Is the Religion vs Science Debate Pointless?

[The 13th Kenpachi 4,279]

Arguably the biggest debate in the past 20 or so years (probably even more) is religion vs science. Which is right and which is wrong? Does science have all the answers or does religion hold the key? Did God intentionally the universe or was it a pure coincidence like the Big Bang theory suggests?

 

This debate spawns flame wars and people writing humongous paragraphs trying to defend their arguments. But it never ends, so what's the point? This debate is utterly pointless because those arguing will never reach a conclusion, it will just go on and on and on.

 

Instead of arguing over who created the world why don't you spend some time trying to save it and help it? You can always find common ground somewhere along the line with the person you are arguing with.

 

 

The people involved in the argument will never convince the other one to abandon their beliefs will they?

 

Person 1 thinks she is correct and person 2 thinks she is correct. So a conclusion can never be reached.

Edited August 15, 2016 by Shinobi Bacon and Eggs

[PrinceNoctis 1,011]

Yes it is pointless...at the end of the day, whether science is right or religion is right (even though, they sometimes go hand in hand)...It doesn't bring us anything. 

[Dave 5,715]

I'm not sure about it being pointless. In my opinion, it's far better to hear out differing points of view than simply surround ourselves with yes-men who regurgitate back to us what we want to hear. As someone who considers himself religious, I welcome scientific debate if for no other reason than it forces you to recognize the world outside of your comfortable bubble, and gives you things to think about. If nothing else, it makes religion have to consider itself in a current age and adapt accordingly (in theory). 

 

The problem stems from people who are less concerned about having a debate, persay, and are more concerned about digging their heels in and trying to force the other person to admit that they are right, to the point where they're not really having a debate so much as they are having a gigantic circle jerk. The aim shouldn't be to change the other persons mind, but rather to have a conversation and entertain different modes of thought. 

[Sora_Roxas26 124]

it is pointless, Science is the answer. 

[HeartlessAqua 38]

Yes and no.

 

Yes, it's pointless because no matter how hard or how brilliantly you argue, very few people are actually going to change their views. Religious people can have a conviction which is so strong that even when shown evidence against their beliefs, they will either deny it or they will find a creative way to integrate it into their beliefs. And people who uphold pure rationalism usually won't give religion much of a chance in the first place because religion is by definition irrational.

 

No, it isn't pointless because you can still potentially expand other people's understanding of science or religion through arguing, whether positively or negatively. And in the case of science/rationalism, sometimes, just sometimes, you NEED to argue or fight against irrational things because they can be detrimental to others.

 

One thing I want to make clear is that science and religion don't always oppose each other. It seems that a lot of people think that this science vs religion debate is some kind of black and white war, but it's not.

 

Religion and science and their conflict can be incredibly wide and varied and ambiguous. There are many scientists who believe in a particular religion, there are many religious people who also believe in modern science to varying extents, and there are many atheists or anti-theists who practice a religion of some kind. (Atheism means you don't believe in gods, but an atheist can still practice a religion which has no gods, like branches of Buddhism or Hinduism)

 

In the end, I think it's less science vs religion and more rationalism vs irrationality. There are people who think the world is or should be a certain way, and because of this they take issue with people who think very differently. As a whole I think rationalism is the better side, because it doesn't base things strictly on belief or faith in what can't be seen, but the whole debate is really gray. Sometimes arguing against religion can be good, especially in cases where people brainwash children or leaders manipulate the masses and promote very unhealthy habits. But sometimes arguing against religion is pointless because religion isn't always harmful and sometimes it can be very personally, spiritually, psychologically fulfilling.

 

Let's say you go meet with a primitive village somewhere. This village believes that the sun is their father and the earth is their mother and that dreams are visits from the spirit world. You can explain to them that the sun is a ball of gas, that the earth is an inhuman mass of minerals, and that dreams are just expressions of the mind, but in the end it won't matter, because these people were fine just the way they were, and can't use what you taught them in any practical way.

 

I do agree that too many people spend more time fighting than making things better. Many of the louder religious people are angry or power-hungry morons, and some of them don't even believe in their own religion and purposely use it to manipulate people. And all over the internet you'll find people who might uphold science but themselves do absolutely nothing that contributes to society. My uncle is a big science guy, but he spends his days drunk, drugged up, and homophobic to the point of saying he wants to kill all gay people.

 

But in the end, human beings will always be this way, so there's no point in complaining about it. All you can do is accept that human beings will always naturally be in conflict, because conflict is only natural, and that you can still try to be a good person regardless.

[Guest]

Yes it is pointless...at the end of the day, whether science is right or religion is right (even though, they sometimes go hand in hand)...It doesn't bring us anything. 

 

This isn't a debate between science and religion, rather, religion versus postmodernism. Religion is firmly rooted in set beliefs whilst postmodernism is all about adapting to an ever-changing world. Understanding which is the better way of living is more of the case of the individual. As a collective, we cannot dictate what's better for humanity because the concept of humanity is humans living in harmony. Humans cannot live in harmony and achieve world peace because of clashing ideals.

[HeartlessAqua 38]

it is pointless, Science is the answer.

 

First of all, way to simplify an incredibly complex debate. Many scientists are religious and many religious people believe in science to differing extents.

 

And second of all, science may be the key to understanding life itself as it really is, but not everyone really needs to know that. What good will it do me if you explain to me how particles work? Nothing. Nothing at all. Because I don't deal with particles on such a deep, intimate level.

 

Sometimes what's important is understanding yourself on a psychological level, which can also be achieved through pure rational science, but can also be achieved inwardly by religious or spiritual practice or mindsets.

Edited August 15, 2016 by HeartlessAqua

[The 13th Kenpachi 4,279]

I'm not sure about it being pointless. In my opinion, it's far better to hear out differing points of view than simply surround ourselves with yes-men who regurgitate back to us what we want to hear. As someone who considers himself religious, I welcome scientific debate if for no other reason than it forces you to recognize the world outside of your comfortable bubble, and gives you things to think about. If nothing else, it makes religion have to consider itself in a current age and adapt accordingly (in theory). 

 

The problem stems from people who are less concerned about having a debate, persay, and are more concerned about digging their heels in and trying to force the other person to admit that they are right, to the point where they're not really having a debate so much as they are having a gigantic circle jerk. The aim shouldn't be to change the other persons mind, but rather to have a conversation and entertain different modes of thought.

 

I get what you mean. It's not bad to debate it, but then arguing over the answer for hours and hours won't do much.

 

it is pointless, Science is the answer.

 

That wasn't the type of answer I was looking for but science is pretty cool .

Yes and no.

Yes, it's pointless because no matter how hard or how brilliantly you argue, very few people are actually going to change their views. Religious people can have a conviction which is so strong that even when shown evidence against their beliefs, they will either deny it or they will find a creative way to integrate it into their beliefs. And people who uphold pure rationalism usually won't give religion much of a chance in the first place because religion is by definition irrational.

No, it isn't pointless because you can still potentially expand other people's understanding of science or religion through arguing, whether positively or negatively. And in the case of science/rationalism, sometimes, just sometimes, you NEED to argue or fight against irrational things because they can be detrimental to others.

One thing I want to make clear is that science and religion don't always oppose each other. It seems that a lot of people think that this science vs religion debate is some kind of black and white war, but it's not.

Religion and science and their conflict can be incredibly wide and varied and ambiguous. There are many scientists who believe in a particular religion, there are many religious people who also believe in modern science to varying extents, and there are many atheists or anti-theists who practice a religion of some kind. (Atheism means you don't believe in gods, but an atheist can still practice a religion which has no gods, like branches of Buddhism or Hinduism)

In the end, I think it's less science vs religion and more rationalism vs irrationality. There are people who think the world is or should be a certain way, and because of this they take issue with people who think very differently. As a whole I think rationalism is the better side, because it doesn't base things strictly on belief or faith in what can't be seen, but the whole debate is really gray. Sometimes arguing against religion can be good, especially in cases where people brainwash children or leaders manipulate the masses and promote very unhealthy habits. But sometimes arguing against religion is pointless because religion isn't always harmful and sometimes it can be very personally, spiritually, psychologically fulfilling.

Let's say you go meet with a primitive village somewhere. This village believes that the sun is their father and the earth is their mother and that dreams are visits from the spirit world. You can explain to them that the sun is a ball of gas, that the earth is an inhuman mass of minerals, and that dreams are just expressions of the mind, but in the end it won't matter, because these people were fine just the way they were, and can't use what you taught them in any practical way.

I do agree that too many people spend more time fighting than making things better. Many of the louder religious people are angry or power-hungry morons, and some of them don't even believe in their own religion and purposely use it to manipulate people. And all over the internet you'll find people who might uphold science but themselves do absolutely nothing that contributes to society. My uncle is a big science guy, but he spends his days drunk, drugged up, and homophobic to the point of saying he wants to kill all gay people.

But in the end, human beings will always be this way, so there's no point in complaining about it. All you can do is accept that human beings will always naturally be in conflict, because conflict is only natural, and that you can still try to be a good person regardless.

That's a really great answer! I guess it would expand people's viewpoints but then again they may not want to listen to others and just be focused on their own ideas.

[HeartlessAqua 38]

This isn't a debate between science and religion, rather, religion versus postmodernism. Religion is firmly rooted in set beliefs whilst postmodernism is all about adapting to an ever-changing world. Understanding which is the better way of living is more of the case of the individual. As a collective, we cannot dictate what's better for humanity because the concept of humanity is humans living in harmony. Humans cannot live in harmony and achieve world peace because of clashing ideals.

I cannot stress this enough. This is a great, intelligent answer.

 

You can be a stubborn fool and tell everyone how they should live, but in the end that decision is up to every individual. You can have a dozen people in the room, and each one can see the world completely differently. As long as they don't harm or bother others, it shouldn't matter what they think.

[Sora_Roxas26 124]

First of all, way to simplify an incredibly complex debate. Many scientists are religious and many religious people believe in science to differing extents.

 

And second of all, science may be the key to understanding life itself as it really is, but not everyone really needs to know that. What good will it do me if you explain to me how particles work? Nothing. Nothing at all. Because I don't deal with particles on such a deep, intimate level.

 

Sometimes what's important is understanding yourself on a psychological level, which can also be achieved through pure rational science, but can also be achieved inwardly by religious or spiritual practice or mindsets.

Well, science is all about the truth, and trying to understand the universe we live in. Religion is good for some people, it helps them deal with horrible world we live in. But science is the only truth in the argument.

[Guest]

I cannot stress this enough. This is a great, intelligent answer.

 

You can be a stubborn fool and tell everyone how they should live, but in the end that decision is up to every individual. You can have a dozen people in the room, and each one can see the world completely differently. As long as they don't harm or bother others, it shouldn't matter what they think.

 

That's exactly right, but at the same time, what I've highlighted in bold in itself is a clashing ideal. Far right political groups, terrorists, sexists, homophobic and racial hatred groups for example have the superiority complex of believing that one set of humans are above others. 

 

And as far as the justification of religion in post-modern society, we don't know what lies beyond this world. For centuries, we've been so hard-wired with the notion of an afterlife, heaven and hell that it's not as easy as saying "science is logical so that's the best way to go about life". Not everything about life is about logic. Romantic relationships for example flourish through emotions. The bonds that form in a romantic relationship is illogical in nature because you're primarily acting upon emotions.

 

 

Well, science is all about the truth, and trying to understand the universe we live in. Religion is good for some people, it helps them deal with horrible world we live in. But science is the only truth in the argument.

 

"Truth" is subjective at best if it is not quantifiable. And even science changes with updated discovery. It was once a science to believe that the earth was flat.

Edited August 15, 2016 by Guest

[Sora_Roxas26 124]

That's exactly right, but at the same time, what I've highlighted in bold in itself is a clashing ideal. Far right political groups, terrorists, sexists, homophobic and racial hatred groups for example have the superiority complex of believing that one set of humans are above others. 

 

And as far as the justification of religion in post-modern society, we don't know what lies beyond this world. For centuries, we've been so hard-wired with the notion of an afterlife, heaven and hell that it's not as easy as saying "science is logical so that's the best way to go about life". Not everything about life is about logic. Romantic relationships for example flourish through emotions. The bonds that form in a romantic relationship is illogical in nature because you're primarily acting upon emotions.

 

 

 

"Truth" is subjective at best if it is not quantifiable. And even science changes with updated discovery. It was a science to believe that the earth was flat.

 

Scientific theories can change, but facts don't change. But my only problem with religion is the people who take it way too far, like the Christians who respond with you are going to hell when I say I'm an Atheist and then they try like crazy to convert me, or people who believe in god so much, that when they get cancer, they don't get treatment because god will heal them if they pray, my Aunt died doing exactly that, it kinda left a bad taste in my mouth with religion.

[Guest]

Scientific theories can change, but facts don't change. But my only problem with religion is the people who take it way too far, like the Christians who respond with you are going to hell when I say I'm an Atheist and then they try like crazy to convert me, or people who believe in god so much, that when they get cancer, they don't get treatment because god will heal them if they pray, my Aunt died doing exactly that, it kinda left a bad taste in my mouth with religion.

 

I'm really sorry to hear about your nan, but think of it like this: she died with what she wanted to believe in. With regards to people saying that "you'll go to hell if you don't believe in this!", ironically, they're saying that for your safety in the eyes of a superpower that has a 50/50 chance of being true. Now I'm not trying to change your ideals but I understand the power that comes with thinking logically, I just feel as though dismissing Religion as a societal detriment doesn't really explain the emotional impacts and philosophical effects it has on science, culture, psychology and sociology.

[Sora_Roxas26 124]

I'm really sorry to hear about your nan, but think of it like this: she died with what she wanted to believe in. With regards to people saying that "you'll go to hell if you don't believe in this!", ironically, they're saying that for your safety in the eyes of a superpower that has a 50/50 chance of being true. Now I'm not trying to change your ideals but I understand the power that comes with thinking logically, I just feel as though dismissing Religion as a societal detriment doesn't really explain the emotional impacts and philosophical effects it has on science, culture, psychology and sociology.

They are not saying that I'm going to hell for ME, they're saying it for themselves, and its not 50/50 chance. I never said Religion was a societal detriment, but it does become one when people take it too far, which is the minority, but still. 

[HeartlessAqua 38]

Interestingly enough, God isn't supposed to be a miracle worker. Christians who treat God like he's this guy who will do everything for them are kinda missing the point of their own religion.

 

Well, science is all about the truth, and trying to understand the universe we live in. Religion is good for some people, it helps them deal with horrible world we live in. But science is the only truth in the argument.

In regards to the horrible world thing, religion isn't that simple. At least, ideally it shouldn't be that simple.

 

Certain Christians today might treat their religion that way, as a mere comfort, but for more serious people, religion does not exist to merely comfort and coddle them.

 

Religions aren't supposed to hold people's hands and tell them everything is fine. Religions are supposed to push people to become better, or to at least follow virtuous laws.

 

Just look at Buddhism. There's no coddling here.

Edited August 15, 2016 by HeartlessAqua

[Sora_Roxas26 124]

Interestingly enough, God isn't supposed to be a miracle worker. Christians who treat God like he's this guy who will do everything for them are kinda missing the point of their own religion.

 

 

In regards to the horrible world thing, religion isn't that simple. At least, ideally it shouldn't be that simple.

 

Certain Christians today might treat their religion that way, as a mere comfort, but for more serious people, religion does not exist to merely comfort and coddle them.

 

Religions aren't supposed to hold people's hands and tell them everything is fine. Religions are supposed to push people to become better, or to at least follow virtuous laws.

 

Just look at Buddhism. There's no coddling here.

I've never heard anybody say that religions are supposed to push people to become better, religions have been twisted and extorted so much that they have lost all their meaning in a lot of cases, ISIS and Al Khida use twisted Islam ideals as an excuse to murder people, crazy cult leaders use twisted Christian ideals to take peoples money, to control them, to sexually control them, and when they get caught, to kill them, Catholic priests use their power to molest kids who trusted them, and then the church defends them, in Christianity supposedly if you sin your going to hell, in yet it is literally impossible for even a priest to never commit a sin, but at the same time, you can commit countless sins, but if you ask for forgiveness it is all good. Religion is principle is good, but in practice it goes very wrong in a lot of cases, that's all I'm saying. And religious people who still disregard evolution, or still think god created the Earth, or that everything that happens is gods will just need to face the truth, evolution is fact, the big bang theory is most likely what created the universe, but even if it isn't the big bang theory, it wasn't any god, and not everything happens for a reason, if everything happens for a reason by gods will, then he/she is insane

[The 13th Kenpachi 4,279]

I'm more of a deist than anything. Religion and science should go hand in hand. I don't believe in the idea of taking the texts literally though. Interpretation seems more logical to me but I don't mind what people believe.

 

Anyhow,

Interestingly enough, God isn't supposed to be a miracle worker. Christians who treat God like he's this guy who will do everything for them are kinda missing the point of their own religion.

 

In regards to the horrible world thing, religion isn't that simple. At least, ideally it shouldn't be that simple.

Certain Christians today might treat their religion that way, as a mere comfort, but for more serious people, religion does not exist to merely comfort and coddle them.

Religions aren't supposed to hold people's hands and tell them everything is fine. Religions are supposed to push people to become better, or to at least follow virtuous laws.

Just look at Buddhism. There's no coddling here.

I can't crop via phone but the first paragraph is a big belief of mine. I don't think God loves us at all.

[KingdomHearts3 2,591]

Yes and no. Yes in that converting someone to your side doesn't happen and won't happen. No in that debate is healthy if done respectfully. It is meant to present viewpoints and make the case for your viewpoint. In the U.S, that is how we choose our next president. It also helps sow seeds of tolerance.

[AnHeiressofaSOLDIER 358]

I'm a Christian. I won't go into too much detail here (as I don’t want to start a debate, as you yourself made this thread wanting to see less of it and I’ll respect that), but here’s why it’s important to me, personally.

I grew up in a Christian family, and went to church all the time, and thought I got what it was about and understood everything about it… but it wasn’t until about three years ago that I truly came to believe, got saved, and understood what I thought I had been but hadn’t at all for years.

For most of my life, I was probably actually anti-Christianity (though I acted as though I wasn’t to my parents), because my family drove a church bus. And long story short, a lot of times my sister and I thought that our parents put the bus kids before us, and that we kind of fell by the wayside at times that we needed them. For that reason, I resented Christianity.

I ended up getting a job as a church secretary, but I mostly hated every minute of it and only took the job because I had social anxiety and it was something I could do that would allow me to interact with very few people.

Looking back on it, I wasn’t qualified for the job at all and the people at the church were more than kind to even give me a chance, and to let me work there for so many years. I was such a brat like then. I was a brat for most of my life, to be honest.

I started going to church because it was pretty much expected of me in having the career that I did, but if I could put it off I would. And I went kicking and screaming for the most part (though I’d try to hide it, of course), and wouldn’t listen to the sermons or I would listen to them angrily.

I even remember there was a point where I thought I was pretty demonic—or, at the very least, I was proudly going against what God wants in a lot of ways, through the things that I liked and whatnot—and I one time, in stepping into the church, pretty much dared God to strike with me lightning, I was so awful back then.

So what changed? How could I ever be a Christian now?

Simple, my dad was diagnosed with Stage Four colon and liver cancer and I started drowning.

Suddenly, the things I’d remembered from church subconsciously all those years came back to me, and I sort of made a deal with God: I would start reading the Bible everyday if He would spare my father’s life.

…Well, maybe “making a deal” isn’t the best way to put it—because making deals with God probably is not a good idea—as I started reading the Bible more because I wanted to understand why this was happening to me, and if this had the answer then I would give it a chance.

So I began reading. And almost from the get-go, I was hit with this power—and I’d only read a few pages in Genesis when I realized that it was all true.

And I’m not stupid. As I said above, I was pretty much anti-Christianity before all of this! I know science and all the arguments against the Bible, I do, and I would try to use these things as ways to disprove it…

And yet it held up: I saw all the prophecies that the Bible has mentioned that have come true so many times, and that continue to/will continue to. I saw the connecting line through all of this recorded history that’s too consistent to have been fabricated (especially when you consider that the Bible had forty different authors!), and therefore could not have been penned by humans, then. I learned that it’s been proven that all of the books of the Bible did come from the same manuscript, and that Jesus fulfilled all the prophecies that were spoken about His coming and that in His life, he confirmed all of the Old Testament books’ accuracy and then told his disciples to write the next ones.

(And I even saw, such as on the TV show “Quick Study with Ron Hembree” and “Wretched” with Todd Friel how different sciences and archaeology confirm various accounts found in the Bible.)

I can’t really begin to explain how I changed through this. And looking back on my life, I can barely remember or understand who I was before I read through the entirety of the Bible. 

But I came to believe everything that the Bible has to tell me, I got saved, and I’ve changed SO much since then. I am not at all the person I was before this, and it’s just as people say!

I actually… care about people more now and love them. As much as I’d like to say I did before, I really didn’t. Not like I do now. 

 

For instance, I pretty much just spent all the money I have to save starving children in Africa. And this was a risky move, I know that, but I... In learning about it, I couldn't not do that. And at the end of the day, I know I'll be okay, because "I can do all things through Christ who strengtheneth me."

I actually am okay with talking to people now. Before I wasn’t at all (once again, I took the secretary job to avoid people), but now I can get through it happily and without really having the panic attacks that I used to. 

My anxiety is mostly gone now (did you know that the Bible actually preaches about anxiety for three straight chapters to help people not have to deal with that particular emotion? Because I sure didn’t), and everyday my soul ACHES to see how lost people are—as lost as I once was—and that if they don’t get saved, they’re going to go to Hell like I would’ve not so long ago.

Furthermore, getting saved allows you to see how God works and exists in the world around you, and I can do that now. 

And all of the sins that I used to do—that I used to love! That I arrogantly dared God to strike me down for—has no power over me anymore. I really can’t do them anymore. I don’t WANT to do them, even when I used to live for them. And if I get close to maybe thinking about doing it again, I turn away from it easily. 

And it’s not because you feel like you have to do this that this happens, but rather you willingly want to follow Jesus’ commandments because you love Him and have a connection with Him and you don’t want to let him down, because He’s your friend—a friend who did so much more for you than you ever deserved. And I’ve never had as much joy and peace in my life as I do now.

…This ended up a lot longer than I thought it was going to be, and I apologize for that. But to answer your question… The reason this argument will probably go on forever by the Christian side, is because so much is at stake here! We’re talking about souls being in torment forever, unless they understand this truth. And as long as there is breath within me, I will fight to try and help people understand where they stand and to plant seeds within them that the Holy Spirit can use to minister to and save their souls.

I’m willing to die for my faith now, and I guess at the end of the day… That’s why you’ll see this argument going on until the end of time, probably. “My word that comes from My mouth will not return to Me empty, but it will accomplish what I please and will prosper in what I sent it to do.”

And sorry if I offended anyone here! That wasn’t my intention at all. I’m not trying to confront or convert people, I swear. These are just all my thoughts on it, for me, and that’s really all. My testimony, if you will.

Edit: Oh, and for those wondering, my dad is still alive and is doing much better than anyone could’ve ever predicted (who all agree he probably should’ve died quite a long time ago, and be a lot sicker than he is now), and most people involved in his case do think it’s a miracle and that is must be through the hand of God that he’s (thankfully) still here with me

[Robbie the Wise 5,050]

There is a big difference between debate and two parties trying to convince the other that their stance is the right one. The problem is the discussion invokes such powerful emotions, that it always digresses into both parties trying to force the other party to believe their point of view. You're never going to change someone's point of view through force, and in that sense the discussion is pointless. However a true debate relies on the exchange of information as a way of conveying each parties POVs. It's a great way (really the only way) to broadening each other's understanding, and increase the depth of future discussion. If you have a thorough understanding of an opposing POV it's a lot easier to make your case in future discussion. So I certainly wouldn't call it pointless.

[khsg 73]

It's not exactly pointless to discuss the topic. It's always good to hear other opinions so as to expand your own ideas and change your way of thinking. What's really pointless (and irritating) is that people usually don't respect different opinions on the subject. And this NEEDS TO STOP!

[Sora_Roxas26 124]

I'm a Christian. I won't go into too much detail here (as I don’t want to start a debate, as you yourself made this thread wanting to see less of it and I’ll respect that), but here’s why it’s important to me, personally.

 

I grew up in a Christian family, and went to church all the time, and thought I got what it was about and understood everything about it… but it wasn’t until about three years ago that I truly came to believe, got saved, and understood what I thought I had been but hadn’t at all for years.

 

For most of my life, I was probably actually anti-Christianity (though I acted as though I wasn’t to my parents), because my family drove a church bus. And long story short, a lot of times my sister and I thought that our parents put the bus kids before us, and that we kind of fell by the wayside at times that we needed them. For that reason, I resented Christianity.

 

I ended up getting a job as a church secretary, but I mostly hated every minute of it and only took the job because I had social anxiety and it was something I could do that would allow me to interact with very few people.

 

Looking back on it, I wasn’t qualified for the job at all and the people at the church were more than kind to even give me a chance, and to let me work there for so many years. I was such a brat like then. I was a brat for most of my life, to be honest.

 

I started going to church because it was pretty much expected of me in having the career that I did, but if I could put it off I would. And I went kicking and screaming for the most part (though I’d try to hide it, of course), and wouldn’t listen to the sermons or I would listen to them angrily.

 

I even remember there was a point where I thought I was pretty demonic—or, at the very least, I was proudly going against what God wants in a lot of ways, through the things that I liked and whatnot—and I one time, in stepping into the church, pretty much dared God to strike with me lightning, I was so awful back then.

 

So what changed? How could I ever be a Christian now?

 

Simple, my dad was diagnosed with Stage Four colon and liver cancer and I started drowning.

 

Suddenly, the things I’d remembered from church subconsciously all those years came back to me, and I sort of made a deal with God: I would start reading the Bible everyday if He would spare my father’s life.

 

…Well, maybe “making a deal” isn’t the best way to put it—because making deals with God probably is not a good idea—as I started reading the Bible more because I wanted to understand why this was happening to me, and if this had the answer then I would give it a chance.

 

So I began reading. And almost from the get-go, I was hit with this power—and I’d only read a few pages in Genesis when I realized that it was all true.

 

And I’m not stupid. As I said above, I was pretty much anti-Christianity before all of this! I know science and all the arguments against the Bible, I do, and I would try to use these things as ways to disprove it…

 

And yet it held up: I saw all the prophecies that the Bible has mentioned that have come true so many times, and that continue to/will continue to. I saw the connecting line through all of this recorded history that’s too consistent to have been fabricated (especially when you consider that the Bible had forty different authors!), and therefore could not have been penned by humans, then. I learned that it’s been proven that all of the books of the Bible did come from the same manuscript, and that Jesus fulfilled all the prophecies that were spoken about His coming and that in His life, he confirmed all of the Old Testament books’ accuracy and then told his disciples to write the next ones.

 

(And I even saw, such as on the TV show “Quick Study with Ron Hembree” and “Wretched” with Todd Friel how different sciences and archaeology confirm various accounts found in the Bible.)

 

I can’t really begin to explain how I changed through this. And looking back on my life, I can barely remember or understand who I was before I read through the entirety of the Bible. 

 

But I came to believe everything that the Bible has to tell me, I got saved, and I’ve changed SO much since then. I am not at all the person I was before this, and it’s just as people say!

 

I actually… care about people more now and love them. As much as I’d like to say I did before, I really didn’t. Not like I do now. 

 

For instance, I pretty much just spent all the money I have to save starving children in Africa. And this was a risky move, I know that, but I... In learning about it, I couldn't not do that. And at the end of the day, I know I'll be okay, because "I can do all things through Christ who strengtheneth me."

 

I actually am okay with talking to people now. Before I wasn’t at all (once again, I took the secretary job to avoid people), but now I can get through it happily and without really having the panic attacks that I used to. 

 

My anxiety is mostly gone now (did you know that the Bible actually preaches about anxiety for three straight chapters to help people not have to deal with that particular emotion? Because I sure didn’t), and everyday my soul ACHES to see how lost people are—as lost as I once was—and that if they don’t get saved, they’re going to go to Hell like I would’ve not so long ago.

 

Furthermore, getting saved allows you to see how God works and exists in the world around you, and I can do that now. 

 

And all of the sins that I used to do—that I used to love! That I arrogantly dared God to strike me down for—has no power over me anymore. I really can’t do them anymore. I don’t WANT to do them, even when I used to live for them. And if I get close to maybe thinking about doing it again, I turn away from it easily. 

 

And it’s not because you feel like you have to do this that this happens, but rather you willingly want to follow Jesus’ commandments because you love Him and have a connection with Him and you don’t want to let him down, because He’s your friend—a friend who did so much more for you than you ever deserved. And I’ve never had as much joy and peace in my life as I do now.

 

…This ended up a lot longer than I thought it was going to be, and I apologize for that. But to answer your question… The reason this argument will probably go on forever by the Christian side, is because so much is at stake here! We’re talking about souls being in torment forever, unless they understand this truth. And as long as there is breath within me, I will fight to try and help people understand where they stand and to plant seeds within them that the Holy Spirit can use to minister to and save their souls.

 

I’m willing to die for my faith now, and I guess at the end of the day… That’s why you’ll see this argument going on until the end of time, probably. “My word that comes from My mouth will not return to Me empty, but it will accomplish what I please and will prosper in what I sent it to do.”

 

And sorry if I offended anyone here! That wasn’t my intention at all. I’m not trying to confront or convert people, I swear. These are just all my thoughts on it, for me, and that’s really all. My testimony, if you will.

 

Edit: Oh, and for those wondering, my dad is still alive and is doing much better than anyone could’ve ever predicted (who all agree he probably should’ve died quite a long time ago, and be a lot sicker than he is now), and most people involved in his case do think it’s a miracle and that is must be through the hand of God that he’s (thankfully) still here with me

Did you father get treatment for his cancer?

[HeartlessAqua 38]

I've never heard anybody say that religions are supposed to push people to become better, religions have been twisted and extorted so much that they have lost all their meaning in a lot of cases, ISIS and Al Khida use twisted Islam ideals as an excuse to murder people, crazy cult leaders use twisted Christian ideals to take peoples money, to control them, to sexually control them, and when they get caught, to kill them, Catholic priests use their power to molest kids who trusted them, and then the church defends them, in Christianity supposedly if you sin your going to hell, in yet it is literally impossible for even a priest to never commit a sin, but at the same time, you can commit countless sins, but if you ask for forgiveness it is all good. Religion is principle is good, but in practice it goes very wrong in a lot of cases, that's all I'm saying. And religious people who still disregard evolution, or still think god created the Earth, or that everything that happens is gods will just need to face the truth, evolution is fact, the big bang theory is most likely what created the universe, but even if it isn't the big bang theory, it wasn't any god, and not everything happens for a reason, if everything happens for a reason by gods will, then he/she is insane

Note that I said religion in general isn't supposed to coddle you (nor is it usually supposed to be used as a way to manipulate others). I said that many Christians don't understand their own religion and often simplify it to "God will do good things for me and punish everyone I don't like".

 

But that is not what religion these days is supposed to be about. I thought I made that clear.

 

Religion has LOTS of cases of assholes using it for their own selfishness, but it also has lots of examples of people trying to become better or good people. The only reason you and many other people focus solely on the bad side is because that's the part of religion which gets all the coverage. What do you think people will talk about more? Terrorist acts which make the news? Or the theological essays of an old scholar from Europe?

 

Do you know anything about Buddhism? Because that's a religion which basically demands you to strengthen yourself.

Edited August 15, 2016 by HeartlessAqua

[Firaga 5,947]

It's not really much of a debate in the first place when one side is rooted in facts and the other is rooted in stories.

[HeartlessAqua 38]

It's not really much of a debate in the first place when one side is rooted in facts and the other is rooted in stories.

What many people argue is whether or not religion is bad, or if it has any place in this world. I am not religious, but I argue that religion does have a place in this world because on an inward, psychological level, it can be very healthy to some individuals.

 

Look at the Haitians. They practice Voudou. Would it be wise for a person to go to a Voudou ceremony and tell them that what they're doing is wrong? What's the point? What would that accomplish? Basically, that person would be trying to destroy a culture which has so far been living the way it wants to without harming others.

 

And religion is more than just stories. Religion encompasses ethics and philosophy. Ethics and philosophy, whether fueled by a big man in the sky or by rationalism, can be good useful tools.

 

I enjoy reading the works of Carl Jung and Nicholas Roerich (please tell me someone has heard of at least one of them), and they are rational, good men who see the strong points of religion and discuss in depth how religion can be a healthy, and sometimes even necessary, expression of the mind.

 

People are so obsessed with cold hard logic that they forget that there's a more complicated emotional world inside all of us, and all of these inner worlds (our psyches) require different things, and there are different ways to gain those different things, whether through religion, spiritualism, rationalism, etc.