I'm not even going to respond to that, as I don't believe in 'heaven'. But isn't the christian message: love the friend, the stranger and the enemy? Isn't it all about kindness?Originally Posted by Jeremy
You are the embodiment of people who blindly follow things they think are in the Bible...
Rules like 'don't have sex before marriage' all come from misinterpretation of the Bible. If you think THAT's what christianity is all about, you're not a good christian. Not remótely.
And STOP double posting...
Last edited by RagnaToad; 08-21-2009 at 07:51 PM.
Crao Porr Cock8: Getting it while the getting's good
To say this would imply that everyone should be Christian, and in my mind is wrong.This is basically saying everyone else who is not will go to Hell, which I don't think is true. I would say devoted people, more like. (to God I mean, because I do belive in him) are you telling me that because I am not Christian I too will go to hell eventhough I DO believe in God?? (pshhh!)
Last edited by GypsyElder; 09-28-2009 at 01:39 PM.
Technically, they don't.
Have you heard of the concept of the Abrahamic faiths? Both Christianity and Islam are descendants of Judaism. Jesus is a prophet in the Islamic tradition. They read (and learn) his comments in the Koran. Yahweh, Allah, and the Christian God (the Father), are the same being. Christianity also holds the concept of the Divine Mystery of the Holy Trinity. Jesus, God, and the Holy Spirit are separate and one. It's a mystery, don't dwell on that too much. Easy answer however, is that they are the same. Mohammad did not teach the Arabs to believe in an entirely new deity, so he was clearly building on the Judeo-Christian tradition.
Personally, I'm a liberal Catholic. I believe in Heaven, but I'm not so sure about Hell, and I believe that anyone can go to Heaven. Jesus said that to love our neighbours and to love God are the most important lessons. That summarises Jesus' message. But if Jesus thinks that just because someone didn't get all these special oils rubbed on their forehead that they can't be saved, then that's not really loving one's neighbour, is it? Sending Muslims to Hell for not believing in the Christian concept of (what is really the same) religion is not loving them. Provided people don't kill and rape and do stuff that most countries criminalise, then you'll be all good. Remember that Christianity doesn't have a high horse. In the Crusades we killed tens of thousands of Jews in the Pogroms, and tens of thousands of Muslims in the Holy Land.
The Bible does have lessons, Rags. Just like how one can learn from a textbook. The lessons however are largely narratives, and need to be placed in context and read critically, not literally.
I don't believe in conversion. I think forcing one's beliefs onto another is wrong. Especially because religion and culture are linked. To convert someone would be to dislocate them from their ancestry and culture. Choosing to convert is a lot different though.
Last edited by Alpha; 08-21-2009 at 10:44 PM.
I didn't feel like explaining all that stuff to that guy, so thanks, Alpha. You said almost exactly what I would have said.
Also, I know what you mean with the Bible 'teaching' us something. There's a moral. But I was just trying to point out that you don't have to believe anything or follow any rules by reading a book.
You're free to draw strength or inspiration from the stories as you please.
Crao Porr Cock8: Getting it while the getting's good
So you don't need it, don't want it, don't have any idea what it's about, but still don't like it. Kind of aggorant and ignorant, don't you think?
So you've read it, but you haven't read it?
Damn those people! They believe that their beliefs will save them from an eternity in Hell, and they have the audacity to come try to save me from it too? What jerks!I hate when Bible thumpers come knocking on my door trying to convert me
Because some people aren't like you, and some people DO listen. They do things like, say, ask "why". They usually come back around to the beliefs they held before, but still. It's very ignorant to stereotype Christians with the assumption that they never question or re-evaluate their own beliefs.Whats the point?? think about It if someone came up to you and tried to tell you that your religion is false would you listen?? of course not!! so why would someone else?
What makes you a good person does not necessarily make you a good Christian. Christianity is a religion of FAITH, not works. According to Christianity, it's not what you do, it's what you believe that's important.
Except for the whole not-wishing-death-on-nonbelievers thing, you might be a little closer.If you're trying to say that following the Bible is the only way to happiness, and that being friendly in general, without following all those (here it comes) rules is a waste of time, you're no better than muslim fundamentalists who think everyone that doesn't live by the Koran is the devil.
If you have any knowledge or understanding of the Bible, I'd like you to point out passages prohibiting sex before marriage and cursing. Cursing is considered generally improper and dictated by society, not religion.
It's not God, it's Jesus, according to Christianity. And whether you think he's self-righteous or not, according to the Bible, it's the belief in salvation by God through Jesus that gets people out of Hell -- not what they do or how "righteous" they are.
No, it's very Christian to say that only people who believe in Christianity get into Heaven. There's nothing to "deserve" or "earn" -- NOBODY deserves to get into Heaven. Under Christian belief, faith doesn't "get you into Heaven", it gets you out of Hell. Nobody is "good" enough to pay for all the bad things they've done, so it's only through acceptance of Jesus's sacrifice (the only one who did nothing bad) that we can get out of Hell, the place where we would pay for our sins.Isn't it un-christian to say only people like you deserve eternal happiness? (Cause I assume that's what you mean by 'heaven'.)
That's what the Bible says.
Islam branched off Judaism, not Christianity, but they both branched from Judaism, if that's what you're referring to. Islam was founded well after Christianity, but Islam understands Jesus the same way Judaism does -- not the Messiah.
Islam was founded as a way to "go back" to the original Judaism, because Mohammad believed that the original teachings and beliefs had been corrupted by those who controlled it.
So while Christianity could be considered the child of Judaism, Islam would be the attempted clone that turned out all screwed up.
In theory, yes. According to how Islam interprets their god and how Judaism and Christianity view their god (God), hell no. The God of the Torah and the Bible asks much, much different of his followers than the god of the Qur'an.Yahweh, Allah, and the Christian God (the Father), are the same being.
First -- it wasn't a Judeo-Christian tradition at all. It didn't branch off Christianity, it branched off Judaism. And second, Mohammad incorporated some old beliefs and traditions with his new stuff, and also included some pagan rituals, to "stay with the times", if you will. The sacred rocks and crap like that.Mohammad did not teach the Arabs to believe in an entirely new deity, so he was clearly building on the Judeo-Christian tradition.
So you claim to be Catholic, but you don't follow the Bible ... do you follow the Catholic Church, or just do your own thing?Personally, I'm a liberal Catholic. I believe in Heaven, but I'm not so sure about Hell, and I believe that anyone can go to Heaven.
Being saved is just that -- SAVED. It's not "getting to go to a good place", it's "not having to go to Hell". The only thing somebody has to do is believe, and that's not easy enough?Jesus said that to love our neighbours and to love God are the most important lessons. That summarises Jesus' message. But if Jesus thinks that just because someone didn't get all these special oils rubbed on their forehead that they can't be saved, then that's not really loving one's neighbour, is it?
It's not the same religion, not at all. Nobody would be "sent", they just wouldn't be saved from it -- we're all headed that way anyway, and the only way out of it is to accept Jesus. If it was a situation of "not loving them", there would be no way for them to get out of Hell.Sending Muslims to Hell for not believing in the Christian concept of (what is really the same) religion is not loving them.
According to the Bible, it's not what you do, it's what your believe. Faith, not works. Murderers and rapists can repent and accept Jesus, and they'll end up in Heaven.Provided people don't kill and rape and do stuff that most countries criminalise, then you'll be all good.
Something I've heard before that makes perfect sense, is that there will be a lot of surprised people in Hell, and a lot of surprised people in Heaven. (Some will think, "I was a good person," while they're in Hell, and others, "I was a Christian, but not a good one" while they're in Heaven.
That was the Catholic Church. And let's not forget that the Holy Land was taken over through force by Muslims, and the Crusades were about taking them back.Remember that Christianity doesn't have a high horse. In the Crusades we killed tens of thousands of Jews in the Pogroms, and tens of thousands of Muslims in the Holy Land.
When a religion is founded and its FIRST movement is a military invasion, it kind of tells you something.
That is all fine and dandy for people who don't claim to be Christian.The Bible does have lessons, Rags. Just like how one can learn from a textbook. The lessons however are largely narratives, and need to be placed in context and read critically, not literally.
At some points in history, forceful conversion happened (for prettymuch all religions), which of course was wrong. At this point, however, at least Christianity does missions and outreach programs that help spread Christianity through education.I don't believe in conversion. I think forcing one's beliefs onto another is wrong. Especially because religion and culture are linked. To convert someone would be to dislocate them from their ancestry and culture. Choosing to convert is a lot different though.
Sig courtesy of Plastik Assassin.
Greater love hath no man than this; that he lay down his life for his friends.
John 15:13
Like I said before i'm not a huge ( go to church everyday ) person,my point in that was i'ts not like I haven't had some influence from the bible,it's exactly as it says: I havent read the whole thing.
First of all, I already stated that I know they're intensions are good. Once again,would you actually change your religous beliefs because someone came to your door telling you all the falts in your religon?? Of course you're gonna listen to what they have to say, but in the end nothing changes you're just being nice and taking to their generosity by hearing them out.
Who's stereotyping???? that was general, I never said Christians. I'm sure SOME people may get a ray of light from there little visit,but for the most part it nothing, again...
Don't you think God would much rather have you believe in him to the fullest and and have faith in him,showing your commitment, rather than worry about some name you slaped on to yourself ?? I don't have to be Christian to do that.
like jeremy said earlier:
isn't this exactly what I am doing...???
You're doing what every other religion does,telling everyone else they're wrong,while you float by in your ship of right.That's exactly what it means so say: Only Christians will go to Heaven,and Thats exactly the crap I get when people come to my door too,and you make it seem like I should feel bad for not wanting to hear them out...Teh!
Last edited by GypsyElder; 08-22-2009 at 09:33 PM.
Oh so it's not acceptable to skip over all the genealogical crap in Genesis which are just lists of names? No, I have to read every word for myself before I'm saved? And what of those who can't read? Or are told what to believe and end up doing everything (by your definition of) right?
The problem is that anyone who has a faith has a similar belief. Muslims believe the exact same thing, but I'm going to assume if they came to your door, you would either get very angry or try and counter-convert. If you do the 'Christian' thing (and I hope you would), and love them by hearing them out and not criticising their religion, you wouldn't convert, would you? So what was the point of the whole exercise? By zealous Christians most of the time, and by zealous Muslims in this example?Damn those people! They believe that their beliefs will save them from an eternity in Hell, and they have the audacity to come try to save me from it too? What jerks!
Yes, that is true. But it seems that you aren't really evaluating the "God loves everybody" thing beyond your own scope of "everybody" (i.e. every Christian).Because some people aren't like you, and some people DO listen. They do things like, say, ask "why". They usually come back around to the beliefs they held before, but still. It's very ignorant to stereotype Christians with the assumption that they never question or re-evaluate their own beliefs.
You sound like a pre-Reformation Catholic. They sure had faith in those indulgences. Luther came and said that we needed good works as well as faith.What makes you a good person does not necessarily make you a good Christian. Christianity is a religion of FAITH, not works. According to Christianity, it's not what you do, it's what you believe that's important.
By your argument, I could rape and murder, as long as, in my mind, I was a good Christian who had a tremendous faith in Jesus to save me? WORKS are the most important part of getting your salvation. It's not enough just to believe. Did Jesus spend all day praying, or did he actually help people? I'm not giving a Bible reference here except for the whole New Testament.
You're marginalising the world's second-largest religion down to fundamentalists. I know plenty of Muslims. I went to my University's open-prayer-room day two weeks ago. I told them I was a Catholic and that I was interested in learning about what they believed, though I'm happy with my faith. They explained what all the praying was about, and some of their beliefs and festivals. I don't recall the bit where they tried to kill me for my "non-belief". In fact, they gave me lunch.Except for the whole not-wishing-death-on-nonbelievers thing, you might be a little closer.
Besides, plenty of fundamentalist Christians do believe that non-believers must die. Isn't the Rapture an even more extreme version of the same thing? Not only will non-believers die, but they will suffer eternally.
What happened to forgiveness?
You prefix everything with "according to the Bible". Sure, that's a good way to live, but it's a little extreme in many cases. If a non-Christian was to emulate Mother Theresa, would they go to Hell? That's your argument. Think for yourself just a tiny bit. Does that sound right?It's not God, it's Jesus, according to Christianity. And whether you think he's self-righteous or not, according to the Bible, it's the belief in salvation by God through Jesus that gets people out of Hell -- not what they do or how "righteous" they are.
Hell is the place where we "pay for our sins". Is it sinful to do everything Jesus said about works, but not believe in Him? I thought sin was based on action? Sure, there's the whole "Original Sin" thing, but even Christians have that their entire lives, so that can't be the reason for going to Hell for non-belief.No, it's very Christian to say that only people who believe in Christianity get into Heaven. There's nothing to "deserve" or "earn" -- NOBODY deserves to get into Heaven. Under Christian belief, faith doesn't "get you into Heaven", it gets you out of Hell. Nobody is "good" enough to pay for all the bad things they've done, so it's only through acceptance of Jesus's sacrifice (the only one who did nothing bad) that we can get out of Hell, the place where we would pay for our sins.
The Bible says a lot of things. But the Old Testament was originally a verbal tradition extending a very long time, and was only codified relatively recently in it's history. Who's to say we should interpret that literally? Creationism... fail. You only need to go to one geology lecture to see why. 6000 years? As if, mate. This is only one example of why the Bible (in particular the O.T.) should not be read literally. The New testament is a bit more accurate, but it has missing books, dodgy translations, was largely written several decades after the events, and occasionally has conflicting representations of the same events.That's what the Bible says.
It is full of moral messages, and I think if more people lived by it, then we would be better off. But we don't have to be Christian (and we shouldn't be fundamentalists) to do this. The moral messages do exist apart from Christianity. Just because someone is not a Christian does not mean they are evil.
Yes, that's what I said. Islam and Christianity have the exact same base - Judaism. Islam was several hundred years after Christianity.Islam branched off Judaism, not Christianity, but they both branched from Judaism, if that's what you're referring to.
But their conception of God (the Christian 'Father') is the same. The Torah is the Old Testament (though it contains additional books), but Islam is significantly different. But my point is, they worship the same deity.Islam was founded well after Christianity, but Islam understands Jesus the same way Judaism does -- not the Messiah.
Islam is all screwed up? And Christian fundamentalists believe that the world is 6000 years old. Who is screwed up sorry?Islam was founded as a way to "go back" to the original Judaism, because Mohammad believed that the original teachings and beliefs had been corrupted by those who controlled it.
So while Christianity could be considered the child of Judaism, Islam would be the attempted clone that turned out all screwed up.
Islam is, for the most part, like most religions, a peaceful faith. Yes, it can become violent when linked to nationalism. Osama wishes death to America based on the fact of American troops being based in Saudi Arabia. If you are not familiar with this fact, let me know, and I'll quote Osama's own words (it's in my Religious Studies textbook).
I don't deny that. If their God asked the same things, then they would be the same religion. But it's still the same God.In theory, yes. According to how Islam interprets their god and how Judaism and Christianity view their god (God), hell no. The God of the Torah and the Bible asks much, much different of his followers than the god of the Qur'an.
It was a Judeo-Christian tradition. Explain how Jesus and Mary both turn up in the Koran? Jesus isn't in the Torah (unless, as Christians believe, Jesus is the Messiah). Ergo, it was both Judaism and Christianity that Islam sprouted from, though mostly Judaism, I'll concede.First -- it wasn't a Judeo-Christian tradition at all. It didn't branch off Christianity, it branched off Judaism. And second, Mohammad incorporated some old beliefs and traditions with his new stuff, and also included some pagan rituals, to "stay with the times", if you will. The sacred rocks and crap like that.
Catholics gain inspiration from both the Bible and from tradition (i.e. The Holy See). Pope Benedict has said that belief in the Immaculate Conception isn't a necessary belief to be a Catholic. My R.E. teacher in my final year of High School certainly didn't believe it. And considering that Mary would've been about 12 or 13 when she had Jesus, she says it is preposterous to suggest that she wouldn't have had more children.So you claim to be Catholic, but you don't follow the Bible ... do you follow the Catholic Church, or just do your own thing?
Simply put, the Catholic Church is based in the Bible, but interpretations can and do vary. It's called liberalism (to an extent).
No, it's very difficult. Especially for one who has been brought up under a different tradition their entire life. Would you convert to Christianity if you were born and raised a Muslim or a Hindu? You're asking them to change their whole life - a fairly big ask. And what of those who have never heard the Good News? Tribes in the Amazon is a fair stereotype. Do they go to Heaven or Hell? I'd like to think Heaven, just like unbaptised babies.Being saved is just that -- SAVED. It's not "getting to go to a good place", it's "not having to go to Hell". The only thing somebody has to do is believe, and that's not easy enough?
Do you know that the only way out is through Jesus? Sure, I think it is a "way out", but I don't and can't believe that it is the only one. I know plenty of people who are not Christian, but are probably 'better Christians' than me.It's not the same religion, not at all. Nobody would be "sent", they just wouldn't be saved from it -- we're all headed that way anyway, and the only way out of it is to accept Jesus. If it was a situation of "not loving them", there would be no way for them to get out of Hell.
And people can tend the sick, shelter the poor, and comfort the lonely and end up in Hell? I'd say they were prime candidates to sit with the Lamb.According to the Bible, it's not what you do, it's what your believe. Faith, not works. Murderers and rapists can repent and accept Jesus, and they'll end up in Heaven.
Ask yourself. Do you want to accept that?Something I've heard before that makes perfect sense, is that there will be a lot of surprised people in Hell, and a lot of surprised people in Heaven. (Some will think, "I was a good person," while they're in Hell, and others, "I was a Christian, but not a good one" while they're in Heaven.
It was the Christians who were not of the Eastern or Coptic churches. I.e the forerunners of Catholics and Protestants. And the Catholic Church wasn't chased out of the Holy Land by Muslims, no they established themselves in Europe (St Peter). Pope Urban thought it would be kool to have them, but it was sort of unprovoked.That was the Catholic Church. And let's not forget that the Holy Land was taken over through force by Muslims, and the Crusades were about taking them back.
It tells you that three religions share the same holy sites, and that there are understandable tensions.When a religion is founded and its FIRST movement is a military invasion, it kind of tells you something.
It's fine and dandy to anyone with an ounce of reason as well. Being a Christian doesn't mean you have to forfeit reason. To quote you:That is all fine and dandy for people who don't claim to be Christian.
And yet you do just that.It's very ignorant to stereotype Christians with the assumption that they never question or re-evaluate their own beliefs.
Education, a lot of which is misguided, ignorant, and bigoted. A better way would be to show others what Christians do: help those who need it. I'm sure that would send a more powerful message that Limbaugh's hateful vitriol.At some points in history, forceful conversion happened (for prettymuch all religions), which of course was wrong. At this point, however, at least Christianity does missions and outreach programs that help spread Christianity through education.
Last edited by Alpha; 08-23-2009 at 03:46 AM.
So you haven't even read the holy book of the religion you have so many problems with. I'm just getting the situation straight here. Is that correct? Those damn "Bible-thumpers" should just keep to themselves, it's wrong to say that non-Christians won't end up in Heaven even though that's what Christianity states, etc. ...
If somebody presents a convincing argument for ANY issue, I hear it out -- not out of courtesy, but out of curiosity. I want to know more about it. And if they present a good, informative argument, they might convince me to check it out for myself, which might lead me to change my stance. If I don't change it, I will come back to it with a stronger belief in it. This has happened to me in regards to religious, political, ethical, and every other type of issue.First of all, I already stated that I know they're intensions are good. Once again,would you actually change your religous beliefs because someone came to your door telling you all the falts in your religon?? Of course you're gonna listen to what they have to say, but in the end nothing changes you're just being nice and taking to their generosity by hearing them out.
In that case, it's very ignorant to claim that people of any specific religion will never question or re-evaluate their own beliefs. Of any belief, period, not just religions.Who's stereotyping???? that was general, I never said Christians.
That depends on what religion you follow. According to Christianity, what's important is faith that Jesus is the Son of God and gave His life to pay for our sin.Don't you think God would much rather have you believe in him to the fullest and and have faith in him,showing your commitment, rather than worry about some name you slaped on to yourself ??
Where did I claim that one religion was right and others were wrong, or that I belonged to or followed any specific religion at all? Please point that out to me, would you?You're doing what every other religion does,telling everyone else they're wrong,while you float by in your ship of right
Not bad. If you feel that you're right and don't have to listen to anybody else's beliefs, you do that. You don't have to listen to anybody else -- you believe that your beliefs are right, and you're going to stick to them, no matter who tries to talk to you about their beliefs. Of course, this is the same thing that you have a problem with Christians/Christianity for -- believing that their way is the only right way -- but it's different for YOUR way, right?That's exactly what it means so say: Only Christians will go to Heaven,and Thats exactly the crap I get when people come to my door too,and you make it seem like I should feel bad for not wanting to hear them out...Teh!
In Genesis? ... That's two chapters. You can't honestly be arrogant enough to assume that somebody is referring to two chapters of genealogy when they admit to not having read all of the Bible.
Not at all -- you don't have to have read any of the Bible before you become Christian, if you hear the message from other people. Many, many people became Christians without ever having touched a Bible.No, I have to read every word for myself before I'm saved?
You'd assume wrong. Of course everybody who has faith in anything believes themselves to be right.The problem is that anyone who has a faith has a similar belief. Muslims believe the exact same thing, but I'm going to assume if they came to your door, you would either get very angry or try and counter-convert.
Really? It's "the Christian" thing to be involved in a discussion of religion with those who do not follow the same beliefs and never bring up how Christianity is "right"?If you do the 'Christian' thing (and I hope you would), and love them by hearing them out and not criticising their religion ...
Probably not, but who knows? A lot of people convert because of neighborhood preaching.... you wouldn't convert, would you?
What's wrong with being zealous about any belief, as long as you're peaceful about it? All too many ignorant people use "zealous" and "fundamentalist" as insults. And the point of the whole exercise would be to spread your belief -- even if you didn't "convert" anybody, you still brought it up, so they might think about it later, consider it, maybe want to learn more about it, etc.So what was the point of the whole exercise? By zealous Christians most of the time, and by zealous Muslims in this example?
On that note, what's the point of your post to me, or this part of this post, that addresses you, if we both know that at this point, neither of us has changed the other's mind?
Where in this thread have I declared my beliefs?Yes, that is true. But it seems that you aren't really evaluating the "God loves everybody" thing beyond your own scope of "everybody" (i.e. every Christian).
Still, according to Christianity, God loves everybody, but everybody has sinned, which means the only place they deserve to go is Hell. It's being "saved" through faith in Jesus that gets believers into Heaven. It's not an issue of love at all.
Say, you have a kid. You tell that kid that the stove is hot. You tell him again that the stove is hot, and that he/she should stay away from it. You tell him again that the stove is hot, and it will burn him/her. You tell him/her many more times. But you don't control the kid, and sure enough, the kid puts his/her hand on he burner and gets the crap burned out of him. According to your illogical line of thinking here, that must mean that you don't love that kid.
I don't sound like a Catholic at all.You sound like a pre-Reformation Catholic.
... The indulgences were Catholic, not Christian. Luther's problem was with the Church, and with clergy, doing whatever they wanted to and justifying it through the Bible, then claiming that certain things -- like PAYING THE CHURCH -- would help "repay" a person's debt of sin. You do something bad, you pray a few times (to Mary, something totally against Christianity, but that's another subject) and give the Church some money and you'll be forgiven. THAT is what Luther's 95 Theses were about -- following the Bible and not the Church.They sure had faith in those indulgences. Luther came and said that we needed good works as well as faith.
That would be between you and God, not up to me. According to Christianity, sinners -- whether they lied once or they murdered a dozen people -- are forgiven through Jesus. But you could not Biblically justify rape and murder, so though you could do those things and still repent, it would be God's judgment of whether or not you were serious.By your argument, I could rape and murder, as long as, in my mind, I was a good Christian who had a tremendous faith in Jesus to save me?
Not in Christianity, they're not.WORKS are the most important part of getting your salvation.
... it is in Christianity. See, this is where it would have helped to have read the Bible.It's not enough just to believe.
Jesus wasn't a Christian, He was a Jew.Did Jesus spend all day praying, or did he actually help people?
PLEASE DO. Please. I want a Bible verse that says that -- like you said -- "WORKS are the most important part of getting your salvation. [sic]" I want a verse. I mean, here, I'll show you some verses that say the exact opposite ...I'm not giving a Bible reference here except for the whole New Testament.
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. -Ephesians 2:8,9
When He saw their faith, He said to him, Man, your sins are forgiven you. -Luke 5:20
But the other, answering, rebuked him, saying, Do you not even fear God, seeing you are under the same condemnation? And we indeed justly, for we receive the due reward of our deeds; but this Man has done nothing wrong. Then he said to Jesus, Lord, remember me when You come into Your kingdom.
And Jesus said to him, Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise." -Luke 23:42-43
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. -John 3:14-18
Then they said to Him, What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?
Jesus answered and said to them, This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent. -John 6:28-29
But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference; for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. -Romans 3:21-26
...
Now, that's a mere fraction of what I found with a simple Google search. I would LOVE for you to post a verse that says the exact opposite -- that works are more important than faith. Honestly, please do. Obviously, you've seen that "the entire New Testament" severely disagrees with your assertion that works are more important than faith, or even comparable ... but let's see what you can find.
Alright kid, you need to know what "fundamentalist" means. It means those who take something seriously and literally. If you read the Bible and followed exactly what it says, you'd be a fundamentalist Christian. If you read the Torah and followed exactly what it says, you'd be a fundamentalist Jew. If you read the Qur'an and followed exactly what it says, you'd be a fundamentalist Muslim.You're marginalising the world's second-largest religion down to fundamentalists.
So using "fundamentalists" -- those who follow the religion closest -- as a representation of the entire religion itself (not its followers, but the religion) isn't a bad thing.
That having been said, when the Qur'an tells its followers to kill non-believers, you can't say much else about it.
I've encountered the kinds that try to kill me for various reasons, the kinds that try to kill me -- or simply resent me -- because I don't follow Islam, and the kinds that care more about people than what religion they are. Next time you supposedly go to that open prayer session, ask about the verses that detail the slaughtering of infidels. Of course, before you do that, you might want to do a little reading in the Qur'an ... but then, if you claim to be Catholic, you might want to do a lot of reading in the Bible, too.I know plenty of Muslims. I went to my University's open-prayer-room day two weeks ago. I told them I was a Catholic and that I was interested in learning about what they believed, though I'm happy with my faith. They explained what all the praying was about, and some of their beliefs and festivals. I don't recall the bit where they tried to kill me for my "non-belief". In fact, they gave me lunch.
Yes, because you see Christian suicide bombers and terrorists attacking non-Christian civilian groups every week, it seems like, right?Besides, plenty of fundamentalist Christians do believe that non-believers must die.
First of all, even believers will die. Second, there is a HUGE difference between believing that they WILL die (as in, they will die) and believing that they MUST die (as in, we should make them die).Isn't the Rapture an even more extreme version of the same thing? Not only will non-believers die, but they will suffer eternally.
In Christianity, it comes with Jesus. Jesus [the] Christ. Hence ... "CHRISTianity".What happened to forgiveness?
Then don't live like that. You have the freedom to follow whatever religion you choose.You prefix everything with "according to the Bible". Sure, that's a good way to live, but it's a little extreme in many cases.
I don't make the rules, kid. You want your own rules, star your own religion ... you might as well, seeing as you don't believe Christianity.If a non-Christian was to emulate Mother Theresa, would they go to Hell? That's your argument. Think for yourself just a tiny bit. Does that sound right?
First, yes, it is a sin. Second, nobody -- NOBODY -- is perfect, except for Jesus Himself. The Bible says that one sin is enough to keep us out of Heaven -- unless our sins are forgiven, through the only entity who can forgive sin.Hell is the place where we "pay for our sins". Is it sinful to do everything Jesus said about works, but not believe in Him? I thought sin was based on action? Sure, there's the whole "Original Sin" thing, but even Christians have that their entire lives, so that can't be the reason for going to Hell for non-belief.
Christians believe that it was inspired by God -- as in, God made sure it was written correctly. Thus, it would be correct and literal.The Bible says a lot of things. But the Old Testament was originally a verbal tradition extending a very long time, and was only codified relatively recently in it's history. Who's to say we should interpret that literally?
I would love to discuss Creation vs. the religion of Evolutionism with you -- and in doing so, correct your ignorance -- but perhaps another time, in another thread. This isn't the place.Creationism... fail. You only need to go to one geology lecture to see why. 6000 years? As if, mate.
It has "missing books" because the Catholic Church says it has "missing books" -- it also has books that the Catholic Church added. Most translations now are extremely accurate to original texts. Christians believe that it was inspired by God, so it doesn't matter when it was written -- hell, it could have been written before the events took place. While I've seen some sad attempts at pointing out "conflicting representations of the same events", the differences are minor, if existent at all and not simply fabricated or misinterpreted (by the individual).This is only one example of why the Bible (in particular the O.T.) should not be read literally. The New testament is a bit more accurate, but it has missing books, dodgy translations, was largely written several decades after the events, and occasionally has conflicting representations of the same events.
So you don't have to be Christian if you don't want, and you don't have to follow the Bible ("fundamentalist") if you don't want. Be a "good person". Live how you want. Do your own thang. Just don't call yourself a Christian when you're obviously not -- or even a Catholic when you're obviously not.It is full of moral messages, and I think if more people lived by it, then we would be better off. But we don't have to be Christian (and we shouldn't be fundamentalists) to do this. The moral messages do exist apart from Christianity. Just because someone is not a Christian does not mean they are evil.
And nobody here said that non-Christians are evil, did they? In fact, I've gone over several times that Christianity states that the major difference between a Christian and a non-Christian -- and the only difference that matters -- is their faith.
The point is, no they don't. Yahweh and God don't tell their followers to slaughter those who don't believe in them -- not as a general rule, anyway.But their conception of God (the Christian 'Father') is the same. The Torah is the Old Testament (though it contains additional books), but Islam is significantly different. But my point is, they worship the same deity.
Yes. When a holy book states that giving one's life during the slaughter of infidels will automatically grant passage into paradise, it's screwed up.Islam is all screwed up?
Once again, this isn't the time or the place to correct your ignorance -- or your arrogance.And Christian fundamentalists believe that the world is 6000 years old. Who is screwed up sorry?
Except for the whole terrorist, suicide bombs, IEDs, slaughtering of infidels, the fact that more than 90% of the conflicts in the last few decades have involved Muslms, etc. etc. ... sure, pretty peaceful.Islam is, for the most part, like most religions, a peaceful faith.
Osama bin Laden also wishes death to America based on the fact that Americans are free to worship who- or whatever they choose, American women show their ankles and are allowed to do things like drive and vote, and that we won't let other Muslim terrorists slaughter every Jew in existence -- which is the stated goal of many Islamic organizations, including some countries.Yes, it can become violent when linked to nationalism. Osama wishes death to America based on the fact of American troops being based in Saudi Arabia. If you are not familiar with this fact, let me know, and I'll quote Osama's own words (it's in my Religious Studies textbook).
Explain where.It was a Judeo-Christian tradition. Explain how Jesus and Mary both turn up in the Koran?
This is why there is a difference between Catholicism and Christianity. Christians follow the holy book of Christianity -- the Bible. Other religions may follow a mix of between the Bible, certain organizations, and appointed leaders, but that would make them non-Christian. And when said appointed leaders openly state that belief in the Bible is not necessary to follow their religion, it's obvious that their religion isn't Christianity.Catholics gain inspiration from both the Bible and from tradition (i.e. The Holy See). Pope Benedict has said that belief in the Immaculate Conception isn't a necessary belief to be a Catholic.
It's preposterous to suggest that Mary wouldn't have had more children? Well, let's see ... since Jesus was born in a stable, without a pap smear, ultrasound, epidural, etc., it's safe to assume that women back then would have a higher chance of becoming sterile after their first child.My R.E. teacher in my final year of High School certainly didn't believe it. And considering that Mary would've been about 12 or 13 when she had Jesus, she says it is preposterous to suggest that she wouldn't have had more children.
That would be overlooking the Bible, though, and the fact that SHE DID HAVE MORE CHILDREN. Jesus had a brother named James.
Again. Reading the Bible might help when discussing the Bible. Just a little bit.
It's called not being based on the Bible, or even the manipulations that the Catholic Church has tried to pass.Simply put, the Catholic Church is based in the Bible, but interpretations can and do vary. It's called liberalism (to an extent).
Where they'd spend eternity is a fairly big issue, too. Eternity's kinda long, you know.No, it's very difficult. Especially for one who has been brought up under a different tradition their entire life. Would you convert to Christianity if you were born and raised a Muslim or a Hindu? You're asking them to change their whole life - a fairly big ask.
While I don't know enough about this to say for sure what the Bible says, I think they are judged on what they DO believe, combined with their actions.And what of those who have never heard the Good News? Tribes in the Amazon is a fair stereotype. Do they go to Heaven or Hell? I'd like to think Heaven, just like unbaptised babies.
No. That's what faith is for.Do you know that the only way out is through Jesus?
Considering the fact that you claim to be Christian, or at least Catholic, but do not believe or follow the Bible ... yes, there are probably quite a few people who are "better Christians" than you are.Sure, I think it is a "way out", but I don't and can't believe that it is the only one. I know plenty of people who are not Christian, but are probably 'better Christians' than me.
If you're referring to people with better works but without the Christian faith, that's one thing. If you're insinuating that one person of faith can be "better" in the eyes of God than another, you are -- once again -- not following the Bible. Since faith is all that matters, strength in faith is important, not whether somebody is "good" or not.
Once again, them's the rules. You can do as much good as you want, and we've all still sinned, which would make us unworthy. Unless we were forgiven.And people can tend the sick, shelter the poor, and comfort the lonely and end up in Hell? I'd say they were prime candidates to sit with the Lamb.
The Protestants split from the Catholics because Catholicism placed too much of an emphasis on the Church and not enough on the Bible. Still, it was the Church that pushed for the Crusades.It was the Christians who were not of the Eastern or Coptic churches. I.e the forerunners of Catholics and Protestants.
The Church wasn't chased out because the Church wasn't there -- it was Christianity and Christians that were chased out.And the Catholic Church wasn't chased out of the Holy Land by Muslims, no they established themselves in Europe (St Peter).
Except for the whole convert-or-be-slaughtered tactic the Muslims had when they moved in. It was a while before, sure, but it certainly wasn't an invasion of a friendly neighbor.Pope Urban thought it would be kool to have them, but it was sort of unprovoked.
Yes, and there are multiple conflicts between Christians and Jews right now over those holy sites, aren't there? Those Christians and Jews just fighting to the death over ... wait? What's that you say? There are no conflicts between Christians and Jews? They're all between Muslims and Jews or Muslims and Christians? But Christians and Jews share some of the same holy sites -- almost all of them. You mean Christians and Jews DON'T slaughter each other? There aren't many Jewish suicide bombers that target buses full of Christian women and children? There aren't many Christians who drop mortars into Jewish densely-populated civilian areas?It tells you that three religions share the same holy sites, and that there are understandable tensions.
Besides, for one thing, the Muslim world's problem with Israel isn't with a "holy site", it's because Israel exists. And for another, Islam's holy sites were not only Jewish holy sites long before, but also include cities which were taken in a military invasion. Do you know what he pilgrimage to Mecca was for Mohammad?
And since you say Christianity is unreasonable, that's all that matters.It's fine and dandy to anyone with an ounce of reason as well. Being a Christian doesn't mean you have to forfeit reason.
Is there anything else you'd like to tell me about myself, Miss Cleo? First you try telling me that I never question or re-evaluate my beliefs, even though you don't know what my beliefs are, and I'm pretty sure I remember doing exactly that ... Maybe you know my lucky lotto numbers for this week? I won't succeed as a professional pole-vaulter? Patenting my idea for a toaster/dishwasher will lead to financial gain? Marry the chubby girl instead of the pretty one because the pretty one only wants me for my penis and the fat one cooks well and will never leave? Please enlighten me!And yet you do just that.
According to you -- so if it follows the Bible, teaches that faith is important, that believing will let somebody spend eternity in paradise ... and that's "misguided, ignorant, and bigoted".Education, a lot of which is misguided, ignorant, and bigoted.
Oh, well. At least you wait until the end of your post to admit defeat by pulling out "bigot". You had a good run, kid. Maybe next year.
Limbaugh ... Are you referring to Rush Limbaugh? You've got to be smart enough to not be referring to Rush Limbaugh while referring to Christian witnessing, missions, outreach programs, and education. You've got to be smart enough to know that Rush Limbaugh is a political commentator, not a religious one. You've got to be that smart. You must be referring to another Limbaugh, of which I have heard nothing.A better way would be to show others what Christians do: help those who need it. I'm sure that would send a more powerful message that Limbaugh's hateful vitriol.
Sig courtesy of Plastik Assassin.
Greater love hath no man than this; that he lay down his life for his friends.
John 15:13
No, not correct, I never said I had a problem with the bible at all. My whole thing on the, “in my mind it’s wrong” to say that only Christians will go to heaven, is that I don’t believe that, plain and simple. Not that It is wrong for them to be Christian( believe that they are the only ones or whatever), because I could care less , which was my whole point in the first post in this thread. I believe in god and that’s it, I believe Jesus died on the cross for our sins...ect..
Well, not everyone is curious, I happen to be one of those. I find that Religion is taken way too seriously. Parts of some religions are exactly the same in others. So tell me what is it exactly, that you would be looking for in these visits, that will actually make you change your mind completely ,that will make you change your entire religion?? I think not just for me but anyone, It would take A LOT. And If someone can convince you that easily, then you obviously didn’t have full belief in your religion to begin with. And when I say that I mean maybe aren’t completely sure, like Agnostic or people who try out different religions because they really don’t know. To believe in something is to trust it to the fullest. To un -trust something like religion would take a lot for me, not just someone knocking on my door. That’s like saying you would decide to not trust your best friend because someone said not to, or they said you shouldn't.If somebody presents a convincing argument for ANY issue, I hear it out -- not out of courtesy, but out of curiosity. I want to know more about it. And if they present a good, informative argument, they might convince me to check it out for myself, which might lead me to change my stance. If I don't change it, I will come back to it with a stronger belief in it. This has happened to me in regards to religious, political, ethical, and every other type of issue.
First of all I’m only speaking of religion here. I think religion is probably more of a sore subject than anything else, including abortion and other political views because it is one of the main things we have full control over and harder to convince.. Second, I don’t see the people who come to my door re-evaluating their beliefs from what I say either. And I do recall saying that some people may get something out of it.In that case, it's very ignorant to claim that people of any specific religion will never question or re-evaluate their own beliefs. Of any belief, period, not just religions.
In the same sense I can ask you , Why the need to stand up for Christianity so strongly when all I did was say what I thought on that one post. This is an opinion thread. I think you’re taking when I said : “to say this would imply that everyone should be Christian, to literally. I meant that I don’t think you have to BE Christian to go to heaven, which I probably said before.Where did I claim that one religion was right and others were wrong, or that I belonged to or followed any specific religion at all? Please point that out to me, would you?
Again, never said that I had a problem with, Christianity, I'm not trying to attack the religon in any way. Which by the way wouldn't make any sense since I already said I’m not big on religion . I just posted my opinion to what was said , and it was I don’t think it’s true.Not bad. If you feel that you're right and don't have to listen to anybody else's beliefs, you do that. You don't have to listen to anybody else -- you believe that your beliefs are right, and you're going to stick to them, no matter who tries to talk to you about their beliefs. Of course, this is the same thing that you have a problem with Christians/Christianity for -- believing that their way is the only right way -- but it's different for YOUR way, right?
And you’re damn straight I don’t listen to anybody else, and that’s my whole point. It’s something almost everyone does, It’s no different for MY way at all. I don’t force my beliefs on anyone or preach to others,because once again, I really don't care.
Last edited by GypsyElder; 09-14-2009 at 05:56 PM.
I doubt I'm going to cover everything, I'm a little short on time, but I'll do what I can.
It's clear you take things literally. I used that as an example of much of the unnecessary information of the Bible to counter an assertion that one must read the whole Bible. Try to take not of when I use examples. Look for implications, I don't mean everything as the be-all end-all.
Good to know; so why then why do you keep saying I'm not a Christian when I do as Jesus says and (do my utmost) to love both my neighbour and God? I have not read the whole Bible, but I go to Mass every Sunday, and on Holy Days of Obligation, and hear no less than THREE readings each time, in addition to 13 years of Catholic education, and occasional reading of the Bible in my own time (admittedly, not as much as I should).Not at all -- you don't have to have read any of the Bible before you become Christian, if you hear the message from other people. Many, many people became Christians without ever having touched a Bible.
So who's right? Where's the proof that Christianity is right? It is a matter of faith, and there's no 'better' or 'worse', so why does anyone preach?You'd assume wrong. Of course everybody who has faith in anything believes themselves to be right.
It's Christian to not slam the door in their face, and it is NOT Christian to bring up why Christianity is 'right', because that would be disrespect another. Many things are moot, but if you're just going to sit there, laugh at someone's belief and say "nup. nup. nup. you're wrong. you're stupid because you don't believe in Christ as the Savior", then you're just being a jerk, by a lot of standards.Really? It's "the Christian" thing to be involved in a discussion of religion with those who do not follow the same beliefs and never bring up how Christianity is "right"?
A lot? I keep the Mormons at bay with a statue of the Virgin at my door. That's not to disrespect them, it's just kind of annoying every second week.Probably not, but who knows? A lot of people convert because of neighborhood preaching.
Is it more tolerant to just keep your belief to yourself? In this day and age, everyone has heard of Christianity in all it's variants, so why do we need zealots to try force people in to it? It scares more people than attracts people.What's wrong with being zealous about any belief, as long as you're peaceful about it? All too many ignorant people use "zealous" and "fundamentalist" as insults. And the point of the whole exercise would be to spread your belief -- even if you didn't "convert" anybody, you still brought it up, so they might think about it later, consider it, maybe want to learn more about it, etc.
Sh*t. What's the point of talking? Maybe someone else is going to read this, or we are going to become more informed about the other's belief. I respect your belief, and I seek to understand it, but I'm not going to change. Debate is one way to understand another.On that note, what's the point of your post to me, or this part of this post, that addresses you, if we both know that at this point, neither of us has changed the other's mind?
You're a fundamentalist Christian. Right or wrong?Where in this thread have I declared my beliefs?
You say "him" at the start of each sentence, and then change to him/her by the end. Sorry, just noticed.Say, you have a kid. You tell that kid that the stove is hot. You tell him again that the stove is hot, and that he/she should stay away from it. You tell him again that the stove is hot, and it will burn him/her. You tell him/her many more times. But you don't control the kid, and sure enough, the kid puts his/her hand on he burner and gets the crap burned out of him. According to your illogical line of thinking here, that must mean that you don't love that kid.
OK, so thinking for myself for a moment, if God created everyone, and He loves them all equally, then why does He hate them enough to eternally damn them? It is illogical to assume that a loving and merciful God would keep us from that? Seems that you prefer the whole 'vengeful God' thing. Even you must be aware that God has several characteristics. Why emphasise the vengeful part when one can emphasise the merciful part?
This is true.I don't sound like a Catholic at all.
They were pre-Reformation, and thus CHRISTIAN. If Protestantism did not yet exist, then it is improper to suggest that only Catholics participated in this.The indulgences were Catholic, not Christian. Luther's problem was with the Church, and with clergy, doing whatever they wanted to and justifying it through the Bible, then claiming that certain things -- like PAYING THE CHURCH -- would help "repay" a person's debt of sin. You do something bad, you pray a few times (to Mary, something totally against Christianity, but that's another subject) and give the Church some money and you'll be forgiven. THAT is what Luther's 95 Theses were about -- following the Bible and not the Church.
Yes, you are right, sorry. According to Luther (among many other things):
But this is not something I see as valid. This suggests that Christians don't have to do any good. What is the point of being Christ-like, and showing the Good News by example?
Do YOU believe that good works are therefore completely redundant?Not in Christianity, they're not.
That's where it is enough for you to listen to Luther. He thought for himself, and so should you.... it is in Christianity. See, this is where it would have helped to have read the Bible.
So, as a Jew, 'real' Christians should ignore him, and listen to Luther?Jesus wasn't a Christian, He was a Jew.
"Leave some grapes on the vine for travelers and the poor." Leviticus 19:10PLEASE DO. Please. I want a Bible verse that says that -- like you said -- "WORKS are the most important part of getting your salvation. [sic]" I want a verse. I mean, here, I'll show you some verses that say the exact opposite ...
"Blessed is he that considereth the poor." Psalms 41:1
"Withhold not good from them to whom it is due, when it is in the power of thine hand to do it." Proverbs 3:27
"Cease to do evil; learn to do well ... relieve the oppressed ... plead for the widow." Isiah 1:16-17
"Blessed are the merciful" Matthew 5:7
"Blessed are the peacemakers" Matthew 5:9
"Whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them." Matthew 7:12
"Love thy neighbor as thyself." Mark 12:31
"This is my commandment, That ye love one another." John 15:12, 17
"In everything I did, I showed you that by this kind of hard work we must help the weak, remembering the words the Lord Jesus himself said: 'It is more blessed to give than to receive." Acts 20:35
"He who has been stealing must steal no longer, but must work, doing something useful with his own hands, that he may have something to share with those in need." Ephesians 4.28
"Comfort the feebleminded, support the weak, be patient toward all men." 1 Thessalonians 5:14
"Pure religion ... is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world." James 1:27
"Let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth." 1 John 3:18
"Beloved, do not imitate what is evil, but what is good. The one who does good is of God; the one who does evil has not seen God." 3 John 11
Good enough?
It's a huge misrepresentation. Did you know that when Westerners first examined the Buddhist scriptures in India, they assumed that they had no funeral rights, or any kind of death practices. While it is not in their scripture, funeral rites and relic worship was and is a huge part of Buddhism. It is not enough to look at the fundamentalists, who are usually in the minority. How religion is practiced is a far more important mode of anaysis.Alright kid, you need to know what "fundamentalist" means. It means those who take something seriously and literally. If you read the Bible and followed exactly what it says, you'd be a fundamentalist Christian. If you read the Torah and followed exactly what it says, you'd be a fundamentalist Jew. If you read the Qur'an and followed exactly what it says, you'd be a fundamentalist Muslim.
So using "fundamentalists" -- those who follow the religion closest -- as a representation of the entire religion itself (not its followers, but the religion) isn't a bad thing.
"Fight in the cause of God against those who fight you, but agress not. God loves not agressors." Koran 2:190That having been said, when the Qur'an tells its followers to kill non-believers, you can't say much else about it.
"And they feed, for the love of God, the indigent, the orphan, and the captive." Koran 76:8-9
Who tries to kill you and when? Don't lie.I've encountered the kinds that try to kill me for various reasons, the kinds that try to kill me -- or simply resent me -- because I don't follow Islam, and the kinds that care more about people than what religion they are. Next time you supposedly go to that open prayer session, ask about the verses that detail the slaughtering of infidels. Of course, before you do that, you might want to do a little reading in the Qur'an ... but then, if you claim to be Catholic, you might want to do a lot of reading in the Bible, too.
And you see a very small minority of Muslims performing those actions, and you denounce Islam as a whole? Tolerance, please. And don't be so sucked in by the media.Yes, because you see Christian suicide bombers and terrorists attacking non-Christian civilian groups every week, it seems like, right?
I asked you to think for yourself. Please go back and do this, as I'm really interested in your response.I don't make the rules, kid. You want your own rules, star your own religion ... you might as well, seeing as you don't believe Christianity.
Give me a Biblical quote for that. Did Jesus even know what he said was going to be codified? Probably not, or he would've written something, right? So why must we think it is literal?Christians believe that it was inspired by God -- as in, God made sure it was written correctly. Thus, it would be correct and literal.
Should you start the thread, or should I? Please note, I believe in a creator God, and accept evolution as an understanding of creation.I would love to discuss Creation vs. the religion of Evolutionism with you -- and in doing so, correct your ignorance -- but perhaps another time, in another thread. This isn't the place.
Surely God would not let the Church be wrong about these Biblical omissions and additions?It has "missing books" because the Catholic Church says it has "missing books" -- it also has books that the Catholic Church added. Most translations now are extremely accurate to original texts. Christians believe that it was inspired by God, so it doesn't matter when it was written -- hell, it could have been written before the events took place. While I've seen some sad attempts at pointing out "conflicting representations of the same events", the differences are minor, if existent at all and not simply fabricated or misinterpreted (by the individual).
That sorta hurts, bro. I've been involved in St Vincent de Paul since I was 12.So you don't have to be Christian if you don't want, and you don't have to follow the Bible ("fundamentalist") if you don't want. Be a "good person". Live how you want. Do your own thang. Just don't call yourself a Christian when you're obviously not -- or even a Catholic when you're obviously not.
The point is, yes they are. We have recorded different instructions, but they are the same deity.The point is, no they don't. Yahweh and God don't tell their followers to slaughter those who don't believe in them -- not as a general rule, anyway.
Martrydom is a Christian tradition too. Did the Crusaders go to Heaven or Hell?Yes. When a holy book states that giving one's life during the slaughter of infidels will automatically grant passage into paradise, it's screwed up.
I think if anyone is being arrogant, it's you, for only accepting one (Biblical) line of thought.Once again, this isn't the time or the place to correct your ignorance -- or your arrogance.
cf. my previous point.Except for the whole terrorist, suicide bombs, IEDs, slaughtering of infidels, the fact that more than 90% of the conflicts in the last few decades have involved Muslms, etc. etc. ... sure, pretty peaceful.
Mary in the KoranExplain where.
Jesus in the Koran
"Then We caused our messengers to follow in their foot-steps: and We caused Jesus, son of Mary to follow, and gave him the Gospel, and placed compassion and mercy in the hearts of those who followed him." Surah lvii:27
Any follower of Christ is a Christian. Are you suggesting that the Catholic Church is non-Christian? You'd have a billion people to disagree with.This is why there is a difference between Catholicism and Christianity. Christians follow the holy book of Christianity -- the Bible. Other religions may follow a mix of between the Bible, certain organizations, and appointed leaders, but that would make them non-Christian. And when said appointed leaders openly state that belief in the Bible is not necessary to follow their religion, it's obvious that their religion isn't Christianity.
That's a Protestant belief. Catholics believe in the Perpetual Virginity of Mary, as a general rule, though there is tolerance around this.That would be overlooking the Bible, though, and the fact that SHE DID HAVE MORE CHILDREN. Jesus had a brother named James.
While I believe in Heaven, neither of us have any certainty that it exists.Where they'd spend eternity is a fairly big issue, too. Eternity's kinda long, you know.
Here you would tell me to "read the Bbile". Just sayin'.While I don't know enough about this to say for sure what the Bible says, I think they are judged on what they DO believe, combined with their actions.
Yes, and there are multiple conflicts between Christians and Jews right now over those holy sites, aren't there? Those Christians and Jews just fighting to the death over ... wait? What's that you say? There are no conflicts between Christians and Jews? They're all between Muslims and Jews or Muslims and Christians? But Christians and Jews share some of the same holy sites -- almost all of them. You mean Christians and Jews DON'T slaughter each other? There aren't many Jewish suicide bombers that target buses full of Christian women and children? There aren't many Christians who drop mortars into Jewish densely-populated civilian areas?Get your facts straight, please.
Besides, what is America (a Christian state), doing in two Islamic nations right now?
I didn't call you bigoted. Nice try.Oh, well. At least you wait until the end of your post to admit defeat by pulling out "bigot". You had a good run, kid. Maybe next year.
I apologise for not being an American. How's Fred Phelps? Jerry Falwel (he is who I meant to use as an example the first time around)?Limbaugh ... Are you referring to Rush Limbaugh? You've got to be smart enough to not be referring to Rush Limbaugh while referring to Christian witnessing, missions, outreach programs, and education. You've got to be smart enough to know that Rush Limbaugh is a political commentator, not a religious one. You've got to be that smart. You must be referring to another Limbaugh, of which I have heard nothing.
Last edited by Alpha; 08-27-2009 at 05:15 AM.
There's a difference between believing you're right unconditionally, and re-evaluating your own beliefs/thoughts/knowledge from time to time. Truth is that most hardcore Christians/Jews/Muslims don't do that.
That's pretty convenient of you to say. I hope people like you will think the same of Muslims when they stop their Jihad in a couple of hundreds of years.The indulgences were Catholic, not Christian.
I wonder...
Just like Muhammad wasn't a muslim.Jesus wasn't a Christian, He was a Jew.
And the Bible was never intentionally misinterpret to justify the killing of innocent people in some foreign country, burning people alive or not allowing people to have a proper funeral?That having been said, when the Qur'an tells its followers to kill non-believers, you can't say much else about it.
Keep in mind that the Islam is 600 years younger than Christianity. What were we doing about 600 years ago?
What?I've encountered the kinds that try to kill me for various reasons, the kinds that try to kill me -- or simply resent me -- because I don't follow Islam, and the kinds that care more about people than what religion they are.
I will refer to what I said about the age of Islam previously in this post.Yes, because you see Christian suicide bombers and terrorists attacking non-Christian civilian groups every week, it seems like, right?
Plus, you're probably talking about the Jew-Muslim tensions in the Middle East. That's hardly a fair comparison. The Israel/Palestina problem is a world on its own.
You are generalising here. It is in no way true that all Christians believe that the Bible is meant to be read literally.Christians believe that it was inspired by God -- as in, God made sure it was written correctly. Thus, it would be correct and literal.
I'm curious. A person who goes to church every day, but does nothing to help anyone whatsoever is better than a person who helps out thousands of poor people, because the latter one (to put it in Christian terms) hasn't seen the light?So you don't have to be Christian if you don't want, and you don't have to follow the Bible ("fundamentalist") if you don't want. Be a "good person". Live how you want. Do your own thang. Just don't call yourself a Christian when you're obviously not -- or even a Catholic when you're obviously not.
And if Jesus wasn't a Christian, wouldn't that make any christian better than he was?
It's all about interpretation.The point is, no they don't. Yahweh and God don't tell their followers to slaughter those who don't believe in them -- not as a general rule, anyway.
I could say: Yes, they do.
Or I could say: The Quran doesn't either.
(Again, Cf. previous statement in this post.)
Were the hell (haha) did you get that 'fact'???the fact that more than 90% of the conflicts in the last few decades have involved Muslms
Read some European History and discover... the horrors... of christianity...
Why?it's safe to assume that women back then would have a higher chance of becoming sterile after their first child.
I knew it. James Joyce was the second coming!That would be overlooking the Bible, though, and the fact that SHE DID HAVE MORE CHILDREN. Jesus had a brother named James.
No seriously, I forgot about that, thanks. (Not being ironic here)
You're pulling that out of context. And you're generalizing.Yes, and there are multiple conflicts between Christians and Jews right now over those holy sites, aren't there? Those Christians and Jews just fighting to the death over ... wait? What's that you say? There are no conflicts between Christians and Jews? They're all between Muslims and Jews or Muslims and Christians? But Christians and Jews share some of the same holy sites -- almost all of them. You mean Christians and Jews DON'T slaughter each other? There aren't many Jewish suicide bombers that target buses full of Christian women and children? There aren't many Christians who drop mortars into Jewish densely-populated civilian areas?
It's a pitty that the Islam has such a bad image because of that 1% of nutjobs. I thought you were better than that.
By the way, what's up with the arrogant 'kid' thing?
And if you can use the muslim terrorists as evidence for the Islam being a bad religion, so can anyone else with Christian nutjobs.
Last edited by RagnaToad; 08-27-2009 at 07:28 AM.
Crao Porr Cock8: Getting it while the getting's good
In my life I have collected many little facts that have turned me away from religion. Like if you put the human race in clock terms we would be considered as seconds, or if you look at the earth as a whole we only make up 4% of the universe, and our universe only makes up about 10% of the whole galaxy. IDK...I watch too much Nova. Knowing that I make such a minuscule impact on the earth I don't believe a God would think it worth while to keep an eye on me and spank me when I am bad. It just doesn't make sense to me. I am no more than a whisper to this world, and I would like to spend the little time I have on this earth concentrating on what makes me and my family happy. Just living a descent life is good enough for me, and if there is a God than I would hope he not think me evil for simply wanting to live an average loving life.
So I guess I have become an atheist in a way. Where I used to be a bit agnostic. I have heard so many religions copy-cat each other over and over, and try to one-up everyone in their righteousness, or even just the ones that pity me for believing what I do. That's not for me. I don't want to judge others by what they believe, nor do I want to follow a herd. I don't need to be told how to be happy and live a fruitful life. I know what makes me happy, I'm not afraid of what is after this, and I am confident things will always work out.
It's funny that I'm a political, financial, moral, and social conservative, because fundamentally I have one big difference that sets me apart from the vast majority of those place themselves in that category.
I'm a complete and utter athiest.
Am I evil? No I'm a really good guy, and I actually I love religion and think we need more of it, because I fully believe that the moral lessons and social structure it provides are deeply important to the fabric of any society. Without it, things have a habit of falling into chaos.
But that being said, religion merely serves several base needs.
- It provides us answer to the desperate human question of what happens when you die, and it provide a comfy answer that there is a glorious heaven of which you truly belong. Nice.
- Most important to me, and the reason that I love it, is that it provides moral boundaries. It says don't cheat on your spouse, don't abuse your body, don't lie, don't kill, and on an on. Those are good qualities and need to be promoted as much as possible.
- In ancient times esspecially it answered the questions of the universe. What is the sun? Why does it rain? These were things that previous to ancient Greek society could never have been understood, and religions provided grossly inaccurate guesses.
There are other functions of a religion, but these are the main ones, and if you just look for a moment with Athiest eyes at these, you'll see that were there no god, these pretty simple tools of a social institution. If you choose to believe they're rules of a higher power, then more power to you, but there's nothing inhuman about these goals.
My main take on Religion is that it's bound in a perfect little self fulfilling bow. It's completely impervious to denial by those who believe. I could create life in front you and it would simply be gods will, or perhaps more often a perversion of his will. And forget simple commodities as proving that evolution is real, or that alien life exists. Those foundation shakers are easily incorporated or dismissed outright.
Consider if you will though that through the course of time, god has continuously moved. He began on a hill top or in the weather, but in later centuries, once it was better understood what natural phenonmenon actually were, god moved the clouds or into space. But then we reached those as well and it became necessary for god to simply exist everywhere, within us, around us, and yet inperceptible to us. Again impervious to denial.
If you ask me and you apply Hakim's Razor to the issue (the idea that the simplest solution is correct) then the concept of residual energy in the void of space that emits plaza balls that went on to form stars & consequently planets and life, is way easier to accept than the idea that a great and magical being decided to flash us into existance.
Perhaps the most troubling part to me though is that religous people assume that god actually likes or pays attention to the them. Why would you think that?
We already know that the Earth isn't even the center of our own Solar System, much less the universe, which was of course a founding concept of a lot of religions. That we were so special that god placed us at the center and cared for us. But we are of course not at the center, and yet gods devotion to us was never questioned along with that revelation.
Supposing we were created by some higher power, why would we be any more than pets to him, or a biological experiment just to see what would happen. Why couldn't god be an uncaring observer. Why this image that he's some nurturing do-gooder who wants nothing more than for you to prove your worth to him so that you might join his angels in heaven and suckle on his nurturing teet for all enternity.
Or what if he's just a cold bastard who kicked you out of heaven, wiped your memory of the place and has subjugated you to the terrors and torment of mortal life? I mean really, what do you know. Hell, he could have founded your religion just to fool you into thinking you had a purpose when in fact your just floundering around wasting time. How would you know any different?
You couldn't. And what's more is that there are hundred's of religions. Each one of them is completely devout and commited, fully certain that they are correct, and yet by simple logic, at most only one of them would be. That means the majority of you out there are in fact wrong right off the top, even if any type of god exists.
So the question would be, why in the world I trust any of you? Why would I accept any religion over another when the vast majority of them clearly must be incorrect?
The only logical thing to do is be an athiest. Again I support the moral value of faith, and I don't seek it's end, but in the end, it's petty, weak, and devoid of critical thought. And so I'll commit myself to being the best person I can be, and live my life honorably. But that's all there is to it folks.
Okay, firstly: I'm an atheist, and I love religion too because you learn about the cultures in different parts of the world, and what people believe in, and what motivates them day to day, still keeping their faith in an unseen power.
But. Never would I ever say that religion stops things falling into chaos. Look back in time, and you'll find many wars and/or much blood was shed because of religion. No religion is refined into one set of practices or beliefs. I pick two Christians from a crowd of people, and one believes you have to go to church every Sunday to get your place beyond the pearly gates, and the other believes they can do whatever they like and still go to Heaven because God will forgive them anyway. That is just a small example, but something like that would have started a war a couple of hundred years ago.
I'm not saying that without religion, there will be no wars. There will always be some atheist, douchebag dictator to screw everyone over and brainwash people into thinking he/she is the boss.
I'll admit it helps stop chaos when a five year old won't go to bed, and you tell him/her that God will rip their toes off if they won't go to ****ing sleep.*
Faith. You'd be surprised how strong it can be if you're a believer.
* I've never used that one, nor do I intend to. ŹŹ;;
"I used to be active here like you, then I took an arrow in the knee."
>>>------------->
Suddenly... clutter.:
Warning free for over eight years. Feels good.
last night, but I didn't have enough time to adequately express the thoughts that came to mind. Hopefully I'll be able to articulate my thoughts today. And hopefully this multi-quote thing works....
Ok...you're an athiest, but you're a political, financial, moral, and social concervative. Right on....like you, I have many of the same view points (concervative) as you do, but unlike you, I'm a Christian. And not just a Christian, but one of those hard-core types. However, my viewpoints on "worldly" matters do not originate completely from my belief system, but instead are rooted in other ways (much akin to your situation).
In regards to your first point, religion does provide an answer to the question of what happens after you die...however that is not necessarily a comforting answer to receive. Not everyone goes to heaven after all. All have the opportunity, but not everyone decides to. Besides which, no matter which side of the debate one resides upon, after death comes the judgement. Most feel uncomfortable with that notion...
As per your second point, I agree....religion does provide moral boundaries and codes of conduct (both do this & don't do this examples).
As per your third point, I agree...to a point. In ancient times, god/gods were used to explain things about the natural world which they had no knowledge of or couldn't understand. Do you think much has changed in the thousand of years since? In many cases, we have exchanged one God with a belief which necessiates as much faith.
You are right....there are other functions of religion, but I wouldn't necessarily label these as the main ones. From your point of view, they very well may be, but also understand that you are looking at the situation from the outside. It may seem that you are the impartial observer, but lacking an internal perspective, I believe that you are overlooking some aspects.
Ok...This was the part that I wanted to get around to. Let me state some background on myself. I am a scientist by trade & education. I've been in the scientific field for better than 15 years now. I've got degrees in biology & chemistry, and I even have my Masters in Business. My professional career has been dominated by working within the scientific community. But in addition to all this, I also have a minor in Biblical Theology. One would think that these two worlds are incompatable, however I can personally state that they are not. You mentioned three "foundation shakers" that I would like to speak on.
The first was creating life. I'm going to assume that what you had in mind would be creating life from non-life. After all, we see the creation of life all the time in the combination of sperm/egg. Although its often regarded as the miracle of life, it is in fact the "oldest trick in the book". Instead, life from non-life is something that we have never been able to duplicate. Some may say that it is a matter of time until it happens, but as a scientist, I'm not so sure.
We can duplicate protein systhesis, or combine DNA sequences. We can even clone cells and make duplicates. However we have never been able to actually create life from non-life. We have never been able to create a cell from the "raw materials". We have never been able to get even the simplist of life forms to "spring out" of our laboratories. But lets say that some day, some brilliant scientist manages it. What then? Foundation shaker...? I would still say no. Why? Because it didn't happen randomly. Some scientist planned it out...it wasn't a random convergance of fate/chance/whatever which produced life. Someone in their wisdom created....
The second "foundation shaker" which you mentioned is evolution. Ok...without getting hung up on semantics and for any Christians reading this don't get all twisted. Evolution is a real and true event. However let me qualify that by saying micro-evolution is a real and true event. Animals adapt to their environment and over time begin to specialize. Survival of the fittest does occur. However macro-evolution has not been seen or evidenced. We do not see the gradual change in one species to another. A bird may adapt its beak over time to get the little insects on an island, but ultimately, its still a bird. And then just to complicate matters, the entire Life-Origin theory rests upon abiogenesis. As mentioned in the first "foundation shaker"...that is the weakness of the theory, and ultimately its death blow.
And the last "foundation shaker" mentioned was alien life. Scripture does not mention either way that there is life on other planets. Am I open to the possibility? Sure. Whatever...its neither here nor there to me. Do I think that they are visiting earth & taking off and anal probing people? No. Do I think that alien life may just be bacteria floating around some pool of whatever on some random planet? Maybe...who's to say. Either way, it doesn't really shake anything. In centuries past, humans thought that the earth was the center of the universe, and everything revolved around it. I'm not so foolish as to think that this would be the case in this instance either.
I find this....odd. Did God move...or was it simply our understanding of God which moved? Much like a child which at first doesn't understand a situation and just makes things up as they go...and then a child which does understand the situation. The event itself is fact, but mearly the understanding which has evolved.
Hmmm...I think that you may have painted yourself into a corner. Hakim's Razor actually supports a God. Why? Because the random conflux of events to happen in a universe which just happen to produce the right environment which just happened to produce life....all by chance, is far more complex a solution than a God who created life.
So just to point out, you have crossed over into a theological realm here. Before, we were speaking about the nature and existance of the intangible in a universe which is tangible. Now, we are actually speaking of the nature of God....and God as perceived by Christians. The long and short of it is this. Love. We could explore this concept further if you want.
Who says that it was never questioned? I, myself, have thought through this very thing. But two concepts have floated to the surface multiple times. The first was that when Earth and everyone on it was created, God spoke it into creation. God was pleased, but it was just so much construct. However when God created humanity, Adam was breathed to life by God. There's something far more intimate about that. The same goes for when Eve was created...God specifically made her. Right there says special to me....humanity was more than just a construct that was spoken into existance. Humanity was created intimately and specifically by God...to such a degree that the Bible records that God actually came down to earth & walked with humans "in the cool of the day".
It should be noted that was the first time that God came to earth to walk with humans. Much later, the same occured under different circumstances. The overall goal was the same, but it was demonstrated much differently. You mentioned devotion...would you not agree that a good example of devotion is sacrificing something of value for someone else's gain?
Again, we are well into the theological realm, but let's keep going....
Do people regard their children as pets? Do scientists who do experiments/studies with humans regard them as simply animals? No, they do not. Why? Because there is something more happening. Humanity is not just animalistic in nature. Instead, there is something else going on. Humans are self-aware. We are capable of abstract thought that can be expressed either through advancements in technology or the creation of art, music, or literature.
You mentioned the image that "he's some nurturing do-gooder who wants nothing more than for you to prove your worth to him..." Actually, in the case of Christianity, you have it backwards. Its not me having to prove my worth to God. I don't have to do good works, unlike what the other faith systems of the world require. Instead for Christianity, Jesus already proved my worth by dying for me.
The answer that first comes to mind is probably one which would make you toss your hands into the air and roll your eyes with a "oh, that same old answer" thought on your lips. I don't believe the above to be the case because of my faith. This is why the Bible is so important, because it spells out the circumstances of "how" and "why" and doesn't leave me floundering around wasting my time. I know that this doesn't really hold any water for you, but its kind of the best that I can do. That and to reitterate the fact that God loves me...so the cold bastard characterization doesn't really come into play.
Ok, now you've traveled into the "which one is right" area of faith systems. I would challenge you to not look at the depth of the devout or even the sheer numbers of believers, but instead upon the faith system itself. Without getting down to every single one of them, there is one faith system in the entire world which says that God scrificed for humanity, and not humanity sacrificing for God. In all instances, it is humans who are seperated from God (for various reasons), and it is humanities responsibility to overcome that seperation...whether that is through good works & deeds...having plenty of children....overcoming the unwanted through a series of good lives...whatever. In all the cases except for one, its humanity who is doing the work. In Christianities case, it is God who has done the work, and its up to humanity to choose to accept it.
That, right there, is the differentiating factor between all the faith systems of the world.
Its not me that you have to trust.
But here's a question for you...is the logical decision always the right decision? Even logic must give way eventually. It is illogical to love someone, yet we as humans do. Just to say it, I take exception to the characterization that in the end, the moral value of faith is petty, weak, and devoid of critical thought. The reason being is that faith is neither petty or weak. This is evidenced by the fact that people die for their faith. Whether its some Christian missionary in the jungle who gets killed for preaching (this would be a martyr), or someone who blows themselves up (not an example of a martyr, but a fool), their faith is neither petty nor weak. As for devoid of critical thought, I would say that it isn't the faith itself that is lacking critical thought, but instead the individual who has that faith.
I've been taught over a very long time to critically think through what I believe...either in the scientific realm or that of the theological. The Bible even supports this by saying that we (Christians) are supposed to study our faith so that we can give an account as to *why* we believe. That study smacks of critical thought. Many see faith as a crutch holding up a person. I would challenge this thought. Instead, see faith as the mortar in a wall. It fills in the gaps between the bricks...it strengthens and supports where the bricks cannot go. Furthering that analogy, which wall is stronger? The one of bricks alone, or the one with both the bricks and mortar? Is it so logical to assume that I can live my life honorably on my own, basing my actions/decisions on my own worldview which I know to be flawed (since we can safely assume that we all acknowledge that we make mistakes)?
Or is it far more logical to base our actions/decisions upon something which hasn't changed over time?
This has been a really good post, and I'm thinking that this reply is *way* too long...but well, its a big topic. I hope that someone has read it, but I know that for me, typing it out reitterated some concepts for me.
~Jeordam
Saving the World since there was a World to Save.
I'm taking a class in religion right now at my university. It's a comparative class, which means that we look at the different world religions, and even some minor religions, in a positively-critical and open-minded way. I find it quite refreshing. It's amazing how much culture and history influences the religion of a particular area. It's also very interesting how similar religions are. All of them, even if they don't worship something or someone, seem to have some revelation, some answer for life. Personally, I try to be open-minded about everything, but I suppose that I don't really practice any religion.
Im more of 'cross believer' -
I believe partly in the Big Bang theory, i don't think that a big explosion happened and here we are, but i do believe that something like that must have happened.
I also do not believe in any kind of god, i believe that there is definetley some sort of higher power. (Maybe something to do with politics?) we are definitley being controlled and driven to do something.
100th post!
Last edited by Messiah; 09-29-2009 at 04:20 PM. Reason: Oh yeah, 100th post!
When the world decends into darkness - I'll bring the light!
Bringer Of Light - Guiding Souls away from Darkness Since 1989!
VISIT MY SITE TODAY!
Square-Zone
CURRENTLY EMPLOYING:
Moderators
Review Writers
Illustrator for a GFX team.
I know that you posted this a long time ago UE, but I just wanted to point out something interesting (or maybe not so interesting, who knows...) so it could seem like what I type next belongs on topic.
Have you ever heard of Young Earth Creationists? They believe that the dinosaurs are mentioned in the Bible as "behemoths" and that they perished in the Great Flood, or even perhaps afterward because they couldn't adapt to the new environment that came to be after the flood waters subsided.
I don't consider myself a YEC, but I thought that it was kind of interesting to read about.
I consider myself a Christian and I also believe in evolution to an extent. It may seem contridictory of one another, but I don't think life would have survived for as long as it has if it never evolved in some way, shape or form.
Anyway to the subject at hand. I do consider myself a Christian but I don't know what denomination. To me, it's kind of silly to branch off like that when we are basically believers of the same idea. I also love reading religious views of all types. I am very tolerant of people's beliefs, and like to hear thier ideas about things of that nature. No, I don't think that there is just one true religion, because that's really kind of a presumptuous thing to say. There really is no way of actually knowing anything like that, but I think it has to do with what you feel is right in your heart, and Christianity feels right to me (I mention "right" as in appropriate for a condition or purpose or occasion or a person's character, not "right" as in free from error). I think that the Bible teaches you important values that you should uphold in your everyday life, but of course that's what all religious text teaches. These kinds of texts also provide comfort to people, and I don't see how that can be wrong.
This is probably a little off topic, but I think that some of the most beautiful works of art (Paintings, music, architecture, etc.) have been brought to the world because of religious inspiration.
Well, that's my two cents and I'll leave it at that.
Click at your own risk.:
Just wanted to point something out about the evolution thing.
I don't see how believing in a God stands in the way of believing in scientific stuff like evolution.
And I don't see why being a Christian equals believing that dinosaurs never existed...
Crao Porr Cock8: Getting it while the getting's good
In my (rather long) post, I noted that there is actually a degree of differentiation within the "evolution" world. The easiest way to put it is micro and macro evolution. Micro-evolution would be considered adaptation to environment & survival of the fitest. Macro-evolution would be considered one species giving rise to another over mutation changes over time.
Besides the fact that there is no evidence of Macro-evolution, and everything we know of as scientists tell us that mutations are bad, and extremely difficult to replicate in offspring, it just seems very unlikely since we don't see it today.
Specifically within a Christian context, the theology of the Bible and the belief in macro-evolution are like oil and water. They cannot blend & coexist. There are several different reasons for this. The first is that the Bible is specific that the animals that were created were reproducing after their own kind. Its subtle, but its there.
The second part is that there are many instances of the geneologies in the Bible...you know, the parts that are all "so and so lived xxx years, and had sone so and so who lived xxx years..." and on it goes. Well here's the thing, those geneologies trace all the way back to Adam....as in the *first* human. There is no transition in the language to speak of a transition from an actual person into a mythical figure. Adam is regarded as the start of it all.
As for being a Christian and seeing dino bones...dinosaures existed and ran around the earth. There is no conflict with the Bible or theology or anything along those lines. Why they deny their existance in the face of the *actual* bones sitting in a museum...especially when there is no conflict, I would chalk up to ignorance of the individual. It is not a weakness in the faith.
~Jeordam
Saving the World since there was a World to Save.
As Dodie16 mentioned, Behemoth is discussed in Job 40. Leviathan is also discussed (as Final Fantasy fans, I'm sure we all know those names), and dragons are mentioned multiple times. Of course the word "dinosaur" isn't mentioned in the Bible -- the word was invented in 1841. While most people think of winged, fire-breathing creatures when "dragon" is mentioned, that's because all they've known for "dragon" is overblown stories and a mix-and-match of body parts from dinosaurs. It would be the same thing as somebody describing "fish" as a flying fish with the legs of a mudpuppy and a mouth like piranha. And wouldn't that be freaky?
Christians that follow (and know) the Bible don't attempt to deny the existence of dinosaurs. As Jeordam pointed out, that'd be the fault of individual ignorance, not of faith or of the Bible.
A belief in God is not mutually exclusive to a belief in Evolutionism. A belief in Christianity, however, is.
Sig courtesy of Plastik Assassin.
Greater love hath no man than this; that he lay down his life for his friends.
John 15:13
Not necessarily.
The Bible is a book that contains His Story, not History.
Being a Christian does not mean you think everything written in the book is what actually happened back then.
They're stories from which you can learn.
Of course Jesus didn't make a blind man see, it's a metaphore for helping a criminal get back on the right path. There are numerous stories like these.
Thát is what makes the Bible such a popular book. The lessons. Or that's how it should be read at least. Through the course of time, less intelligent people have always interpreted written works in a wrong way. The Bible and the Curan being the most famous examples in these days.
Crao Porr Cock8: Getting it while the getting's good
for snipping out a bit of your post, but this portion is what I wanted to comment on.
I'm choosing my words carefully here, so everyone, please forgive me if I say it wrong or offend someone. It is certainly not my intention to.
If a Christian doesn't believe what the Bible says....then what is the point of believing at all? The Bible is not some theological buffet...where you can walk along and take what you like, and leave the rest. Of course, there are very specific instances where Jesus is telling a story with a moral point (a parable), and there are instances of poetic language where the author is clearly not being literal...but in both of these cases, it is *very* clear.
In the example that was used by Ragnatoad, there is no literary evidence that Jesus healing the blind man was a metaphore for getting him "back on the right path". Instead, it is a story of Jesus *actually healing* a blind man. Speaking as a Christian, why would I want to believe in a God who *can't* work miracles.
To further this thought, the Bible speaks of God holding the sun in its course through the sky so that Joshua & the tribes could defeat their enemies. Do I believe that this was done? Yes, I do. Why, because the Bible doesn't express this as anything but what it is, and then my God can do whatever needs to be done.
Or was there a world-wide flood....or an *actual* Adam & Eve in The Garden of Eden....or when Lazaras died, and Jesus brought him back from the dead (which he also did for a little sick girl). Do I believe that these things (and more) *actually* happened...*and* that leassons can be learned from them?
Yes, I do. If you're going to believe in something, why not go full out for it? In for a penny, in for a pound (as they say).
~Jeordam
Saving the World since there was a World to Save.
I never said that getting someone on the right path shouldn't be considered a miracle. I've seen and known people who have denied anything to do with God and Christianity specifically who after years finally came to know Jesus Christ. It was most definately a miracle, however I believe you are mistaken in the belief that miracles cannot be characterized as "some huge magic trick". And as you said, there are some who think that miracles don't happen now adays...however I can personally tell you that they do. And its not just the subtle ones, but instead the "magic trick" ones also happen in today's day & age.
There is a flaw with your logic equating free will and God's activity in our lives. The presence of free will does not conflict with outside interference, anymore than it does between humans. God can certainly interfere with our daily lives...that doesn't take away our free will, but instead just modifies what can choose from.
Wait...can you point out to me the place in the Bible where it says something along the lines of "Everything within this text is phrased in metaphorical terms." I would be most curious to read such a passage. This would be especially interesting to note since the dates & references within the history sections of the Bible are reinforced by outside references.
Hmmm....even the writers of the Bible knew the difference between the sun & a full moon.... If it was the moon standing still in the sky & they were able to see because of that, they would have said so. And then as per the northern lights....we're talking present day Isreal here. They are *way* too south to see the Northern Lights.
Hmmmm....since when does "physically impossible" limit God...who *literally* spoke existance into creation? I believe in a God who does not have to work within the realm of the physical laws of the universe. I don't really know how to comment on the whole "the world is not a magical place, and it never was..."
Even as a Scientist, I know enough to realize that not everything in this world is explained away through science or physical universal understanding. As a (fictionary) philosopher once said "Logic is the begining of wisdom, not its culmination." Wisdom is not limited to what can be explained away through natural means. Shall I provide examples for you?
As for the magical stories being magic-ed up...just to be remembered, there are many stories in the Bible which have no "magic" in them...yet they are remembered. The example of Ruth & Boaz comes to mind....or Queen Esther....or Rahab...or Hannah. Each of these stories carries a huge lesson and theological point of interest...yet there is no "magic" (term as you have utilized in this post). Again, you say that the point was never to believe them at face value. How did you come to this belief? What education and study led you to hold this ideal as truth?
Those stories, and the ones containing extraordinary attributes, have all survived. Their survival is not determined so much by their literary qualities, but instead by the fact that its the Word of God.
~Jeordam
Saving the World since there was a World to Save.
The bible is a collection of inspirational stories meant to serve as a guideline on how to live a good life. If you look at any type of religion, they have basically the same thing.
This is where things go wrong. People take the shit way too seriously and start believing everything written to be exactly true, and something that should be taken with the utmost seriousness.
Then you have shit like this: YouTube - Brain Washing ( Jesus Camp ''Highlights'' )
Then you have wars started because all those kids in that video are fucked. People like that grow up and don't use things in the bible as guidelines to live a better life, so they don't. They take them way too seriously and end up doing exactly the opposite. They ruin other people's lives with their selfishness and ignorance.
Religion is getting out of hand. What man needs to do is begin to terraform Mars, possibly the moon if we can control the lack of atmosphere, or create one. AND GTFO
Like Locke and others I am also a atheist that loves religion simply because it gives you some insight on others belief's.
I agree with Clint on this.All religious writings are all handed down stories that was eventually put into writing so beliving that they was fabricated is a logical belief...
Religion like many things is an opinion but some people take religion way too seriously such as those in the middle east they hate us and started a war because they despise our countries christian beliefs. The war in Iraq is a religious war and noone will win....
Im a catholic, and i personally think that religion was created to help people, no matter what the belief is. now this isn't every atheist im talking about(i hate generalization) but many Atheists i know are pretty arrogant about these things. i understand that you dont belive in a god. thats fine. but sayng people are loons or insecure or just stupid to belive in god is unexceptional. everyone is entitle to an opinion or belief, but please keep it clean. that goes for the religious to!
I'm Mormon/LDs I love religions.I like to learn more about other.I like mine a lot.With out it my like would suck.It help a family a lot it made my mom and dad more happy then they ever would be and many other people I know.Yes we have wars because of them but they are the most important thing everyone has religion even if they don't think they do.It help people lives makes them think that they are important and thats life is important. It brings friends and family together.I don't care if people don't like the religion I have because its makes me who I am and many other things in the world.And to me thats really important.
Do you really believe that? I think the whole 'religion causes war' argument is very redundant. War has a multitude of causes. Religion is one, but I'd argue that religion is used more by leaders in fragile societies who are attempting to create an 'us versus them' dichotomy. Resources, inequality, ideology; these are far more prominent causes of war, especially in the modern world.
As for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, one can blame them just as easily on the personal beliefs of George Bush, who said that he made the decision to invade Afghanistan "after a lot of prayer", as on Osama or any other Muslim radical. But I still think resources (Oil; for the Americans) and ideology (liberalism, brought about through globalisation or 'cultural imperialism'; for the Muslim extremists) are more significant causal factors. Religion is still there, however.
I am an Atheist personally. I do not mind any Religion, providing they keep themselves to themselves, and stop trying to convert people. I find it sad that people can willingly force a belief upon people (I.E. Jahova Witnesses), and to be fair I believe you deserve all the hatred and insults you get by doing so. I also hate it when people actually try to prove Gods existance. How can you prove someone's faith? You cannot. Stop wasting your time, thinking you're right.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks