Thoughts on why Christianity is fake

[hblair]

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?

[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.

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.

[StSanta]

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.

[AKIron]

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.

[StSanta]

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.

[AKIron]

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?

[Siaf__csf]

What are you afraid of AkIron? lol.

[AKIron]

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.

[medicboy]

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.

[StSanta]

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

[skernsk]

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.........

[Bodhi]

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.

[hblair]

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.

[hblair]

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...

[Nomde]

ummm, santa.... "pooped into a place"

I think you're letting us know too much of your personal life bro