Is ELP against christianity

Arteum wrote: maani wrote: Atom Heart Mother: Your intentions are good, but to suggest that someone "try religion somehow" or "see what it is like to believe in God for a little while" is ultimately moot.  One cannot simply "try religion" or pretend to believe in God.  Either one does, or one doesn't.  Either one's inner spirit "connects" with God, or it does not.  Either the "light switch" is turned on or it is not.  It is fruitless to hope that non-believers will simply "try" to be believers.  They cannot. This does not mean they never will.  As noted, I had the light switch turned on for me at 19.  And although it is true that I was already a spiritual "seeker" of sorts, I could no more have believed in God simply because I "wanted" to than I could have jumped off a cliff and defied the laws of gravity simply because I wanted to.  It had to happen.  However, I firmly believe that even the most adamant atheist could have the light switch turned on at some point. Maani, so why does God, who for some reason is dying to get adoration and love from people, who needs people so badly to believe in himself (as if he wasnted to reassure himself that he really exists), why does God, I say, rely on such a complex and an imprefect mechanism of recruiting his army of converts? [I think adoration for him is like gasoline for a car. the moment it stops completely, God dies (Devil wins)]. First, God only recruits a small part of the world -- Christians. Other people he automatically does not need. Why take pains to create Arabs at all then? Then, somebody must tell people about God, otherwise they will never find out about him. And further yet, it takes such a long time for many people to "switch", and many still don't do it! Why is he so obscure if he really wants people to believe in him? Why doesn't he create people so that they don't and can't have doubt in his existence? Why doesn't he manifest his existence unequivocally (he's apparently starving for adoration)? Is he so stupid?

Because having faith in God, somehting that science can't explain, really shows love for him.

Arteum wrote: AtomHeartMother wrote: Arteum wrote: AtomHeartMother wrote: I highly suggest you try religion somehow or another and atleast try to open you mind atleast once in your life enough to accept somekind of religion if your going to critizise it. Like in prog, don't evaluate and critizise an album without listening to it, and not just once but many times, this is the same with religion. It is very immature and ignorant to dismiss or ridicule religion if you have not even tried it. See what it is like to believe in God for a little while and study it before you say that it is all bad and wrong. Like what? Let's suppose that miracles happen. Let's suppose that 2 + 2 is not 4. Let's suppose that there is a clear demarcation line between good and evil. Let's suppose that world is ruled by some supernatural deity with fantastic superpowers who is never going to reveal or manifest itself. Now, where do we go from here? You know, I might as well believe in trolls and elves ... So typical. You avoided the very clear point I made, that you cannot just citizise religion and all others if you don't know about them. You cannot simply just read about religion and know about it either, you have to EXPERIENCE it. Religion is not somehting that can be felt or explained simply in a book, it must be practiced. I assume you know a good deal about many religions and know that they all revolve around a God that you refuse to believe in. Mabey so, but don't argue with others that have experieced it just because you read about it and decided it was crap. If you tried it and got nothing out of it that is one thing, but to look at it and not try it and still say it is fake and wrong, that is immature and ignorant. So when people are doped up and convinced there are pink elephants flying in the sky, I must believe that what they're saying is true and respect their opinion?

Good job agian at taking my point, that is really only relevant to this topic, totally out of contexted. Beleiving somehting because of drugs, or anything that can altar your state of mind, is not the same as using your unaltared mind plus your "heart" or emotions or whatever you want to call it to believe in something like God. Yes, it does take "logic" to believe in such a thing as God and we all know a "doped up" mind uses no real logic.

Arteum:

Yet again, you proceed from false assumption.  What makes you think I "needed" religion?  I didn't "need" religion any more than I "needed" a knowledge of theoretical physics.  Although it is not true of all believers, there are some believers (myself included) for whom the cliche "You don't find God; God finds you" is apropos.  But once He did "find me," it was a "revelation" of sorts, and I was happy to follow where it led, and learn.

And yes, I was a student of Michio's for two years, taking both physics and other classes that he taught at City College.  I also attended a number of anti-nuclear rallies and other political events with him.  I never claimed to be a scientist, so your sarcastic comment about "published works" will be ignored.

You accept that I obviously have some grounding in science, logic and the scientific method, and have read numerous books, and you then ask "Maybe you found all these books wrong?"

As noted, I never abandoned the rational, intellectual aspects of my life and being.  Indeed, far from "negating" them or "limiting" them or "repressing" them, I actually added to them.  This is something that you, as a rabid atheist, find far too fearful to do: add to your knowledge, rather than allowing it to stagnate with what you know - or think you know.

Indeed, as someone else suggested earlier, my ability to look at things from both perspectives - the "rational, intellectual, scientific" and the spiritual - allows me to see possible connections, relationships and "overlaps" between ideas and theories that many others - both believers and non-believers - see as mutually exclusive: creation and evolution; the Big Bang and the world being created in "six days"; pro-life and pro-choice; and a host of others.  And the connections, relationships and overlaps I see are not a result of "diluting" one side or the other (though "compromise" may sometimes be suggested), but of being able to "step back" and see these issues from both sides - i.e., understanding why each side sees the issue as one of mutual exclusivities.  Yes, my brain is "quite logical."  But I have the added benefit of seeing things from a perspective that, rather than being even marginally interested in, you choose to insult and denigrate constantly.

In this regard, your continued denigrations notwithstanding ("Most religious people I met had a flaw in their brain"), having faith is not a "flaw."  As an aside, there is a difference between "religion" and "faith": "religion" is about laws, regulations and behavior; faith is about a relationship with God and Christ.  Most mainstream "organized" Christianity focuses on the former, often at the expense of the latter.  In this regard I, too, find many "religious" people to be "flawed" - but not for the same reason you do.

As for not being afraid to die, I find it interesting that you would say that this is a result of having "poisoned your mind so that it is no longer afraid."  Do you equate calm and inner peace - even to the point of lack of fear of dying - to be a result of "poisoning?"  That is, wouldn't most people like to get over the "fear" of dying?  Indeed, over all fears?  Let me ask you: if someone were to be able to get over a particular fear through counseling and analysis, would you call that "poisoning" one's mind?  If not, what would you say is the difference?  If one is able to conquer one's fears, isn't that a good thing?  No matter how they accomplish, as long as it is a "true" conquering and not a form of suppression, repression or denial?

In using metaphors like "poisoning" and "flaw," you resort to condescension, insult and denigration.  As a counseling minister, my initial response to this (without knowing anything about you or your upbringing or background) is that you use these terms, and denigrate people of faith, out of fear - particularly xenophobia (fear of the unknown) - and as strong an "indoctrination" in atheism - to the exclusion of anything else, or even the possibility of anything else - as you accuse faith-based people of having in faith and religion.

Peace.

Arteum:

There is a very simple reason why God did not create humankind to automatically believe in and love Him: it's called "free will."  God gave us all free will.  And the ultimate "application" of that free will is the free will to believe or disbelieve in God Himself.  As others point out, if you are "forced" to love someone or something, what kind of love is that?  God wants us to love Him because we want to love Him - not because He makes us do so, or demands it.  God does not want "automatons" who love Him because He made them do so.

Do you love your girlfriend (or boyfriend, or mother, or father, or whoever) because they expect you to or demand it of you?  Of course not.  Your love is freely given.  God's love is freely given, and he is looking for our love freely given.

It can't be any simpler than that.

Peace.

Arteum wrote: maani wrote: Arteum: There is a very simple reason why God did not create humankind to automatically believe in and love Him: it's called "free will."  God gave us all free will.  And the ultimate "application" of that free will is the free will to believe or disbelieve in God Himself.  As others point out, if you are "forced" to love someone or something, what kind of love is that?  God wants us to love Him because we want to love Him - not because He makes us do so, or demands it.  God does not want "automatons" who love Him because He made them do so. Do you love your girlfriend (or boyfriend, or mother, or father, or whoever) because they expect you to or demand it of you?  Of course not.  Your love is freely given.  God's love is freely given, and he is looking for our love freely given. It can't be any simpler than that. Peace. Why is he looking for love freely given? Is he that queer? [I am serious] What's the point? And why then can't he create people so that they automatically give him their free love? He's all-mighty. Don't tell me he can't do it. It would solve all God's problems in an instant. Or he's just not that clever, is he? Or is he looking for problems? For himself and his puppets people? Strange chap that God is. I thought he was about solving problems, not creating them.

His only problem is the Devil, not us. He wants love in order for the world to be perfect, and peacfull. Giving love is "queer" to you no doubt because society has said so, since it's not "cool" for their to be love these days it must automattically be "queer" huh?

Sounds like somehting off of MTV to me.