I'm not sure one should dismiss God anymore

[Heraclitus]

My denomination is close to the Annihilationism.

JM

Could you elaborate on what you mean by close?

[Ben Kenobi]

What makes you think you have picked the correct religion and that you're not wasting your time with the wrong one?

This is a really good question.

I went through this whole process about 10 years ago.

For me, it went like this:

Is there a God? What do I believe about him. At the time I was a believer in the weak anthropic principle, that the universe was ordered and that God was a watchmaker who wound up the world and let it run. I didn't believe in a pantheon, so that left,

Christianity, Judaism and Islam, Sikhism and Zoroasterianism or Deism/Unitarianism or some sort like that.

Christianity claims that Jesus was the son of God. That he died and rose again. If Christianity is right, then all this is true. If none of this is true, than Christianity is wonrg and one of the other religions must be right. This is contrary to Deism, in that God has an active role in the world through miracles.

So in order to assess Christianity, you have to read up on all the historical sources of the time. What struck me is both the paucity of the sources, the lateness of the translations and the ubiquity of the bible. That left me with the uncomfortable argument that based on the textual evidence that the bible was more likely to be true true assuming corruption was the same everywhere, than any other source of the time.

I didn't like that conclusion very much, so that left me the question of reading the bible for myself, and seeing what it taught about scripture. Christianity is really a very simple religion at it's core. There existed a man named Jesus of Nazareth, who rose from the dead. if he rose from the dead, than he is God and man together, and Christianity is true. If he did not rise from the dead, than he is false, and a liar, and people should not be Christians. What did the Gospel teach about him? They make the argument right away, that the Jews claimed that the tomb was empty. They accused the disciples of stealing the body, despite the fact that Peter was so dejected that he stayed at home, and it was the women who went to see Christ that morning. If he had stolen the body, why would he permit anyone to go there rather then sealing it off? Could it have been one of the other 12who did so without consulting Peter? Also unlikely. Then you have Peter's testimony that the burial wrappings were undisturbed, but there was no body. Why on earth woud anyone steal a body but leave the wrappings? And how could the body vanish without the wrappings being untied?

So this is why I am a Christian today, because I believe in the Gospel account. I believe they are true, and thus Christianity is the true religion.

As for Catholicism, that came later. For that it took coming to an understanding of Apostolic successsion. There is an unbroken chain of bishops from Peter to Benedict. Christ gave a blessing to St. Peter that he had the authority to bind and loose. Therefore, the Church must have this line going back to Peter. Of course that leaves the Orthodox as well, but even though I went to a russian language ministry mennonite church, I wasn't happy about some of the things that the Orhodox church did. I don't like the fact that they retain their national bodies. Antiochene and Syriac I can understand but every country adds their own label. If I wanted nationalism, I would not become a Catholic. I believe that Christian ties supercede national ones and that it is important that Christians should be unified with one another. "Christ is the head of his bride, the church. One Christ, one Church.

[Elok]

This is my basic problem with religion: What consequences? From whom?

Currently I am faced with the choice of hundreds of different religions which all basically say the same thing: If you are not a part of us, you will be punished for your mistake when you die.

Something of an oversimplification. Buddhists, for example, don't believe there's a "you" to be punished, or indeed anyone to do the punishing. Taoists...I think they just believe your life will be easier if you simply follow The Way. In Hinduism you aren't really punished, you just fail to escape the cycle of rebirth. It's also the only one of those three that believes in deities at all, except for certain SE Asian variants of Buddhism.

I've heard Jews saying that they believe Jews alone were called out to be a moral example, and that universal conversion is not a goal in Judaism. But there are a ton of variants within Judaism. In my own faith, we don't say you WILL go to Hell (in fact, we pretty much never mention Hell except as a synonym for "Hades," the state of death before Christ, but that's a long digression), only that we believe we have a better understanding. And our goal is theosis, the reunion with God which can be at least partially achieved in this life. Long story short(er): It's not so cut and dried.

Clearly with such a massively important decision to make, I have to be certain that I join the right religion, or else it will all be for nothing when I realise I've been following the wrong religion and end up going to hell or wherever. No religion right now seems to be more compelling to join than any other - should I simply join the one with the most members on the proviso that it is the mostly likely one to be the true religion? Perhaps they just have a better marketing strategy than the others?

What makes you think you have picked the correct religion and that you're not wasting your time with the wrong one?

Leaving aside that for many people, one religion is more convincing than the others, what makes you think, given that argument, that sitting out the game entirely is better than taking your chances?

(This is not a troll, but essentially goes to the heart of the reason why I am an atheist and no one has ever satisfactorily answered me as to why there are so many different religions, of different types, often teaching entirely different things - surely there can be only one if a divine being existed!?)

You've given this argument before, and it baffles me. People are disagreeable creatures, and the more important a topic is, the more vehemently we are prone to disagree about it--witness politics. Do you mean that, if God existed (leaving out nontheistic religions for which this is impossible), He would be up on a mountain with a bullhorn continually elucidating correct doctrine, or something like that? Anything else will result in factionalism.

[Jon Miller]

Could you elaborate on what you mean by close?

Actually, it is a form of annihiliationism. Just probably different than that practiced in the first couple hundred years after Christ.

Basically the idea is that after death we are just in the grave. We await the coming of Christ. Christ resurrects all, those who follow Him to everlasting life and those who don't to death. Which would be the final death, or annihilation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soul_sleep

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_conditionalism

I note that if I went to traditional Christianity, I would go to something along the lines of Eastern Orthodoxy rather than Catholicism.

JM

[Maniac]

Since religious people basically say they need God as a "fix" for their emotional/psychological/spiritual wellbeing, does it logically follow they see atheists as emotionally/psychologically/spiritually stronger, more independent and mentally well-balanced?

[MikeH]

Yep.

[Elok]

So.. if a man refuses to go to the doctor, he must be healthier than people who do?

[Maniac]

Why do you assume all people are ill?

[Hauldren Collider]

Because it's Sick People Awareness Month, duh.

[Guynemer]

Didn't read the thread, but anything that keeps Hera from posting more racist trolls is okay by me.

[germanos]

I think I should try and repair my relationship with God. My life and mental health really has turned to a ****ed up direction since abandoning HIM. I'll try praying today for the first time after a long while.

A heroin addict will also go cold turkey.

[Elok]

Why do you assume all people are ill?

I don't think you're really all that interested in a discussion of Original Sin. Certainly I'm not, as it would probably provoke a long discussion with BK about the Catholic vs. Orthodox understandings of the idea. But I'm not looking to start an argument. I was simply pointing out a problem with what he said. Incidentally, why are atheists privileged to be snide, condescending ****** about religion but not the other way around?

[Guynemer]

Because you're not nearly as good at it, obviously.

[Elok]

If anybody wants to be known as a more practiced and gifted heel than myself, far be it from me to deny him.

[Berzerker]

cant say I'm atheist, agnostic, gnostic, religious or spiritual... But this much I figure, whatever is responsible for existence is far beyond my limited imagination and knowledge. The more I learn about the universe the more I "believe" in god, be it prime mover or a more "personal" god still taking an active role in existence.