Things to think about.

[Aestrius]

I can't justify being christian and listening to files like the ones found on this site, so I had a choice to make Either follow the word of someone that only had their own financial gain ahead of them, guilting me into giving all my spare money away to them so they could richer, and make me feel bad about myself, so that I might eventually Ascend to another realm in which I would have many regrets once I reached if I even did, OR
I can be happy, who I want to be, and who I enjoy being, while following my own beliefs, and even if there is no heaven, I can die with no regrets, and having been happy my whole life, helping people, and being at ease with who I am, even if there does happen to be a god, or heaven, I am quite sure he would overlook the whole church thing because I lived how I wanted me and others to live.

It all comes down to a choice you must make for yourself, it is always unhealthy to be 100% dedicated to something, sometimes you need to open up and look at things a different way, and decide what you want, and whats in your best interests, if youve always wanted something in your life, but your religion forbids it, mabye you need to rethink your religion, you can still worship god in your own way if you wish, and I just want to put a call out to all you people who are curious about these things.

</rant>

thanks for reading and I hope you had something to think about after reading this.

[Cade]

very true, what you've said. and i ran across this very point long ago.

[Storms]

I'll second that. Moderation in all things, including moderation.

But it's a moot point though. All religion has been created and written down by men who claimed devine intervention. It's not reasonable to insist one is right and the rest are wrong.

They all have the same probability. And that fact, whether you'll admit it or not, puts L.Ron Hubbard and Pope Ratzinger one the same level.

There's still plenty of merit for attending church though. I've seen some churches that run faith based charities that are refreshingly more about the charity than the faith.

Personally, I never thought I'd get to the point where I could stop worrying about burning in hell for ever and ever. But it happens, and when it does, you'll sleep a lot better.

One tidbit that I found comforting was... After death, you'll cease to exist, just like before you were born. It didn't scare you then, and it shouldn't scare you now.

[Jeshi]

I'm interested in hearing your reasoning as to why hypnosis went against your faith? I agree with your post, I just don't get where the conflict came from.

[Jacoburline]

It's illogical to bet everything on the idea of an afterlife...because an afterlife is merely speculation. There is NO proof that an afterlife exists (nor is there proof that an afterlife does not exist...but, you cannot prove that something does not exist.) Pascal's wager is an unsound argument (essentially, it goes: If you belief in the Christian God and are wrong, then you die and simply cease to be; if you believe in the Christian God and are right, then you live forever in paradise; if you do no believe in God and are right, then you simply cease to be; and if you do not believe in God and are wrong, then you suffer eternity in Hell. The argument is unsound because it does not count for the possibility of any other religion being the correct one. It assumes, incorrectly, that there are just two possibilities in that regard.

The only thing we have consistent, empirical evidence that we have, is this life. Anything more than that is speculation; we simply cannot know. Thus, the most reasonable thing to do is live this life happily, successfully, and fully.

If anyone hasn't done so...it might be worthwhile to study religion from a sociological perspective. It seems logical to assert that religions exist primarily because of the functions they serve, considering the absence of any empirical proof as to their claims.

[VeryGnawty]

The argument is unsound because it does not count for the possibility of any other religion being the correct one. It assumes, incorrectly, that there are just two possibilities in that regard.

Actually, almost all religious assumptions are based on false dichotomies. Good/evil, Heaven/Hell, life/afterlife (unless you believe in reincarnation) all rely on making a choice between one option or its "opposite" with the religion heavily favoring one particular choice.

Because anyone of sound mind will chose whatever choice is personally most appealing, religions use negative reinforcement to make one choice always seem unappealing. Evil is "bad" and will get you the consequences of punishment and judgment. Heaven is a place of bliss, while Hell is a place of eternal torment. If you must choose between good or evil, only an insane man would choose evil.

By setting up false dichotomies, religions create a demand for something that doesn't exist (salvation, escape from suffering, etc.) and then those religions fill that demand by promising to supply things which they can't deliver. The reason that religions cannot deliver is because the false dichotomies are never real to begin with. They take something which does exist (people with malicious intent) and extrapolate it into extremely polarized fantasy (Evil, Hell, God's wrath, etc.)

This is the reason religions don't want you to question their dogma. The only way to keep people believing in a false dichotomy for any period of time is if nobody questions that belief. As soon as people start asking questions, the game is up. By appealing to authority (i.e. the Bible is infallible and God doesn't make mistakes) people are assured that they have no reason to question their beliefs.

If someone goes to two different doctors and gets two different diagnoses, they would want another opinion. Or at the very least, they would want to know which doctor was better qualified to diagnose their condition. There are many religions, yet nobody is interested in a second opinion. People are not interested in a second opinion on religion because they have been convinced that their first "doctor" (the religion they were brought up with) is perfect and that they do not need a second opinion. Thus, people feel perfectly fine with believing in whatever dichotomy religion tries to sell them even though they would not do such a thing with any other aspect of their lives. Religion is a special case because people are convinced it is correct. Even if the diagnosis is wrong (i.e. the religion is not true) people are unwilling to even look at the evidence.

Religion is a perfect system because it promises to be the supplier of the demand that it itself created, while simultaneously convincing people not to question the necessity of the demand which religion claims to fulfill. This is the reason there are so many scam artists and immoral people using religion to further their own personal position. Religion is the "wombo combo" of brainwashing. If people are already deathly afraid of eternal torture, they are easily manipulated because of their fear. All the scammer has to do is know which buttons to push.