Religion

[Nice]

Exactly, you dont give a shit that's why it's difficult to debate with someone like you. Those that pursue wealth are greedy and they pursue it for luxury, which is a "no no" according to bible. Those that become wealthy because they had luck or invented something are definetly not greedy bastards, as long as they dont spend all their money on luxury and for themselves. And also not all poor are angels, obviously.

Except the Bible doesn't matter for billions of people who've come up with other religions for their spiritual needs. I don't give a shit about what some westerner says about how we should rule our life, because I care about people right now and not some hypothetical future.

No it doesn't, not for a religious person.

There lies the problem in debating with STUBBORN people. I know many religious people who can reconcile their faith with still valuing life here and now.

Let's face it: religion came about because life is hard. Too many people die young. When you're suffering, struggling to make ends meet, and dealing with the unfairness of life, it's easier to take heart in the belief that all your good deeds will be paid off.

My argument is - why take that chance? We have the ability to challenge the problems on earth that make many other people suffer, rather than selfishly let it continue to happen after you die and cease to care about anyone else.

I'm defending religion from religious point of view, you dont care what the bible says well that's too bad because the bible explains why you cant have a brand new car or a toy whenever you ask God. Sorry but you're kinda hard to understand here...First you rant about how religion and things work then you say that you dont care. So sorry if i'm not in-depth enough here, but it's hard to understand what exactly you want.

As to the last part of what you said:

First of all you dont find many of those people, i'm definetly not among them. I'm talking about the people that say "screw life, just wait for afterlife" I'm not saying that life is not important, i'm saying that there's more than just this life and every religious person is well aware of that. In religious views we werent brought on this world just so we can die and go to afterlife, we believe that this life was given so we could make something out of it, not just wait and die. Both of "lives" are important but which do you think is more? from a religious point of view...This one that lasts less than 100 years or the other one which lasts forever?

Why take the chance? who exactly is taking the chance here? Who is the one that actually can lose something here? You can treat life good and live happily here while believing in God, if you die and it just happens that there is no such thing you dont really lose anything, it's just blackness...Nothing you're not even aware that you were believing into something that doesnt exist. You're talking like being religious means cutting your heart out, stabbing and torturing yourself till you die. A religious person can live just as happily as a non religious one.

And speaking of taking chances, if you take the chance that there is no God and if it just happens that there actually is one. Well i think it's an worse experience than to a religious person that dies in a godless world.

You're missing the point. The question isn't whether it's corrupt, it's whether it's corruptible. Why should you place your faith in a system that can be exploited? And that thing about free will you mentioned is just comical because it supports my argument. If every man is free to do whatever he wants and God will not interfere in any way, then why trust the Bible? By that logic God had nothing to do with it, it was written by men and Jesus was not the messiah. Or do you mean to say that he interfered that one time long ago nobody remembers but doesn't want to anymore? Why?

There's not much left to discuss Bridge because i'm not a die hard follower of catholic ways. We fell into this argument because i defined the word "corrupt" different than you and didnt see what you meant. I agree that the church CAN become corrupt and i agree that it was corrupt. It is definetly corruptible but i'm just saying that at the moment it's far from being actually really "corrupt".