sentence is the fact that less people would go to hell, assuming that the Christian god exists. It is not the fact that if the Christian god exists, then less people would go to hell.
An eternity of feasting on pork and fighting each other sounds a lot less boring than the Xian heaven, that's for sure.
It's unfortunate that a religion's worth isn't solely represented by its musical output, because viking metal beats anything Christianity has to offer.
Sounded cool until he started ... singing... if you can call it that. You know the singing is awful when you have the lyrics in front of you and you still can't understand what he is saying. I love the guitar work. I am a musician myself. I started on Metallica and Megadeth but has since moved into more musically challenging music such as Joe Satriani and Steve Vai. Anyways... back to the thread.
Well, if the Christian god does in fact exist, then there happens to be a pretty large benefit, namely, the fact that less people would be going to hell. I think that would probably outweigh the concerns (notice, I don't use the word "flaws") you describe.
He asked what the benefits of Christianity is, not the benefits if the Christian god exists.
What on earth are you talking about, Godel1? Less people? Less than what? If there is no god, no people go to hell. Or do you mean that becoming a Christian means *one* less person is going to hell? I'm confused.
I thought we were talking about "benefits of believing in Christianity, whether or not it's true" here anyway. I don't think the OP wanted us to argue about the veracity of Christianity in this thread at all.
Also, no, I haven't forgotten the philosophy thread, and notice I said *reason*. Taylor told me I was being reasonable but not logical, and I kinda like that. Induction power, go!
This argument does not work. I know I have shown this once, and perhaps twice on various threads on here. If you don't want to take my word for it, find my arguments. But yes, this argument doesn't run though.
Having trouble finding it, even though you have only 51 posts.
But hold on there. When you're talking about Perfection, it seems possibilities become a little bit less smoky of notions to so easily tout. With one mode of escape, it seems to me you have to either say that the universe with Hell is the optimal one, or the one without. So, I beg of you to provide this account of how the with-Hell world is in fact perfect - since, if it's possible that it's the perfect good, if we take it that the perfect universe is unique, the possibility has to be the actuality, under the omnibenevolence.
Don't want to get sidetracked too much; this is already tangential to the discussion. I was speaking only to the case how, I figured that most organized sects have dropped the Hell-place from their modern doctrine.
I'm always greatly jarred when I see the H-word come up in the ol' debate. It just seems so irrelevant and emotionally charged.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Epic banner by Erasmus of æтђєг.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
From an economic stand point, the Cathedrals have done more to bring in money and prosperity to areas that house them than art derived from anti-Christian sentiments like Piss Christ. There are some other examples I can use, but the movement away from some standardization is killing some truly inventive new forms of art.
Considering that having a standard in art allowed for reactions like Picasso's Starry Night and other such great works, within the terms of relativism people are more likely to construct random gibberish like that.
I'd argue also that the framework of Christianity gives adherents, dissenters, deniers, or people that are inherently indifferent most of the time something to react against or through. Church is a staging ground for effective community organizations. The social systems built around church are now lower than they used to be worth new technological social frameworks like Facebook rising up, but church is still important for minority and immigrant communities.
Different intellectual frameworks also broaden the landscape in terms of perspective and reaction to a particular subject. Coming from a different orientation can give someone a seed for thought that may not have been thought of otherwise. Debate also can strengthen arguments. What good are tenets or philosophies if they are not galvanized through challenges?
I'd say as far as value, one is most certain it that it makes for a more intelligent atheist. It's all the same for other belief and philosophical structures.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.
Individualities may form communities, but it is institutions alone that can create a nation.
Nothing succeeds like the appearance of success.
Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle.
The the only way anyone goes to hell is if the christian God does exist (a negative) *also includes other gods who built a heaven/hell for mankind*. Then that is not a benefit. If no God exists, then no one goes to hell because there wouldn't be one.
So actually. You are wrong on that one.
The LEAST amount of people going to hell is a good thing, right? To see that the least number of people go to hell, then that would be an existence without hell. An existence without the christian God, or any God for that matter that sends disobedient people to burn forever and ever in "hell".
Well, hell not being real in the first place actually is the only way to achieve the least number of people going to hell (that number being zero). So isn't the greatest benefit NO GOD?
Not to mention that you seem to think the majority of souls would go to Heaven. You are wrong.
There are nearly 7 billion people on earth. Only 2.3 (roughly) billion of those people believe in christ. That's less than half.
The tenets of christianity demand that you believe in Jesus, and accept him as your savior to get into heaven. (narrow is the path indeed) That leaves out close to 5 billion people, who will go to hell simply for not knowing or believing in Jesus.
Now. That's assuming that all 2.3 billion christians actually go to heaven. This is not true either. I am sure that at least 15% (im being generous) of the people who call themselves "christian", do not qualify due to sin, backsliding, blasphemy, non-repentence, lack of true belief, double-think, and I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the "christians" who don't truely believe but "hedge their bets" are not worthy of heaven either. God said "be hot or be cold, if you are lukewarm I will spew you out of my mouth"
So. If in fact christianity is truth. Then, just based on todays population, (not counting the billions of people who have already lived and died before us)...I'd say 75% of all "souls" are going to hell.
Seeing as the majority of souls go to hell...it is not a benefit that the chrisian God pan out.
So does anyone know of a God dogma that gets a majority of the population by shear % into paradise?? Anyone??
I don't.
If a God exists that created a heaven and hell, then the only reason anyone is going to hell is because that God made it that way. The God that builds the torture chamber for the people he doesn't like is completely culpable for blame, even IF he gives those people a chance to stay out.
Isn't that terrorism?? I mean, using fear and threats of suffering to persuade a desired response from other people? Sounds like terrorism to me.
"Love me or burn in hell!" strikes me as a pretty serious threat.
Therefore, even if 50% of people go to heaven ( a huge stretch), and 50% of people go to hell (im being generous, we all know that 50% of the people on earth going to heaven is a pipe dream)
Without a God who made a heaven or hell, 100% of people don't have to go to hell.
Sure there is no heaven, but so what.
Tell me. What is better?
50% of people eternally happy, and 50% of people tortured with eternal suffering...
or 100% of people just live out their lives and die a natural death and thats the end of it.
Now answer that same question if the numbers are more realistic.
Is it better for 15% of people to live in eternal bliss, while 85% burn in neverending torment and fire?
Or is it better that no one goes anywhere, we are all equal, no one gets pie, but no one gets tortured either. we all just live this earthly life and die when the time comes.
Or better yet, tell me this.
How many people are you willing to accept getting sent to hell so that you get to go to heaven? If you are part of the 15%, would you feel better, knowing that friends of yours, maybe some relatives, some children who only merely believed in the cultural gods they were raised with, some other people who never heard of your wonderful gods, how would you feel, come time to get on the lifeboat, knowing that 10,100 people for every ONE of you get to suffer unimaginable pain forever??
Believe me, they aren't all going to hell because they are horrible sinners murders and rapists....
Some of them just never got a chance to find Jesus....
I'll say this though.
I know from first hand experience.
There were times when the only christmas gifts I got were from donations given by the local church to needy families.
There were times when the only food on our table was given to us by a local church who saw us in need.
We even got free housing from a big church campground for a while when we had no home of our own.
I had a rough life. I really had faith, I believed in the things that I was raised to believe. I honestly followed Jesus with all my heart.
Christianity, (as well as islam and LDS, etc.) they do great things for their communities.
Almost makes me want to overlook the bad things people do in the name of God.
One thing though. As much as I believed, I never felt the presence inside. Everyone around me reaffirmed my faith, other PEOPLE told me that jesus was there, I never actually felt him inside, I never heard gods voice, or the holy spirit or anything. When I lost my faith....I still haven't.
Its not easy going from devout, to denial.
But really....I'd rather be the way I am now, I'll take my natural working world with no strings attached, no gods, no heaven or hells...I'll take what I can prove over what cannot be proven anyday. And I still give to charity and help my fellow man.
An eternity of feasting on pork and fighting each other sounds a lot less boring than the Xian heaven, that's for sure.
It's unfortunate that a religion's worth isn't solely represented by its musical output, because viking metal beats anything Christianity has to offer.
Having trouble finding it, even though you have only 51 posts.
But hold on there. When you're talking about Perfection, it seems possibilities become a little bit less smoky of notions to so easily tout. With one mode of escape, it seems to me you have to either say that the universe with Hell is the optimal one, or the one without. So, I beg of you to provide this account of how the with-Hell world is in fact perfect - since, if it's possible that it's the perfect good, if we take it that the perfect universe is unique, the possibility has to be the actuality, under the omnibenevolence.
Don't want to get sidetracked too much; this is already tangential to the discussion. I was speaking only to the case how, I figured that most organized sects have dropped the Hell-place from their modern doctrine.
I'm always greatly jarred when I see the H-word come up in the ol' debate. It just seems so irrelevant and emotionally charged.
I cannot figure out exactly what you are saying here in your most recent post, but here is one location where I argued against an argument of the sort that you gave a couple posts back (the one I told you to find). It was actually a response to slightly different argument, but the same line of reasoning works just as well against yours: http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=4630282&postcount=2647
It is the first argument I give in that post. If you want to see supposed objections to that argument, continue reading that thread; they all get settled at some point.
The the only way anyone goes to hell is if the christian God does exist (a negative) *also includes other gods who built a heaven/hell for mankind*. Then that is not a benefit. If no God exists, then no one goes to hell because there wouldn't be one.
So actually. You are wrong on that one.
Was this addressed to me? If it was, here is my response:
Obviously, someone not being a Christian does not entail the inexistence of the Christian god. The OP was talking about advantages to being a Christian, not the advantages of the Christian god existing. I said that one such advantage is how the whole hell situation plays out if the Christian god does indeed exits. That is a conditional "if the Christian god exists, then X". Now, you are talking about the Christian god not existing? Well, I didn't mention that in my argument. I totally agree with everything you said, but it is not related in any interesting way to what I said.
The LEAST amount of people going to hell is a good thing, right? To see that the least number of people go to hell, then that would be an existence without hell. An existence without the christian God, or any God for that matter that sends disobedient people to burn forever and ever in "hell".
Again, I am not saying anything about the differences in quality of life (or eternity, in this case) if deities like the Christian god were to exist. That is a completely different issue. The OP was talking about being a Christian, ie having certain beliefs. So, as a result, I am talking about the advantages of having certain beliefs.
Well, hell not being real in the first place actually is the only way to achieve the least number of people going to hell (that number being zero). So isn't the greatest benefit NO GOD?
I think you can probably guess what my response here will be.
Not to mention that you seem to think the majority of souls would go to Heaven. You are wrong.
Where do I say that? I never even said that all Christians would go to heaven.
As far as the rest of your post, all of it is talking about whether or not things are better with the Christian god around, which misses what I was saying exactly like the earlier stuff. Also, I would check out the first argument in that post I linked above, as it argues against an argument that you aren't exactly making but seems like something that you are sort of pushing towards.
There really is no negative to Christianity just people doing dumb things or justifying themselves in the name of their religion. People will try and justify anything they can in the name of something regardless but Christianity only has a net benefit for the world as a whole.
How much charity equals one person tortured to death in the inquisition?
So because someone misuses religion as a way to justify something that the religion is inherently against then the religion is bad? It's the people that are bad not the religion these people will use any number of things to justify an absurd belief or action. It's not a guilty by association type of thing no matter how much you disagree with religion.
So because someone misuses religion as a way to justify something that the religion is inherently against then the religion is bad? It's the people that are bad not the religion these people will use any number of things to justify an absurd belief or action. It's not a guilty by association type of thing no matter how much you disagree with religion.
And lynch mobs often attack accused witches. A particularly gruesome incident occurred near Kisii in late May. Fifteen people, mostly elderly women, were murdered in a witch-hunt.
Omambia says witches should be sent to jail, not killed. That he, a Pentecostal preacher, believes in witches, rankles some more traditional Christians.
Although, I don't know, I almost want to say that believing in things without evidence in general is the problem, and religion is a form of that, and encourages it. The only thing that'll fix that is education, because humans seem to be born with a propensity for doing it.
So because someone went crazy that was Christian that means Christianity is bad? So every mentally ill person makes the perspective groups they belong to bad. Or say she was English so now are all English people bad?
A question with no answer because honestly what should I say there lives are worth in charity? Churches help people get things they need to live so I guess a life for a life to make up for it? Also I wasn't just talking charity.
Although, I don't know, I almost want to say that believing in things without evidence in general is the problem, and religion is a form of that, and encourages it. The only thing that'll fix that is education, because humans seem to be born with a propensity for doing it.
So people believing in spirits and getting exorcisms is bad? They can do whatever they want I mean who does it hurt? The power of positive thinking or believing in something can do a lot to help people. You put your faith in medicine to heal which isn't that much more reasonable then this because science has shown time and again that the placebo effect works just as well all too often maybe not as often as medicine but often enough.Hell half the medicine that's available they speed up production and testing to get on the market only to down the road be proven wrong or have negative health side effects. All those uneducated people in the world are horrible people too right because they believe in something not objective verifiable?
@Both: I think you feel your in such a position of superiority of belief and faith in science your blind to good things that come from outside of it that or your overwhelming hatred for religion won't allow you to see it. You see religion as a disease which you must cure because you lack perspective and are pissed off.
I'm not even religious so you know I'm just not blinded by hate.
It's like the thread before in Philosophy religion and science are not mutually exclusive they both do good things for the world regardless of if you like them or want to believe it.
So people believing in spirits and getting exorcisms is bad? They can do whatever they want I mean who does it hurt?
1. We're talking about old ladies being dragged out in the street and murdered for practicing "magic", and
2. If you "treat" a disease by attempting to cast out demons, you're not actually treating the disease, are you? This means that the victim is still going to die, whereas had they visited a real doctor we might have a different story.
These places aren't so backwater that real doctors don't exist or are unheard of. Some people, however, prefer to ask for divine help rather than human help. This is what happens when you have too much faith. That's just one example; theirs is far from the only case.
*shrug*
I don't have respect for silly ideas which are claimed to be something else... from anybody... for whatever reason. Calling it a religion doesn't make your idea of the world resting on the back of a giant turtle more worthy of respect than Joe Blow off the street who believes in leprechauns. That's just how I see it.
1. We're talking about old ladies being dragged out in the street and murdered for practicing "magic", and
So religion is to blame for them acting in contrast to what there religion teaches by killing someone? I mean America had witch trials but no one ever said the ☺☺☺☺ing church is the reason. People have a level of personal responsibility in there actions you can't blame a misguided view on something not even taught in the religion. Most likly the veiw came from mixing traditional African religious practices with Christianity
but, it doesn't mean Christianity(Or their traditional religion either) is to blame.
2. If you "treat" a disease by attempting to cast out demons, you're not actually treating the disease, are you? This means that the victim is still going to die, whereas had they visited a real doctor we might have a different story.
These places aren't so backwater that real doctors don't exist or are unheard of. Some people, however, prefer to ask for divine help rather than human help. This is what happens when you have too much faith. That's just one example; theirs is far from the only case.
Not treating it in a scientific way but it doesn't mean the power of positive thinking doesn't help your body fight off the disease. Also medicine is not proven to work all the time for whatever the illness is we just show a correlation is works enough of the time in comparison to the placebo effect. They will die either way if they are beat to death like point 1 is about so an exorcism seems to be the best option anyway. So people may choose treatment in ways not like ours but when did Christianity advocate medicine is wrong? Never. People choose how they wish to live nothing wrong with it and if they die earlier so be it but they lived how they wished.
I recently converted to atheism so i guess my opinions would be biased of course but i've notice some flaws in christianity as a whole when i myself was a christian. Flaws that include
-different sects
-creationism
-morality (stem cell research/gay marriage)
-interpretation of the bible
-problems with the bible itself (contradictions, etc)
The one good thing about Christianity so i've been told is that it fosters community and so forth. But there arguements against that such as the existence of different sects and exclusivism.
So my question is, what are the benefits of Christianity and do those benefits outweigh the consequence?
Welcome to the light of reason, and congratulations. One of the main things I've heard cited as a benefit of Christianity is that it gives people hope and inspires them. I'd honestly like to hear some theists expand on this. I can tell you right now I don't buy it, but I'd like to hear the other side before saying why.
Well, if the Christian god does in fact exist, then there happens to be a pretty large benefit, namely, the fact that less people would be going to hell. I think that would probably outweigh the concerns (notice, I don't use the word "flaws") you describe.
You seem to have forgotten about the thread over in the philosophy section =)
Hell is impossibly compatible with a manifest omnibenevolence.
There is no way that our existence could be such that it is ever achieving (or actuating) perfect good, and also satisfy that sometimes, for some "souls", it is good for them to be condemned to suffering and torment for eternity.
EDIT: Since (I claim): If there is some way that our existence, as we see it, and its apparent 'local evils' (immature deaths, psychosis, natural disasters etc.) is, in fact, one of maximal good, then that says something about the sort of thing which experience (consciousness) is. On no view, then, could putting some souls (experiencing-vantage-points) through Hell be superior to a reality in which that does not happen.
The benefit would be more beings reaching heavenly bliss, though, so it's just a flipside.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
They do, however, cast great doubt on the reliability of the bible, and if the bible is unreliable, than the only evidence for you to believe on christ just falls apart.
So?
What if the muslim god exists? Or what if buddhism is true? Or the native american religions? Or asatru? Or Wicca? Or Or Or Or?
While I doubt you intended it as such, comments like this are just pascals wager.
Argument from consequence is no argument at all.
An eternity of feasting on pork and fighting each other sounds a lot less boring than the Xian heaven, that's for sure.
It's unfortunate that a religion's worth isn't solely represented by its musical output, because viking metal beats anything Christianity has to offer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfrYkpa3770
Netdecking is Rightdecking
My latest data-driven Magic the Gathering strategy article
(TLDR: Analysis of the Valakut matchups. UB rising in the rankings. Aggro correspondingly taking a dive.)
This argument does not work. I know I have shown this once, and perhaps twice on various threads on here. If you don't want to take my word for it, find my arguments. But yes, this argument doesn't run though.
Actually, no. The OP asked what the advantages would be to being a Christian or having Christianity around or whatever. My answer is that, in that event, if the Christian god does exist, less people would go to hell (if we want to be super technical, one cannot be entirely certain about this, but very strong reasoning could be used to support this).
Pascal's wager is completely different. Pascal's wager doesn't merely talk about the benefits of a position; it is the argument that one should take a certain religious position because it has such advantages and no disadvantages. This sort of thing runs into the problems you were hinting at. I am making no such argument. I am just bringing out the advantages.
The OP didn't ask for good reasons to be a Christian, the OP asked for the advantages of being a Christian. The OP specifically asked "is Christianity really worth it?"
Important comment: I noticed, in writing this response, that, in my previous post, there is a scope ambiguity in one of the statements I made. I said:
"Well, if the Christian god does in fact exist, then there happens to be a pretty large benefit, namely, the fact that less people would be going to hell. I think that would probably outweigh the concerns (notice, I don't use the word "flaws") you describe."
The "that" in the second sentence is the fact that less people would go to hell, assuming that the Christian god exists. It is not the fact that if the Christian god exists, then less people would go to hell.
Sounded cool until he started ... singing... if you can call it that. You know the singing is awful when you have the lyrics in front of you and you still can't understand what he is saying. I love the guitar work. I am a musician myself. I started on Metallica and Megadeth but has since moved into more musically challenging music such as Joe Satriani and Steve Vai. Anyways... back to the thread.
He asked what the benefits of Christianity is, not the benefits if the Christian god exists.
I thought we were talking about "benefits of believing in Christianity, whether or not it's true" here anyway. I don't think the OP wanted us to argue about the veracity of Christianity in this thread at all.
Also, no, I haven't forgotten the philosophy thread, and notice I said *reason*. Taylor told me I was being reasonable but not logical, and I kinda like that. Induction power, go!
Having trouble finding it, even though you have only 51 posts.
But hold on there. When you're talking about Perfection, it seems possibilities become a little bit less smoky of notions to so easily tout. With one mode of escape, it seems to me you have to either say that the universe with Hell is the optimal one, or the one without. So, I beg of you to provide this account of how the with-Hell world is in fact perfect - since, if it's possible that it's the perfect good, if we take it that the perfect universe is unique, the possibility has to be the actuality, under the omnibenevolence.
Don't want to get sidetracked too much; this is already tangential to the discussion. I was speaking only to the case how, I figured that most organized sects have dropped the Hell-place from their modern doctrine.
I'm always greatly jarred when I see the H-word come up in the ol' debate. It just seems so irrelevant and emotionally charged.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_Christ
(NSFW, it's a crucifix placed in urine.)
Versus:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathedral
From an economic stand point, the Cathedrals have done more to bring in money and prosperity to areas that house them than art derived from anti-Christian sentiments like Piss Christ. There are some other examples I can use, but the movement away from some standardization is killing some truly inventive new forms of art.
Considering that having a standard in art allowed for reactions like Picasso's Starry Night and other such great works, within the terms of relativism people are more likely to construct random gibberish like that.
I'd argue also that the framework of Christianity gives adherents, dissenters, deniers, or people that are inherently indifferent most of the time something to react against or through. Church is a staging ground for effective community organizations. The social systems built around church are now lower than they used to be worth new technological social frameworks like Facebook rising up, but church is still important for minority and immigrant communities.
Different intellectual frameworks also broaden the landscape in terms of perspective and reaction to a particular subject. Coming from a different orientation can give someone a seed for thought that may not have been thought of otherwise. Debate also can strengthen arguments. What good are tenets or philosophies if they are not galvanized through challenges?
I'd say as far as value, one is most certain it that it makes for a more intelligent atheist. It's all the same for other belief and philosophical structures.
Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.
Individualities may form communities, but it is institutions alone that can create a nation.
Nothing succeeds like the appearance of success.
Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle.
The the only way anyone goes to hell is if the christian God does exist (a negative) *also includes other gods who built a heaven/hell for mankind*. Then that is not a benefit. If no God exists, then no one goes to hell because there wouldn't be one.
So actually. You are wrong on that one.
The LEAST amount of people going to hell is a good thing, right? To see that the least number of people go to hell, then that would be an existence without hell. An existence without the christian God, or any God for that matter that sends disobedient people to burn forever and ever in "hell".
Well, hell not being real in the first place actually is the only way to achieve the least number of people going to hell (that number being zero). So isn't the greatest benefit NO GOD?
Not to mention that you seem to think the majority of souls would go to Heaven. You are wrong.
There are nearly 7 billion people on earth. Only 2.3 (roughly) billion of those people believe in christ. That's less than half.
The tenets of christianity demand that you believe in Jesus, and accept him as your savior to get into heaven. (narrow is the path indeed) That leaves out close to 5 billion people, who will go to hell simply for not knowing or believing in Jesus.
Now. That's assuming that all 2.3 billion christians actually go to heaven. This is not true either. I am sure that at least 15% (im being generous) of the people who call themselves "christian", do not qualify due to sin, backsliding, blasphemy, non-repentence, lack of true belief, double-think, and I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the "christians" who don't truely believe but "hedge their bets" are not worthy of heaven either. God said "be hot or be cold, if you are lukewarm I will spew you out of my mouth"
So. If in fact christianity is truth. Then, just based on todays population, (not counting the billions of people who have already lived and died before us)...I'd say 75% of all "souls" are going to hell.
Seeing as the majority of souls go to hell...it is not a benefit that the chrisian God pan out.
So does anyone know of a God dogma that gets a majority of the population by shear % into paradise?? Anyone??
I don't.
If it was orthodox jew's Yaweh http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_population, then your looking at maybe 90% go to hell.
If it's Jehova's witness Jehova http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah's_Witnesses, then probably 90% go to hell (or more)
If its Allah http://www.religioustolerance.org/isl_numb.htm, then maybe 78% or so go to hell.
If Shinto http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinto is the real deal....no one goes to heaven or hell? Their spirits just float around?
If hindu http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html, then possibly everyone just gets http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism reincarnated?
If a God exists that created a heaven and hell, then the only reason anyone is going to hell is because that God made it that way. The God that builds the torture chamber for the people he doesn't like is completely culpable for blame, even IF he gives those people a chance to stay out.
Isn't that terrorism?? I mean, using fear and threats of suffering to persuade a desired response from other people? Sounds like terrorism to me.
"Love me or burn in hell!" strikes me as a pretty serious threat.
Therefore, even if 50% of people go to heaven ( a huge stretch), and 50% of people go to hell (im being generous, we all know that 50% of the people on earth going to heaven is a pipe dream)
Without a God who made a heaven or hell, 100% of people don't have to go to hell.
Sure there is no heaven, but so what.
Tell me. What is better?
50% of people eternally happy, and 50% of people tortured with eternal suffering...
or 100% of people just live out their lives and die a natural death and thats the end of it.
Now answer that same question if the numbers are more realistic.
Is it better for 15% of people to live in eternal bliss, while 85% burn in neverending torment and fire?
Or is it better that no one goes anywhere, we are all equal, no one gets pie, but no one gets tortured either. we all just live this earthly life and die when the time comes.
Or better yet, tell me this.
How many people are you willing to accept getting sent to hell so that you get to go to heaven? If you are part of the 15%, would you feel better, knowing that friends of yours, maybe some relatives, some children who only merely believed in the cultural gods they were raised with, some other people who never heard of your wonderful gods, how would you feel, come time to get on the lifeboat, knowing that 10,100 people for every ONE of you get to suffer unimaginable pain forever??
Believe me, they aren't all going to hell because they are horrible sinners murders and rapists....
Some of them just never got a chance to find Jesus....
I'll say this though.
I know from first hand experience.
There were times when the only christmas gifts I got were from donations given by the local church to needy families.
There were times when the only food on our table was given to us by a local church who saw us in need.
We even got free housing from a big church campground for a while when we had no home of our own.
I had a rough life. I really had faith, I believed in the things that I was raised to believe. I honestly followed Jesus with all my heart.
Christianity, (as well as islam and LDS, etc.) they do great things for their communities.
Almost makes me want to overlook the bad things people do in the name of God.
One thing though. As much as I believed, I never felt the presence inside. Everyone around me reaffirmed my faith, other PEOPLE told me that jesus was there, I never actually felt him inside, I never heard gods voice, or the holy spirit or anything. When I lost my faith....I still haven't.
Its not easy going from devout, to denial.
But really....I'd rather be the way I am now, I'll take my natural working world with no strings attached, no gods, no heaven or hells...I'll take what I can prove over what cannot be proven anyday. And I still give to charity and help my fellow man.
Thanks to Xenphire @ Inkfox for the amazing new sig
“Thus strangely are our souls constructed, and by slight ligaments
are we bound to prosperity and ruin.”
― Mary Shelley, Frankenstein
Buddy of mines a Gothei for that religion, priest equivalent.
Its all bollocks, but its badass bollocks.
Godel, yours comments have already been commented on, so I'll crib off of KurCE/Mr.Stuff/ICM
Captain Morgan,
You present a false dilemma with "Piss Christ verse Cathedral"
That framework you mention has some glaring problems, which I recall both myself and ICM giving nuuumerous examples of in the other thread.
I cannot figure out exactly what you are saying here in your most recent post, but here is one location where I argued against an argument of the sort that you gave a couple posts back (the one I told you to find). It was actually a response to slightly different argument, but the same line of reasoning works just as well against yours: http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=4630282&postcount=2647
It is the first argument I give in that post. If you want to see supposed objections to that argument, continue reading that thread; they all get settled at some point.
Was this addressed to me? If it was, here is my response:
Obviously, someone not being a Christian does not entail the inexistence of the Christian god. The OP was talking about advantages to being a Christian, not the advantages of the Christian god existing. I said that one such advantage is how the whole hell situation plays out if the Christian god does indeed exits. That is a conditional "if the Christian god exists, then X". Now, you are talking about the Christian god not existing? Well, I didn't mention that in my argument. I totally agree with everything you said, but it is not related in any interesting way to what I said.
Again, I am not saying anything about the differences in quality of life (or eternity, in this case) if deities like the Christian god were to exist. That is a completely different issue. The OP was talking about being a Christian, ie having certain beliefs. So, as a result, I am talking about the advantages of having certain beliefs.
I think you can probably guess what my response here will be.
Where do I say that? I never even said that all Christians would go to heaven.
As far as the rest of your post, all of it is talking about whether or not things are better with the Christian god around, which misses what I was saying exactly like the earlier stuff. Also, I would check out the first argument in that post I linked above, as it argues against an argument that you aren't exactly making but seems like something that you are sort of pushing towards.
Thanks to Magus of the Sheep at Scuttlemutt Productions for the best ever sig.
A question then?
How much charity equals one person tortured to death in the inquisition?
So because someone misuses religion as a way to justify something that the religion is inherently against then the religion is bad? It's the people that are bad not the religion these people will use any number of things to justify an absurd belief or action. It's not a guilty by association type of thing no matter how much you disagree with religion.
Thanks to Magus of the Sheep at Scuttlemutt Productions for the best ever sig.
It's not always by association.
Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live
My question stands.
Just to back this up a bit...
Although, I don't know, I almost want to say that believing in things without evidence in general is the problem, and religion is a form of that, and encourages it. The only thing that'll fix that is education, because humans seem to be born with a propensity for doing it.
So because someone went crazy that was Christian that means Christianity is bad? So every mentally ill person makes the perspective groups they belong to bad. Or say she was English so now are all English people bad?
A question with no answer because honestly what should I say there lives are worth in charity? Churches help people get things they need to live so I guess a life for a life to make up for it? Also I wasn't just talking charity.
So people believing in spirits and getting exorcisms is bad? They can do whatever they want I mean who does it hurt? The power of positive thinking or believing in something can do a lot to help people. You put your faith in medicine to heal which isn't that much more reasonable then this because science has shown time and again that the placebo effect works just as well all too often maybe not as often as medicine but often enough.Hell half the medicine that's available they speed up production and testing to get on the market only to down the road be proven wrong or have negative health side effects. All those uneducated people in the world are horrible people too right because they believe in something not objective verifiable?
@Both: I think you feel your in such a position of superiority of belief and faith in science your blind to good things that come from outside of it that or your overwhelming hatred for religion won't allow you to see it. You see religion as a disease which you must cure because you lack perspective and are pissed off.
I'm not even religious so you know I'm just not blinded by hate.
It's like the thread before in Philosophy religion and science are not mutually exclusive they both do good things for the world regardless of if you like them or want to believe it.
Thanks to Magus of the Sheep at Scuttlemutt Productions for the best ever sig.
2. If you "treat" a disease by attempting to cast out demons, you're not actually treating the disease, are you? This means that the victim is still going to die, whereas had they visited a real doctor we might have a different story.
These places aren't so backwater that real doctors don't exist or are unheard of. Some people, however, prefer to ask for divine help rather than human help. This is what happens when you have too much faith. That's just one example; theirs is far from the only case.
*shrug*
I don't have respect for silly ideas which are claimed to be something else... from anybody... for whatever reason. Calling it a religion doesn't make your idea of the world resting on the back of a giant turtle more worthy of respect than Joe Blow off the street who believes in leprechauns. That's just how I see it.
So religion is to blame for them acting in contrast to what there religion teaches by killing someone? I mean America had witch trials but no one ever said the ☺☺☺☺ing church is the reason. People have a level of personal responsibility in there actions you can't blame a misguided view on something not even taught in the religion. Most likly the veiw came from mixing traditional African religious practices with Christianity
but, it doesn't mean Christianity(Or their traditional religion either) is to blame.
Not treating it in a scientific way but it doesn't mean the power of positive thinking doesn't help your body fight off the disease. Also medicine is not proven to work all the time for whatever the illness is we just show a correlation is works enough of the time in comparison to the placebo effect. They will die either way if they are beat to death like point 1 is about so an exorcism seems to be the best option anyway. So people may choose treatment in ways not like ours but when did Christianity advocate medicine is wrong? Never. People choose how they wish to live nothing wrong with it and if they die earlier so be it but they lived how they wished.
Thanks to Magus of the Sheep at Scuttlemutt Productions for the best ever sig.