Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: davidpt40 on February 15, 2003, 05:00:06 AM
-
Heres why I think Christianity is fake:
(1) An all-powerful, all-knowing God creates Heaven and Hell. Hell is supposed to be only for Lucifer and the angels that followed him, but somehow, out of Gods control, EVERY SINGLE HUMAN is destined for hell.
(2) Since the two original humans, created in Gods own image, were tricked into eating a piece of fruit from a tree by Lucifer, man is kicked out of paradise and is forced to work and subsequently die. Every single human is punished for the faults of Adam and Eve.
Lets just pretend the entire old testament is an allegory. Now for the New Testament-
(3) God sends his only son to earth so that people don't have to burn in a fiery pit for eternity. Yet what does his son do? He goes around in a very limited area, performing obscure miracles at his leisure. For some reason Jesus won't perform miracles for disbelievers, even if it means they will spend ETERNITY in a fiery pit.
(4) Jesus is crucified and DIES. Then he supposedly comes back to life, but what does he do? He reveals himself to only 3 or 4 people! What a selfish guy. Here he has a chance to give the entire world some evidence to believe in God and he won't even do it.
So in summary, Christianity is this- A God that won't give any evidence of his existance, yet if you don't believe in him 100% you go to a fiery pit called hell where demons torture you.
There is a book out now called "excavating jesus". In the book, it tells how 'virgin births' were common in Jewish history and how it took 40-100 years after the death of Jesus for people to write about him (and subsequently make his story fit the prophesies). In actuality, the body of Jesus was most likely eaten by dogs.
I think people believe in Christianity for a few reasons- (1) They are afraid to question the bible (2) They don't want to believe that they wont go to a paradise when they die (3) They are afraid of going to hell (4) they have no common sense/are uneducated.
-
man they are gonna gird your loins hehe.
glad you joined the club
-
The single best *objestive* argument I've ever seen for putting stock in the Christian faith:
Even secular history shows that almost all of the 12 apostles met a violent end for refusing to back down on what they were preaching. (this is different than meeting a violent end fighting in some Jihaad or fanatical combat)
Exactly what did these people *see* that led them to be so sure of their beliefs that they would rather die than recant their position?
-W
-
Originally posted by davidpt40
of Adam and Eve.
(4) Jesus is crucified and DIES. Then he supposedly comes back to life, but what does he do? He reveals himself to only 3 or 4 people!
Ever actually read the bible?
Jesus appeared to over 200 people after his resurrection.
Mostly it boils down to this, you have the right to believe or not.
Choose wisely.
-
Originally posted by X2Lee
Mostly it boils down to this, you have the right to believe or not.
Choose wisely.
Or what? Burn in some hot underground fire pit and be tortured for all eternity by demons? Is that really the best sales pitch Christianity could come up after almost 2000 years?
-
The old testament is greatly shared by Islam and Judaism. While it is politically okay to attack Christianity, you are a racist bigot for attacking the shared beliefs of these other two peaceful religions.
----------
So in summary, Christianity is this- A God that won't give any evidence of his existance, yet if you don't believe in him 100% you go to a fiery pit called hell where demons torture you.
----------
Shared belief among many religions: Belive my way or be damned. (also re-read PC-Bigot statement above)
-----------
(4) Jesus is crucified and DIES. Then he supposedly comes back to life, but what does he do? He reveals himself to only 3 or 4 people! What a selfish guy. Here he has a chance to give the entire world some evidence to believe in God and he won't even do it.
----------
According to the book of Mormon, the Resurrected Chirist appeared to the natives of the new world. Perhaps this belief can quiet your misgivings.
Many well educated and intellegent people believe in God, as evidenced by the quote attributed to Albert Einstien when discussing Quantum Theory,"I can't believe God throws dice!"
You can find many logical fallacies in religious belief, because religious belief is a system based on faith, not logic. Faith and logic are two mutually exclusive thought processes. You cannot use one to prove the other. A Leap of Faith is by definition, illogical.
Bigot.
-
Originally posted by Ratbo
The single best *objestive* argument I've ever seen for putting stock in the Christian faith:
Even secular history shows that almost all of the 12 apostles met a violent end for refusing to back down on what they were preaching. (this is different than meeting a violent end fighting in some Jihaad or fanatical combat)
Exactly what did these people *see* that led them to be so sure of their beliefs that they would rather die than recant their position?
-W
All they had to do to be spared was say they didnt see the resurrected Jesus. But they didnt deny to the point of being crucified, some crucified upside down.
These guys saw somthing so compelling that
they would DIE horribly for the cause of chrisianity.
Think for a minute, all but one of the diciples died rather than deny Jesus was God. Just a month earlier they had seen Jesus
tortured, beat till he was unrecognizable,spit on and paraded to the tree and nailed to it to die. These guys say all this.
Think it was demoralizing for the 12? Think it blew thier whole belief system apart? they saw him do miracles, they believed he was God.Now the romans crucufied him. Think they would die for the cause of a humiliated leader who was dead?
No they saw him rise again or not a man among them would have died for a lost cause.
I think this evidence brought to a modern court would agree
Its just common sence and logic.....
-
duck and cover David!:D
I do agree, however with you. I love when folks quote the bible...written by HUMAN MEN..actually based on more ancient religions..
people need a crutch and the fairy tale of god and 'miracles' is a great opiate for them
-
Originally posted by X2Lee
Its just common sence and logic.....
Agreed! Just like the big boat with all the animals on it.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Or what? Burn in some hot underground fire pit and be tortured for all eternity by demons? Is that really the best sales pitch Christianity could come up after almost 2000 years?
Grun I am not trying to convert you or offer you heaven or hell.
Like I said, its up to each person to choose.
If you choose to believe and you are right and theres no God,
you have lost nothing. On the other hand if you are wrong?
Men are free to believe in what they choose.
-
You are clearly stating that if I'm wrong then I will suffer eternal pain and torture. It has to come down to that - and that means that is the best sales pitch all you billions of Christians have been able to copme up with in 2000 years.
That is pretty weak. More to the point what kind of insecure god is he if he must have such a policy to ensure his peoples adoration?
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
You are clearly stating that if I'm wrong then I will suffer eternal pain and torture. It has to come down to that - and that
You must cant read dweeb. I said nothing about hell or torture.
I also said I aint trying to convice you.
Many are called, few are chosen.
-
Originally posted by X2Lee
If you choose to believe and you are right and theres no God,
you have lost nothing. On the other hand if you are wrong?
Correct you did not use the word hell. But it's really funny how you are clearly implying something bad and trying to tip toe around the concept of hell with ridiculous threats of "what if you are wrong"...
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Correct you did not use the word hell. But it's really funny how you are clearly implying something bad and trying to tip toe around the concept of hell with ridiculous threats of "what if you are wrong"...
Threats? Man you are deluded.
By the way? You are wrong and yer going to hell and burn forever.
Bite me demon. :p
-
I've learned long ago that most people need the safetynet of religion just to get by. They can't handle the reality of life as it is, so they have to believe in supernatural things which give them comfort in bad times.
It's well documented that the more primitive a society gets, the more gods it starts to have. Those tribemen in the Amazon believe every other tree is a God, not even mentioning the forest animals.. :)
It's inherent to a humans nature to explain the things thier brain can't grasp with divine intervention. Scientits like Einstein are no objection from that fact.
In fact, at times when he lived, people were given a very strict christian upbringing which included regular church trips and brainwashing. Church in earlier ages was often the most massive, even little scary building where people heard stories thier virgin conciousness never heard before. All this done with the echoing strong voice of the priest covered with mystical paintings.. Like going to the movies.
How many of you people would ever find out there's a God, Jesus or whatever unless you learned these facts from the birth? Your parents, grandparents and sometimes even church usually make damn sure the baby will be stuffed with 'ideas' way before it has any possible means to analyse and grasp the things it's been told.
I was lucky enough to have parents who didn't stuff thier religious aspects on me, so when I went to visit my grandparents who were believing and religious people, it came as a strong contrast to home. This enabled me to question and suspect the things I was told and in the end form my own opinnion about how things work in this universe.
Christian type of God is not part of it, trust me. I'm an agnostic.. I really can't say if there is a God or not, but I laugh at the ones that blindly shout out His/Her's existence too, based on a scrap book written during hundreds of years and by dozens of people.
When I read the Holy Bible, I see a lot of wisdom in it. It perfectly fits the hygienical standards of those days and it's giving many good advice on people.. Eating pork was dangerous in those days, for real.. Blood transplants were dangerous in those days, not anymore..
Bible gives hygiene instructions for troops on wartrips (like that you should build a lavatory some way out of the camp, not toejam inside the perimeter to avoid infectious diseases etc.)
It's easy to see the value the book must have had 2000 years ago, but now all that stuff is really outdated and anyone still following the 2000 year old (material) teachings is really nothing but a fool.
The social teachings are, of course, still as valid as they were in those days. If you live like the Bible says, you're prone to live a peaceful co-existence with your neighbors. Nothing smarter has been invented afterwards (even though Bush administration thinks otherwise at the moment ;) )
-
In this context "what if you are wrong?" is a pretty straight forward veiled threat concerning some sort of negative consequence if one does not accept the traditional Chirstian view on religion.
You can try to tip-toe around the whole "hell" issue and be a smart bellybutton but the second you brought up the old tired "what if you are wrong?" argument in this discussion you cannot avoid the fundemental implication and belief that not being a Christian means a trip to hell.
But I'm sure that will go right over your head...
-
Not again.
Einstein believed in Spinozas God, that is, that the universe was God if anything. A deist. This quote ought to help:
"I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings." Upon being asked if he believed in God by Rabbi Herbert Goldstein of the Institutional Synagogue, New York, April 24, 1921, Einstein: The Life and Times, Ronald W. Clark, Page 502.
That a dancer supports the theory of evolution doesn't add credibility to it.
That a scientist is a theist doesn't add credibility to theism. Evidence would. Personal beliefs is just that - personal and *belief*.
X2Lee: let us assume for a second that God is called Barney and is an atheist loving God, sending all believers to hell instead.
This is enough to invalidate Pascals Wager, which you're using.
Not gonna add anything other than corrections to this thread methinks.
-
BTW lets not forget Kuuullax. :)
-
Originally posted by Ratbo
The single best *objestive* argument I've ever seen for putting stock in the Christian faith:
Even secular history shows that almost all of the 12 apostles met a violent end for refusing to back down on what they were preaching. (this is different than meeting a violent end fighting in some Jihaad or fanatical combat)
Exactly what did these people *see* that led them to be so sure of their beliefs that they would rather die than recant their position?
-W
That's a lousy argument: by its own logic, it's objective proof for putting stock in pretty much any faith whatsoever. The logic seems horribly flawed to me though. Timothy Leary got locked up for preaching about what he *saw* too. So what?!? Does this mean he was totally right? I don't think so. Thousands have died for their country - every country. Does this mean every country is right? Again - I think not. Thousands of people have been persecuted for their religion - every type of religion. There's also thousands of different types of heretics who died without recanting their faith in some heresy or another. What about all the witches in Europe - were they right? Personally I think people "meeting a violent end for refusing to back down on what they were preaching" conveys no "right" or "wrong". It merely implies they are very stubborn and, in my opinion, socially inept.
-
Originally posted by Ratbo
Even secular history shows that almost all of the 12 apostles met a violent end for refusing to back down on what they were preaching. (this is different than meeting a violent end fighting in some Jihaad or fanatical combat)
[/b]
I think "almost all" is a bit strong...a couple are known to have met with persecuted ends: Peter at the hands of the Romans and the Jewish historian Josephus reported that James Alpheus was stoned and then clubbed to death by the Pharisees. But what of the rest:
Judas - Suicide
John - means of death is by conjecture only but is thought to be from old age
Bartholomew - There is little information concerning his death, even by tradition. Some Christians speculate he was crucified in India, although crucification was not a known practice in India.
Philip - Again, the Bible does not say when he died nor do we have accurate information. There are contradicting traditions as to his death. Some say he was crucified. Others say he preached in Phrygia, and died at Hierapolis tortured to death at the hands of a Roman Proconsul who personally carried out the torture.
Andrew - Conflicting reports speculate he may have been crucified while preaching in Asia Minor or possibly in Southern Greece
Matthew - Some of the oldest reports say he was not martyred, while others say he was stabbed to death in Ethiopia.
Thomas - Tradition claims that he died in Syria when pierced through with the spears of four soldiers. Conflicting reports indicate he died in India.
Simon - No reliable information about his death, but there is a legend about his martyrdom in Persia
Jude - Conflicting accounts, but possibly crucified.
James the fisherman - Reports confuse this James with James Alpheus, but he may have been beheaded.
Unfortunately, of the 12, we only have reliable info on the death of 2. All the other accounts are speculation by revisionist historians wanting history to say what they desire. The truth is that we don't know.
Exactly what did these people *see* that led them to be so sure of their beliefs that they would rather die than recant their position?[/B]
I'm sure they saw the exact same thing that Jews who refused to convert "saw" when threatened with death by Christians. And by any political prisoner who refuses to recant their position and die as a result. Or by any POW who chose torture and death over publically denouncing their country.
But since so little is known about their deaths, how do you even know that any, besides Peter, were given the opportunity to recant before being killed?
-
what about islam (almoust identical books), dont be a rasist tell us the fake about that too ? :D
-
Here you go.
St. Thomas Aquinas .. proof of God (http://www.aquinasonline.com/Topics/5ways.html)
The first and more manifest way is the argument from motion. It is certain, and evident to our senses, that in the world some things are in motion. Now whatever is in motion is put in motion by another, for nothing can be in motion except it is in potentiality to that towards which it is in motion; whereas a thing moves inasmuch as it is in act. For motion is nothing else than the reduction of something from potentiality to actuality. But nothing can be reduced from potentiality to actuality, except by something in a state of actuality. Thus that which is actually hot, as fire, makes wood, which is potentially hot, to be actually hot, and thereby moves and changes it. Now it is not possible that the same thing should be at once in actuality and potentiality in the same respect, but only in different respects. For what is actually hot cannot simultaneously be potentially hot; but it is simultaneously potentially cold. It is therefore impossible that in the same respect and in the same way a thing should be both mover and moved, i.e. that it should move itself. Therefore, whatever is in motion must be put in motion by another. If that by which it is put in motion be itself put in motion, then this also must needs be put in motion by another, and that by another again. But this cannot go on to infinity, because then there would be no first mover, and, consequently, no other mover; seeing that subsequent movers move only inasmuch as they are put in motion by the first mover; as the staff moves only because it is put in motion by the hand. Therefore it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, put in motion by no other; and this everyone understands to be God.
He may be wrong, but pretty eloquent stuff for a 13th century cleric don't you think.
-
Born and raised Catholic, but here's my general belief:
1. Do not take the bible literally, word for word.
2. The bible has many wonderful stories in it and a great number of these describe how to live peacefully with your nieghbor.
3. The bible has been mis-translated, mis-understood, and mis-quoted since its creation.
Bottom line, i've used the catholic version bible as a foundation for morality. But I read it carefully and research its contents as best I can to understand the meanings of the stories.
Too many use this book for justifying themselves for unjust causes by mis-quoting portions. The crusades and inqusitions are just the tip of the iceburg, IMHO.
Use it wisely, use it to learn how to love thy nieghbor.
-
Originally posted by -dead-
That's a lousy argument: by its own logic, it's objective proof for putting stock in pretty much any faith whatsoever. The logic seems horribly flawed to me though. Timothy Leary got locked up for preaching about what he *saw* too. So what.
Timothy Leary was one man.
There are 12 of them willing to die because of something they saw.
Find another instance where this happened.
You dont die for a dead leader....
-
Originally posted by StSanta
That a scientist is a theist doesn't add credibility to theism. Evidence would. Personal beliefs is just that - personal and *belief*.
Right on Stsanta. Its my personal belief and I have hope in it.
Like I said every man has the right to believe in what he wishes.
I didnt believe in God till i was in my late 30s. I was way to scientific to believe in the "mumbojumbo"
I had a religious experience where I felt I met God and now
I talk to him.
I guess I am insane....
I most certainly threw away logic for a "feeling"
There are things in this universe that we cannot fathom no matter how smart we *think* we are.
It is true arrogance to think we can know anything about the way the universe was created and how we came to be and that there is no God.
NO amount of secular logic will sway me because I been there and done that.
Grun you may think I am too stupid to argue on your level, but the truth is its a waste of time. No logic will ever sway anyone.
Its something
you have to experience for yourself.
-
Say, if the Devil is evil, shouldnt he be *rewarding* sinners? Have an inverse St. Peter at the gates of Hell, checking records, handing out rewards, shaking hands and patting backs? Showing us to our comfy chairs? :)
-
Originally posted by X2Lee
Timothy Leary was one man.
There are 12 of them willing to die because of something they saw.
Find another instance where this happened.
You dont die for a dead leader....
What's your point? Are you saying you have to have at least 12 guys willing to die for a dead leader to make your religion the truth? Still opens up the field to pretty much every religion in the world. Let's see: The Jews - they don't even have a human leader, but I'm sure we can find 12 Jews killed for their beliefs. The muslims - I'm sure mohammed was dead by the time they were persecuted and killed in the crusades & in Spain. Buddhists, Taoists, Confucians, Witches, whatever - all have been persecuted & killed in large numbers for adhering to beliefs espoused by dead leaders. All these things that all these people throughout "saw" have conflicts both internally (sects) and externally (religions). Which one is right? Are you seriously basing your perception of a religion's truthfulness by some sort of body count?
Your chosen religion can have 57 varieties of martyrdom for all I care - it still doesn't demonstrate whether it's true or not. Objectively, it merely shows you have lots of stubborn and/or socially inept adherents.
-
I agree that you cannot sway religious types with logic. and I dont think I was trying to do that.
However I did ask a very simple moral question as to why an all powerful all loving god needs to have this punishement of eternal suffering if one does not heap praise upon him. To me thats clearly a petty and vein human trait - not very big or grand or wise...
And I think thats definitely a fair question to any religius type.
-
Originally posted by -dead-
Your chosen religion can have 57 varieties of martyrdom for all I care - it still doesn't demonstrate whether it's true or not. Objectively, it merely shows you have lots of stubborn and/or socially inept adherents.
Riggghttt, then youre point is that all these guys were so stupid that after thier "cult leader" was killed and mocked in front of them that they all would rather die than say he was dead.
They must have all been idiots.
I guess thats kinda your point too.
I would have said hes dead myself.
Unless I saw him alive after he was killed...
-
Originally posted by X2Lee
Timothy Leary was one man.
There are 12 of them willing to die because of something they saw.
Find another instance where this happened.
You dont die for a dead leader....
You're kidding?
-
"The meek shall inherit nothing"
-
Originally posted by X2Lee
Riggghttt, then youre point is that all these guys were so stupid that after thier "cult leader" was killed and mocked in front of them that they all would rather die than say he was dead.
They must have all been idiots.
I guess thats kinda your point too.
I would have said hes dead myself.
Unless I saw him alive after he was killed...
No my point is that martyrdom seems to me a lousy indication of the objective truth of a religion. Especially as most of them claim to be the one true religion, and they all have martyrs. Bit of a problem - using this daft "must have 12 martyrs" criteria, all these "one and only true religions" are telling the truth: they are all the only "one true religion".
Patriotism is a good analogy - people are willing to kill and be killed for any cause - it doesn't matter if the cause is just or not - it merely has to be their country's cause. The number of people willing to die for a cause is no indication of how good the cause is. You seem to be saying that the willingness of several people to die for something they saw is all you need to prove that what they saw is true. I'm saying that your argument is a non sequitur: most people "see" the sun go down in the evening, and before copernicus, most of christendom would have been prepared to die for what they "saw": the earth is the centre of the universe. The Xian church was certainly prepared to kill for it. Thousands could be killed or kill either way - it wouldn't make the statement "the earth is the centre of the universe" true.
-
having lived in a heavily christian area my whole life. the main proof that there isnt a god is that the god they speak of would never allow them to exist as is. churches have been the source of more evil than pretty much anything else i have seen. ever notice how its always the religious ones screamin for blood?
-
Originally posted by SirLoin
"The meek shall inherit nothing"
Cockroaches are pretty meek.
-
Hey, trying to convince a believing person that there is no God is like trying to convince Fox Mulder not to believe..
Lol.
-
This is perhaps the most retarded religion thread yet. Why Christianity is "fake"? Unless you can prove there is no god, you're not going to disprove the Christian faith. Hell, even if you did, it's still a faith ... meaning belief despite any logical opposition.
Besides, why do you even care. Why bother disproving something until it is actually proven. Because as of now, there is no solid proof of the existance of God.
SOB
-
i believe he was really talking to the brainwashed piramid scheme that is modern christianity. the actual existance of christ is a blind faith thing, some like to practice blind faith ( and call it other things) but most not indoctrinated young don't.
and as predicted christians come on and make the same tired parroted thinly veiled threats as always.
get over its a confience game he figured it out. some people enjoy amway god bless its the same toejam really,um but keep um far from me thanks.
-
So much for religious tolerance.
-
Originally posted by davidpt40
Heres why I think Christianity is fake:
(1) An all-powerful, all-knowing God creates Heaven and Hell. Hell is supposed to be only for Lucifer and the angels that followed him, but somehow, out of Gods control, EVERY SINGLE HUMAN is destined for hell.
(2) Since the two original humans, created in Gods own image, were tricked into eating a piece of fruit from a tree by Lucifer, man is kicked out of paradise and is forced to work and subsequently die. Every single human is punished for the faults of Adam and Eve.
Lets just pretend the entire old testament is an allegory. Now for the New Testament-
(3) God sends his only son to earth so that people don't have to burn in a fiery pit for eternity. Yet what does his son do? He goes around in a very limited area, performing obscure miracles at his leisure. For some reason Jesus won't perform miracles for disbelievers, even if it means they will spend ETERNITY in a fiery pit.
(4) Jesus is crucified and DIES. Then he supposedly comes back to life, but what does he do? He reveals himself to only 3 or 4 people! What a selfish guy. Here he has a chance to give the entire world some evidence to believe in God and he won't even do it.
So in summary, Christianity is this- A God that won't give any evidence of his existance, yet if you don't believe in him 100% you go to a fiery pit called hell where demons torture you.
There is a book out now called "excavating jesus". In the book, it tells how 'virgin births' were common in Jewish history and how it took 40-100 years after the death of Jesus for people to write about him (and subsequently make his story fit the prophesies). In actuality, the body of Jesus was most likely eaten by dogs.
I think people believe in Christianity for a few reasons- (1) They are afraid to question the bible (2) They don't want to believe that they wont go to a paradise when they die (3) They are afraid of going to hell (4) they have no common sense/are uneducated.
LOL, what's next? You're going to go around and tell little kids that Santa Claus doesn't exist?
Perhaps God wants only those with faith to worship him, not those that are forced to.
Have the generousity to allow those of faith to worship and believe in their God(s).
Let's say for the sake of argument that you convert all the believers into non-believers. Do you think that they will stop acting Christian, Catholic, Muslim, etc.? Perhaps it is the person that makes the religion and not the religion making the person.
-
God is a creation of man. I dont trust people I do not know as a general rule. I dont know Christ, Muhammad or anyone who states they are a direct descendant or relative of God. Therefor anyone religious has my respect as they choose to believe but I am wary of blind faith in matters other than instinct.
I do believe that the universe is a creation. I also believe that man evolved along with all other life on this planet. I also believe that there is a vast likelihood that life has been sparked in other areas of this universe and that there is possibly more that just one universe. What created our universe I do not know and I may very well never know. I do hope of course for a greater understanding of this at some point in time.
My favourite passage from the bible is this:
"Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and ye shall be saved."
This is what it all boils down to and is why I distrust organized faith. God help us all.
-
..
-
ZZZzzz
next thread please ...
can we go back to bashing ragheads? :)
-
I used to actually keep up with these bulletin boards. The o'club especially. But after a few years of the same old crap whats the point? Same people crusading for their own retarded internet agenda. People apparently so uncomfortable with their situation that they try to take jabs at peoples religious views? why? make ya feel good? If so, why? justification?
Even before I became a religious man I couldn't imagine where somebody would get something like this:
churches have been the source of more evil than pretty much anything else i have seen.
lol!
Hey nice jpeg there sandman, you really got us religious idiots good with that one. That'll learn us. Now get back to your usual posting of porn of some unfortuante misled 18 yr. old girl. :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by hblair
Even before I became a religious man I couldn't imagine where somebody would get something like this:
They've never been to a church or seen the good work the Lord's people do.
Bigotry wears many guises.
-
While I obviously dont agree with the Christian view of god I'm also shocked at the utter hatred spewed at the whole Christian aspect of western civilization by our own people. Interestingly enough much of this vitriol comes from the so called "tolerant progressive" crowd often the first ones defending non-western Islam to the last breath in all its recent failings and atrocities.
-
Originally posted by hblair
Hey nice jpeg there sandman, you really got us religious idiots good with that one. That'll learn us. Now get back to your usual posting of porn of some unfortuante misled 18 yr. old girl. :rolleyes:
I'm pretty sure I've never posted porn... 18 year old or otherwise...
Glad the pic got a reaction tho... :D
-
Grunherz is shocked that some people spew hatred at undeserving targets for no good reason other than to serve their own misguided agendas or to assuage their insecurities.
My irony meter just exploded...
Kill the intolerant!! - favorite oxymoron
kbman
-
Why not kb? These little toejams go around preaching tolerance this end bigotry that yet they have absolutely no tolerance or respect when it comes to their own culture.
-
Grun,
My reason for that post is because I am hard pressed to think of anyone who has spewed more needless hatred and vitriol on this board than you, except for Hortland, and he's a professed christian...go figure.
kbman
-
I know why you wrote it kb. :D
-
The things hblair and funkedup said above shows that they know nothing of past history of church.
Absolutely nothing. They were not talking about your tv-priests at work now.. Nor the local parish around the corner.
They were talking about the Inquisition and the great Crusades, and the oppression of the American pagans (the natives) that were forced to accept the church or die.
That stuff makes Saddam pale in comparison, and it was ALL done by our church, in the name of God.
In fact, there's a photocopy of our religions first steps going around. It's called Islamist fundamentalism and related terrorism.
They're on a crusade, and the 911 was one step on the way.
You got to love religion.
Edit: The more I learn about fundamentalist religion, the more I begin to think that fundamentalist religion equals to stupidity. Really.
-
Originally posted by davidpt40
Heres why I think Christianity is fake:
(1) An all-powerful, all-knowing God creates Heaven and Hell. Hell is supposed to be only for Lucifer and the angels that followed him, but somehow, out of Gods control, EVERY SINGLE HUMAN is destined for hell.
(2) Since the two original humans, created in Gods own image, were tricked into eating a piece of fruit from a tree by Lucifer, man is kicked out of paradise and is forced to work and subsequently die. Every single human is punished for the faults of Adam and Eve.
Lets just pretend the entire old testament is an allegory. Now for the New Testament-
(3) God sends his only son to earth so that people don't have to burn in a fiery pit for eternity. Yet what does his son do? He goes around in a very limited area, performing obscure miracles at his leisure. For some reason Jesus won't perform miracles for disbelievers, even if it means they will spend ETERNITY in a fiery pit.
(4) Jesus is crucified and DIES. Then he supposedly comes back to life, but what does he do? He reveals himself to only 3 or 4 people! What a selfish guy. Here he has a chance to give the entire world some evidence to believe in God and he won't even do it.
So in summary, Christianity is this- A God that won't give any evidence of his existance, yet if you don't believe in him 100% you go to a fiery pit called hell where demons torture you.
There is a book out now called "excavating jesus". In the book, it tells how 'virgin births' were common in Jewish history and how it took 40-100 years after the death of Jesus for people to write about him (and subsequently make his story fit the prophesies). In actuality, the body of Jesus was most likely eaten by dogs.
I think people believe in Christianity for a few reasons- (1) They are afraid to question the bible (2) They don't want to believe that they wont go to a paradise when they die (3) They are afraid of going to hell (4) they have no common sense/are uneducated.
Funny thing about choices....you often don't see the fruit of choices made until it's too late.
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
The things hblair and funkedup said above shows that they know nothing of past history of church.
Absolutely nothing. They were not talking about your tv-priests at work now.. Nor the local parish around the corner.
They were talking about the Inquisition and the great Crusades, and the oppression of the American pagans (the natives) that were forced to accept the church or die.
Wrongo slick. Looks to me like dolf vader is talking about his own personal experiences. How could he be talking about the history of the church in the following paragraph?
having lived in a heavily christian area my whole life. the main proof that there isnt a god is that the god they speak of would never allow them to exist as is. churches have been the source of more evil than pretty much anything else i have seen. ever notice how its always the religious ones screamin for blood?
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
That stuff makes Saddam pale in comparison, and it was ALL done by our church, in the name of God.
Maybe your church, but not christs church. Christs church is the one in the Bible in case you're wondering.
Hey if I decide I want to be a special forces guy and put on a similar looking uniforn and train in a similar way, then I decide to go rob and murder 20 women and children, would you hold the "real" green berets responsible for my actions? why not? I looked and acted kinda like one, that makes me the real thing using your twisted logic.
Do you have a clue what the bible says about the "church" ? Do you know the references to being the bride of christ? Christ being the head of the church. Christians are to be christ-like as much as humanly possible. Did christ rape and plunder? Did christ conquer people? You tell me. The problem with people like you is you are VERY ignorant with the teachings of the bible concerning the church, therefore when you say the crusades, etc. were carried out in the name of God, you have no clue that they were simply misled ignorant men, not unlike yourself, carrying out what they thought was the work of the church.
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
In fact, there's a photocopy of our religions first steps going around. It's called Islamist fundamentalism and related terrorism.
ahh, so instead of being persecuted the apostles were out chariot bombing the romans?
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
You got to love religion.
religion no, christianity yes.
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
The more I learn about fundamentalist religion, the more I begin to think that fundamentalist religion equals to stupidity. Really.
Sounds like you need to actually see what the bible says about the subject firsthand instead of making ignorant assumptions.
-
Say, who created God?
Daff
-
Originally posted by Daff
Say, who created God?
Daff
Kinda hard to imagine anything outside our realm of space and time isn't it? Of course a beginning or creation is only relevant when you're within the confines of time.
-
Hblair, do some studying on the crusades and the spanish inquisition. Then tell me christianity has clean hands.
I'm not talking about the church you have now, I'm talking about the history of religion as mankind sees it, and it's not pretty.
"churches have been the source of more evil than pretty much anything else i have seen. ever notice how its always the religious ones screamin for blood?"
I understood this as a clear reference to the past and comparison to the present. The UBB inquisition shall we say.. :)
"Maybe your church, but not christs church. Christs church is the one in the Bible in case you're wondering"
In case you're wondering we most probably belong to the same church, and our church is guilty of crimes against humanity. AQ and the likes are merely repeating the mistakes of our church's past (done before we or our fathers were born) only this time they have more advanced technology to use.
The end result is the same whether you burn on a bonfire or get petrol-bombed. The idea behind the terror is exactly same.
" Christians are to be christ-like as much as humanly possible." Again if you'd have studied anything else than the Bible (which is not really a source of any information.. ;) ) you'd know that christian church in the past has been as little christ-like as anything humanly can be. Torturing, oppressing and executing people based on pure superstitions.
"ahh, so instead of being persecuted the apostles were out chariot bombing the romans? "
Did I mention apostles anywhere? It wasn't the apostles that crushed people's limbs in exotic torturing devices in order to make people confess they were witches.
"Sounds like you need to actually see what the bible says about the subject firsthand instead of making ignorant assumptions."
I know what the bible says, but the church hasn't and never will live up to the true word. This is the bottom of the problem - just as Islam is supposed to be the most peaceful religion known to man.
Only recently the catholic church showed its corrupt and rotten inside when the century-long silent approval of molestation and sodomy of young kids was finally brought to public.
It's all about interpretations.
-
You're trying to equate what corrupt man has done in the last 2000 years to the one church in the bible. That's where you're way off base.
You want to pin the salem witch trials on the church? Ok, where in the bible are we told members of the church should "burn witches"? Not in there? Well, where did that come from then?
About as stupid as me blaming all the deaths in hiroshima "on science". Science did it! heh. Those crazy scientists did it! They hold us back! ;)
Siaf__csf, when and where did the church begin anyway ?
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
I agree that you cannot sway religious types with logic. and I dont think I was trying to do that.
However I did ask a very simple moral question as to why an all powerful all loving god needs to have this punishement of eternal suffering if one does not heap praise upon him. To me thats clearly a petty and vein human trait - not very big or grand or wise...
And I think thats definitely a fair question to any religius type.
That is a pretty good question..
And I have given much thought to it.
Men are created Equally, Men are created Evil.
Maybe we should consider;
Is HE the one punishing? or is HE the one saving?
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
" Christians are to be christ-like as much as humanly possible." Again if you'd have studied anything else than the Bible (which is not really a source of any information.. ;) ) you'd know that christian church in the past has been as little christ-like as anything humanly can be. Torturing, oppressing and executing people based on pure superstitions.
Sorry I did not have time to read your entire post, but I've been reading for at least 45 mins and have other things to do today besides read AH BB lol.
But this I can answer:
The Church IS wrong. Most Churchs ARE wrong. Why?
Heres why:
Churchs want power, everyone wants power, and most teach things that the bible totally disagrees with, mainly that (in the case of Catholicism) that you Must go to church and that only the high preists can properly interpret the Bible. Why? to keep people blinded. If you realise You can read the bible, if you realise You don't Have to go to their church to be saved (as the bible clearly states) then You don't need them, and they could easily be out of a job and out of Power. So allong with a bunch of other stuff the CHURCHS were born and changed "christianity" to more of a religion that we think of, when its really less of a religion How We Think Of It and more of a beleif IMO.
-
Originally posted by hblair
You're trying to equate what corrupt man has done in the last 2000 years to the one church in the bible. That's where you're way off base.
You want to pin the salem witch trials on the church? Ok, where in the bible are we told members of the church should "burn witches"? Not in there? Well, where did that come from then?
About as stupid as me blaming all the deaths in hiroshima "on science". Science did it! heh. Those crazy scientists did it! They hold us back! ;)
Siaf__csf, when and where did the church begin anyway ?
There is a reference in the bible concerning witches.
"Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." (Exodus 22:18)
However, there is much debate regarding the translation and intent of this verse.
-
"Kinda hard to imagine anything outside our realm of space and time isn't it? Of course a beginning or creation is only relevant when you're within the confines of time."
Not bad...would you accept if I used the same answer when someone asks me who created the universe?
Daff
-
Originally posted by Daff
"Kinda hard to imagine anything outside our realm of space and time isn't it? Of course a beginning or creation is only relevant when you're within the confines of time."
Not bad...would you accept if I used the same answer when someone asks me who created the universe?
Daff
Sure, in fact that is exactly what I was referring to, the creation of the universe.
However, if you're suggesting that just because we with limited perspectives can't conceive of anything beyond time and space and therefore it doesn't exist, I take exception.
-
Actually, it was a leading question. Normally I would say "I don't know who or what caused the big bang" and promptly get a "See!..it must have been God!"
Thanks for being reasonable about it.
Daff
-
Originally posted by Daff
Actually, it was a leading question. Normally I would say "I don't know who or what caused the big bang" and promptly get a "See!..it must have been God!"
Thanks for being reasonable about it.
Daff
No reaon for anyone that seeks truth to ever become unreasonable, imo. I'm not suggesting I always seek truth, I've been known to be moody and stubborn on occasion. ;)
-
Originally posted by hblair
Sounds like you need to actually see what the bible says about the subject firsthand instead of making ignorant assumptions.
Which version of the bible? English, Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic? Before or after the Council of Nicea? Or the Council of Trent? Let's face it most Xians, indeed most people can't read the bible firsthand, because what they noramally read is a translation of a translation of a translation with a lot of editing and omissions in between each go at it, as well as the usual loss in translation. All of which makes the bible a rather tricky set of books.
-
The Bible is chock full of interesting stuff.
http://www.thereverend.com/brick_testament/genesis/rape_treachery_and_slaughter/gn34_15-16.html
-
Hblair I'm not trying to pin the bad things on THE church..
THE church was a set of very nice ideas that lived in the minds of christians.
Unfortunately as Cajun said the real church is nothing but a noble dream, things went wrong because during the times of Jesus and after, the church was the single most powerful tool of power at hand. The leading figures had great power, and that power corrupted them, enough to lead into murder.
It's the reason why Jesus got executed. He posed a clear threat to the powers that be.
The church used to have a really powerful role in the society, just think what Leonardo Da Vinci and Copernicus had to go through with the 'all knowing' church. If it wasn't for these few guys who risked ban (= practically losing thier lives) on thier blasphemous ideas, we'd still ride horse carts believing firmly the earth is flat.
On the other hand we wouldn't have to worry about overpopulation nor global warming.. Maybe the church was right afterall? :)
-
There is one obscure school of thought that Jesus was married to Mary Magdelene, fathered one daughter and two sons, divorced Mary, traveled east, studied Buddhism, and died in Srinagar, Kashmir, at about 60 or 70 years of age. The two sons are supposedly ancestors of the Merovingian Frankish dynasty, which preceded the Carolingian dynasty (Charlemagne, etc.) on the throne of France. (Apparently Emperor Constantine shared some of this ancestry through his mother Helena, born of noble British blood.) Some allege that the heresy for which the Templars were destroyed was the belief in and allegiance to the persistence of Jesus' royal line, which is also the line of David and Solomon. The book "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" gives more detail on this theory.
As to religious belief, I guess I am limited to believing in God as my creator and Man as my brother. The rest, I will find out in time, and, pending that, I think God would rather we follow the Golden Rule and honor God's creatures, our fellow humans, than worry about what exact name we should address God with and similar minutiae.
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
THE church was a set of very nice ideas that lived in the minds of christians.
It was? Where'd you get that?
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
Unfortunately as Cajun said the real church is nothing but a noble dream, things went wrong because during the times of Jesus and after, the church was the single most powerful tool of power at hand. The leading figures had great power, and that power corrupted them, enough to lead into murder.
Wow, how would they get corrupted if they were following the scriptures? "Leading figures"?
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
The church used to have a really powerful role in the society, just think what Leonardo Da Vinci and Copernicus had to go through with the 'all knowing' church. If it wasn't for these few guys who risked ban (= practically losing thier lives) on thier blasphemous ideas, we'd still ride horse carts believing firmly the earth is flat.
On the other hand we wouldn't have to worry about overpopulation nor global warming.. Maybe the church was right afterall? :)
Again you refer to what man did on his own. Is man encouraged to conquer or opress others by the scriptures in the bible? If not, where did it come from?
From man. That's the point. All the terrible things you've been listing isn't even part of christianity. It's not the church. It's what man did with it. The church is perfect. Man isn't.
-
Hblair it seems you're talking of church as a paraphrase. An ideal..
I'm talking about the church as it is. An organisation run by men. This organisation has done all the attrocities I'm talking about.
For the true church, one does not need church buildings. One does not need a parish nor priests. It's within.
All the structures that man artificially creates around faith are not the true church, yet many follow it blindly. They believe what the priests or the pope says to them, even though they're just mortals like any of us. And certainly not smarter..
Horrible things have been justified during the millenia with quotes from the bible. The book was not meant to be used that way for sure, but because of blind faith and fear, the unimaginable became reality in the hands of a few rotten apples.
If people would have been able to use thier own reasoning instead of faith and respect to the church politics, this world would look a lot different.
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
If people would have been able to use thier own reasoning instead of faith and respect to the church politics, this world would look a lot different.
That assumes an awful lot. If not for morality and conscience imposed by religion the world would indeed be a lot different, but not in the way I think you imagine.
-
Well if you think for a minute of how many intellectuals church managed to burn as witches, you can't help but wonder of all the knowledge destroyed in the process. Knowledge which would have potentially helped human kind in it's development. But it was all suppressed or killed in the dark ages.
Church knew even back then that knowledge was power. Therefore they destroyed a huge amount of priceless works of science and the rest they kept for thierselves in the closed church libraries..
It seems they knew also then that the more primitive people are, the more prone they're in believing the cock and bull they wanted them to believe.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
That assumes an awful lot. If not for morality and conscience imposed by religion the world would indeed be a lot different, but not in the way I think you imagine.
This assumes even more. The eastern world has managed fairly well without Christianity.
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
Hblair it seems you're talking of church as a paraphrase. An ideal..
no man...
I'm talking about the church as it is explained in the Bible. You're talking about church as what man has done with it in the past 2000 years or so. There's a big difference. I hope you see it.
I know man screwed it up in many ways. You know man screwed it up in many ways (not as bad as you want to believe but we'll say you're right)
What you refer to in your ramblings isn't christs church. It's man's halfhearted attempt at it. So when you call it "church" you're really just describing a bunch of misled religious people.
-
Originally posted by Vulcan
This assumes even more. The eastern world has managed fairly well without Christianity.
I didn't say Christianity, I said religion.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
I didn't say Christianity, I said religion.
The original context refers to the Christian 'Church'.
Anyways, Eastern beliefs, ie, Buddhism, really cannot be compared to the Western religions. Buddhism doesn't have a defined set of rules, or a deity even. While Buddhism is classed as a 'religion' in the english language, it is by no means a religion in the same context as Christianity or Islam. For example, a Buddhist could be a Christian, however Christianity precludes this.
-
Originally posted by -dead-
Which version of the bible? English, Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic? Before or after the Council of Nicea? Or the Council of Trent? Let's face it most Xians, indeed most people can't read the bible firsthand, because what they noramally read is a translation of a translation of a translation with a lot of editing and omissions in between each go at it, as well as the usual loss in translation. All of which makes the bible a rather tricky set of books.
Well, if you're saying the bible has been translated so much as to have lost its original meaning, well, the discovery of the dead sea scrolls kinda throws a wrench in that theory. In the first cave at qumran for example, two copies of Isaiah (which are carbon14 dated to be about 1900 years old) agreed 95% with masoretic text. The biggest differences were punctuation and mispellings.
Your implication that the bible has been watered down is not as strong as you would like it to be. ;)
As for me I mostly use the king james version, but I also keep new king james, new international version, american standard, a few concordances, all in english, and a greek lexicon.
-
Originally posted by Vulcan
The original context refers to the Christian 'Church'.
If we're gonna get nitpicky then let me point out the original text: "Thoughts on why Christianity is fake". As I think more on this I believe I'm not really being so nitpicky. Some here have already pointed out the difference between the ideal and the human practice of that ideal.
And so my point is that Christianity is the ideal and has not caused the oppression and suffering that has been attributed to the Christian Church, which is the body of believers practicing Christianity.
Anyhow, by "religion" I meant the search for God. Without this higher ideal we would be nothing more than animals, where only the strong survive.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Kinda hard to imagine anything outside our realm of space and time isn't it? Of course a beginning or creation is only relevant when you're within the confines of time.
With thier debate on the above quote, I believe AkIron and Daff are closer to an understanding then anything else i've read on this thread yet.
I'll use this example as I understand it:
I was once explained about a native american's thought of color as "it emits a color". Kinda like, "that house reds", meaning the color of the house is red, it's essence. There was no word in the language which described color as the early europens knew it.
When we look at the universe around us, does it "God"? That's is, the very essence of God's spirit is all around us, everything from time, mass, & dimensions et al. We had to give it a name, and we're currently using the term "God" for this dicussion.
It is only our past and present understanding which is flawed, about that which we have given the name "God" to. Other religions have given "God" a different name, but in the end, I believe we'll all be surprized.
The essence of most religions, as I understand them, is how to lead a peaceful life. It is each individuals interpretation of how to do this which leads us throughout our lives. It is our "interpretation" which is flawed, and much work and understanding needs to be completed before we know "truth".
Sadly, many more will die in this quest, for as many people which inhabit this earth, there are "interpretations" of "peace" and "truth".
-
Originally posted by hblair
Well, if you're saying the bible has been translated so much as to have lost its original meaning, well, the discovery of the dead sea scrolls kinda throws a wrench in that theory. In the first cave at qumran for example, two copies of Isaiah (which are carbon14 dated to be about 1900 years old) agreed 95% with masoretic text. The biggest differences were punctuation and mispellings.
That's great to hear, but that's the result of 900 years of seriously meticulous copying and no translation. Dead Sea Scrolls = Hebrew, Masorectic = Hebrew. Pulling out the similarities between two versions of the text in the same language as an example of how nothing has been lost in the translation seems rather silly to me. How is your hebrew? Mine is non existent. Also, the important bits (from the Xian point of view anyway) - the gospels - are not found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. Your implication that the bible has been watered down is not as strong as you would like it to be. ;) As for me I mostly use the king james version, but I also keep new king james, new international version, american standard, a few concordances, all in english, and a greek lexicon.
I don't care if the bible is "watered down", 100% original or a cheap "made in China" copy - only the religious have to worry about that. ;) Actually my point was that almost no one can study the xian bible firsthand, because almost no one can read the necessary ancient Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew. If you're studying it in English your are by definition studying it secondhand or even third hand or fourth hand depending on the version you are using. My other implication was that there are many different versions of the bible which leads to the question - much debated - as to which version is the original or at least the best to get down to "firsthand" study with, as you put it. Furthermore some gospels were lost, and some rejected by the catholic church. Again whether they were correct in ditching the gospels or not is not really an issue that bothers me - the point is it brings in human choice and doubt - are we missing stuff or not? The bible is still a very tricky issue. Indeed one might say that "the Bible" is really just a platonic fiction - it doesn't actually exist, although the KJV Bible does. To avoid confusion and flame wars over that last sentence - "the bible" is rather like saying "the BMW car" - to be accurate, you have to clarify which bible and which BMW.
-
The basic gist of it is this- What kind of God would let myself or any other human burn in agony for eternity-or- If it was beyond Gods control, why wouldnt he give people overwhelming evidence of himself so that we would believe in him.
The correct answer is this- The ancient Hebrews invented a War God. In the ten commandments, it says "Thou Shalt Have No Other GodS Before Me". It wasn't talking about the "gods" of today (tv, cars, naked women), it was talking about other invented Gods, the Gods of the Egyptians, Mesopotamians, Hittites, etc etc.
Jesus Christ has been debunked. Even his annointing oil (which contained very high amounts of THC-drug found in marijuna).
Who would want to spend eternity with this type of God? Certainly not me.
-
The whole concept of blind faith has produced the bad things as a side-effect.
Christianity itself can not naturally be blaimed for the bad things. Islam in itself cannot be blaimed for the bad things terrorists do in its name.
But the very fact that people who lack judgement easily fall into the misconceptions the religious leaders feed them, causes all the trouble in the end. These people act as the left hand of God, and the very fact that these morons BELIEVE there's divine intervention taking place, they blindly perform the things they believe they're obligated to. They believe non-believers are the scum of the earth and deserve to die (when talking about fundamentalism.) They believe that non-believers (or even believers, but of the wrong religion) should be destroyed.
If the Mullah tells them USA is the great satan, they'll run and stab the next closest American they can find. All because they've been brainwashed by the system first to believe in something that can't be logically proved, then do something as illogical as to kill in the name of his faith.
Once you throw away the logic, what stops you from going into extremes? Nothing. Fundamentalism, as I see it, is a form of a collective insanity be it christian or muslim.
-
Originally posted by davidpt40
The correct answer is this
Everyone has one :D
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
Fundamentalism is a form of a collective insanity be it christian or muslim.
Agreed, round of drinks on me. Let's get drunk, then molest the sheep and shave the women :D
-
AKIron wrote:
Kinda hard to imagine anything outside our realm of space and time isn't it? Of course a beginning or creation is only relevant when you're within the confines of time.
Well, this 'solution' to the problem of infinite regression is vulnerable to Occam's razor.
Occam's razor is often called the principle of parsimony. It underlies all scientific modelling and theory building. It admonishes us to choose from a set of otherwise equivalent models of a given phenomenon the simplest one. In any given model, Occam's razor helps us to "shave off" those concepts, variables or constructs that are not really needed to explain the phenomenon. By doing that, developing the model will become much easier, and there is less chance of introducing inconsistencies, ambiguities and redundancies.
In this case it applies the following way; one explanation is an all powerful all knowing deity with a special interest in small bipedal cabrbon based life forms on a small planet in a small solar system in a small galaxy exists outside time and space and creates time and space so he has a place to put the bipedal carbon based life forms.
The alternative is to suggest that the thing that created the universe, whatever it is, also resided outside time and space. It has no intelligence but just is.
Much simpler, more likely. Occam's razor cuts the carbon obsessed deity away.
I find the intent of this whole thread a bit annoying. No need to bash the Christians before they're doing something that warrants it. Of course one can argue that 2000 years of opression justifies it, but I don't want to walk down that route. Leave the Christians alone as long as they leave us alone. You've given Ripsnort one of those rare threads where the intent was to bash Christianity (and rippie, that thread you posted all the links to threads started to bash Christianity was proven to be erroneous, so you should smile and drool at this one :D)
AFAIK, there is nothing supernatural that cannot be explained in a simpler, less complicated way without resorting to superstition.
The latter is a disease of the mind.
Hblair wrote:
Hey if I decide I want to be a special forces guy and put on a similar looking uniforn and train in a similar way, then I decide to go rob and murder 20 women and children, would you hold the "real" green berets responsible for my actions? why not? I looked and acted kinda like one, that makes me the real thing using your twisted logic.
Heya Hblair, I know the two of us can have a civil discussion on religion, as we have before.
I believe your logic has a twist of its own - taking it to its logical conclusion, you're saying that there aren't any true Christians.
Killing like that is not according with the teachings of Christ and therefore a sin. The bible says we're all sinners. If one who has sinned is not a true Christian, then there can be no true Christians.
Ok, that's reaching. How about this; according to the bible we're all sinners. Those of us that are True Christians try to live according to Christ's teachings, well knowing we're pathetic sinners, woefully inept in it, resulting in a lot of sins in our lives. But IF we live in accordance to the teachings of Christ *to the best of our abilities*, would we not then be True Christians?
It is harder for some. Some might have mental issues that result in injury, torture or death of others - despite their best efforts to live as Christ teaches. So I'd argue that intent is the key here.
You cannot simlply say 'that dude dinnae live as Christ would want him to, therefore he is not a true Christian' because, as mentioned before, then no one would be a true Christian. You have to judge intent and commitment.
Which is why it is *plausible* that true Christians, like other people, have committed horrible crimes against humanity.
It is also known that True Christians of their various times have done a lot in the name of the Lord that is not consistent with Christ's teachings. But the *interpretation of the time* suggested it was - it was somehow justified. Man with his limited intelligence failing to interpret the bible correctly. Hell, we even kill each other over that today.
Any comments, Hblair? When do you judge someone to be a true Christian?
-
Originally posted by StSanta
Heya Hblair, I know the two of us can have a civil discussion on religion, as we have before.
I believe your logic has a twist of its own - taking it to its logical conclusion, you're saying that there aren't any true Christians.
No I'm not. I'm saying that only those who follow the teachings of the bible are christians according to the bible, not according to me.
Now, who follows what the bible says? Which church does that? Well, according to the NT there is only one church, with everyone being in agreement with one another. Wow. Today we have hundreds of different denominations (or divisions, denomination is a word man came up with to describe the many splits in *the church*). But in the first century there was only one church, Christs church. The apostle Paul preached that they all be in agreement. But "churches" today are not. Yet the popular belief today is all the different denominations we have are just different "interpretations" of the scripture. This cannot be so according to the teachings of the NT. In Matthew Christ himself says that not all who call on his name will be saved, only those who do the will of the father.
For example, today you have people who "believe" in sprinkling babies in order to baptize them. This is 180 degrees off from the NT teaching of what baptism is supposed to be. Baptism is for the remission of sins according to the bible. How can a baby sin? This is something man came up with on his own in the past two thousand years.
Originally posted by StSanta
Killing like that is not according with the teachings of Christ and therefore a sin. The bible says we're all sinners. If one who has sinned is not a true Christian, then there can be no true Christians.
I don't know anybody who doesn't sin. We all do. We all have our weaknesses. the apostle paul had his. You can tell if somebodys trying to follow the "path of righteousness" or not. It shows in their works, their doctrine etc.
Originally posted by StSanta
Ok, that's reaching. How about this; according to the bible we're all sinners. Those of us that are True Christians try to live according to Christ's teachings, well knowing we're pathetic sinners, woefully inept in it, resulting in a lot of sins in our lives. But IF we live in accordance to the teachings of Christ *to the best of our abilities*, would we not then be True Christians?
I agree.
Originally posted by StSanta
It is harder for some. Some might have mental issues that result in injury, torture or death of others - despite their best efforts to live as Christ teaches. So I'd argue that intent is the key here.
Somebody who has an "issue" that causes them to torture people? :D You're trying to pull my leg. Either the person has fallen away (no longer saved) or he was never christian to start with. Or perhaps he has a mental issue that keeps him from hearing and understanding the word?
Originally posted by StSanta
Which is why it is *plausible* that true Christians, like other people, have committed horrible crimes against humanity.
I know of no "true christians" who could be capable of horrible crimes against humanity. :) A person just couldn't be that misled if he knows the scripture.
Originally posted by StSanta
It is also known that True Christians of their various times have done a lot in the name of the Lord that is not consistent with Christ's teachings. But the *interpretation of the time* suggested it was - it was somehow justified. Man with his limited intelligence failing to interpret the bible correctly. Hell, we even kill each other over that today.
as far as "interpretation of the time". There's where people get into trouble. Another way of saying that is "what i'd really like the scripture to say" or "my preacher told me this is what it means, so heck i guess it's true" It really says what it says. People like to yank things out of context to try and disprove or prove this or that.
In a letter to timothy paul tells him he must "study to show himself approved". That really says a lot.
Originally posted by StSanta
When do you judge someone to be a true Christian?
Well I'm not in a position to "judge" anybody, but if somebodys beliefs and doctrine come from somewhere other than the bible, then what are they really?
I answered these as I had time today, been busy, hope I didn't botch it up too bad.
-
Originally posted by -dead-
That's great to hear, but that's the result of 900 years of seriously meticulous copying and no translation. Dead Sea Scrolls = Hebrew, Masorectic = Hebrew. Pulling out the similarities between two versions of the text in the same language as an example of how nothing has been lost in the translation seems rather silly to me. How is your hebrew? Mine is non existent. Also, the important bits (from the Xian point of view anyway) - the gospels - are not found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.
yeah translation obviously wasn't the right word to use, was a lil pressed for time yesterday. But the point I was trying to make is that over many many centuries, the hand-copied book of isaiah went unchanged. I'll try to expand on this later if I don't get piled on too bad for my last reply. ;)
-
Originally posted by StSanta
In this case it applies the following way; one explanation is an all powerful all knowing deity with a special interest in small bipedal cabrbon based life forms on a small planet in a small solar system in a small galaxy exists outside time and space and creates time and space so he has a place to put the bipedal carbon based life forms.
Your scenario does seem unlikely to me. However, how about an all powerful, all knowing deity creates the universe and cares about all living creatures within it, on all planets, in every galaxy, even a lowly sparrow on earth?
Regarding Occam's Razor, didn't Einstein (a pretty smart fellow) say "Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler"?
-
the bible has been translated so many times and changed so many times by whoever was in power its a squealing joke. give up on it. remember the telephone game you played as a kid, that is what happened to the bibble.
-
Can we PLEASE get away from the argument that religion is the source of more evil than any other single institution in history? I don't believe that Hitler's SS thugs were very religious. Neither were Mao's Chinese Communists. Nor were Stalin's murderous goons. Find a less idiotic argument.
Shuckins
-
Originally posted by Frogm4n
the bible has been translated so many times and changed so many times by whoever was in power its a squealing joke. give up on it. remember the telephone game you played as a kid, that is what happened to the bibble.
Who was in power and what did they change specifically?
-
Thanks for yer answer Hblair. It raises a number of questions, however.
Monopoly on truth and monooly on Christianity, to be more specific. And the problems of interpretations.
You would argue that your Christian beliefs are the right ones and you'd quote the Bible to support your claim.
Another chap will do exactly the same, might even quote the same passages, yet arrive at a different conclusion.
Since the readers of the Bible aren't inhabitated by the Holy Spirit there'll be a very clear possibility of misunderstanding passages. Take literally or figuratively? How much importance? Is he implying A or B, or not at all?
Different denonimations result in different answers. The Lutheran Evangelical church here for instance is a largely 'personal relationship with God, not so much mentioning about the horrible horrible sins, not relying on priests for communication with God' whereas the Catholic church nowadays have more with bad sins that only priests can make go away, relationship with God goes through priest. You catch my drift.
I'd like you to expand on one of the answers. I was arguing that as long as we followed the teachings of Christ as well as humanly possible (and we have to assume that God made all stuff around us, including us), then we'd be True Christians. If we're weak in the flesh and seek out prostitutes (and have a very bad conscience about it afterwards and all that), yet recognize it as a sin and do what we can short of castrating ourselves, would we not be True Christians *despite* falling for the temptation from time to time?
Thanks for yer answers Hblar; appreciate it.
-
AKIron, it is correct that one must not make things TOO simple.
The thing with the way Occam's razor is usually used is that th *same conditions* are in place, *minus* the deity. Instead, a natural explanation is inserted - perhaps on as big a leap of faith as with the deity. But the result is simpler than, yet closely related to, the theist/superstitional suggestion.
Gnomes may use bars and steel to hold up a bridge over a river. Or the steel might hold itself up. Someone yelling 'that is too simplistic!' is easy to disprove here. Harder when there is no evidence - yet in such cases where evidence is scarce, it is more likely that the less complicated version is true, so one should bet the odds.
If the argument can stand without the supernatural,it is better than with the supernatural simply because less complexity makes it more likely.
-
StSanta, I'll agree that the simplest explantion is most often the correct one. However, to assume that we understand the underlying nature of the physical universe to the degree that we can say there is no force other than that which we can perceive with our knowledge is not only arrogant but also foolish.
The word "supernatural" implies a force outside or beyond the natural. However, I suggest that God, and other supernatural beings, aren't necessarily outside the natural but only beyond our usual perceptions and limited understanding of the actual universe.
I think Shakespeare was correct.
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
--From Hamlet, Prince of Denmark - 1601 - Act I. - Scene 5.
-
AKIron, if God is outside space and time, he is supernatural:
supernatural
adj : not existing in nature or subject to explanation according to natural laws; not physical or material; "supernatural forces and occurrences and beings" [ant: natural]
He is(it is) neither physical or material, breaks laws of physics, cannot be detected or empirically verified - except by checking brain waves in people, and that only could possibly verify a belief in him/it.
And again. If you suggest God is part of nature and that this is just the way nature works, one can just as easily claim that a singularity existed in the same (unnatural) way you suggest God does. And cut away with God.
I say nothing on the issue. We have some hypothesis out there, some with supporting evidence, but it's still being debated whether it is enough to formulate theories on. So a rational man would say:
'We lack the information at the moment, but what info we have indicate [insert statement]'
A rational man would not say
'I cannot see how this was done. Therefore, God did it'.
It's a huge leap of faith. Many things have been attributed to gods and God which have later been found to have natural causes. As our knowledge progresses, I think more and more things in the bible will have to be taken figuratively, not literally.
-
StSanta, a rational man would also not say "I don't see God therefore he doesn't exist." An arrogant and ignorant man that thinks that his understanding of pyhsics is complete might.
If matter can simply pop into existence from nowhere and of it's own volition as some would seem to think, then who knows what else may exist in this peculiar universe of ours. And who knows, maybe it'll just pop out at anytime, same as it popped in?
-
What are you afraid of AkIron? lol.
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
What are you afraid of AkIron? lol.
You mean besides my wife being in a bad mood?
If you mean dying then no, I'm not afraid to die. Even though I sometimes have doubts about my faith and consider the posibility that we may simply end at death. Doesn't make me afraid to consider that though, only sad.
But, I don't think that I believe the alternative simply because the sadness is unbearable, but rather because of something within me that comes alive when I commune with God.
-
This is a subject that will not be solved on this BB or in any of our lifetimes. The fact is, is that people are entitled to believe in whatever or whomever they want.
That said heres my view:
The Bible is a great idea that has been manipulated to serve a financial purpose. I was raised in a religious home, grew up not even really thinking about what I had been taught, just taking it at face value, why would people lie about God, right? Several things happened in my life that caused me to take a step back and really look at life, not just my own but life in general. I tried to go back to church but I got so frustrated with people telling me that I had to believe this, do that, oh ya and give money and I will enjoy an everlasting life by the side of God. I have worked as a paramedic for over 10 years now and doing such have been present during the last few moments of many, many lives. This is an experience that until you have been there you will never understand. What I have seen is mostly fear in those that are still awake during those last moments. I have talked to many people that were in cardiac arrest and came back. No one ever told me of a bright light, or anything like that. I had one 10 year old boy tell me he was up in the corner of the room watching us work on his body and recited word for word several things that were said.
Anyway I don't have any idea if there is such a thing as a God, no one ever will. I think the Bible is like all other books in that it is full of great ideas, and "rules" for living a peaceful life and getting along with others but it is also full of fables and fiction. The people that wrote it did not have the means to explain things in a scientific way so like the Native Americans and pretty much all other cultures they explained them with religion. I have never seen any reason to believe God does exist and I tried for years to convince myself to believe, but in the end I have to admit I don't. The few people that I have gotten to know that are hard core Bible thumpers were just using it to hide behind. In conclusion I think we just completely missed the point that the people who wrote the Bible were trying to set forth.
-
AKIron wrote:
"StSanta, a rational man would also not say "I don't see God therefore he doesn't exist." An arrogant and ignorant man that thinks that his understanding of pyhsics is complete might. "
I ain't saying God isn't there. I am saying I lack any belief in such a deity as described in the bible, simply because there is no supporting evidence. The onus of proof rests on the shoulders of the claimant. I personally believe Barney the Atheist Loving God created your god. Disprove that!
'Disprove that' - so common. It's the other way around :)
If I was to believe based on faith I'd be stuck believing in all the worlds religion, despite them being mutually exclusive. I simply cannot cut any alternative, no matter how far out, away. Because then I'd be 'arrogant and ignorant'. So what I do with all things in life is: show me evidence. Lack of evidence and I accept the fact (things fall down) but consider why unproven.
'If matter can simply pop into existence from nowhere and of it's own volition as some would seem to think, then who knows what else may exist in this peculiar universe of ours. And who knows, maybe it'll just pop out at anytime, same as it popped in?'
That would be pretty cool. If it pooped into a place where there were beautiful women in thongs all over the place, ready to do my bidding.
God, are you listening? You have yer chance to prove yer existence here; and save one soul. Heheh.
Oops blasphemi. Just remember to an atheist, blasphemi is a victimless crime :D
-
Wow...I can't tell you how many times throughout reading this thread I've changed my mind aboout posting. I kept saying walk away...then I read the next post and decided to reply ...and on and on it went.
Hblair. You are talking about the Church as it is in the bible. Can you quote what it says? I understand the argument about the Crusades, Inquisition and things like buying your way out of Purgatory as things the Church invented for it's own misguided reasons. The reason I understand that is it is in every history book ever printed. It is for the above reasons why I kind of view the chuch as in the INSTITUTION as a place where I will not worship.
Let me say this. Do I believe in a higher power? The answer is yes. Do I go to church....only for weddings and funerals. In fact I got married in a hall because I would have felt like a hypocrit to get married in a place that I do not readily support.
None of us will ever agree. Everybody has a belief and there is no changing it. I have to ask the question....which religion is the oldest? That would seem to me to be the one that is correct.
For instance....in the bible if I understand it correctly quoted in previous posts there is to be only 1 god. Well, the indians believed in the Great Spirit before any other type of religion set foot on this continent. There is a Bhuddist religion that I believe is older than Christianity. Perhaps they are correct....
My point is this. There is a higher power. If you think about it nothing could simply exist. Who that higher power is is up for debate an has been for thousands of years. Call it what you will, worship him/her as you please. The biggest key to any religion is FAITH. One must believe.
I find it hard to belive that God, Buhdah, The Great Spirit or the Grand Pubah, would turn me aside at the gates for not spending my Sunday mornings listening to a sermon.........
-
I feel everyone here has the power of free will. It says so in the bible. As Skernsk said, I do not spend my time in church either, but I do believe in God, and that Jesus died for us all. That is how I see it. I will not refute it, nor will I modify it to fit in with any group or individuals.
The funny thing about my faith is that it started by basically hedging my bet. I.E. Better to believe and not take the chance and be wrong. Well that only lasts so long, as I started to delve into what I was believing, I found and was pleasantly surprised that it is true.
So, it is basically up to you whether you choose to or not. But to refute it seems to be a bad choice in my eyes.
-
Originally posted by StSanta
Thanks for yer answer Hblair. It raises a number of questions, however.
Monopoly on truth and monooly on Christianity, to be more specific. And the problems of interpretations.
You would argue that your Christian beliefs are the right ones and you'd quote the Bible to support your claim.
Another chap will do exactly the same, might even quote the same passages, yet arrive at a different conclusion.
The important thing to keep in mind is scripture isn't going to disprove or argue with other scripture. One book's not going to say one thing and another say another. Some people would use books from the old testament to try to dispute things in the new. Noone in the world is under old testament law today. Non-jews never were. Yet half the religious world think they are. All they have to do is read the book of hebrews to see that the old law was fulfilled. We are now under the new law. This is a big error. If the bible is true and our salvation lies on whats in that book. Shouldn't we study it and be sure we understand it? Or just take the preists word for it like most everybody else does?
Originally posted by StSanta
Since the readers of the Bible aren't inhabitated by the Holy Spirit there'll be a very clear possibility of misunderstanding passages. Take literally or figuratively? How much importance? Is he implying A or B, or not at all?
It takes study man. I admit I'm no expert and I obviously don't know the whole bible. But the basic premise of the book is God created the world and everything in it, created man. Man sinned against God at the outset of his creation and fell from grace. The rest of the OT is basically man coming up short. The Jews offer animal sacrifices to the Lord but cannot ever make up for the sinful nature of man. God then sends Jesus Christ as a human sacrifice for mans sin. All of man, even the gentile (non hebrew). Anyone who believes on him and obeys him has a home in heaven.
Originally posted by StSanta
Different denonimations result in different answers. The Lutheran Evangelical church here for instance is a largely 'personal relationship with God, not so much mentioning about the horrible horrible sins, not relying on priests for communication with God' whereas the Catholic church nowadays have more with bad sins that only priests can make go away, relationship with God goes through priest. You catch my drift.
Put what they're teaching up against the scripture. Where in the NT are we to confess sins to a priest? It's just not there. Next question, should we confess sins to another man? or to pray to God for forgiveness?
Originally posted by StSanta
I'd like you to expand on one of the answers. I was arguing that as long as we followed the teachings of Christ as well as humanly possible (and we have to assume that God made all stuff around us, including us), then we'd be True Christians. If we're weak in the flesh and seek out prostitutes (and have a very bad conscience about it afterwards and all that), yet recognize it as a sin and do what we can short of castrating ourselves, would we not be True Christians *despite* falling for the temptation from time to time?
I think just about all men are really affected today by sex. Whether it be by internet porn or whatever. Thing is we are supposed to do our best. Bible teaches to flee youthful lust. Sometimes I should run from my PC. ;) Trying to keep the mind right is tough. Before I got married I had been with a lot of girls at parties, was a party dude, etc. I ate internet porn up for several years. You have to be determined to stay away from it.
Originally posted by StSanta
Thanks for yer answers Hblar; appreciate it.
No problem man. Thanks for being respectful. We can disagree on things and not belittle each other. I don't mind discussing factual stuff about the bible. It's interesting to me.
-
BTW fellas, I'm just tellin ya what the bible says about things. I'm not arguing whether or not the bible is true, just that it didn't get watered down during translation, etc.
skernsk, I'll get back with you later today on that...
-
ummm, santa.... "pooped into a place"
I think you're letting us know too much of your personal life bro :D
-
Originally posted by StSanta
I ain't saying God isn't there. I am saying I lack any belief in such a deity as described in the bible, simply because there is no supporting evidence. The onus of proof rests on the shoulders of the claimant. I personally believe Barney the Atheist Loving God created your god. Disprove that!
What would you accept as proof? How about I present to you his creation; the universe. Guess we could go 'round and 'round on this.
Forgot to mention, blasphemy doesn't hurt God but rather the blasphemer. Kinda like an angry child that screams and insults it's parent. The parent is hurt only because of the injury done to the child by himself.
-
I guess a suitable proof would be an experiment where something would be done by divine intervention in a controlled enviroment.
The universe is not a very good proof AkIron because despite of your beliefs, nothing proves it was created by an entity.
Numerous scientists have described phenomenon they've seen and tested as 'the work of God' - that is untill later scientists proved that the unexplainable could be explained with quantum physics for example. Same has been repeated over and over in the history of man and science. The church institution has been extremely active in trying to stop the development of science. It was the official stance of the Church that there is no evolution and that the earth is a flat pancake. Scientists trying to prove otherwise were attacked heavily by the church and many lost even thier lives as a result.
So, untill someone can present a phenomenon to which there's no other explainable reason except the work of God, nobody can really tell if God exists or not. God could easily stop all this debate by appearing on top of the Empire State building and shouting from a cloud 'I exist now stop the pickering.'
The Bible says God is appearing to numerous people all the time.. Why did he stop?
-
God does not need to prove anything to you. He is almighty. He provides the gift that saves people from hell. You only have to believe and put your faith in Him. You choose to not believe, then that is your perogative, however, there is a price that is eternal.
As for me and my house, I choose to believe.
all good men and women.
-
I have a hard time believing that belief is a matter of choice.
IMHO, you either believe or you don't. WRT religion, I believe what I believe. As a child and a teenager, I spent a lot of time in church and I always felt dishonest. I could read the Bible but it didn't resonate. As an adult, I finally realized that I was not a believer and going through the motions was not going to make me one. The first time I said, "I am an atheist" felt like a weight off my conscience.
-
If he truly would be almighty, it would be no problem for him to prove he exists. It's not logical that the Bible talks about God's appearances repeatedly but there are no known occurrences in the recorded history after the bibliotic times.
Most likely these things 'stoped' happening once people started using thier own brains more and not believing everything to be coming directly from God. People were extremely superstitious during the decades that bible was written and tended to believe all sorts of stories very easily.
Edit: Much like Sandman I was raised to christian religion as a child. But very early on I started doubting the teachings simply because none of it made any sense to me. I saw how firmly my grandparents believed but even as a child I just couldn't agree with them. So maybe I was doomed from the birth.. tough luck. :)
-
My .02
I actually envy those who are true believers (in any religion). They seem very happy in their own skins, and have a simplified view of things that I'm sure is stress reducing and healthy.
I just can't do it.
-
Sandman, I can only say that as a man, you have to make a decision, and you have. More power to you.
I don't beleive that the truth is subjective. I believe that it is solid, unmoving, and will never change. God is, was, and will always be God. Man is the flaky variable.
What I don't understand is the first statement you made I have a hard time believing that belief is a matter of choice.
Do you think that our minds are made up by some other force or something, that you don't have control over what you think, or believe? please explain.
BTW, until I accepted Christ as my personal Savior, I could read the bible and it did not hit home with me.
-
MT: There are studies that clearly prove what you said is right. People with strong religious beliefs or people with tight communal ties and support network are generally healthier than people who lack this mental support network.
There's a reason why they say 'knowledge increases pain.'
-
siaf_csf-
I think that God sacrificed enough when he gave his son to endure the cross. I think, with that sufficient sacrifice for all sin (remember that God is holy, he cannot permit sin in His prescence), that now he requires men and women to believe. He doesn't owe a thing to mankind. He has already given something that he cherished that he did not owe. If you choose to not believe it, then so be it.
Know this, that that sacrifice proves to me (and all true believing Christians) that God loved me more than I could ever love. When I consider whether I could do the same thing to that he did for this evil world,I don't think I could. My own son(s)? No way. Consider that objectively please.
just my POV, I know it does not sit well with all.
-
Originally posted by -ammo-
Sandman, I can only say that as a man, you have to make a decision, and you have. More power to you.
I don't beleive that the truth is subjective. I believe that it is solid, unmoving, and will never change. God is, was, and will always be God. Man is the flaky variable.
What I don't understand is the first statement you made I have a hard time believing that belief is a matter of choice.
Do you think that our minds are made up by some other force or something, that you don't have control over what you think, or believe? please explain.
There you have it... I believe truth is indeed subjective. Take a group of witness from a crime scene or auto accident. They can all be telling the truth, but their stories are not all the same.
If there a universal truth, I haven't seen it. Nor have I seen any reason to believe in a god.
When it comes to belief... take it from an unbeliever's perspective. Do you think an unbeliever wakes up one day and says, "Today, I'll believe in Jesus Christ." and then it just happens?
-
I understand that Ammo but you should also realise that symbolism doesn't mean much to us who try to see things from the logical side.
This issue is just one that can't be argued I guess.
Anyways Ammo, you don't know this but you were my first wingman ever in AH special event (which I joined on my first day in AH) through which I found my fat love, the p47. ;)
-
Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
When it comes to belief... take it from an unbeliever's perspective. Do you think an unbeliever wakes up one day and says, "Today, I'll believe in Jesus Christ." and then it just happens?
Absolutely not. I was an unbeliever for the first 24 years of my life. I can describe what I felt about God, the Bible, and Jesus Christ leading up to the point where I gave in and accepted that I was wrong. That in all my rationalizing, I was still wrong.
Then- God? He doesn't pay my bills. He doesn't allow "fun". Christians? I have seen too many that like to do the same things that I do. If God is so loving and kind, he would never send me to hell. heck, I don't hurt anyone. I am not a murderer in the least. How could He sned anyone to hell if he is so loving and He loves everyone?
Now- God? He IS a loving God. He is also a God of wrath. Yes he Loves me, why else would he sacrifice his only son to die for my sins, and all mankinds sins for that matter. He seeks a personal relationship with me. He wants me to lean on him wholly for all decisions in my life. He has given me the Bible, His inerrant Word, as a guideline. I believe that through all of lifes trials, that God knows best for me and I will trust Him. Will it be easy? No, He did not promise an easy road.
-
Siaf-
I am glad that you have been stricken by the P-47 bug:) She will take care of you if you treat her right. Feel free to come fly in the Squadron Operations series of events with us if you like.
I do understand why men want to logically justify things. God just does not fit into that mold.
God is on a different level than men. He states in the bible that He does not reveal all to us. I just have to accept that and move on. It is a hard thing for the analytical mind to just accept that God knows all and is in control, even beyond our own control.
-
Originally posted by -ammo-
Absolutely not. I was an unbeliever for the first 24 years of my life. I can describe what I felt about God, the Bible, and Jesus Christ leading up to the point where I gave in and accepted that I was wrong. That in all my rationalizing, I was still wrong.
Then- God? He doesn't pay my bills. He doesn't allow "fun". Christians? I have seen too many that like to do the same things that I do. If God is so loving and kind, he would never send me to hell. heck, I don't hurt anyone. I am not a murderer in the least. How could He sned anyone to hell if he is so loving and He loves everyone?
Now- God? He IS a loving God. He is also a God of wrath. Yes he Loves me, why else would he sacrifice his only son to die for my sins, and all mankinds sins for that matter. He seeks a personal relationship with me. He wants me to lean on him wholly for all decisions in my life. He has given me the Bible, His inerrant Word, as a guideline. I believe that through all of lifes trials, that God knows best for me and I will trust Him. Will it be easy? No, He did not promise an easy road.
So... would you say that you consciously chose God or that events in your life caused a change in your belief?
-
A couple of my favorite jokes.
Q.) What is an agnostic, dyslexic insomniac?
A.) Someone who stays up all night wondering if there is a dog.
Q.) What did the Buddha say to the hotdog vendor?
A.) Make me one with everyting.
Apologies to anyone who's heard these old gems before.
:D
kbman
-
While I believe that God Knows who will believe and who will not, I believe that all men and women choose under their own free will to believe what they want. I do beleive that circumstances help shape our decisions in life. But the choice is always yours to make.
-
I believe the sky is green.
-
Obviously circumstances will influence this. If it is a cloudless sky, during the daytime, then you are wrong, unless of course you have some chronic issue with your eyes that makes blue things look green. If ti is nightime, or sunset, sunrise, the color of the sky will be different. But you are baiting me.
-
Oh no... not baiting. Just trying to illustrate the point. :)
Don't get me wrong, Ammo. I consider you one of the "true believers."
True believers seldom irritate. It is not my intention to convert you. :)
-
It can be for a colorblind person..
-
My favourite thing was to bait my religion teacher to arguments at school..
I was extremely bored at religious history lessons (where we were taught of the different religions on this planet, not only christianity)
I made a cup with my hand and I stated: There is a small invisible goblin on my hand, can't you see it? I believe it's there. If you state you believe there's a God and I should believe it, the same should go vice versa. Prove me wrong..
We spent the whole hour in class arguing that time, I wasn't bored at all. With time she saw through me and spit the bait out.. :)
-
But it still remains blue for most people. It is widely accepted, even to folks that are color blind, that the sky is blue. If you choose to believe that it is green, yellow, whatever, then you are still wrong. You can argue the point all you want, but it will not change.
BTW, God made that beautiful blue sky.
-
I.....nope, nope, not gonna do it.
Peace, Brothers :)
-
Originally posted by -ammo-
But it still remains blue for most people. It is widely accepted, even to folks that are color blind, that the sky is blue. If you choose to believe that it is green, yellow, whatever, then you are still wrong. You can argue the point all you want, but it will not change.
BTW, God made that beautiful blue sky.
Acceptance is not truth. :)
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
I made a cup with my hand and I stated: There is a small invisible goblin on my hand, can't you see it? I believe it's there. If you state you believe there's a God and I should believe it, the same should go vice versa. Prove me wrong..
Believe what you want, including that you are smarter and wiser than those who choose to believe in a creator. We can't and won't stop ya.
BTW, where did the hand that you were holding your goblin come from?
-
Umm... AkIron did you skip biology lessons perhaps? I don't want to go into too graphic detail. Lol.
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
Umm... AkIron did you skip biology lessons perhaps? I don't want to go into too graphic detail. Lol.
Of course you don't know, not that hard to admit it. Unless you find it necessary to maintain your superior knowledge and wisdom personna. I find your "let's ridicule the ignorant and superstitious christians" to be quite contrary to the image you would portray.
-
AkIron first of all, I'm a parent myself. I know exactly from where children come to this world.
What you meant probably is what created the universe where we live - and for that my friend I have no answer. In fact nobody does.
There are some that believe in big bang, there are some that believe the universe is pulsating, exploding and collapsing repeatedly. There are some that believe the universe was created by some divine being.
What's common to all of them is that they can believe whatever they want, nobody has and probably ever will know the final answer to this question.
I personally have wondered why it's so important for people to try to look for a reason why we're here. The big WHY question.. I've always settled to the fact that we ARE. Just as the ants are in the ground, the birds in the trees and the clouds on the sky.
There is no need for a bigger purpose, since being is a purpose in itself. Evolution needs no purpose, it becomes the purpose through necessity.
We're all a part of a big ants nest called Terra on this remote section of a mostly forgotten area of Plural B (or how did Douglas Adams describe it.)
That is what I believe - I'm not saying it's right but you can't prove me wrong either.
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
AkIron first of all, I'm a parent myself. I know exactly from where children come to this world.
What you meant probably is what created the universe where we live - and for that my friend I have no answer. In fact nobody does.
There are some that believe in big bang, there are some that believe the universe is pulsating, exploding and collapsing repeatedly. There are some that believe the universe was created by some divine being.
What's common to all of them is that they can believe whatever they want, nobody has and probably ever will know the final answer to this question.
I personally have wondered why it's so important for people to try to look for a reason why we're here. The big WHY question.. I've always settled to the fact that we ARE. Just as the ants are in the ground, the birds in the trees and the clouds on the sky.
There is no need for a bigger purpose, since being is a purpose in itself. Evolution needs no purpose, it becomes the purpose through necessity.
We're all a part of a big ants nest called Terra on this remote section of a mostly forgotten area of Plural B (or how did Douglas Adams describe it.)
That is what I believe - I'm not saying it's right but you can't prove me wrong either.
here ya go...
"Far out in the uncharted backwaters of the unfashionable end of the Western Spiral Arm of the Galaxy lies a small unregarded yellow sun.
Orbitting this at a distance of roughly ninety-eight million miles is an utterly insignificant little blue-green planet whose ape descended life forms are so amazingly primitive that they still think digital watches are a pretty neat idea..."
-
I thought it was obvious that my question about your hand referred to creation, perhaps not. Anyhow, for anyone to sneer at another's belief is both arrogant and ignorant. If that isn't what your were doing then my apologies.
Regarding the "big" question. If you don't wonder or care why you're here, no biggie, some of us do though.
-
Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
Acceptance is not truth. :)
Yes, but can we not look up into the sky and see its blue? Physical proof that is blue, seeing is believing.
-
Bingo.
This is why I'm an atheist. :)
-
Takes as much faith to be an atheist as it does a christian Sandman. Sure you're not rather an agnostic?
-
I've always looked at agnostics as people that are afraid to commit.
If there is a hell, I'll know why I'm there. :D (an added bonus will be seeing the surprised expressions on the faces of my friends.)
-
If you're interested in some fiction regarding what hell might be like I recommend "The Great Divorce" by C.S. Lewis. I enjoyed it.
-
Yes, but you would argue that the evidence leans torward an accidental existence, while I would argue that the evidence undeniably leans toward a divine creation.
-
Originally posted by -ammo-
Yes, but you would argue that the evidence leans torward an accidental existence, while I would argue that the evidence undeniably leans toward a divine creation.
Ya know.. I don't see any evidence either way. Certainly, when it comes to creation theory and the beginning of everything, we know little enough that there very well could be a supreme being that started it all.
Still... if there is such a being, I see no evidence of it today nor do I get the impression that this supreme being is concerned with the day to day operations on this insignificant blue-green planet.
-
You didn't offend me, thanks for being considerate though.
I guess what ticks me off is the way many believers act like they really knew something in which they simply believe but which can't possibly be proven in any way. If you know what I mean :)
I really don't know if man ever visited space or the moon nor can I prove it with the material I have at hand. But based on what I've seen in the media I believe in it even though it seems quite wild.
Probably if I'd witness a launch myself it would be much easyer to believe that I know men were launched to space.
When you start to question the simple things like this, all the 'higher' things really start smashing you in the face. Soon you realise that you can not really count on anything except your own reasoning - and even then you're likely to get things very wrong.
It's not an easy way to go, defining the existence to yourself instead of clinging to pre-made explanations.. But I'm sure it has created a lot more moral debate and evaluation of values to me than it does in an average believer. My stance for example is that since no deity (IMO) created humans over the rest of the animal kingdom, all animals have a similar right to exist on this planet alongside of humans. I have no special right to smash a housefly to the window, but I have no obligation not to do it either. If I feel it necessary I can do it. Just as I can kill a bigger animal if I get threatened by it. By my moral however, it's dead wrong to hunt animals for fun. When I see sport hunters, I get an urge to pull the trigger on them.
By rules of nature co-existing animals are often natural enemies to eachothers. Therefore it's natural for me to destroy the insects that potentially harm my existence. One shouldn't go to extremes however since that affects the foodchains and the natural balance. Human kind is a danger to this planet because it's the only one that has the ability to render other species extinct. We have to reckognize our responsibility.. The teachings of the bible certainly do not help in this matter.
I guess I went a little off-track here.. But maybe that clarifies the issues behind the way I think. If one doesn't care why we're here, it doesn't mean that they won't care in general.. I'm focusing to the present instead of wasting my resources pondering about what happened billions of years ago. It doesn't touch my life in any way whatsoever.
-
Sending His Son to die for mankind is showing no interest?
I consider things that are taken for granted by most people and I see the evidence of God's hand.
Take the human body for example. I don't believe that such a complex fleshly precision machine could evolve from an accident. The seasons themselves are evidence of a Creator. Just the way a Christian sees things
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
If one doesn't care why we're here, it doesn't mean that they won't care in general.. I'm focusing to the present instead of wasting my resources pondering about what happened billions of years ago. It doesn't touch my life in any way whatsoever.
Though I don't share all your convictions, I can respect your position. I will disagree about the past not touching your life however.
-
I think we've made everything so complicated, no-one can see the obvious.
You want proof of the existance of God? Breath
We exist, therefor we are. Don't complicate the matter by asking for a "sign". The very act of our conciousness questioning existance is the greatest "sign" anyone could expect.
The elements in our body which have been created through the process of countless suns exploding making heavier elements, is the act of God as nature. We are in effect, created from the dust of the earth, literally.
A few wise prophets tried to explain our existance in the only way they could, as they understood at the time. To literally read into the bible word for word, is to misunderstand the spirit of it's creation.
As was stated earlier, "man is the only variable", hits it right on the head. Nature has not changed, only our understanding of it and I would lay my money on Nature/God anyday over man. Never has there been a more cruel or Loving creation in nature then that of man, and it has all been of his own choosing.
Choice, the freedom of thought and action is yours. Do with it as you will. I, for one, choose to live with my concience and neighbor.
-
Whenever one attempts to argue matters of faith through logic and intellectual devices one makes the fundamental error of placing Descartes before de horse. And we all know common sense tells us that you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him think. ;)
kbman
-
Originally posted by -ammo-
Sending His Son to die for mankind is showing no interest?
It's a nice story. Certainly, there is enough evidence to show that there was indeed a person called Jesus Christ. There is no proof that he was anything more than the son of an ordinary man.
No, the Bible is not proof.
-
Yes it is a nice "story", and it rebutts your statement Still... if there is such a being, I see no evidence of it today nor do I get the impression that this supreme being is concerned with the day to day operations on this insignificant blue-green planet.
Whether you believe it or not, I was just replying to that statement. Certainly if you sacrificed something that you love dearly (whether it be your son, daughter, car, house:D) for someone that did not deserve it, maybe a convicted murderer heading for execution, the world would believe that you cared.
-
Reasons I quit beeing a christian 12 years ago;
1. They`re trying to sell (do as we say) me something I can`t verify to exist (eternal life)
2. They want my absolute, obedescient well obedience. Sworn when first born, as a immature, and as a immature yet again.
3. They preach peace and giving to the poor, while they amass fortunes and wage war. (Think Crusades, the catholic church in WW2-Germany etc etc)
-
I don't care what denomination you belong to,
as long as you're ashamed of it.
:eek: