Atheism - ? I agree..

[Evil Sonidow]

I wonder if those biblical people also teach Ezekiel 23:19-21 to their children.

That's a rather famous passage, taken out of context.

i for one also have the train of thought that if you're only 'surviving', thats not gonna keep up forever the way it is. at a logical perspective, i'd figured that lots of people would deduce this already.

You'd be amazed how far some people can get through inaction. Not necessarily a good end, but far.

i totally agree about what youre saying that if god didnt first love and that we needed to prove it, it would make the whole message pointless. my background to my perspective is that, imagine if we were just too weak to even do something, someone has to help. i dont see it as superiority, and thats where i think the misunderstanding (my lack of explanation maybe) occurs. to me i see it as a reaction and and its more humbling instead. when i realise what an idiot i am and that i'm still loved by someone despite what i do. an honest, heartfelt and response is to love back because its just a natural response. thats pretty much where im coming from. hope this doesnt make things any more complicated

I didn't mean to be offensive, just pointed out what it seemed like to me. Indeed, loving back is your honest and heartfelt response, perhaps natural for you, not obligatorily for everybody else. Great that you decide to do it this way.

Dixon's post isn't quite off topic.
He pointed out that not everything in the bible is good. In fact, you cannot find anything that a normal human, without the help of God, could not have written 2,000 years ago. It's just logical to point out that the bible is just another man-made fiction.

It's not off-topic, but read above.

The bible even use knowledge from 2,000 years ago that is now scientifically proven wrong. For example, the creation of different species. Back then, people don't know about the theory of evolution, so that the story of the creation of the world was written that way. Today, it's proven wrong from many evidence (including fossils, for instance).

The bible is outdated, big news. They're not mutually exclusive but many people choose to: believing in science or believing in religion (whichever it is). Also, your example isn't the best. The theory of evolution continues to be questioned even today in the scientific community, although for different reasons.

When one part of the bible is proven wrong, can we still believe the truth of the other parts? XD

One person lies to you once, you question everything? That's pretty harsh. Where to draw the line depends on what kind of effect that lie has upon you.

Well, actually people has got one way to get out of it: rationalization

- when the bible says something wrong, then it must just be an illustration. e.g. God created the world in 6 days, it must be an illustration to an actually very long time span.
- when something good is going on, it must be the blessing of God
- but when something bad is happening, it must be a trial from the God

Apparently, with rationalization we can make everything seems correct.

God creating the world in 6 days isn't one of the bible's metaphors. However, I agree that the last two are included in the mindset of religious people in general. My main issue with that viewpoint is that it takes away the merit of your successes and the character of your defeats.

The origin of universe is also a very weak argument, because the existence of God itself is just as impossible, and since he still has to create the universe after he impossibly appear, it's just more impossible than just the universe.

The existence of God itself is just as impossible, but if you do assume he exists then it doesn't really matter how it came to be, does it? It's all about where you start from. You don't question what came before, but what happened after.

You need to work on your argumenting skills. Search your doubts further, you need stronger reasoning either for becoming an atheist or finding that your beliefs are right (for you).