Debate

[EMINEM]

Dottie writes:
Yes, thats right. Neither of us can objectivly be considered right or wrong. What eventually is going to make a judgement between us are you, me and the involved slaves. And as far as i can se the verdict is at the moment falling the way i want it to.


MM:
That's cuz neither of us are true moral relativists.

[Dottie]

Well, i still dont know or care if i am a true moral relativist, but i dont think that any moral standpoint have any other backing then whats in our minds, or can be judged in a objective way.

[EMINEM]

Originally posted by Dottie
Well, i still dont know or care if i am a true moral relativist, but i dont think that any moral standpoint have any other backing then whats in our minds, or can be judged in a objective way.

What about rape?

[fable]

@Frogus, to assist in your discussion, what about offering a definition for what you mean by "worship?" As it can be interpreted in many different ways, that would help (I think) focus the question for debate that you've offered.

[ThorinOakensfield]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The good old discussion

Originally posted by EMINEM


Ah, but an even greater majority think Islam is wrong, Buddhism is wrong, Hinduism is wrong, Judaism is wrong, Atheism is wrong. Why single out Christianity when among these religions it can boast the highest number of adherents?

Obviously Christianity thinks everybody else is wrong. Duh!
Even greater majority than yours think that Christianity is wrong.
Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Athiests.
(Not saying that all Hindus don't like Chrisitianity etc.)

[EMINEM]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The good old discussion

Originally posted by ThorinOakensfield


Obviously Christianity thinks everybody else is wrong. Duh!
Even greater majority than yours think that Christianity is wrong.
Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Athiests.
(Not saying that all Hindus don't like Chrisitianity etc.)

You can say the same thing about every other religion or irreligion. Why are you singling out Christianity?

Since Christianity is the world's biggest religion, then an even greater majority of people must think Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists and Atheists are wrong when you compare the total number of adherents against the sum of one particular faith. On the basis of numbers alone, Christianity is the LEAST wrong of all other religions in the world.

[C Elegans]

Originally posted by frogus

That's why I tried to spice up the discussion a bit by saying
IF God exists, why should we worship him. I believe that an undeniable argumet is reachable in that debate (and already has, though I won't tell you where it is until afterwards).

@Frogus: I certainly agree with you that at present, with the present information, there is no way to conclude whether transcendental beings, like gods, exist or not.

To address your original question, if a god exists why should we worship him/her/it? IMO, there is no specific reason to worship any of the gods as they are presented in the world religions. Should we worship a being because it is powerful, more powerful than us? Should we obey and follow the rules of a powerful being because we are weaker? Surely not - I can find no moral justification for the powerful to rule over the less powerful.

Should we worship a creator just because it has created us? Maybe the universe and all life was created, but I see no reason to worship that creator - to me, that's like if Dolly the sheep should worship the British scientists who created her. Being created but somebody else doesn't automatically give the creator any rights over the created.

MM points out that we should worship god because he has created us to worship him. This sounds to me that it is beyond human control and human choice to worship this creator, and clearly, that is not the case since not everybody worships this god or even any gods.

So no, I see no reason at all to worship a god even if I believed they/it existed.

[Dottie]

Originally posted by EMINEM


What about rape?

What is your point? Yes, I think rape is wrong, but moral is a definition made by us humans to do with as we choose, and fact remains that not all humans have the same view of what moral behaviour is. And there is no way to objectivly judge wich view is right.

[frogus]

@ Eminem
I'm sorry to sound mean, but I can't be bothered to discuss the evidence for God's existance. I think all the evidence for God's existence can be used as evidence for (natural selection, humankind's inherent morality) etc, and there is no evidence whatsoever which supports the theory of God's existence and only that theory.

I don't wanna end up slugging science at you while you slug religion at me.

What I originally intended was for somebody to try and prove that religion does more harm than good in the world, thus making either god's intentions being abused by humans which would make him less than omnipotent, or making Him not completely virtuous. That argument I think would be the best evidence for not worshipping God.

@Fable
By worship I mean to believe in, and attempt to live by the perceived example set by God.

This argument is interesting though, about using God as a yard stick against wich to measure morality.

If you (Eminem) know exactly what is right and wrong (through knowledge of God) and can tell which actions are good, because God would act in such a way, and which are bad, because god wouldn't, do you believe that it is possible for a non-christian (or actually, let's say non-religious) person to know exactly what is wrong and what is right?

[Maharlika]

I think the original question posted is problematic for me...

...since answering such a question would make me sound like a preacher then maybe, just maybe, I might say stuff that might/would offend non-believers.

At any rate, this is my personal opinion, being a Catholic. And please, bear in mind that whatever I say is not meant to offend anybody nor represent my fellow Catholics.

I continue to believe in God because it's simply Faith. Empirical methods to prove that He exists is something that I don't need. Man was not created to fully fathom what God has in mind, nor to have equal faculties like Him.

If Man did indeed could, then what do we need God for when we can do without Him?

The way I see it, is that our God gave Man the freedom to choose on what path to take. He has given us the "gift" of reason probably to test our Faith in him. He allowed all these things around us that would make us question His very existence... then only the Faithfuls will be allowed to enter the Kingdom of God.

There was some passage in The Bible that went something like Jesus saying: "Blessed are those who believe in Me but moreso for those who haven't seen Me (and My miracles) yet still believe in Me.'

IMO, the montheistic religions believe in the same One God. Human Nature (ergo the existence of the word "politics") has just caused the diiference in THE MANNER we want to worship Him. Even among the Catholics, you've got different Orders among the priesthood: Jesuits, Dominicans, Benedictines, Franciscans, etc. These Orders have a different view on certain things yet they are all Catholics. Same as the Muslims. I'm not aware of the names but IIRC, the Iranian, Saudi and Iraqi forms of Islam is different too in some aspects. Brother Muslims, please correct me on this if needed.

Religion, as seen by others, is a good "excuse" to explain things that Science cannot. Well, for me, not everything is meant to be explained the way Man expects things to be. We were never meant to be omnicient (sp?).

I have a question though, and I wish I can ask a priest about this: What happens to all those who lead a morally upright life, followed everything that is right and moral as stated in the Scriptures except for one glaring thing --- he doesn't believe in God?

Does he deserve not to enter the Pearly Gates simply because he was a non-believer?

[EMINEM]

Elegans writes:
To address your original question, if a god exists why should we worship him/her/it? IMO, there is no specific reason to worship any of the gods as they are presented in the world religions.

MM:
This hinges on the question: Do you know how they are presented in the world religions? Obviously my perception of God is very much different from your own. My understanding of God leads me to seek a relationship with him, revere him, respect him, trust that he loves me and wants only what's best for my life. What does your understanding of God lead you to do?

Elegans:
Should we worship a being because it is powerful, more powerful than us? Should we obey and follow the rules of a powerful being because we are weaker? Surely not - I can find no moral justification for the powerful to rule over the less powerful.

MM:
Again you make it clear that your understanding of God is nowhere near the one described in the New Testament. He is not some sort of Zeus-like figure who wants to rule those less powerful than himself. He compels by love and liberty, not by fear and force.

Elegans:
Should we worship a creator just because it has created us?

MM:
Absolutely. It's a sign of gratitude and thankfulness. God didn't just create us, he created us wonderfully! We are not like sheep, with the inability to reason and think, but intelligent, self-aware, conscious beings created in his very image. But of course, worship presupposes faith and humilty.

Elegans:
MM points out that we should worship god because he has created us to worship him. This sounds to me that it is beyond human control and human choice to worship this creator, and clearly, that is not the case since not everybody worships this god or even any gods.

MM:
God created us to worship him, but worship is not true worship unless it is not done out of a willing and sincere heart. This is why humans have the choice to reject him, or even live their lives as though he doesn't exist. God doesn't want robots; he wants genuine devotees who come to him in good faith.


Elegans:
So no, I see no reason at all to worship a god even if I believed they/it existed.

MM:
This is non-sequitor, and just doesn't make sense, because in order for you to understand why God should be worshipped, you first must have faith in him.



PS
Great to hear from you again, Jackie.

[EMINEM]

Originally posted by Dottie


What is your point? Yes, I think rape is wrong, but moral is a definition made by us humans to do with as we choose, and fact remains that not all humans have the same view of what moral behaviour is. And there is no way to objectivly judge wich view is right.

My point is this: If there is no objective way to judge what is right or wrong, then you cannot say "rape is wrong!" You must have some way of making an objective judgment, and apart from God, you have no way of doing that. To quote a prominent atheist who understands this dilemma:

"If a higher-than-human lawgiver is no longer taken into account, does the concept of a moral obligation still make sense? The concept of moral obligation IS UNINTELLIGIBLE APART FROM THE IDEA OF GOD (emphasis mine). The words remain but their meaning is gone.
. . . The modern age, more or less repudiating the idea of a divine lawgiver, has nevertheless tried to retain the ideas of moral right and wrong, not noticing that, in casting God aside, they have also abolished the conditions of meaningfulness for moral right and wrong as well (Richard Taylor, Ethics, Faith and Reason [Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1985] pp. 83-84, 2- 3).

[EMINEM]

frogus writes:
I'm sorry to sound mean, but I can't be bothered to discuss the evidence for God's existance. I think all the evidence for God's existence can be used as evidence for (natural selection, humankind's inherent morality) etc, and there is no evidence whatsoever which supports the theory of God's existence and only that theory.

MM:
I'm sorry to say this, frogus, but this sounds like a cop-out. If you believe that God does not exist, please post your reasons why. Otherwise, concede the point and let it go. As for evidence for the existence of God; I believe God has given evidence which is sufficiently clear for those with an open mind and open heart, but sufficiently vague so as not to compel those whose hearts are closed. I think that those who are seeking for God, who are open to God, will find the evidence satisfactory. In fact the New Testament says that God's existence is evident to all persons through the created order around us and by the moral law that we sense in our hearts.

frogus:
What I originally intended was for somebody to try and prove that religion does more harm than good in the world, thus making either god's intentions being abused by humans which would make him less than omnipotent, or making Him not completely virtuous. That argument I think would be the best evidence for not worshipping God.

MM:
Why are you waiting for someone else to defend your personal views? If you really think religion does more harm than good, argue the point yourself. You sound smart enough. For that matter, how does human fallacy take away from God's omnipotence? How does the abuse of religion make God less virtuous? Why should one person who exploits Christianity for selfish purposes prevent another person (ie. me) from being devoted to Christianity?

frogus:
If you (Eminem) know exactly what is right and wrong (through knowledge of God) and can tell which actions are good, because God would act in such a way, and which are bad, because god wouldn't, do you believe that it is possible for a non-christian (or actually, let's say non-religious) person to know exactly what is wrong and what is right?

MM:
I've been asked this question before. Basically, atheists and non-Christians can tell the difference between right and wrong, good and evil, without the benefit of divine revelation. The problem is - without an objective moral point of reference (ie. God), what one person considers right and good can be considered wrong and immoral by another person. With no objective standard, everything is permissible.

[frogus]

OK, reasons why I do not believe in God:

You argue that

I believe God has given evidence which is sufficiently clear for those with an open mind and open heart, but sufficiently vague so as not to compel those whose hearts are closed. I think that those who are seeking for God, who are open to God, will find the evidence satisfactory.

firstly, my mind, is not 'closed'. Why would I want God not to exist? The only reason is because that is what I believe already, and would therefore be able to say 'told ya so' to all theists. This doesn't hold water because it is self referential. I don't want to believe in God because I don't believe in God because I don't want to believe in God. How did I come to not believe in God in the first place?
anyway I am no more averse to the theory of God's existence than any other theory. I am impossible of hating a notion just for being what it is-after all it is nothing.
To try and see what I mean, you can imagine that noone would hate 'killing' if it didn't result in death. It's the results of an action which one can have an opinion on, not on the action itself.
I can dissaprove of a notion only because it seems to have bad results. I dissaprove of the notion of God's existence because it seems to have bad results

If you really think religion does more harm than good, argue the point yourself

I will come back to this.

Sorry for the long post, but it looks like starting to get a lot longer.

Basically, atheists and non-Christians can tell the difference between right and wrong, good and evil, without the benefit of divine revelation. The problem is - without an objective moral point of reference (ie. God), what one person considers right and good can be considered wrong and immoral by another person.

So, (I am assuming that you believe that the difference between Right and Wrong is God's doing) if God created the difference between right and wrong then it must be true that to He Himself there is no difference between right and wrong-so he is not perfectly good. I believe that for this reason one should not worship him.
On the other hand, if you believe that God is perfectly good, then you must believe that right and wrong have some meaning independant of God. If this is the case then there is either a force more powrful than he or he has to obey rules which were not of His creation, making Him less than omnipotent. For these reasons I believe that one should not worship him.

That's why I believe that one should not worship God....
now, the way in which religion does more harm than good:

It allows anyone to do anything and say that it is the right thing to do. e.g
the Taliban's repression of women,
Catholic forbidding of the use of contraception
killing of south americans by the Conquistadors
the Crusades
burning of Witches in America
Catholics killing Protestants in Ireland
Partition of India
Missions into Africa

etc etc.....I know that these are not novel examples, I'm sure you get the picture and can think of many more similar events.
I do not claim that without religion these would not have happened (well I do for some), but I do claim that their prolongment, impetous and popular support is entirely the fault of religion.

Good people can do good things and get away with them wether they are religious or not, however, in the above (and more) cases, evil people would not have been allowed to do evil things without the smokescreen of religion and the abuse of God's name.

[Nippy]

Ok, normally I woudn't get involved in one of these discussions, but my dad and I had a long talk over religion and Christianity last night so I want to post some of my views...

Firstly, the one thing I want to know when I die, is, what is God? He/she/it I'd like to know who thousands of people pray to is.

Secondly, the one thing I don't like about religion (and particuarly Christianity) is exclusion. My cousin is being a God-Mother to her dads daughter I think, (my aunty and uncle are divorced), to be a God-Mother she needs to be a member of the church. Why? Surely one of 'Gods Children' would be welcomed into any house of God, therefore into heaven. Why do churches exclude non-members of a particular church? Surely they want to get more people inside that keeping them out.

Another thing I dislike is when religion is enforced. My grand-parents are very religious. They were a mission in Africa and make a regular large tithe to their Church. Why? When they were younger they could barely pay rent yet they still gave money. I understand that contribution is voluntary but surely they should realise that the family need it more than the Church does.

Another thing is that I dislike the fact that my life is not under my control. Is it fair for a being to decide whether I live or die? Whether I pass an exam or fail? I can't understand the justification that is given to faith and God's control over a human being.

The last thing I want to say is that I dislike the way that forgiveness is given. If a man who has killed thousands of people with his bare-hands is lying on his death bed and begs for forgiveness and asks for his sins to be absolved it is said that he will go to heaven. The man has killed thousands of people. What right does he have to control who dies or not? Surely God should have stopped him if he takes a life that he has not meant to...

Ok that's basically it. You are welcome to post anything about this that you want and you can tear it apart. If I read this thread again I will try and post a rebuttal...

[EMINEM]

frogus writes:
Why would I want God not to exist? The only reason is because that is what I believe already, and would therefore be able to say 'told ya so' to all theists. This doesn't hold water because it is self referential. I don't want to believe in God because I don't believe in God because I don't want to believe in God. How did I come to not believe in God in the first place? Anyway I am no more averse to the theory of God's existence than any other theory. I am impossible of hating a notion just for being what it is-after all it is nothing.

I can dissaprove of a notion only because it seems to have bad results. I dissaprove of the notion of God's existence because it seems to have bad results


EMINEM:
I’m not sure what you mean by this. On one hand you’re saying that you are not averse to the possibility of God’s existence, but then you say that you disapprove of the idea of God’s existing because of “bad results.” What do you mean by “bad results” exactly, and how do bad results disprove the existence of God?

frogus:
So, (I am assuming that you believe that the difference between Right and Wrong is God's doing) if God created the difference between right and wrong then it must be true that to He Himself there is no difference between right and wrong-so he is not perfectly good. I believe that for this reason one should not worship him. On the other hand, if you believe that God is perfectly good, then you must believe that right and wrong have some meaning independant of God. If this is the case then there is either a force more powrful than he or he has to obey rules which were not of His creation, making Him less than omnipotent. For these reasons I believe that one should not worship him.

EMINEM:
First of all, God did not create evil and wrongdoing. He ALLOWS evil and wrongdoing to exist, but he is not the instigator. Human beings are the cause of evil and wrongdoing in the world, not God. Although God is perfectly good, and that everything is possible with him, it is also scriptural that God is limited by his own laws. The Bible makes it clear that God cannot tell a lie, cannot tempt others to sin, and cannot tolerate even a hint of evil to exist inside him. Is God omnipotent? Yes. But can he did whatever the hell he wants? No.


frogus:
now the way in which religion does more harm than good:

It allows anyone to do anything and say that it is the right thing to do. e.g
the Taliban's repression of women,
Catholic forbidding of the use of contraception
killing of south americans by the Conquistadors
the Crusades
burning of Witches in America
Catholics killing Protestants in Ireland
Partition of India
Missions into Africa

etc etc.....I know that these are not novel examples, I'm sure you get the picture and can think of many more similar events. I do not claim that without religion these would not have happened (well I do for some), but I do claim that their prolongment, impetous and popular support is entirely the fault of religion.

Good people can do good things and get away with them wether they are religious or not, however, in the above (and more) cases, evil people would not have been allowed to do evil things without the smokescreen of religion and the abuse of God's name.

EMINEM:
You anticipated my answer with your last statement. September 11 should have already made this one clear: Don't judge a religion by its abuse.

Don’t judge a religion, whether that religion is Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, or Christianity, by the way its teachings are twisted and abused by its so-called followers for their own evil purposes. Is it the fault of Mohammed if Osama Bin Laden twists the teachings of the Koran to justify acts of terrorism? Is it Christ’s fault if murders are commited in his name? If you read the New Testament (you really should, even apart from this debate), you will find no support whatsoever for most of the examples you gave above. Rather, you will find condemnation of the fire and brimstone variety. Religion can be used as a smokescreen for nefarious purposes, but religion can also be used to promote goods works, establish hospital and schools (Yale and Oxford come to mind), and inspire great works of art and literature. Like a surgical scalpel, it has the potential for good and evil, to heal or to harm, to save life or to take it, depending ultimately on its proper/improper use and application.

[EMINEM]

Oh man, where is Loner when you need her? All right, I’ll do my best to address your concerns

Nippy:
Firstly, the one thing I want to know when I die, is, what is God? He/she/it I'd like to know who thousands of people pray to is.

EMINEM:
You don’t have to wait until you die to understand who or what God is like. Read the Bible! Focus especially on the New Testament. Jesus Christ is God made flesh, and his biography and teachings can be found in the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Get to know Christ, and you’ll get to know God, because Jesus Christ IS God.

Nippy:
Secondly, the one thing I don't like about religion (and particuarly Christianity) is exclusion. My cousin is being a God-Mother to her dads daughter I think, (my aunty and uncle are divorced), to be a God-Mother she needs to be a member of the church. Why? Surely one of 'Gods Children' would be welcomed into any house of God, therefore into heaven. Why do churches exclude non-members of a particular church? Surely they want to get more people inside that keeping them out.

EMINEM:
Christianity is the most inclusive religion is the world, with representatives from almost every nation. If you’re wondering who initiated the abolition movement that ended slavery, look no further than the Christian church. The problem you described above seems to stem from denominationalism, and that involves a 45-minute discussion I really don’t want to get into.

Nippy:
Another thing I dislike is when religion is enforced. My grand-parents are very religious. They were a mission in Africa and make a regular large tithe to their Church. Why? When they were younger they could barely pay rent yet they still gave money. I understand that contribution is voluntary but surely they should realise that the family need it more than the Church does.

EMINEM:
If it’s voluntary, it’s voluntary. Your grandparents are responsible adults and can make decisions for themselves. IMO, giving is a matter of trust. God promises to meet the needs (not the wants) of those who tithe. I’ve found it’s also a good deterrance against greed and materialism.

Nippy:
Another thing is that I dislike the fact that my life is not under my control. Is it fair for a being to decide whether I live or die? Whether I pass an exam or fail? I can't understand the justification that is given to faith and God's control over a human being.

EMINEM:
You are in control of your own life, not God. He gave each of us a free will. If you want to commit suicide right now, I doubt God will stop you. Also, whether you pass or fail your exam doesn’t depend on God’s power. I’m sure he wants you to pass, but if you refuse to study and end up flunking, the blame rests with you.

Nippy:
The last thing I want to say is that I dislike the way that forgiveness is given. If a man who has killed thousands of people with his bare-hands is lying on his death bed and begs for forgiveness and asks for his sins to be absolved it is said that he will go to heaven. The man has killed thousands of people. What right does he have to control who dies or not? Surely God should have stopped him if he takes a life that he has not meant to...

EMINEM:
Let me get back to you on this one. Right now, I gotta go to a basketball game…

[EMINEM]

Re: I think the original question posted is problematic for me...

Okay, I'm back. First, to answer Maharlika's post:

Originally posted by Maharlika


IMO, the montheistic religions believe in the same One God. Human Nature (ergo the existence of the word "politics") has just caused the diiference in THE MANNER we want to worship Him. Even among the Catholics, you've got different Orders among the priesthood: Jesuits, Dominicans, Benedictines, Franciscans, etc. These Orders have a different view on certain things yet they are all Catholics. Same as the Muslims. I'm not aware of the names but IIRC, the Iranian, Saudi and Iraqi forms of Islam is different too in some aspects. Brother Muslims, please correct me on this if needed.

I have a question though, and I wish I can ask a priest about this: What happens to all those who lead a morally upright life, followed everything that is right and moral as stated in the Scriptures except for one glaring thing --- he doesn't believe in God?

Does he deserve not to enter the Pearly Gates simply because he was a non-believer?

[/color]

I agree with everything you said except for these two points. The monotheistic religions do NOT believe in the same One God. If you read the books, you'll quickly discover that the God of the Koran is not the same God of the Bible. They're not even close.

Regarding your question to the priest... I think Scripture can answer your question for you. In Romans chapters 1 and 2 of the New Testament, the Apostle Paul says that salvation is available to any person who responds to the light of nature and conscience if he hasn't heard the Good News about Jesus Christ (ie. a person living in North America during the Middle Ages, before missionaries came). If this person responds to the witness of God in nature (ie. he can see there's a Creator God, and senses the moral law of God written on his heart), then God will give that person eternal life. Now that doesn't mean he's saved apart from Christ, but it would mean that he may not have a conscious knowledge of Christ, which is the basis of his salvation. He would be like a person in the Old Testament who was saved through Christ, even though he hadn't yet heard of Christ; he responded to the light that he had. So I think God gives sufficient grace or salvation to every person. God is fair and just and wants everyone to come to know Him and be saved.

God doesn't send people to Hell. People send themselves by rejecting God's grace, whether it's through witness of Scripture and the gospel, or it's through the witness of nature and conscience. So don't blame God for the fact that people reject Him. It's not because salvation is unavailable.

[Maharlika]

Man, you're giving your log-in name a total paradigm shift!

I would like to know exactly how different the Islamic God is from the Christian God. Meaning, why do you say that they are not the same entity? I understand that Jesus Christ is also considered a prophet among the Muslims so I figured then that we must have the same God. I'm in the largest Buddhist country in the world and I don't have access to the Koran.

Thanks for answering my query which I needed a priest to answer. I'm more than satisfied with what you have explained, Reverend MM ...

...and no, I never blamed God if people reject Him nor did I ever think that salvation is unavailable.

Many are called, few listen, and a fewer still heed that call.

It is Man's choice to accept Him or not.

I agree with you MM, that people tend to judge God with the way His followers "misbehave" under His name. These transgressions have caused a lot of disillusionment among believers and would-be believers.

The Philippines used to be a colony of Spain (my grandfather is a peninsulares - a full-blooded Spaniard born in the Philippines). It was Spain who introduced to the natives in this archipelago of 7,100 islands the Roman Catholic Faith. There were many atrocities committed by the Spanish friars against my people in the name of God and yet the Philippines is still the largest Catholic country in Asia --- more than 100 years after Spain has left.

The Spaniards refused to educate the natives in Spanish, much less Latin. During that time it was also a crime for an indio (native Filipino) to own a Bible! Even during that time, information is a very valuable weapon. Whatever they say or do is supposed to be seen as consented and approved by God. It was solely the friars' responsibility to interpret God's Word, and well, just looking at history and documented events, this responsibility was ABUSED and CORRUPTED to serve these "HOLY" men's vested interests.

Is it God's fault? I find it hog-wash if people say or think that the true essence of God is reflected by the unbecoming acts of His followers, who, in the final analysis are not true representatives of His Faith.

I call them religious hypocrites.

Even in my own country (sadly ), these people go a dime a dozen.

My religion is Roman Catholic but my relationship with God is a personal one and not just because my parents and community told me that it is the right thing to do.

True religion for me is best defined as your own personal relationship and experience with your God.

My brief stint working for the Jesuits has introduced me to spiritual exercises that teaches us discernment - the ability to see God's graces wherever you are, whatever you do and whatever you see...

...and yes, it is difficult, nay, near impossible, to discern if one's mind and heart is already closed. God WOULDN'T PRY them open. He loves us and respects us too much to do such a thing. One must be willing to open himself up to recognize and appreciate for who He really is.

Thinking TOO empirically clouds one's full appreciation of His existence.

God is not meant to be discerned through empirical and scientific methods...

...discernment comes from an open heart not from a quizzical mind.

Funny, I remember somebody who told me in jest that I have no right to condemn him to hell (I did not, by the way) just because he doesn't believe in God. I told him, why should he be offended in the first place since he doesn't believe that God, Heaven and Hell exist?

[frogus]

God is limited by his own laws

a being which is limited by his own laws cannot exist. It's impossible.