Posted on 11/02/2003 12:16:10 PM PST by mrs9x
I surely do !!!
.
I was going to say the same thing. I was basically born Jewish, but I can't call myself a "Jew," because I'm not one. Jews might consider me to be an apostate Jew (because I was born of a Jewish woman), but I don't consider myself to be that. I'm just an atheist, like so many other Americans.
Yep...I definitely liked that line.
I suppose I believe in God primarily because I hope to see my parents and others again in heaven, if I make it there.
I would rather hope for heaven and eternal life than to spend a whole lot of time and energy arguing about the existence of God.
If I die and just become "dead", did I waste my time hoping for something more?
No. If there is no God, there is no heaven.
It's the mental realm (spiritual) that lives on. If you don't believe in God, therefore no possability of a heaven, your eternal realm will be an existance without either.
Your subconscience mind needs logic. No God = no heaven, and that's what will prevail.
I would rather hope for heaven and eternal life than to spend a whole lot of time and energy arguing about the existence of God.
If I die and just become "dead", did I waste my time hoping for something more?
Pardon me, but that doesn't sound like belief in God. That sounds like hope that there's a God, with the hedge that if there isn't, no loss for you, because the hope while alive feels better than the intellectual exercise of questioning.
Did I misunderstand? I think of belief in God as the positive, unquestioning belief. Not hope. Not it feels better than the alternative. But the awesome belief that God exists, and all the fear, love, etc that goes with that.
Which is all well and good, except for this. Let's say I agree with Pascal that piety, if nothing else, is a good hedge. How do I know what this possibly real God wants? There are competing notions on almost every point of religion. No matter how hard I try to hedge my bets, I still run the same risks. I don't think you can hedge your way out of it.
The way I see it is that all morality is relative -- with the religious it comes from clergymen and books, as no two people can agree on what God is, so there is no true immutable source of morality (just my opinion).
I do believe in good and evil. 'Good' is doing what is helps the individual, whether or not it personally benefits you. 'Evil' is doing what is good for you, especially if it hurts other people. Bush: Good; Hillary: Bad.
I could spend a long, long time refining and expanding that statement to clear up any potential confusion. But I'm too ill at the moment to do so.
I also believe that if God exists, perhaps he deliberately does not make Himself known to certain people, so that they will act as checks against religion run amok, or, in the case of Satanists and pagans, so that they will serve as reminders to the faithful of what lies at the end of the slippery slope. Perhaps God does not like his followers to know him TOO well, or get too full of themselves.
If I could be assured that religious debates would remain civil, I'd participate in them a lot more frequently. That I do not is not an indication that I lack conviction, merely that I lack the stomach for the nastiness that too often ensues (making both believers and nonbelievers alike look pretty small).
The afterlife would be a bouncing around between the worst of horrors and the pleasure of seeing parents. It sounds like an eternity of mental chaos. All the negatives in life would still become a reality, and what rightous thoughts there are would be few and far in between.
"Let your yes be yes, and your no be no."
"Chose thou, whom you will serve."
That's known as Pascal's Wager. Somehow I have a hard time believing he said that in seriousness. What kind of all-knowing God wouldn't see through such behavior?
Incidentally, I just did a search for Pascal's Wager, and found a site with some articles discussing Pascal's Wager. It may be found here.. I don't know the mission of that web site, but it was the first page I looked at through Google search. I might go read some of it myself.
There is some logic, though. By behaving as though there was a God, you'd see the rewards of Godly living, and understand actions have consequences. In Godly living, the consequences are good.
By not living in a Godly manner, you'll live to see the chaos and misery. It's enough to lead one to God.
Example - anti-God left wing policies have lead to disease, poverty, dependancy, misery , dispare, and death.
Pro-God policies on the right have lead to health, wealth, freedom, happiness, and life.
This is the most intelligent way EVER to put this query. This gets rid of the pretension. Even if you CLAIM to be an athiest, if you are still hedging your bets with a full Jewish/Catholic etc. burial, you are affiliated and maybe your squirrel brain thinks athieism is cool, but your heart believes in G-d.
I'm sort of like that, though in my case I behave as though what I do matters, somehow. Even if it only matters to those who come after me here on Earth.
Once you stop believing that your actions matter, or that only those that affect you personally are important, you open the door to all sorts of licentiousness. Why do I keep thinking of the Clintons?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.