This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
CountScrofula · 41-45, M
SW-User
@CountScrofula So, who created God?
BlueMetalChick · 26-30, F
SW-User
@BlueMetalChick >_>
How long ago was he alive?
How long ago was he alive?
CountScrofula · 41-45, M
@SW-User Religious beliefs and practices change in the same way cultural practices change. If religion was based on real Truths, certain aspects would stay the same. Instead they change hugely as people move around and time passes.
Holy books aren't set in stone, but have changed according to the politics of day. Every society has had religious beliefs, yet they all believe the next one over is wrong.
Millions of people believed in Zeus as passionately as anyone today believes in the Christian God. The only reason we call what they believe myth is popularity. What separates God from Zeus?
Your beliefs don't harm anyone and I respect them and you. If you look at them in the context of human history they're defined by human action and politics, just like my atheism.
Holy books aren't set in stone, but have changed according to the politics of day. Every society has had religious beliefs, yet they all believe the next one over is wrong.
Millions of people believed in Zeus as passionately as anyone today believes in the Christian God. The only reason we call what they believe myth is popularity. What separates God from Zeus?
Your beliefs don't harm anyone and I respect them and you. If you look at them in the context of human history they're defined by human action and politics, just like my atheism.
SW-User
@CountScrofula there is one religion which hasn't changed :p
And is considered outdated, even though the book remains in pristine condition for over 1,500 years, so that is a special case that condradicts your claims of religion changing over time.
Second, proving and disproving God is not related to the human being at all. It is situated in the foundation of one's mental costruction of the concept of God, meaning that if I believe in God, you cannot disprove God. I will find everything to be a creation and relating to a designer. However, if I disbelieve in God, the I cannot be swayed as well in that I cannoy disprove God, but I am arguing that there is no compelling reason to believe in God. I mean, if you cannot prove a God exists, what kinda of logic is it that you can claim you can disprove God at the same time? 😂
Picture this:
A lot of religions changed. Check these theoretical and hypothetically constructed views from those that believe in God and those that don't.
1. God exists. God spoke to the human being. People took the message and Word of God and corrupted it because popularity demanded so.
2. God does not exist. People constructed religion and the concept of God. People changed their religions in relation to popularity and ine.
BOTH of these views are correct based on the foundation. If God REALLY EXISTS, and He spoke to the people and taught what is right and wrong, then people literally altered and corrupted the message of God and that explains the change in religion. However, if God DOESN'T EXIST, then people made and changed the message just because they felt like it and knew it was not real.
Just understand that human beings do not determine the existence of God just because religion changes :p
That's a flawed logic I've seen too many times over. If you wanna talk about God, then talk about Him. Not what peeps do breh XD
And is considered outdated, even though the book remains in pristine condition for over 1,500 years, so that is a special case that condradicts your claims of religion changing over time.
Second, proving and disproving God is not related to the human being at all. It is situated in the foundation of one's mental costruction of the concept of God, meaning that if I believe in God, you cannot disprove God. I will find everything to be a creation and relating to a designer. However, if I disbelieve in God, the I cannot be swayed as well in that I cannoy disprove God, but I am arguing that there is no compelling reason to believe in God. I mean, if you cannot prove a God exists, what kinda of logic is it that you can claim you can disprove God at the same time? 😂
Picture this:
A lot of religions changed. Check these theoretical and hypothetically constructed views from those that believe in God and those that don't.
1. God exists. God spoke to the human being. People took the message and Word of God and corrupted it because popularity demanded so.
2. God does not exist. People constructed religion and the concept of God. People changed their religions in relation to popularity and ine.
BOTH of these views are correct based on the foundation. If God REALLY EXISTS, and He spoke to the people and taught what is right and wrong, then people literally altered and corrupted the message of God and that explains the change in religion. However, if God DOESN'T EXIST, then people made and changed the message just because they felt like it and knew it was not real.
Just understand that human beings do not determine the existence of God just because religion changes :p
That's a flawed logic I've seen too many times over. If you wanna talk about God, then talk about Him. Not what peeps do breh XD