The religion discus thread....

[Morgoroth]

It all started here…

By the way what u guys reckon about people or Christian beliefs of no sex before marriage? Cause a couple of my friends say they would 'give' their virginity away after they get married.

Mature comments please no 'They are stupid', or 'Fuck Religion' etc

.....
Personal point of view: I respect religious beliefs, but religion is a waste of time, religion is the opium of society, also for me religion and faith are two different things, religion is made by men so is imperfect, faith comes from god whatever he/she/it is for you. :amused:

.......
About the religion thing: i have no problem myself with religion itself, although in a lot of cases religion can cause absolutely horrific things (but come on....wtf doesnt? lol), but sometimes i honestly envy those who have a god to believe in. Sometimes i wish i had something to be able to pray to and to profess my problems to lol.......but.....ive never been able to......believe in some dude in the sky :/ Just not my thing i guess. Thus ends the rambling of........some wierd new guy =D

The phrase is 'opiate of the masses', and it isn't about religion being a 'waste of time' - Marx meant that religion is an active tool in repressing people, by offering them great rewards in the afterlife for being 'good' in this one - with 'good' being a set of behaviors that support the current power structure, and discourage 'rocking the boat'. Of course, how Islamic suicide bombers* fits into that is an interesting question...

*: Yes I know that not all (or even 'no true') Islamic believers are suicide bomber, that Islam is a religion of peace, etc.. However, their are suicide bombers who do what they do in the name of their God, and whether or not that God is the God of Islam, it is a religious belief.

In fact as I said... is my personal point of view... I was not quoting Marx... but somehow taking some ideas from Nietzsche.... and making "my own" phrase, since nowadays is really hard to be original..... :amused:

Islamic suicide bombers are like the KKK. They use their twisted view of religion to justify the crimes they commit. That's all there is to it.

I agree, but my point is that some would call it twisted Islam, some would say it is so twisted it is no longer Islam, but it is a religion, distinct or not. And you cannot deny they fight for change. We might no like the means of the fighting, or the ends of the change, but they are dying for change in the name of a religion. That is all I meant.

Incidentally, this is an intriguing discussion, and I'd hate to see it deleted as 'off-topic'. If any one wishes to continue it, let us do so in another thread.

if anyone would like to add their point of view is welcome

Well, considering that Muslims are fighting a holly war against people that believe in the same god (Jews, Christians and Muslims have the same god) makes me thing that religion is a big waste of time, and as a said religion is made by men, therefore is imperfect and the consequence is that is twisted and therefore we have mad suicidal bombers or religious fanatics that go to the extreme to impose their so called "faith" to everybody else with the use of force.. an example of this is the Christian inquisition.... then again this is only my point of view.




@mods and admins: I put it here but don't know if you consider to leave it here or move it some place else.

[Violat3r]

...people that believe in the same god (Jews, Christians and Muslims have the same god)...

Sorry, i know this is for Religious discussion but when you said that a certain story i read a while back popped into my mind, so i went and found it :amused:

Hell

The following is an actual question given on a University of Washington
chemistry mid-term. The answer by one student was so "profound" that
the professor shared it with colleagues, via the Internet, which is, of
course, why we now have the pleasure of enjoying it as well.

Here is the professor's "Bonus Question":
Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or endothermic (absorbs heat)?

Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyle's Law
(gas cools when it expands and heats when it is compressed) or some
variant.

One student, however, wrote the following:

First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So we
need to know the rate at which souls are moving into Hell and the rate
at which they are leaving. I think that we can safely assume that once
a soul gets to Hell, it will not leave. Therefore, no souls are leaving.
As for how many souls are entering Hell, let's look at the different
Religions that exist in the world today.
Most of these religions state that if you are not a member of their
religion, you will go to Hell. Since there is more than one of these
religions and since people do not belong to more than one religion, we
can project that all souls go to Hell.

With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of
souls in Hell to increase exponentially. Now, we look at the rate of
change of the volume in Hell because Boyle's Law states that in order
for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay the same, the volume
of Hell has to expand proportionately as souls are added.

This gives two possibilities:

1. If Hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls
enter Hell, then the temperature and pressure in Hell will increase
until all Hell breaks loose.

2. If Hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in
Hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes
over.

So which is it?

If we accept the postulate given to me by Teresa during my Freshman
year that, "it will be a cold day in Hell before I sleep with you", and
take into account the fact that I slept with her last night, then
number 2 must be true, and thus I am sure that Hell is exothermic and
has already frozen over. The corollary of this theory is that since
Hell has frozen over, it follows that it is not accepting any more
souls and is therefore, extinct...leaving only Heaven . . . thereby
proving the existence of a divine being . . . which explains why, last
night, Teresa kept shouting "Oh my God."

THIS STUDENT RECEIVED THE ONLY "A"

[Angelofdarkness]

I think a lot of people misuse Religion and give it its bad rep. The purpose of religion, imo, is to spread the word. Basically to tell people about it so that they may see your "truth". Certainly that's what Jesus wanted, or Buddha, or Mohammad (Tho I don't presume to speak for any of them of course; it just seems to me that that's their intention from what I've learned about them).

However, people often try to find any means to power. So religion is often used because it is such a powerful tool. These people don't follow the footsteps of the founders but are nevertheless "part" of that religion and they are mostly the ones who give religion its bad name.

I think in its pure form, Religion could be used to spread knowledge about the metaphysical and philosophical and this spread of knowledge could help mankind. But too many people want to just corrupt it and use it for personal gain. :sad: In the end it's not religion itself that's flawed, but man. Like fire, people often misuse it to commit crimes, but it's a very useful tool when used properly.=/ That's my view anyways.

[AbyssRaven]

How can you mis use religion when the church and established religious groups use religion how they do?
More people have died in the entire history of the world because of religion then every other cause combined.

One small question, raised by Jimmy Car (a great comedian)
If we are all gods children, what makes Jesus so special?
And one of my own
If we are all god children, then does not the act of reproduction damn us to hell for sleeping with ones own kin?

[Angelofdarkness]

How can I personally misuse religion? Many ways my man. Start a sect, gain power, etc. All misuses of religion.

Where do you get the statistic for "religion" killed the most people? I mean yes there was the crusades, there was the inquisition. But what about plague(millions just in Europe), famine(tens of millions if not hundreds), disease ( a few hundred million at least), (great leap forward in China killed a few million), Vietnam, Korea (both about communism not religion, a few hundred thousand), World War I (which was about the triple entendre and the axis powers, also the murder of ArchDuke Ferdinand, a few million), World War II (Which was about Hitler's plot to control the world and Italy and Japan's joining forces with him. Naziism vs all. Also don't ever start saying it was "against the Jews" like I've heard so many times. Hitler prosecuted Jews as a Race not a religion. A few HUNDRED million), The tribal wars in China and other places which also killed a few million, and good old fashioned suicides, murders, and accidents. You want to tally that up for me and tell me with a straight face that RELIGION killed more than Half the people who have ever lived? (Or probably ~ 5-10billion people)

[Robby Bubble]

This thread's a disaster waiting to happen...

[Morgoroth]

.......
If we accept the postulate given to me by Teresa during my Freshman
year that, "it will be a cold day in Hell before I sleep with you", and
take into account the fact that I slept with her last night, then
number 2 must be true, and thus I am sure that Hell is exothermic and
has already frozen over. The corollary of this theory is that since
Hell has frozen over, it follows that it is not accepting any more
souls and is therefore, extinct...leaving only Heaven . . . thereby
proving the existence of a divine being . . . which explains why, last
night, Teresa kept shouting "Oh my God."

THIS STUDENT RECEIVED THE ONLY "A"

I would have give him an A+... I love this guy’s analogy about hell....


I think in its pure form, Religion could be used to spread knowledge about the metaphysical and philosophical and this spread of knowledge could help mankind.

Well, religion in its pure form should be the one given by god itself, which is supposed to be the case of the Koran that is the base of the Islam... which has given a lot of mad suicidal bombers.... in my way to see thing religion get corrupted as soon as is touched by a man that doesn’t have the capacity to understand god, which is true in almost all the cases

How can you mis use religion when the church and established religious groups use religion how they do?
More people have died in the entire history of the world because of religion then every other cause combined.

read previous paragraph



How can I personally misuse religion? Many ways my man. Start a sect, gain power, etc. All misuses of religion.

Where do you get the statistic for "religion" killed the most people? I mean yes there was the crusades, there was the inquisition. But what about plague(millions just in Europe), famine(tens of millions if not hundreds), disease ( a few hundred million at least), (great leap forward in China killed a few million), Vietnam, Korea (both about communism not religion, a few hundred thousand), World War I (which was about the triple entendre and the axis powers, also the murder of ArchDuke Ferdinand, a few million), World War II (Which was about Hitler's plot to control the world and Italy and Japan's joining forces with him. Naziism vs all. Also don't ever start saying it was "against the Jews" like I've heard so many times. Hitler prosecuted Jews as a Race not a religion. A few HUNDRED million), The tribal wars in China and other places which also killed a few million, and good old fashioned suicides, murders, and accidents. You want to tally that up for me and tell me with a straight face that RELIGION killed more than Half the people who have ever lived? (Or probably ~ 5-10billion people)

I agree with you, but I think that religion has caused death for the most stupid reason, example the Salem’s witch burning.... or any witch burning in history.... all the book burnings during inquisition, they also killed people that kept printing those books, Galileo , well he wasn't killed but they were close, the thousand Jews that were killed by inquisition only because the didn’t want to convert to Christians.... and I can go on and on giving you stupid deaths that shouldn’t have happened because of religion (note that I was only giving Christian religion causes but the other religion have their faults too)


One small question, raised by Jimmy Car (a great comedian)
If we are all gods children, what makes Jesus so special?
And one of my own
If we are all god children, then does not the act of reproduction damn us to hell for sleeping with ones own kin?

according to catholic church Jesus is god, because god have 3 forms the father, the son (Jesus) and the holly ghost, this is called the holly trinity, according to most north American Christians Jesus is god, that’s what makes Jesus so special to Christianity in general

to answer your second question.... I will make you and other question

Are we all clones of god?

I'm using King's James since is the most familiar to native English speaking persons
Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
http://bible.cc/genesis/1-27.htm

Of course all of this is only my point of view, because nobody holds the absolute truth, except for god (the question is, which of all the gods that humand kind have?), and that is the only certain truth I know (and even I doubt that is a certain truth)

[BalrogLord]

let bygones be bygones and if someone wants to pray to god/allah/yaweh/the goddess, let them you have no right to judge. however when someone tried to impose their religion unto others it creates problems, its an even worser problem when its used as a manipulative tool by fundmentalists. there also are certain practise within religions that need to be changed and adapted into modern society (ex:the forced wearing of a burkha, creation of lower classes like the untouchables in hinduism).

although im no believer if in fact there is a god, he isnt all powerful as he is restricted to moving and obeying the laws of nature and he moves thrue others instead of himself. the exode perioed for example, why go thrue the trouble of sending 10 plagues when if your god u just revela yourself and order them. there are always nemerous overly fortunate coincidences in history.(the nile water turning red like blood), although its a natural phomenon its timing was a bit to convenient in my opinion. there are other examples as well if you look thrue any holy book.


heres what i wrote in the 10th squad general section (wich is an open forum for debates fyi)

[Morgoroth]

Is an excellent analogy, but just I have one little question for you... how did you enter to the 18+ section? :weird: :amused:

[Violat3r]

.....whooo....that is freaky.......

[Angelofdarkness]

@Morgoroth:

Killing for religious purposes is ONE OF THE STUPIDEST things people can ever do, I agree. But don't underestimate the stupidity of people. People have killed each other for NO REASON, or for other very very stupid reasons. I mean look at ancient China, the Qing emperor killed millions of his own scholars, and burned all the books because he was afraid people would become smart enough to rebel against him. Gotta say that's a pretty stupid reason to kill. (Not that I'm bashing any one particular country, I know other countries have done similar its just I'm most familiar with what China did). Basically I think killing is killing, and it's wrong, and very stupid in all its forms (except self defense). But yes religious killing has an extra oomph to it. <_<

[unknown T]

all they are doing is twisting sacred texts of their religion to get revenge against America. it isn't cause we are infidels they are just pissed at us and the infidel killing idea just happens to bring in desperate men who want to be met in heaven by 70 virgins.
bottom line killing is killing and it is just wrong

[Morgoroth]

You right killing is just wrong, there is no excuse for it.

And I just was using that example to demonstrate one of the reason why religion is a big waste of time to me.

I have known a lot of religious people in my life and most of them are quite intolerant with people that doesn't share their religious believes, or their so called "faith", most of them are just a bunch of hypocrites.

Believe me when I said it, just in my state there are more pseudo Christian religions than casinos in Las Vegas, and every one of them claims to have the absolute true about the meaning of life.

Religion is a big business, at least in my country they don't pay taxes by law, and I’m not just talking about catholic church or Christians that are the major religions in my country, you can found your own religion if you want and don't pay taxes the rest of your life as long as you have followers.

Those who live in America can see the televangelism gaining power every year or religious association trying to take out the teaching of evolution out of the public schools, at least in my country we are save from that because in the constitution says that the religion must be separated from the state, meaning that the church can't intervene in the educational programs or in politics in the country.


Edit: I hope you can find that more easy to read :amused:

[BalrogLord]

Is an excellent analogy, but just I have one little question for you... how did you enter to the 18+ section? :weird: :amused:


quite simple really, when you go to the bleach exile forum homepage (the one with all the section), in the 18+section it says right to teh right view the latest unread message in x thread. so i cant acces 18+section but i can access individual threads, i could probably do the same if i were to say look at your profile look at your latest post and look for any in the 18+section. theres also another method but ive forgotten it.

[Morgoroth]

wow nice bug in the page's code :amused:

[Angelofdarkness]

You right killing is just wrong, there is no excuse for it. and I just was using that example to demonstrate one of the reason why religion is a big waste of time to me, I have known a lot of religious people in my life and most of them are quite intolerant with people that doesn't share their religious believes, or their so called "faith", most of them are just a bunch of hypocrites, believe me when I said it, just in my state there are more pseudo Christian religions than casinos in Las Vegas, and every one of them claims to have the absolute true about the meaning of life, religion is a big business, at least in my country they don't pay taxes by law, and I’m not just talking about catholic church or Christians that are the major religions in my country, you can found your own religion if you want and don't pay taxes the rest of your life as long as you have followers, those who live in America can see the televangelism gaining power every year or religious association trying to take out the teaching of evolution out of the public schools, at least in my country we are save from that because in the constitution says that the religion must be separated from the state, meaning that the church can't intervene in the educational programs or in politics in the country

Woah! was that one sentence followed by one LOOONNNG sentence?:amazed: I'm not one to point grammar, (esp when mostly I agree with u) but could u like split that up a bit. It's hard to read :suspicious:

[Morgoroth]

There I hope you can read it better.....

[GregHouse]

Sorry, i know this is for Religious discussion but when you said that a certain story i read a while back popped into my mind, so i went and found it :amused:

Hell

The following is an actual question given on a University of Washington
chemistry mid-term. The answer by one student was so "profound" that
the professor shared it with colleagues, via the Internet, which is, of
course, why we now have the pleasure of enjoying it as well.

Here is the professor's "Bonus Question":
Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or endothermic (absorbs heat)?

Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyle's Law
(gas cools when it expands and heats when it is compressed) or some
variant.

One student, however, wrote the following:

First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So we
need to know the rate at which souls are moving into Hell and the rate
at which they are leaving. I think that we can safely assume that once
a soul gets to Hell, it will not leave. Therefore, no souls are leaving.
As for how many souls are entering Hell, let's look at the different
Religions that exist in the world today.
Most of these religions state that if you are not a member of their
religion, you will go to Hell. Since there is more than one of these
religions and since people do not belong to more than one religion, we
can project that all souls go to Hell.

With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of
souls in Hell to increase exponentially. Now, we look at the rate of
change of the volume in Hell because Boyle's Law states that in order
for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay the same, the volume
of Hell has to expand proportionately as souls are added.

This gives two possibilities:

1. If Hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls
enter Hell, then the temperature and pressure in Hell will increase
until all Hell breaks loose.

2. If Hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in
Hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes
over.

So which is it?

If we accept the postulate given to me by Teresa during my Freshman
year that, "it will be a cold day in Hell before I sleep with you", and
take into account the fact that I slept with her last night, then
number 2 must be true, and thus I am sure that Hell is exothermic and
has already frozen over. The corollary of this theory is that since
Hell has frozen over, it follows that it is not accepting any more
souls and is therefore, extinct...leaving only Heaven . . . thereby
proving the existence of a divine being . . . which explains why, last
night, Teresa kept shouting "Oh my God."

THIS STUDENT RECEIVED THE ONLY "A"

Holy shit...That is awesome...!

[Morgoroth]

Is there somebody else that wants to share his/her opinion about religion.... Or can I assume that this thread is dead...

[Maiorem]

all they are doing is twisting sacred texts of their religion to get revenge against America. it isn't cause we are infidels they are just pissed at us and the infidel killing idea just happens to bring in desperate men who want to be met in heaven by 70 virgins.
bottom line killing is killing and it is just wrong

Well it wasn't exactly stated that the 72 virgins (not 70, according to Islamic theology) have to be female...

I see many people putting the blame on religion when things go wrong; the Inquisition, Salem witch trials, other related "religious disasters"...are they all called for in the respective Holy Scriptures? NO.

The exception is Islam though, where the Islamic teaching tells you that every act done in the name of Allah is a form of worship, which misleads others to thinking that suicide bombings in the name of Allah is worship. Then again, Muhammad had always been preaching about taking up the sword, as can be read in the Qur'an.

On the other hand, there are always certain idiots who want to control people by telling them "God has spoken to me", and ignorant people would believe him even though what he says next would go against what the Holy Scriptures say. Take, for example, many of the different sects (not denominations) of Christianity, like the so-called "Fundamental Church of Jesus Christ and Latter Day Saints"; if you do research into its history, it all started with an idiot named Joseph Smith who actually thinks that America is going to be the New Jerusalem.
Back to the Inquisition and Salem witch trials, nowhere is any of these called for.

It's time people decide to realize that instead of blaming the religion which the perpetrator is blaming, we have to know who is the one actually responsible for such bloody nonsense.

[ulqqie]

"Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned."

[13thwarrior]

religion? well, i don't know, somehow i fear it...

[Violat3r]

Well it wasn't exactly stated that the 72 virgins (not 70, according to Islamic theology) have to be female...

H6dtGcC8mN4&feature=user

Fast Forward to about "-5:50" then wait and see =D (the player only shows about how long the video is and not how far you actually are, in real time its about 1:05 or so away from the beginning

EDIT: Video doesnt seem to wanna work, even though it worked fine inh the preview, so heres the link: http://youtube.com/watch?v=H6dtGcC8mN4&feature=user

[vgrippa]

religion? well, i don't know, somehow i fear it...

The reason you fear religion is because they use fear to get people to follow their religion, just like terrorism.

Question for all the Christians out there:

If God can do anything, can he make a stone that is so big he can not even lift it?

*WAIT* before you answer really think about your answer. Also I do not want any of those bull puky answers like, "God is a supreme being he doesn't have to do this to prove he is real." All I want is a good logical answer. GOOD LUCK AND HAVE FUN!

[Morgoroth]

^Nice paradox, the answer is yes and no at the same time... LOL

Well it wasn't exactly stated that the 72 virgins (not 70, according to Islamic theology) have to be female...

Well considering that Islam s basically a male dominant religion (the men have the most rights and women are treated like objects) is logical to think that the 72 virgins are female


I see many people putting the blame on religion when things go wrong; the Inquisition, Salem witch trials, other related "religious disasters"...are they all called for in the respective Holy Scriptures? NO.

The exception is Islam though, where the Islamic teaching tells you that every act done in the name of Allah is a form of worship, which misleads others to thinking that suicide bombings in the name of Allah is worship. Then again, Muhammad had always been preaching about taking up the sword, as can be read in the Qur'an.

On the other hand, there are always certain idiots who want to control people by telling them "God has spoken to me", and ignorant people would believe him even though what he says next would go against what the Holy Scriptures say. Take, for example, many of the different sects (not denominations) of Christianity, like the so-called "Fundamental Church of Jesus Christ and Latter Day Saints"; if you do research into its history, it all started with an idiot named Joseph Smith who actually thinks that America is going to be the New Jerusalem.
Back to the Inquisition and Salem witch trials, nowhere is any of these called for.

It's time people decide to realize that instead of blaming the religion which the perpetrator is blaming, we have to know who is the one actually responsible for such bloody nonsense.

Also consider that religion and faith is not the same (at least for me), faith comes from god therefore can not be corrupted, religion comes from men, therefore can be corrupted and the result is all the examples that you gave.

[vgrippa]

I heard in Muslim that the word for virgin is also the word for white olives. So maybe they get 70+ white olives?

[Maiorem]

The reason you fear religion is because they use fear to get people to follow their religion, just like terrorism.

Question for all the Christians out there:

If God can do anything, can he make a stone that is so big he can not even lift it?

*WAIT* before you answer really think about your answer. Also I do not want any of those bull puky answers like, "God is a supreme being he doesn't have to do this to prove he is real." All I want is a good logical answer. GOOD LUCK AND HAVE FUN!
You're asking two infinites, running parallel to each other, to try and exceed the other.
We can't even handle the full concept of 'infinity' ourselves.

The main excuse people give for not accepting religion is that the religious group of people are death-fearing people; the interesting thing to note is that Jesus called for us to embrace death.

I heard in Muslim that the word for virgin is also the word for white olives. So maybe they get 70+ white olives?

Nah; that's just some lame excuse in an attempt to cover up the blunders of their so-called prophet.
My other Muslim friend lamented about this fact, and he said his religious teachers taught him that for women, the 72 virgins can also be male.
Question to Muslims: why do you need sex in heaven?

@Morgoroth:
The only problem is, everyone has faith, but that faith when put in the wrong things can be fatal mentally, physically, spiritually. I would agree with you that religion is corrupted, depending on your definition of 'religion'.

Thanks, Violat3r; you really made my day LOL

[BalrogLord]

i agree with 90% of your post only one little thing


The exception is Islam though, where the Islamic teaching tells you that every act done in the name of Allah is a form of worship

that here isnt really true, the way u worship is by prnouncing the shahadah, practising prayer, to perfom the hajj, to fast during ramadan, and to practise charity.

[vgrippa]

Two things I don't understand is why religion has to involve some kinda of worship to a "higher" being. If whatever god you believe is as good as you say he is then as long as I am a good person I will go to heaven or wherever, even if I do not worship him every Sunday or every day at noon.

And..

In the Christian religion how come as long as I accept Jesus as my savior before I do I will go to heaven, no matter what. If that is true I can commit a mass genocide and kill every single person in the whole world but as long as I truly accepted Jesus as my savior I would be completely forgiven and go to heaven with everyone I killed. That to me makes no sense at all because if that were the cause then why would anyone fear hell or the devil?

*EDIT* Its ironic that Lucifer, the name of the devil, actually means "He who brings the light."

[Angelofdarkness]

The reason you fear religion is because they use fear to get people to follow their religion, just like terrorism.

Question for all the Christians out there:

If God can do anything, can he make a stone that is so big he can not even lift it?

*WAIT* before you answer really think about your answer. Also I do not want any of those bull puky answers like, "God is a supreme being he doesn't have to do this to prove he is real." All I want is a good logical answer. GOOD LUCK AND HAVE FUN!

Well if your argument is "it doesn't work logically so God can't exist" it's a fallacy of logic to assume that you must logically understand something for it to exist. There may indeed be things out there that is impossible for us to logically understand. For example, can you logically understand 13 dimensions of space that's suggested by Super String theory? I bet not, but the math works so it's possible.

Anyways, it's not like I understand infinity myself; however, considering GOD is all powerful and can DEFINE things like logic then it should be relatively easy for him to make this question logically answerable. The question as it stands from a human perspective is a fallacy of logic since there is no "Can not" when it concerns God. It's like saying "if my quarter is a nickle how much is it worth?" or "If my black eyes are white what color are they?" It just doesn't make any sense.

[vgrippa]

Well if your argument is "it doesn't work logically so God can't exist" it's a fallacy of logic to assume that you must logically understand something for it to exist. There may indeed be things out there that is impossible for us to logically understand. For example, can you logically understand 13 dimensions of space that's suggested by Super String theory? I bet not, but the math works so it's possible.

Anyways, it's not like I understand infinity myself; however, considering GOD is all powerful and can DEFINE things like logic then it should be relatively easy for him to make this question logically answerable. The question as it stands from a human perspective is a fallacy of logic since there is no "Can not" when it concerns God. It's like saying "if my quarter is a nickle how much is it worth?" or "If my black eyes are white what color are they?" It just doesn't make any sense.

^^^I envy you:smile:
Thanks for an amazing answer.

[Angelofdarkness]

Thanks for the compliment :amused:

[Violat3r]

*EDIT* Its ironic that Lucifer, the name of the devil, actually means "He who brings the light."

Just cause i can: The story goes that yes, one of the "devil's" given names is Lucifer (the oldest recorded name i believe is something like Bealzabub or w/e) It is said that the name "Lucifer" was his heavenly name, while he was still an angel of heaven. Since the devil is supposed to be "the fallen angel", its not TOO ironic in the sense that when he had the name of "Lucifer" he was still an angel. Those stories were also based i believe purely of Latin origin, so theres all kinds of names and translations and blah blah blah (kinda tired so thinking straight is OUTTA da question :weird:).

Thanks, Violat3r; you really made my day LOL

Thanx! :bigsmile: I do what i can.

[Maiorem]

Two things I don't understand is why religion has to involve some kinda of worship to a "higher" being. If whatever god you believe is as good as you say he is then as long as I am a good person I will go to heaven or wherever, even if I do not worship him every Sunday or every day at noon.

And..

In the Christian religion how come as long as I accept Jesus as my savior before I do I will go to heaven, no matter what. If that is true I can commit a mass genocide and kill every single person in the whole world but as long as I truly accepted Jesus as my savior I would be completely forgiven and go to heaven with everyone I killed. That to me makes no sense at all because if that were the cause then why would anyone fear hell or the devil?

*EDIT* Its ironic that Lucifer, the name of the devil, actually means "He who brings the light."

The reason why we Christians come together every Sunday is not solely for the purpose of worship; we are called to worship every day, ever moment of our lives.
Also, by whose standards of "good" are you measuring up with?

The only problem is that if you have truly accepted Jesus as savior then you wouldn't do the things he told you not to do. Jesus mentioned that he would say to those who confess with their mouths about knowing him but not doing what he told them to do "depart from me, you wicked men".
Christianity has never been a religion of fear, because God never gave us a spirit of fear. We believe because we no longer need to fear anything but God, and even in that case it is a reverential fear.

The word 'Lucifer' literally translates from Latin to 'light bearer', but it is not so in the original Hebrew. I can't believe how many people actually thought that the Bible was originally in English.

[Morgoroth]

.....
@Morgoroth:
The only problem is, everyone has faith, but that faith when put in the wrong things can be fatal mentally, physically, spiritually. I would agree with you that religion is corrupted, depending on your definition of 'religion'. ….


As I have witnessed faith and fanaticism are separated by a really thin line where does faith ends and fanaticism stars is really difficult to say exactly, and for me fanaticism is when you put faith in the wrong things, but is just my way to see things maybe I’m right maybe I’m wrong.

Religion: a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

And who regulates religion?

A: Men.. just simple mortals, I’m not saying that I understand god better than them but I can see that their “guidance” is not working, and is really sad that the alternative isn’t working ether, the Muslims doesn’t have a regulatory organism like Catholic church for example, for most of them works but they also have the mad bombers sects.


Examples of religion corruption (Catholic... because is the most familiar to me, but that doesn't mean that the other religions don't have their own faults):

1.- The pope selling indulgencies(one of the main reason why Martin Luther made his thesis)
2.- The crusades (it wasn't to take the holly land from infidels hands, anyone watched the movie? is the easiest way I can find to explain my point, and the holly land was conveniently in the middle of the silk trade route... what a coincidence)
3.- The Inquisition ( a way to control the free thinking and the flow of ideas that where diminishing the church's power over the common people)

4.- The Borgias (one of the reasons why the church started with the celibacy vote, and those are the most famous because it was common that all ecclesiastic charges where inherited)

And mainly the church was a rich people club to keep power, and don't let me star with the beginnings of Catholic church, is "coincidence" that Catholic Church has the “same” rank system that the Roman empire had (of course with different names but works the same).


In the end all I see is a conflict of ideas, everyone claims to have the absolute truth, but no one has it, that’s the only truth I know and sometimes I doubt of it.

(Sorry if don’t make myself clear, if I find very difficult to express my ideas the way I would like in my native language, now imagine how hard it is to me to express myself in a foreign language.)

[ulqqie]

cba to read.. Just watch the latest family guy and laugh ur asses off at the 72 virgins

[Violat3r]

...I can't believe how many people actually thought that the Bible was originally in English.

There are people who believe that the bible was originally in English?..........that is either one of the funniest things ive ever heard.......or in fact one of the saddest things ive ever heard :weird: Not sure which to choose....so i think i shall give a little "chuckle" then contemplate the idiocy of man while sitting in the fetal position, in a corner, sucking my thumb.....seriously :/

[ulqqie]

There are people who believe that the bible was originally in English?..........that is either one of the funniest things ive ever heard.......or in fact one of the saddest things ive ever heard :weird: Not sure which to choose....so i think i shall give a little "chuckle" then contemplate the idiocy of man while sitting in the fetal position, in a corner, sucking my thumb.....seriously :/

dude.. america has like a huge population and statistics indicate they are stoopid

[Violat3r]

dude.. america has like a huge population and statistics indicate they are stoopid

i resemble/resent that remark!!! xD Anyhoo yes i know, many Americans are dumb, fortunately i choose NOT to be that dumb, if you think that (about the english bible thing) then i believe you should be thrown into a Volcano YAY!!!. But for the most part....the world is full of idiots!!! not just in America.

[vgrippa]

If there are people in the South that still think they won the Civil War than there is people that think the bible was originally written in English. As the great Albert Einstein once said:

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."

[Maiorem]

As I have witnessed faith and fanaticism are separated by a really thin line where does faith ends and fanaticism stars is really difficult to say exactly, and for me fanaticism is when you put faith in the wrong things, but is just my way to see things maybe I’m right maybe I’m wrong.

Religion: a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

And who regulates religion?

A: Men.. just simple mortals, I’m not saying that I understand god better than them but I can see that their “guidance” is not working, and is really sad that the alternative isn’t working ether, the Muslims doesn’t have a regulatory organism like Catholic church for example, for most of them works but they also have the mad bombers sects.


Examples of religion corruption (Catholic... because is the most familiar to me, but that doesn't mean that the other religions don't have their own faults):

1.- The pope selling indulgencies(one of the main reason why Martin Luther made his thesis)
2.- The crusades (it wasn't to take the holly land from infidels hands, anyone watched the movie? is the easiest way I can find to explain my point, and the holly land was conveniently in the middle of the silk trade route... what a coincidence)
3.- The Inquisition ( a way to control the free thinking and the flow of ideas that where diminishing the church's power over the common people)

4.- The Borgias (one of the reasons why the church started with the celibacy vote, and those are the most famous because it was common that all ecclesiastic charges where inherited)

And mainly the church was a rich people club to keep power, and don't let me star with the beginnings of Catholic church, is "coincidence" that Catholic Church has the “same” rank system that the Roman empire had (of course with different names but works the same).


In the end all I see is a conflict of ideas, everyone claims to have the absolute truth, but no one has it, that’s the only truth I know and sometimes I doubt of it.

(Sorry if don’t make myself clear, if I find very difficult to express my ideas the way I would like in my native language, now imagine how hard it is to me to express myself in a foreign language.)

I really agree to your ideas, with one little exception: there are facts that remain unchanged regardless of perception, so your idea that there is no such thing as 'absolute truth' isn't entirely correct, though at the same time not entirely wrong either.
Take for example, the long-held belief that the world is flat, then suddenly Columbus suggested that the earth is round. Now we know that the earth had been spherical all along. So were the people living before Columbus speaking the truth as they know it? Yes, but they are hardly speaking the facts.

So what do you take for those who follow their respective scriptures without any human/outside influence such as the Pope in Roman Catholicism?

On a side note, America has been discovered numerous times before Columbus, but they are all hushed up...

[Morgoroth]

......
As the great Albert Einstein once said:

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."

thanks for making my day vgrippa :rotfllmao:


So what do you take for those who follow their respective scriptures without any human/outside influence such as the Pope in Roman Catholicism?


Well, as I say Muslims don't have a regulatory organism such as the Catholic church, in other words they don't have a Pope, Muslims have been following their sacred scriptures by their own since they were written, and look at them, well most of them are living a good respectable life (although I don't like some of their ideas about how to treat women), but they also have the mad bombers sects. As I previously said no one has the absolute truth, but let me put it in better words, no one knows all the facts, that’s the only fact I know

[Maiorem]

Well, as I say Muslims don't have a regulatory organism such as the Catholic church, in other words they don't have a Pope, Muslims have been following their sacred scriptures by their own since they were written, and look at them, well most of them are living a good respectable life (although I don't like some of their ideas about how to treat women), but they also have the mad bombers sects. As I previously said no one has the absolute truth, but let me put it in better words, no one knows all the facts, that’s the only fact I know

Actually the Muslims have what they call 'ulama' e.g. religious leaders who issue 'fatwas' e.g. Islamic rule that's supposedly based on the Qur'an and the hadith.
I wouldn't say that they actually follow only the Qur'an since they have introduced many other laws which are not from the Qur'an.
In any case, have you heard the news of this Saudi rape victim who was actually sentenced to four (or was it six) months in prison AND 200 lashes?

They have a long hiearchy of Islamic leadership in the Islamic community, and as such the more religious leaders there are the bigger the tendency for one of them to come up with nonsense.

[Morgoroth]

Wow.... I didn't know that.... a new day a new thing I learned.... but correct me if I'm wrong, doesn’t that proves my point, the more men try to regulate a religion the more it get corrupted?

[Maiorem]

That is only true if Man tries to "regulate" religion based on their own human standards; had they actually went by the book (literally, since 'Bible' is Greek for 'Book') without any such nonsense like adding traditions and positions not mentioned in the Bible (e.g. "Pope") all this nonsense would not have happened. The bigger problem nowadays is that some people who have been elected as the leader of the congregation is the kind that does not believe in confrontation, so when the Bible speaks about confrontation he would skip that and preach that we should all be milksop and follow a make-believe "gentle Jesus, meek and mild", which you really don't find in the Bible. So we always have to check back on what the doctrine of the scriptures really is instead of judging a religion based on what the preacher, famous or otherwise, says.

[Sacrifice4]

I'm an atheist, I couldn't care less about others religious statements unless they go to far. I'm glad I don't live in an islamic country though cause their hole life is based on their religion and that goes a little far for me.

[nivla]

What's interesting about Islam is that in Qu'aran, it never regards men as the dominant sex, for the most part it preaches equality between men and women. In fact, based on the Qu'aran women are not required to wear the hijab or hide their faces, it is merely a law made by Arab leaders and what not. So basically, the mistreatment of women in Muslim countries has nothing to do with Islam.

[Morgoroth]

That is only true if Man tries to "regulate" religion based on their own human standards; had they actually went by the book (literally, since 'Bible' is Greek for 'Book') without any such nonsense like adding traditions and positions not mentioned in the Bible (e.g. "Pope") all this nonsense would not have happened. The bigger problem nowadays is that some people who have been elected as the leader of the congregation is the kind that does not believe in confrontation, so when the Bible speaks about confrontation he would skip that and preach that we should all be milksop and follow a make-believe "gentle Jesus, meek and mild", which you really don't find in the Bible. So we always have to check back on what the doctrine of the scriptures really is instead of judging a religion based on what the preacher, famous or otherwise, says.
Well, the problem is that the bible, is also regulated, so anyways any bible based religion is screwed, don't tell me you didn't know that the bible is a collection of books and the Church said which book goes in and which one goes out, the church also made some "translation errors" corrections. Besides the oldest book in the New Testament was written 100 years or so after the death of Christ when NO apostle was alive and no body that really met Jesus was alive. so we don't certainly know that what is written in the bible is the real deal or a bunch of thing that were made up to give the church power, I'm not saying the hole book is manipulated, but certainly is manipulated.

[13thwarrior]

The reason you fear religion is because they use fear to get people to follow their religion, just like terrorism.

Question for all the Christians out there:

If God can do anything, can he make a stone that is so big he can not even lift it?

*WAIT* before you answer really think about your answer. Also I do not want any of those bull puky answers like, "God is a supreme being he doesn't have to do this to prove he is real." All I want is a good logical answer. GOOD LUCK AND HAVE FUN!

no, i don't fear it cause i think of the past. i'm just afraid of believing it and i'm also afraid that if i start not believing in it then it might turn its bad against me. i don't know whether you get my point or not...

[Charliehsv]

no, i don't fear it cause i think of the past. i'm just afraid of believing it and i'm also afraid that if i start not believing in it then it might turn its bad against me. i don't know whether you get my point or not...

There's the main reason why still so many people "belive" in their gods. They aren't sure if god exists or not, and so they reason "Well it can't hurt to belive, but on the other hand if I don't belive and follow the faith I might end up in hell/purgatory".

Edit: Deleted a large part of this post because I'm way to tired to actually write a logical and well understanbadle post right now :p

[vgrippa]

That does not really make sense though (what charliehsv and 13thwarrior said) because according to Christians as long as we accept Jesus as our savior it does not matter what we did in our life. So really you do not have to believe in God until just before you die. Also if God is all forgiving then why would he send people to Hell? Even if they do not ask for forgiveness he still should forgive you because of his own kindness.

*edit* props to Morgoroth for starting this thread.

[Morgoroth]

That is not entirely correct, according to the old testament we have to worship god and we have to accept him our hole life, well also according to what is written in the old testament god is a very bellic god.... he loves wars and gets angry very often, not much alike the new face he presents in the new testament.... sometimes I think of Jesus as his public relations manager LOL..

Also you have to baptized to enter heaven, if not you’ll stay in purgatory, also you have to truly repent of your sins, not only confess them or believe in god, you can’t commit suicide or you will spend eternity in hell, there also the 7 capital sins that according to the catholic church can be unforgivable, so conveniently for the religion is not that easy, well also all that rules were imposed by the church because we suppose to have only the 10 commandments from god.. I don’t really know where the rest comes from, I know them because they were taught to me when I was little.

[unknown T]

the seven deadly sins are bullshit because it is impossible to commit them. that is why god gave them to us , he was reminding us that we aren't (to quote) "shit without him" because we cannot even follow 7 simple rules, it is the same thing with the ten commandments
and all the other rules were most likely added when the church had absolute control of things and decided to fuck with us

[BalrogLord]

That is not entirely correct, according to the old testament we have to worship god and we have to accept him our hole life, well also according to what is written in the old testament god is a very bellic god.... he loves wars and gets angry very often, not much alike the new face he presents in the new testament.... sometimes I think of Jesus as his public relations manager LOL..

Also you have to baptized to enter heaven, if not you’ll stay in purgatory, also you have to truly repent of your sins, not only confess them or believe in god, you can’t commit suicide or you will spend eternity in hell, there also the 7 capital sins that according to the catholic church can be unforgivable, so conveniently for the religion is not that easy, well also all that rules were imposed by the church because we suppose to have only the 10 commandments from god.. I don’t really know where the rest comes from, I know them because they were taught to me when I was little.

umm in general youre right however your post did drift from the truth a bit,

first off after noahs arc god became a loving god not a hating god. near the end of that part of genesis he says something along the lines of "i will no longer punish humanity in such a ways". i havent read the bible, so i coulndt tell you the exact passage.

were not only supposed to have the 10 commandements, because the jews and christians share a common ancestry, not only do we need to follow the 10 commandements but as well as the 261 mitzvoths as well as the kasheroutes (nutrition laws). however do people actualy follow all of those things? no unless your an orthodox christian/jew.

and another thing to add, to be fair the 4 evangiles were written from 50-100 years after his death, if i had my religion binder here id give you more details.

and srry for my nitpicking lol

[Maiorem]

What's interesting about Islam is that in Qu'aran, it never regards men as the dominant sex, for the most part it preaches equality between men and women. In fact, based on the Qu'aran women are not required to wear the hijab or hide their faces, it is merely a law made by Arab leaders and what not. So basically, the mistreatment of women in Muslim countries has nothing to do with Islam.
Really? How many light years away have you lived from Islam?
Polygamy is one thing already; I don't have to go so far as to mention the rest.

Well, the problem is that the bible, is also regulated, so anyways any bible based religion is screwed, don't tell me you didn't know that the bible is a collection of books and the Church said which book goes in and which one goes out, the church also made some "translation errors" corrections. Besides the oldest book in the New Testament was written 100 years or so after the death of Christ when NO apostle was alive and no body that really met Jesus was alive. so we don't certainly know that what is written in the bible is the real deal or a bunch of thing that were made up to give the church power, I'm not saying the hole book is manipulated, but certainly is manipulated.
The church did not determine what book goes or not; otherwise you'd think the church would have scrapped a few of the books in the Bible and deleted the Songs of Solomon (really steamy) from history. Besides, if the church really controlled the books, they would not allow embarassing incidents to be mentioned at all, but because those incidents are historical, they are in today's Bible as we read it.
Regarding "translation errors", that does not happen with any language other than English. The reason why English is a universal language is because it is one of the simplest and least complex of languages, therefore making it easy to understand. However, the languages that the Bible was originally written contains terribly complex grammar and thus it really takes years for a Bible to be actually translated into English, let alone other languages.
Also, the date set for the earliest manuscript copy of the four Gospels is no more than 30 years within Christ's death and resurrection; the latest date is 90 years. Remember, these are dates of manuscript copies, not the originals, so the originals may have gone even far back.
It certainly wouldn't be possible for the Gospels to be invented because they all speak about Rome's failure to contain even the body of Christ, and historically the Roman empire believes that the Caesar is a god, so the Romans would not take too kindly with this sort of thing; millions of people actually die for the truth, but not in the "suicide bomb" way.
If the church wanted power then the Bible wouldn't be containing statements like Jesus condemning the elites of the time, called Pharisees, and Jesus talking about being least to be first.
Yeah, the Bible is definitely manipulated; by God.

That does not really make sense though (what charliehsv and 13thwarrior said) because according to Christians as long as we accept Jesus as our savior it does not matter what we did in our life. So really you do not have to believe in God until just before you die. Also if God is all forgiving then why would he send people to Hell? Even if they do not ask for forgiveness he still should forgive you because of his own kindness.

*edit* props to Morgoroth for starting this thread.
NO.

21"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' 23Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'
Matthew 7:21

God literally gave people a lifetime to know Him and obey Him already; Jesus did not say to forgive even when the other has not asked for forgiveness.

That is not entirely correct, according to the old testament we have to worship god and we have to accept him our hole life, well also according to what is written in the old testament god is a very bellic god.... he loves wars and gets angry very often, not much alike the new face he presents in the new testament.... sometimes I think of Jesus as his public relations manager LOL..
God doesn't love wars; as much as He hates wars, He has no other choice to rid the land of those who rebel against Him. Even you don't find Jesus being such a nice guy in the New Testament; you can read the whole of Matthew 23 to see what I mean, and I quote an excerpt:

33"You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell? 34Therefore I am sending you prophets and wise men and teachers. Some of them you will kill and crucify; others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town. 35And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. 36I tell you the truth, all this will come upon this generation.
Matthew 23:33-36

And historically, what Jesus said really happened within 30 years - one generation, so to speak.

Also you have to baptized to enter heaven, if not you’ll stay in purgatory, also you have to truly repent of your sins, not only confess them or believe in god, you can’t commit suicide or you will spend eternity in hell, there also the 7 capital sins that according to the catholic church can be unforgivable, so conveniently for the religion is not that easy, well also all that rules were imposed by the church because we suppose to have only the 10 commandments from god.. I don’t really know where the rest comes from, I know them because they were taught to me when I was little.
The doctrine that you must be baptized to enter heaven is Roman Catholic, not Biblical; there are two forms of "purgatory" mentioned in the Bible, but none of the two are anything like the Roman Catholic idea of "purgatory"; and yes, you are right in saying that you have to truly repent of your sins, otherwise confession would be good for nothing other than juicy gossip for others; the suicide-condemnation also comes from Roman Catholicism, not the Bible; the only unforgivable sin as mentioned in the Bible is what Jesus referred to as "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit"; even the 10 commandments are supposed to be for the Jews alone, but we receive the two Great Commandments, namely "love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength" and "love your neighbor as yourself".
In fact, you can never find any such verse that says it is a sin to lie. Explains why many Biblical figures lie themselves.

the seven deadly sins are bullshit because it is impossible to commit them. that is why god gave them to us , he was reminding us that we aren't (to quote) "shit without him" because we cannot even follow 7 simple rules, it is the same thing with the ten commandments
and all the other rules were most likely added when the church had absolute control of things and decided to fuck with us
I think you meant that it is impossible not to commit any of the Seven Deadly Sins (as preached by the Roman Catholic church, NOT the Bible); well as created beings we are obviously not going to be perfect; no one has ever been perfect, and the beauty of it all is that God loves us just as we are because He was the one who made us that way.

[vgrippa]

How did Adam and Eve populate the world what they had three sons: Cain, Abel, and Seth? Well they technically only had two because Abel killed Cain because God told him to.

How did Noah solve problems like cleaning up animal waste and feeding all the animals on the ark?

Why is there enough religion in the world to incite war, but not enough to instill tolerance?

Does God really trust his followers if he continues to miss lead them and make then do acts to "test" their faith?

How come it is both a sin to have sex with men and a sin to have sex with children, yet catholic priests can do it without repercussions?

Ready...... GO!!!!

[Angelofdarkness]

@Maiorem: The emperor of Rome, Constantine, helped decide what gospels to include in the new testament. He did this because he knew the Paganism was on the decline and that Rome could not survive with dual faith. So he had all the books that didn't portray Jesus as "divine" thrown out, and only added those books which show Jesus' miracles. He wanted Rome to be united under Christianity. Constantine himself was pagan; however, only converting on his deathbed I believe.

There were numerous meetings between the heads of the catholic church to debate the official stand regarding many issues with Jesus (The first council of Nicea debated whether Jesus was of the same substance as God or just of a similar substance, for example) And many of these conclusions have stuck with the Catholic church to this day. Many conclusions have been revised by various Popes along the way. For example the Catholic church invented the idea of "purgatory" to put those souls who were unbaptized but otherwise innocent - like babies, and I'm not sure their official stand on purgatory at the moment but they have thought about throwing it away altogether.

Anyways there has been numerous revising and interpreting of the Bible and Jesus's word by a boatload of theologians. I think that's what Morgoth meant when he was speaking of the Bible being "regulated" by the Catholic Church. Although the Catholic church can't just go around and change the Bible since so many people have one, they can change interpretations and laws of the bible nonetheless.

[vgrippa]

Still doesn't explain the guaranteed incest that went on, that I believe is a sing. Some naughty boy had sex with mommy.

[SuburbanBuddha]

My 2 cents.

I don't believe in a personal god. I think that there is a power beyond us, but we cannot understand it.

Therefore, I believe that humans can do the greatest good on this world. I think that we need to look out for each other, and for earth. We need to appreciate our lives, and make a lasting impression for when we leave this life behind.

[Angelofdarkness]

Still doesn't explain the guaranteed incest that went on, that I believe is a sing. Some naughty boy had sex with mommy.

Anyways, I deleted that part of my post cus I went to look for sources because I was basing it off memory and I didn't want to misstate something about the Bible.

I looked and the sources say that Adam and Eve had other children other than Cain, Abel, and Seth. But they are the only three mentioned by name. We can assume if you follow Christianity, that incest does not apply to the first 2-10 or so generation of Humans (God made it so! He can do anything <_<). After that there is enough genetic diffusion that it would no longer be considered incest.

I'm no theologian, so I'm not really arguing either way. I was just pointing out that Adam and Eve had more than 3 children.

[vgrippa]

Yeah I assumed there were more seeing as how they populated the world, but it just seemed nasty that those were first.

[Maiorem]

How did Adam and Eve populate the world what they had three sons: Cain, Abel, and Seth? Well they technically only had two because Abel killed Cain because God told him to.
Those are not the only children that Adam and Eve had; Adam had up to a few centuries to live, so I'd expect he made the most out of that long period of time.
Furthermore, Cain killed Abel.

How did Noah solve problems like cleaning up animal waste and feeding all the animals on the ark?
Why did you think God ordered seven pairs (as opposed to the fairy tale version of a pair of each animal) of each animal? Do you think animals are that dependent on humans to feed them?

Why is there enough religion in the world to incite war, but not enough to instill tolerance?
This responsibility rests on Man, not religion.

Does God really trust his followers if he continues to miss lead them and make then do acts to "test" their faith?
God gave us free will for obvious reasons.

How come it is both a sin to have sex with men and a sin to have sex with children, yet catholic priests can do it without repercussions?
Because they think they can escape condemnation, but in the end times they will suffer more.

Ready...... GO!!!!
What?

@Maiorem: The emperor of Rome, Constantine, helped decide what gospels to include in the new testament. He did this because he knew the Paganism was on the decline and that Rome could not survive with dual faith. So he had all the books that didn't portray Jesus as "divine" thrown out, and only added those books which show Jesus' miracles. He wanted Rome to be united under Christianity. Constantine himself was pagan; however, only converting on his deathbed I believe.
I think you may have had too much influence from The Da Vinci Code; before the emperor of Rome, the Bible canon was already established. Constantine was never involved in the compilation of the Bible. In fact, the Gnostic gospels actually talk about Jesus as though he's God but not human at all, such as making clay birds come to life as a kid and killing his bullies and resurrecting them later. Now if Constantine really had any power at all in the compilation of the Bible he would not have included the passages which portrayed Rome in a bad light, and he would not have agreed to many parts of the Old Testament.
Regardless of Constantine, the Bible canon was already established a few hundred years before he even existed.

There were numerous meetings between the heads of the catholic church to debate the official stand regarding many issues with Jesus (The first council of Nicea debated whether Jesus was of the same substance as God or just of a similar substance, for example) And many of these conclusions have stuck with the Catholic church to this day. Many conclusions have been revised by various Popes along the way. For example the Catholic church invented the idea of "purgatory" to put those souls who were unbaptized but otherwise innocent - like babies, and I'm not sure their official stand on purgatory at the moment but they have thought about throwing it away altogether.
Before the Roman Catholic church even existed, there were the church fathers who know better than to create unbiblical doctrines such as "purgatory". The Roman Catholic church never existed until at least 300 years from Christ's death and resurrection.

Anyways there has been numerous revising and interpreting of the Bible and Jesus's word by a boatload of theologians. I think that's what Morgoth meant when he was speaking of the Bible being "regulated" by the Catholic Church. Although the Catholic church can't just go around and change the Bible since so many people have one, they can change interpretations and laws of the bible nonetheless.
NO.
The Catholic church has no power over all other Christians or their doctrine. The Hebrew Bible remains unchanged. And so is the Septuagint.

Still doesn't explain the guaranteed incest that went on, that I believe is a sing. Some naughty boy had sex with mommy.
Not mommy; sister.

My 2 cents.

I don't believe in a personal god. I think that there is a power beyond us, but we cannot understand it.
Then that power is not that powerful after all because that power you believe in is impersonal and therefore does not interact with its creation.

Therefore, I believe that humans can do the greatest good on this world. I think that we need to look out for each other, and for earth. We need to appreciate our lives, and make a lasting impression for when we leave this life behind.
By "good" on whose standards are you basing it on? Man's standards or God's standards?

Anyways, I deleted that part of my post cus I went to look for sources because I was basing it off memory and I didn't want to misstate something about the Bible.
Thank you for doing that, but at least please try more credible sources other than the Da Vinci Code for this discussion.

I looked and the sources say that Adam and Eve had other children other than Cain, Abel, and Seth. But they are the only three mentioned by name. We can assume if you follow Christianity, that incest does not apply to the first 2-10 or so generation of Humans (God made it so! He can do anything <_<). After that there is enough genetic diffusion that it would no longer be considered incest.
4 After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters.
Genesis 5:4
Bingo about genetic diffusion; in the beginning, human DNA is perfect enough that even genetic information exchange would not result in anything like disease and disabilities such as Downs Syndrome.

I'm no theologian, so I'm not really arguing either way. I was just pointing out that Adam and Eve had more than 3 children.
Thank you.

[Angelofdarkness]

lol, I don't base my discussion on The Da Vinci Code...Even if you don't agree with my points, don't try to attack me personally. That's Ad Hominem and it's a fallacy of logic.

I don't have time to go research the facts about the changing of the Bible's cannon, but the council of Nicea did indeed decide a lot of how to interpret the Bible/ Jesus's life, and Constantine was involved in that. I don't know if you accept Wikipedia as a source, but it's all I have time to provide at the moment:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_I
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea

Also there has been numerous ecumenical councils, during which the Bishops of the church decide the practices of church doctrine. This discussion is about "religion" and not really just "God" so the Catholic Church has power over Catholics, a vast portion of Christians, and therefore this discussion is germane to their practices as well as that of other Christians.
So, if you say they don't have power over ALL other Christians, it may very well be so. But that is not the focus of this discussion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecumenical_Council

[Morgoroth]

I love this thread unlike most religion discussion you are not fighting at all, in the end that’s what the world is needing the most tolerance and understanding, I bet we all are learning a lot that we didn't know and expanding our level of comprehension and erasing the bad concepts we had and bringing in new ones that make us better persons than we were.

I'm preparing a post with the 100 errors of the bible, I need time to translate them in the proper way so they are clear enough, so we can discus them and point out if the analysis of those errors are right or wrong.

I don’t exactly know when the bible was conformed and who did it but I certainly know that they decided which gospel was included and which wasn’t, for example the St. Thomas gospel.

I know that there are some gospel that belong to the Gnostics but there are others that I think they should be in the bible but they are not, but that’s just my opinion I’m not theologies ether, but I have talked to some theologies and what I have found is that even them can’t get to a unified conclusion.

In the end it feels like humankind are a bunch of frogs trying to understand the ocean.

[Maiorem]

lol, I don't base my discussion on The Da Vinci Code...Even if you don't agree with my points, don't try to attack me personally. That's Ad Hominem and it's a fallacy of logic.
Sorry if I may seem to be doing personal attacks; I never intended to. Perhaps it is because of my method of replying setence-by-sentence, but that's just my method.

I don't have time to go research the facts about the changing of the Bible's cannon, but the council of Nicea did indeed decide a lot of how to interpret the Bible/ Jesus's life, and Constantine was involved in that. I don't know if you accept Wikipedia as a source, but it's all I have time to provide at the moment:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_I
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea
The Council of Nicaea did indeed discuss about Jesus, but their discussion is not concerning Jesus' divinity; that they already agreed upon. The Council was formed to determine if Jesus was fully divine or half-divine since heresy of Jesus being inhuman began spreading around.

Also there has been numerous ecumenical councils, during which the Bishops of the church decide the practices of church doctrine. This discussion is about "religion" and not really just "God" so the Catholic Church has power over Catholics, a vast portion of Christians, and therefore this discussion is germane to their practices as well as that of other Christians.
So, if you say they don't have power over ALL other Christians, it may very well be so. But that is not the focus of this discussion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecumenical_Council
The Catholic Church only has power over Catholics and no other denomination of Christianity. Furthermore, the Ecumenical Councils are all related to Roman Catholicism but not Christianity as found in the Bible.

I love this thread unlike most religion discussion you are not fighting at all, in the end that’s what the world is needing the most tolerance and understanding, I bet we all are learning a lot that we didn't know and expanding our level of comprehension and erasing the bad concepts we had and bringing in new ones that make us better persons than we were.
Yes, and thank you for this.

I'm preparing a post with the 100 errors of the bible, I need time to translate them in the proper way so they are clear enough, so we can discus them and point out if the analysis of those errors are right or wrong.
Not to boast, but I've actually answered the "100 errors of the Bible" questions before, and also others like the "Why Won't God Heal Amputees" 10 questions; perhaps you have a different set of 100 questions, so let us see what went wrong.

I don’t exactly know when the bible was conformed and who did it but I certainly know that they decided which gospel was included and which wasn’t, for example the St. Thomas gospel.
These "Gospels" are the ones dated more than a century after Christ's death; it's no wonder that they are not considered to be authentic. An interesting point about the Gospel according to Thomas is that it talks about Jesus making Mary a male so that she may become a living spirit resembling males, "For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven" (as quoted from the Gospel of Thomas).
Other things to note is that many words in it run counter to what Jesus said in the other four canonical Gospels.

I know that there are some gospel that belong to the Gnostics but there are others that I think they should be in the bible but they are not, but that’s just my opinion I’m not theologies ether, but I have talked to some theologies and what I have found is that even them can’t get to a unified conclusion.
The problem is we have two kinds of theologians: secular theologians and liberal theologians. While the liberal theologian claims to be "accepting everything with an open mind", one cannot but feel that they are not as "liberal" as though out to be, but rather, they accept things that go along with their own agenda; though secular theologians have been viewed as "close-minded", they have their reasons for being such, since they are obliged to follow only one view, and that would prevent them from corrupting understanding with their own views.

In the end it feels like humankind are a bunch of frogs trying to understand the ocean.
Yeah, and even we as humans have never been able to understand even half of the whole earth, let alone the universe. If there is no God, then there is certainly chaos, and the resultant is that no one can ever understand anything since there is no set order.
When I first heard of the probability of this earth forming at the beginning of the universe, right down to all the perfect settings and details such as atmosphere and pressure, though I wasn't Christian at the time I truly bowed down at the magnificence of the earth's amazing structure, and now I give thanks to the Creator who has determined everything accordingly.

[SuburbanBuddha]

Then that power is not that powerful after all because that power you believe in is impersonal and therefore does not interact with its creation.

I never made a claim of how powerful it is. I believe that it's there, but I can't know that, and I certainly can't know anything else about it if it does exist.


By "good" on whose standards are you basing it on? Man's standards or God's standards?


The standards of men, of course. I don't believe god has standards.

[Angelofdarkness]

@Maiorem About your point regarding "Catholic church only has power over Catholics".

Certainly the modern Catholic church only has power over its followers. However, you have to remember that back when the council of Nicea convened at around 300A.D. there weren't that many other churches. Rome was still killing followers of Christ as heretics, and it wasn't until Constantine that this stopped. So before then there was no "official church".

When Constantine converted Rome to Christianity he, along with others I would assume (tho I don't know the exact facts), established the Roman Catholic Church, and along with the church, its own set of dogma. The eastern Orthodox, split off, from this church, and other churches split off from it as well (a notable one being the one King Henry IV or something created so that he could divorce his wife). So all churches have their origins somewhere within this Roman Catholic Church. So many of the doctrines are derivatives of such. Even when Martin Luther started the Reformation, he still kept many of the doctrines of the Church. He made a lot of modifications of course, but he was influenced by the Church. (One modification being that priests should be able to procreate, and not be forced into celibacy).

So, although the catholic church has power over only its adherents, the dogma and doctrines decided upon by the Council of Nicea and other ecumenical councils of the time (although modified over time, some deleted, some added) have remained in the doctrines of most denominations of Christians.

So you can say that the Bible has been interpreted and reinterpreted NUMEROUS times by many dozens of Theologians.

[Morgoroth]

When I first heard of the probability of this earth forming at the beginning of the universe, right down to all the perfect settings and details such as atmosphere and pressure, though I wasn't Christian at the time I truly bowed down at the magnificence of the earth's amazing structure, and now I give thanks to the Creator who has determined everything accordingly.


Well, personally I'm evolutionist and creationalist at the same time, the key to this is not to take the bible too literally.
For god being a supreme being, time is meaningless so he could have made the universe as the scientist propose, and I know, Why make the genesis the way it is?, for that I would like to put a fragment of a writing of Isaac Asimov which it seems I can't find, if somebody has it I would thank if he/she could write it down and share it with the rest.

I'm going to write it in very general way as I remember it so you can have an idea of what I'm talking about.


15,000 million years ago, there was this big explosion, after which the stars and galaxies.....
-strange voice: No, don't put it that way, it sound to boring and most of them won't understand all that complicated language, besides is going to be too long to read...
-old man's voice: hmmm you right, let me start again

65 millions years ago, after the dinosaurs were extinct, and the earth was free for the mammals to evolve...

-strange voice: No, no, no, you are doing it again.. it sound way too boring, most of them won't read it and is still way too long to read
-old man's voice: yes, yes, you right, let me star again

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

-strange voice: good, that’s more like the thing everyone would want to read, short and not too complicated, good job Moses.

-old ma's voice: Thanks god, but I wouldn't have done it without your help and inspiration.

[dyne]

I think a lot of people misuse Religion and give it its bad rep. The purpose of religion, imo, is to spread the word. Basically to tell people about it so that they may see your "truth".


Umm, Since the beginning of time religion has been used to conquer. It's been used as an excuse to massacre millions. It has never been to spread word it's been used to spread fear to join or been killed. In the history of mankind more people have died from religious conflicts than anything else.

The fact that some much of the bible has been changed and re written over time its hard to say that even a person named Jesus existed. As it's been stated before there has never been any evidence of someone of the name of Jesus Christ as we know it from the bible.

[Angelofdarkness]

Will you tally up the number of people who have died from religious conflicts for me please? I'd like to see if it's really >72million from WWII. Which was caused by an overly ambitious Hitler, Naziism (not a religion btw), racial hate (against Jew by Hitler, and Chinese by the Japs), overly ambitious Japan (To take over China), overly ambitious Mussolini, etc.

Also those who kill in the name of Religion are merely manipulating it, and their citizens.

Religion is not Evil.
Some humans with power are.

It's like that saying "Guns don't kill people, people kill people".

Also, Yes sometime people DO just go out and preach. The disciples of Buddha for example (The sagha), they just went around, begged for food, and preached the Dharma. So I wouldn't say it's NEVER been used to spread the word...

[unknown T]

i agree with dyne. the ethnocentric, self important qualities of religion have been used to justify just about anything, from 9/11 to murdering native Americans.

by the way dyne his name wasn't jesus Christ we gave him that name originally he was jesus of Nazareth then we gave him the name christ

and yes angel religions like Christianity preach that it is the only right solution and that all others were sin and that their followers would burn in hell. while it is far fetched to say that the meaning is to kill them but it is in fact feasible
plus ww2 is only one of the long ongoing battles of religion, the protestant-catholic situation in england, the china-Tibet, and indian (hindu/muslum) are very large others

[Angelofdarkness]

Christ just means "The Anointed one". So, it's like a title. (Like Pope)

I think some people are making the logical fallacy of Misleading Vividness. A lot of Religious horrors are really bad, so they stick in people's mind. And although Religious killings may not be the worst cause of death for humanity, people tend to think so.

More on the fallacy here:
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/misleading-vividness.html

[unknown T]

is is in fact one of them (besides disease), all the conflicts i have listed have individually produced tens of thousands to millions of deaths

[Angelofdarkness]

How was WW2 a product of Religion? China and Tibet? wtf? That didn't happen in WW2.

Also China and Tibet is NOT a religious quarrel. It's whether or not Tibet is independent or not. It just so happens that the Dalai Lama's position is that Tibet is INDEPENDENT. So he was exiled from China. He wasn't exiled because he was Buddhist, but because of his political views. Also the Chinese government is ATHEIST. They do not promote ANY religion. Up until recently, (Since 1949-1980s or so)they didn't even allow religion in China. And what do you know? CHINA, being atheist, STILL killed thousands, if not millions during the cultural revolution (and if you count The great leap forward, it's definitely in the millions). People with power will tend to kill people who threaten their power. It doesn't matter if they are religious or not.

JUST BECAUSE some people in the disputes are religious, DOES NOT make the dispute a religious one. Would you call the U.S. revolutionary war a religious one? Both sides were heavily Christian.

[unknown T]

How was WW2 a product of Religion? China and Tibet? wtf? That didn't happen in WW2.



JUST BECAUSE some people in the disputes are religious, DOES NOT make the dispute a religious one.


Would you call the U.S. revolutionary war a religious one? Both sides were heavily Christian.

1 ww2 was a genocide against mainly Jews and some Christians. both sides do not have to be religious for it to be a religious battle

2. that is a valid point. except in the case of Tibet and ww2, the aggressors were both con religion (or at least the religion they were fighting against) and the attacked ones were religious. while in the Tibet case there are other reasons for the fight as well. ww2 was just a want to exterminate all people that were not like themselves. which is what the Americans (Christians) did against the "heathen" Indians. and it was mainly against the jews so it was a "religious" battle. not fought for religious purposses but to destroy the religion

3 no the cause of the battle was moral (over the debate of slave freedom) however was not religious (in my opinion) you could argue both ways. and you said yourself. it is not a religious battle if the two religions are not different in some way

[Angelofdarkness]

Hitler killed the JEWS as a race. Not as a religion. He didn't say "THE JEWISH RELIGION MUST DIE" he said "THE JEWS ARE TO BLAME FOR ALL THAT'S WRONG WITH GERMANY, THEY MUST DIE."

China wants Tibet to not be sovereign. That's the conflict.

Either way, if you see it as an attack on religion then fine. But know that Hitler was not fighting for religion. AT MOST, even if you call his acts of genocide as against a religion not a race, he was fighting against it. How can you blame it on religion?
China is NON-religious. How can you blame that one on religion?

Also, the genocide during WW2 was horrible. But it killed 8 million people. Why were the other 66 million killed for? They were killed so that Germany and Japan could take over the world. There is no religion in the invasion of Poland that started ww2. There is no religion in the mass killings of 30million Chinese when Japan invaded manchuria and raped/killed everyone.

HOW in the WORLD can you blame WW2 on religion?

I think that you guys think I'm defending religion when in fact I am not. I think that religion can be used for bad. That's true. However, I'm merely arguing that it's the PEOPLE who are evil and not the institution itself. I'm saying HUMANS have committed some of the most heinous shit out there. And HUMANS should man up and take the blame, and not blame it on something else like religion.

None of that "oh if only religion didn't exist then we'd all be peaceful and happy and live harmoniously"

BULL SHIT. Even if there wasn't religion, people would still be killing, raping, pillaging, all the same.

[unknown T]

i am not for religion either. i guess we have to agree to disagree on the matter above huh?

[GregHouse]

Judaism is a religion, Hitler hated jews, Hitler killed over 6 million jews. Just because he blurred the lines between race and religion, does not mean that the second world war had nothing to do with religion. There is no "race" called the jews, they are a religion. Hitler wasn't fighting "for" a religion, but the deaths were a result of his hatred for the jews.

Obviously religion is not to blame for WWII, But you cannot deny that People died because of their religion. WWII is not the only instance of mass death due to religion either. The Crusades were a series of wars based on religion, where many people died.

Sorry to jump in to the convo. To tell you the truth I'm not even quite sure exactly what the topic is...just my thoughts though...:amused:

[Maiorem]

I never made a claim of how powerful it is. I believe that it's there, but I can't know that, and I certainly can't know anything else about it if it does exist.



The standards of men, of course. I don't believe god has standards.
There's the problem: you can only know God if and when He comes and tells us about Himself, and even then we can only know the things He tells us. Well believe it or not, as I myself believe, God spoke talked to people, and that conversation was recorded in the Bible. I don't think we can ever worship an unknown god, can we? Speculating his existence? Hm...

The next question would be: where do man's standards come from?

@Maiorem About your point regarding "Catholic church only has power over Catholics".

Certainly the modern Catholic church only has power over its followers. However, you have to remember that back when the council of Nicea convened at around 300A.D. there weren't that many other churches. Rome was still killing followers of Christ as heretics, and it wasn't until Constantine that this stopped. So before then there was no "official church".
Nevertheless Christianity spread before then, and wasn't only confined to the regions of the Roman Empire due to the Great Comission.

When Constantine converted Rome to Christianity he, along with others I would assume (tho I don't know the exact facts), established the Roman Catholic Church, and along with the church, its own set of dogma. The eastern Orthodox, split off, from this church, and other churches split off from it as well (a notable one being the one King Henry IV or something created so that he could divorce his wife). So all churches have their origins somewhere within this Roman Catholic Church. So many of the doctrines are derivatives of such. Even when Martin Luther started the Reformation, he still kept many of the doctrines of the Church. He made a lot of modifications of course, but he was influenced by the Church. (One modification being that priests should be able to procreate, and not be forced into celibacy).
The Eastern Orthodox was separate from the Roman Catholic church and was never joined with it. The first to split from the Roman Catholic church is the Anglican church, headed by King Henry VIII (due to the fact that he wanted to divorce his current wife and remarry another, something which the Roman Catholic church does not allow). Not all churches have their origins in the Roman Catholic church, as the Roman Catholics try to assert. Of course, there are some doctrines of the Roman Catholic church that are retained, but they are only the Scriptural doctrines, as Martin Luther began the "Sola Scriptura" movement, which determines that all must come from Scripture or be rejected. In the early churches way before Roman Catholicism, priests were already allowed to marry and procreate, and there was no such thing as "Pope".

So, although the catholic church has power over only its adherents, the dogma and doctrines decided upon by the Council of Nicea and other ecumenical councils of the time (although modified over time, some deleted, some added) have remained in the doctrines of most denominations of Christians.
Only if they are Scriptural, mind you, and they are not really originally of Roman Catholic origin as the doctrines retained by Protestants are completely Scriptural (though the same can't be said of the Anglican church since they're pre-Luther).

So you can say that the Bible has been interpreted and reinterpreted NUMEROUS times by many dozens of Theologians.
Actually, before the time of Martin Luther only handwritten copies of the Bible exist due to the lack of a printing device, which was invented by Gutenberg much later. The only people who can afford a Bible at those times are the leaders of the church, so there really isn't an option for "theologians" to want to interpret. When Martin Luther read the Bible for himself, he finally realized that the Roman Catholic church has not been completely Biblical, and thus he issued the challenges.

Well, personally I'm evolutionist and creationalist at the same time, the key to this is not to take the bible too literally.
For god being a supreme being, time is meaningless so he could have made the universe as the scientist propose, and I know, Why make the genesis the way it is?, for that I would like to put a fragment of a writing of Isaac Asimov which it seems I can't find, if somebody has it I would thank if he/she could write it down and share it with the rest.
Or else God could have made one day last for as long as billions of years, but logically, let's say God made a tree suddenly appear, would its tree rings show the growth rate of a few hundred years or no tree rings at all? Alternatively, there's also the allegorical interpretation.

I'm going to write it in very general way as I remember it so you can have an idea of what I'm talking about.


15,000 million years ago, there was this big explosion, after which the stars and galaxies.....
-strange voice: No, don't put it that way, it sound to boring and most of them won't understand all that complicated language, besides is going to be too long to read...
-old man's voice: hmmm you right, let me start again

65 millions years ago, after the dinosaurs were extinct, and the earth was free for the mammals to evolve...

-strange voice: No, no, no, you are doing it again.. it sound way too boring, most of them won't read it and is still way too long to read
-old man's voice: yes, yes, you right, let me star again

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

-strange voice: good, that’s more like the thing everyone would want to read, short and not too complicated, good job Moses.

-old ma's voice: Thanks god, but I wouldn't have done it without your help and inspiration.
Well you wouldn't expect to find the word 'dinosaur' in the Bible because it didn't appear even during Shakespeare's time, so logically what we call "dinosaurs" today are known otherwise in the Bible and even during interpretation of the Bible into English. Take, for example, God's description of the "Behemoth" and "Leviathan". Instead of thinking of them as mythical creatures, we can also imagine them as some sort of dinosaur described in those terms. So perhaps even dinosaurs lived during Job's lifetime.

@Others
Has anyone considered the fact that there are Jewish Christians, Jewish Buddhists, Jewish whatevers? Being a Jew is like being American or Indian or Chinese, and Hitler's war against Jews is like the White Supremacists' hatred against blacks. Hitler is suffering from xenophobia.

No matter if the war was started by a religious individual for supposedly "religious" reasons, if that war was never called for by their respective scriptures, then it is an act of the misinformed individual, not the religion. Like Bush's crusade against terrorists, you couldn't quite say that he did it because God told him to wage the bloody war against the Iraqis because as you can see for yourselves it's the American public that's calling for it, be they Christian or non-Christian. There are many Christian groups that are actually against Bush's actions.

[Angelofdarkness]

The Jews are the descendants of the Hebrew people. And although, their religion and their ethnicity are strongly related, they are still a people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jew

I'm not saying religion had NOTHING to do with WW2.

But what I'm saying is:
1) You can't blame WW2's genocide on religion. Hitler needed a people to focus his troops on, and he chose the Jews. Religion was not goading Hitler to start a genocide.
2) Even if you count the 8 million who died during the Genocide as religious killings, WW2 produced another 66million casualties which you can't attribute to religion.
3)People would STILL kill people even if religion didn't exist. People would still start wars, and most likely the same number of people will die. Just for a different "made up" reason. Because in the end, it's about power.

[Violat3r]

...Because in the end, it's about power.

"My Penis is bigger than YOURS!!!"......

[SuburbanBuddha]

There's the problem: you can only know God if and when He comes and tells us about Himself, and even then we can only know the things He tells us. Well believe it or not, as I myself believe, God spoke talked to people, and that conversation was recorded in the Bible. I don't think we can ever worship an unknown god, can we? Speculating his existence? Hm...

The next question would be: where do man's standards come from?



Are you trying to misconstrue something I'm saying? OF COURSE I don't worship an unknown god. I made a passive statement. Do not try to interpret it as anything more.

Oh, and I know the line of thinking you're trying to take me down, and it doesn't work. I was in christian school for 12 years, and I know that tactic well. You're trying to build up a straw man, to make it look like men can't have morality without god.

Man's standards come from themselves. The flaw in your argument is that you just assume that they can't. Well what if they just do?

[Maiorem]

Are you trying to misconstrue something I'm saying? OF COURSE I don't worship an unknown god. I made a passive statement. Do not try to interpret it as anything more.
Passive statements speak more than what you want them to.

Oh, and I know the line of thinking you're trying to take me down, and it doesn't work. I was in christian school for 12 years, and I know that tactic well. You're trying to build up a straw man, to make it look like men can't have morality without god.
I'm not trying to take you down. I'm only speaking what makes more sense.
Being in a "Christian school" doesn't do anything due to the "separation of church and state" policy unless you're not from the US, and even then, it does nothing because I was enrolled into a Chinese school for six years, of which the majority of the teachers are practicing Buddhists, and a further 5 years in a school where we are forced to study Islamic history as an actual examination subject. Adding to that, I come from a family of Buddhists and atheists, and the only person in my family who is a Christian is my aunt, who I honestly did not favor.
Can you honestly tell me that you know 100% that all morality comes from man alone?

Man's standards come from themselves. The flaw in your argument is that you just assume that they can't. Well what if they just do?
Can you explain how they just "came to be"?

[SuburbanBuddha]

Can you honestly tell me that you know 100% that all morality comes from man alone?


Can you explain how they just "came to be"?

mo·ral·i·ty - conformity to the rules of right conduct; moral or virtuous conduct.

This is a simple argument, but also one that I know you'll somehow try to counter.

Morality is different in different cultures. That is a fact. Period. Your head is in your ass if you don't see that.

Recently, in sudan, there was a massive riot, because a schoolteacher named a teddy bear "Mohammed". They called for the death penalty. These people were convinced that what she did was worthy of death.

Source: http://www.shoutwire.com/viewstory/118510/Fanaticism_at_It_s_Worst

In America, that would not happen. There's your answer. But if you want me to go any further, I can give you more examples of of culture specific morality.

They still stone women to death in some middle eastern countries for adultery. We clearly do not do that here. In russia, killing the bourgeois was acceptable in order to advance the proletariat. That did not happen in america, because we had different Ideas about what was right and wrong. The fact that different cultures have different laws PROVES that orality comes from man.

It's black and white, really. If your god gave men one universal morality, then some people clearly did not get the memo.

[Violat3r]

...Being in a "Christian school" doesn't do anything due to the "separation of church and state" policy unless you're not from the US...

Not being rude or anything, but just saying that the "Separation of Church and State" applies only to public venues and such. Christian schools here are "Private" schools and are therefore able to bypass that law, as long as they teach the required curriculum provided by the state. I have a christian school that my uncle went to many years ago that is owned and operated by the church that is located right next door. And they have a "prayer time" and talk about God and such, because as a private school they have that right. So "Separation of Church and State" doesnt mean shit to them.

[Morgoroth]

Or else God could have made one day last for as long as billions of years, but logically, let's say God made a tree suddenly appear, would its tree rings show the growth rate of a few hundred years or no tree rings at all? Alternatively, there's also the allegorical interpretation.

Let me answer that rephrasing a famous phrase: Don't tell god what to do with his tree rings.... original: "Don't tell god what to do with his dices"


Well you wouldn't expect to find the word 'dinosaur' in the Bible because it didn't appear even during Shakespeare's time, so logically what we call "dinosaurs" today are known otherwise in the Bible and even during interpretation of the Bible into English. Take, for example, God's description of the "Behemoth" and "Leviathan". Instead of thinking of them as mythical creatures, we can also imagine them as some sort of dinosaur described in those terms. So perhaps even dinosaurs lived during Job's lifetime.


and that's my point, being a supreme being, for him/her/it time is meaningless, he could have made the design of the universe to work as the scientist think it works, the tale I wrote was to exemplify how god could have transmitted the message, think about it like this and I will use some lines from a movie that explain in my point of view: " a person is intelligent, but the mass is dumb..... 1000 years ago everybody knew that the earth was the center of the universe, 500 years ago everybody knew that the earth was flat, today you learned that we are not alone in the universe, imagine what you would know tomorrow"






............ Like Bush's crusade against terrorists, you couldn't quite say that he did it because God told him to wage the bloody war against the Iraqis......

I will answer that with this:
http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/1808/godspeakstobushsc5.jpg

:rotfllmao: :rotfllmao: :rotfllmao: :rotfllmao: :rotfllmao: :rotfllmao:

@SuburbanBuddha and Maiorem: Theologically speaking, the statement that Maioren gave about that you can only know god if he/she/it speaks to you and only you can know what he/she/it tell you, is applicable for all humankind gods, not only the Christian god, think about it this way, look at the Jews, Muslims and Christians, can you say that all 3 have the same morals?, knowing that all 3 have the same god?

Morals depends on culture, religion costumes depends on culture, the conception about a particular god depends on culture.

an example of this is the conception of hell for different cultures: for some of them hell is an eternal flame place, for others is an eternal winter place, for some there are several hells, even between Christian you can find different conception of Christ and god. for some Christians Jesus was a blonde guy with blue eyes or god is a white bearded old man, are you even sure that god is a man? and an old man? how can he be an old man if he is eternal? so everything depends on culture.

[SuburbanBuddha]

@SuburbanBuddha and Maiorem: Theologically speaking, the statement that Maioren gave about that you can only know god if he/she/it speaks to you and only you can know what he/she/it tell you, is applicable for all humankind gods, not only the Christian god, think about it this way, look at the Jews, Muslims and Christians, can you say that all 3 have the same morals?, knowing that all 3 have the same god?

Morals depends on culture, religion costumes depends on culture, the conception about a particular god depends on culture.

an example of this is the conception of hell for different cultures: for some of them hell is an eternal flame place, for others is an eternal winter place, for some there are several hells, even between Christian you can find different conception of Christ and god. for some Christians Jesus was a blonde guy with blue eyes or god is a white bearded old man, are you even sure that god is a man? and an old man? how can he be an old man if he is eternal? so everything depends of culture.

I don't disagree with any of that. I have believed what you just said for a long time. I just don't think of it in terms of religion anymore, to me, either of those three religions are no more plausible than believing in Zeus or Ra. It's all just archaic beliefs, that will be gone someday. These stupid little semantical arguments about god are irrelevant. "Is god old? DUR DUR DUR" I think that we can now base morality on our humanity, instead of a god.


For all practical purposes, I'm like an atheist.
I prefer not to define myself within the context of theism, but If I have to, I say I'm a deist. I only believe that humans are overwhelmingly good, and that we need to make this life the best that we can.

[justZan]

"My Penis is bigger than YOURS!!!"......

so i was just browsing, and i saw this post. maade me laugh again. hahaha.

and the whole debate with religion is interesting, people here uses big words to argue but after all of this exchange of opinions...

"you believe what you want", everything is a cause and effect from the choices you make.

and just cause i wanna sound smart let me quote jean paul sartre

"man is nothing else but what he makes of himself".

[Morgoroth]

Don't get us wrong most of us are not defending religion in fact must of us are not religious person, we are discussing religion, that’s why is called THE RELIGION DISCUS THREAD, I particularly agree with you, not entirely, because I have seem some things that can't be explained nor trough science or religion (or at least not by Catholic religion)

[justZan]

Don't get us wrong most of us are not defending religion in fact must of us are not religious person, we are discussing religion, that’s why is called THE RELIGION DISCUS THREAD, I particularly agree with you, not entirely, because I have seem some things that can't be explained nor trough science or religion (or at least not by Catholic religion)


i dont mean to point my opinion in any of you, i understand the discussion is about religion, and i think its great to have something as open as that, it just annoys me when people talk big, use big words to sound smart, and start pointing their opinions against another person, its just damn funny how geeks argue through keyboard. just saying, stop acting cool or tough infront of a computer.

but to all who argues and replies with sincere thoughts about the subject, all i can say is goodpoint and keep it up. =)

[Maiorem]

mo·ral·i·ty - conformity to the rules of right conduct; moral or virtuous conduct.
Why use a dictionary when we have a public understanding of it already? This definition of morality is not the one we're discussing here. The definition you just gave is quite redundant as it says "conformity to the rules of right conduct; moral or virtuous conduct".

This is a simple argument, but also one that I know you'll somehow try to counter.
It's not that I want to counter simple arguments, but that I want to make a discussion a serious discussion instead of just some "show and tell" by everyone and discussions by no one.

Morality is different in different cultures. That is a fact. Period. Your head is in your ass if you don't see that.
Why do you get so angry with me so fast? I'm not talking about culture, but the innate morality that subconsciously tells us something just ain't right with certain things. Also, I don't have a donkey to begin with, sorry.

Recently, in sudan, there was a massive riot, because a schoolteacher named a teddy bear "Mohammed". They called for the death penalty. These people were convinced that what she did was worthy of death.

Source: http://www.shoutwire.com/viewstory/118510/Fanaticism_at_It_s_Worst
That's not the morality that we're discussing either.

In America, that would not happen. There's your answer. But if you want me to go any further, I can give you more examples of of culture specific morality.
I'm not demanding cultural morality; I'm asking for the fact that there is capability in all of us to understand morality even where we have not been exposed to morality in the first place.

They still stone women to death in some middle eastern countries for adultery. We clearly do not do that here. In russia, killing the bourgeois was acceptable in order to advance the proletariat. That did not happen in america, because we had different Ideas about what was right and wrong. The fact that different cultures have different laws PROVES that orality comes from man.
Have you ever considered that the specific morality formed the culture instead of vice versa?

It's black and white, really. If your god gave men one universal morality, then some people clearly did not get the memo.
And that's the big problem we have with people, don't we.

Not being rude or anything, but just saying that the "Separation of Church and State" applies only to public venues and such. Christian schools here are "Private" schools and are therefore able to bypass that law, as long as they teach the required curriculum provided by the state. I have a christian school that my uncle went to many years ago that is owned and operated by the church that is located right next door. And they have a "prayer time" and talk about God and such, because as a private school they have that right. So "Separation of Church and State" doesnt mean shit to them.
Thanks for the info; never knew about that, but I doubt non-Christian parents actually send their children to private Christian institutions anyway.

Let me answer that rephrasing a famous phrase: Don't tell god what to do with his tree rings.... original: "Don't tell god what to do with his dices"
Nice.

and that's my point, being a supreme being, for him/her/it time is meaningless, he could have made the design of the universe to work as the scientist think it works, the tale I wrote was to exemplify how god could have transmitted the message, think about it like this and I will use some lines from a movie that explain in my point of view: " a person is intelligent, but the mass is dumb..... 1000 years ago everybody knew that the earth was the center of the universe, 500 years ago everybody knew that the earth was flat, today you learned that we are not alone in the universe, imagine what you would know tomorrow"
From what he have learned today, the earth alone has extremely specific settings, all of which, if tweaked a little here and there, would result in the earth never forming or habitable.
http:www.cosmicfingerprints.com is a good website operated by Perry Marshall in the discussion of the proof of the existence of God.

I will answer that with this:
http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/1808/godspeakstobushsc5.jpg

:rotfllmao: :rotfllmao: :rotfllmao: :rotfllmao: :rotfllmao: :rotfllmao:
Classic, LOL

@SuburbanBuddha and Maiorem: Theologically speaking, the statement that Maioren gave about that you can only know god if he/she/it speaks to you and only you can know what he/she/it tell you, is applicable for all humankind gods, not only the Christian god, think about it this way, look at the Jews, Muslims and Christians, can you say that all 3 have the same morals?, knowing that all 3 have the same god?
Judaism and Christianity share the same God, but apparently Muslims believe that somehow the Bible got corrupted way before Jesus was even born, Muhammad got "the right stuff" from the angel Gabriel, and that Allah has to correct and abrogate Himself often. So I have to disagree that the Muslims actually worship the same God.

Morals depends on culture, religion costumes depends on culture, the conception about a particular god depends on culture.
Then again, morality is a different issue.

an example of this is the conception of hell for different cultures: for some of them hell is an eternal flame place, for others is an eternal winter place, for some there are several hells, even between Christian you can find different conception of Christ and god. for some Christians Jesus was a blonde guy with blue eyes or god is a white bearded old man, are you even sure that god is a man? and an old man? how can he be an old man if he is eternal? so everything depends on culture.
That is why, when religion is not intertwined by culture and man, it is pure.

I don't disagree with any of that. I have believed what you just said for a long time. I just don't think of it in terms of religion anymore, to me, either of those three religions are no more plausible than believing in Zeus or Ra. It's all just archaic beliefs, that will be gone someday. These stupid little semantical arguments about god are irrelevant. "Is god old? DUR DUR DUR" I think that we can now base morality on our humanity, instead of a god.
The difference between the Abrahamic religions and the Greek and Egyptian religions is that we believe in a Supreme Being that is Omnipotent, Omnipresent, and Omniscient, whereas the multitude of gods in Greek and Egyptian mythology are literally killing each other.

For all practical purposes, I'm like an atheist.
I prefer not to define myself within the context of theism, but If I have to, I say I'm a deist. I only believe that humans are overwhelmingly good, and that we need to make this life the best that we can.
And the inevitable question is: who defined "good" in the first place?

@justZan:
Sometimes, using "big words" is inevitable.

[justZan]

@justZan:
Sometimes, using "big words" is inevitable.

not really, like what i said, everything is a choice, i guess im just a humble person. lol.

anyways, have fun with the debate.

[BalrogLord]

Judaism and Christianity share the same God, but apparently Muslims believe that somehow the Bible got corrupted way before Jesus was even born, Muhammad got "the right stuff" from the angel Gabriel, and that Allah has to correct and abrogate Himself often. So I have to disagree that the Muslims actually worship the same God.

The difference between the Abrahamic religions and the Greek and Egyptian religions is that we believe in a Supreme Being that is Omnipotent, Omnipresent, and Omniscient, whereas the multitude of gods in Greek and Egyptian mythology are literally killing each other.


And the inevitable question is: who defined "good" in the first place?

@justZan:
Sometimes, using "big words" is inevitable.

muslims believe the bible was corrupted over the years, waht tehy refer to the bible being corrupt before jesus is the OLD testament not the new. its not the fact that allah has to correct himslef, merely that the orginal message was lost. thats not to far from the truth seing as how the old testament was written in hebrew yet was translated into latin in the bible.

also its called monotheism and polytheism.

[unknown T]

so they are basically jews with some new customs huh

[Maiorem]

muslims believe the bible was corrupted over the years, waht tehy refer to the bible being corrupt before jesus is the OLD testament not the new. its not the fact that allah has to correct himslef, merely that the orginal message was lost. thats not to far from the truth seing as how the old testament was written in hebrew yet was translated into latin in the bible.

also its called monotheism and polytheism.

Actually the part about Allah correcting Himself is found in the Qur'an itself; where Allah causes Muhammad to reveal certain verses He mentioned a few moments earlier, He supposedly reveals a "better, clearer verse" almost as often as IE patches.

The Old Testament was first translated into Greek between the 3rd and 1st century BC, and the Greek manuscript is known as the Septuagint; the Latin Vulgate did not appear until around the 5th century AD. The original Hebrew remains anyway regardless of translation, so comparisons can be made. Any claim made by the Muslims concerning Biblical corruption is unsubstantiated.
Additionally, the New Testament is in Aramaic, not Hebrew for the reason that the people in that time period speak Aramaic instead of Hebrew.

And yes, apart from the apparent lack of divinity among the Greek and Egyptian gods, the other difference between the Abrahamic faiths and Greek and Egyptian mythology is monotheism vs. polytheism. Thank you.

[once_and_again]

I would have give him an A+... I love this guy’s analogy about hell....



Well, religion in its pure form should be the one given by god itself, which is supposed to be the case of the Koran that is the base of the Islam... which has given a lot of mad suicidal bombers.... in my way to see thing religion get corrupted as soon as is touched by a man that doesn’t have the capacity to understand god, which is true in almost all the cases



read previous paragraph





I agree with you, but I think that religion has caused death for the most stupid reason, example the Salem’s witch burning.... or any witch burning in history.... all the book burnings during inquisition, they also killed people that kept printing those books, Galileo , well he wasn't killed but they were close, the thousand Jews that were killed by inquisition only because the didn’t want to convert to Christians.... and I can go on and on giving you stupid deaths that shouldn’t have happened because of religion (note that I was only giving Christian religion causes but the other religion have their faults too)



according to catholic church Jesus is god, because god have 3 forms the father, the son (Jesus) and the holly ghost, this is called the holly trinity, according to most north American Christians Jesus is god, that’s what makes Jesus so special to Christianity in general

to answer your second question.... I will make you and other question

Are we all clones of god?

I'm using King's James since is the most familiar to native English speaking persons
Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
http://bible.cc/genesis/1-27.htm

Of course all of this is only my point of view, because nobody holds the absolute truth, except for god (the question is, which of all the gods that humand kind have?), and that is the only certain truth I know (and even I doubt that is a certain truth)

The scope of this thread is amazing. You probably are aware of it by now, but threads like these end up existing solely for the sake of propagating one's opinion; you never almost never "win" a debate like this, especially with so many uneducated people throwing in their 2 cents.

/begin_mini_rant

First and foremost, I want everyone who reads this post to understand something: it is not religion that is imperfect, it is humanity itself. When you say this or that about a belief, it is according to a) limited understanding, b) limited knowledge, c) almost inherent bias, d) cultural indoctrination further pre-supposing one to bias, e) ignorance, and f) speculation.


You may be able to find apparent logical inconsistencies within a religion or system of beliefs, but, for fucks sake, do not assume at first glance that it is the RELIGION at fault. Assume firstly that it is YOUR intellect and mind that have not fully encompassed what the religion is attempting to convey. People in this day and age (generalizing, yes, but I dare you to prove me wrong) have become betrothed to the ideas of a) instant gratification, b) divinity in humanity (a logically inconsistent idea, since humans are imperfect and therefore can not, by definition, be divine), c) pure fucking ignorance due to the spread of printable media and the internet (which makes people believe that they think they know whereas they in fact know nothing at all), and d) all of the implications of the above.

Because of this, somewhere around 95% of the general populous does not have the necessary knowledge and/or intellect to begin a discussion to tackle these kinds of things. Most people will simply want to throw their opinions out as facts, and argue based on ignorance.


/end_mini_rant


My personal belief is that a singular truth exists out there among the plethora of ideas. The only thing one needs is an open mind with a willing heart.

[SuburbanBuddha]

Why use a dictionary when we have a public understanding of it already? This definition of morality is not the one we're discussing here. The definition you just gave is quite redundant as it says "conformity to the rules of right conduct; moral or virtuous conduct".


It's not that I want to counter simple arguments, but that I want to make a discussion a serious discussion instead of just some "show and tell" by everyone and discussions by no one.


Why do you get so angry with me so fast? I'm not talking about culture, but the innate morality that subconsciously tells us something just ain't right with certain things. Also, I don't have a donkey to begin with, sorry.


That's not the morality that we're discussing either.


I'm not demanding cultural morality; I'm asking for the fact that there is capability in all of us to understand morality even where we have not been exposed to morality in the first place.


Have you ever considered that the specific morality formed the culture instead of vice versa?


And that's the big problem we have with people, don't we.


The difference between the Abrahamic religions and the Greek and Egyptian religions is that we believe in a Supreme Being that is Omnipotent, Omnipresent, and Omniscient, whereas the multitude of gods in Greek and Egyptian mythology are literally killing each other.


And the inevitable question is: who defined "good" in the first place?

@justZan:
Sometimes, using "big words" is inevitable.

Well, then, the definition of moral is even simpler, and I thought you were already assuming the definition of moral.

Oh, and I wasn't mad at you. I was just making a statement. I'm sorry if it came across wrong.

So what morality are we discussing? As I recall, you started asking me questions after I gave my two cents. It's only fair that I have my say in what we're discussing.

Here's what I'm saying. Nobody knows where morality came from. It's all a big guess on our parts. The point is, it's here, and we should probably know how to manage it.

[BalrogLord]

one thing i forgot to mention in my previous post. all the books written before the exile (genesis, exode, psaumes etc) were written during the exile. that means that during the first millenia bc everything was more or less written down and before that it was an oral tradition, and seing as how this oral tradition was kept up for millenias, the original story must have gotten twisted somehow.

not only that but writting those books in exile whilst being so rounded by polytheism, need i elaborate?

[Maiorem]

one thing i forgot to mention in my previous post. all the books written before the exile (genesis, exode, psaumes etc) were written during the exile. that means that during the first millenia bc everything was more or less written down and before that it was an oral tradition, and seing as how this oral tradition was kept up for millenias, the original story must have gotten twisted somehow.

not only that but writting those books in exile whilst being so rounded by polytheism, need i elaborate?

That is false information.

The first five books of the Bible are written during the 2nd millenium BC. And the rest were recorded and written down in their own time period. We have manuscripts to prove that.

I don't know what "Exile" are you referring to, and there is no such book as "Psaumes". And yes, you need to elaborate.

[Morgoroth]

so they are basically jews with some new customs huh

Well, basically Christian and Muslims are Jews with new customs :amused:

[BalrogLord]

That is false information.

The first five books of the Bible are written during the 2nd millenium BC. And the rest were recorded and written down in their own time period. We have manuscripts to prove that.

I don't know what "Exile" are you referring to, and there is no such book as "Psaumes". And yes, you need to elaborate.


exile, the period where the jews wher exiled to babylonia by king nebaschanezarII(i know im spelling this wrong)

psaumes is a book in the old testament, it was written by king solomon and its basicly a bunch of poems dedicated to yahweh.

what i was saying about judaism being in babylonia, u have a minority wich is monetheism and a majority wich is polytheist. nevermidn the fact that youve lost your old home these influences are huge. granted judaism as we know it was defined in babylonia but im sure there were a few influences that warped the message.

anyways what it all boils down to is a question of faith. if u believe thats good for u, if u dont thats good for you.wether islam or judaism is wrong or right doesnt matter as long as both parties respect each other.

[AnimeRayne]

Honestly I think that all religions are one. I think the greek gods and goddess, the egyptian gods and goddess, buddah, jesus, hare krishna, allah are all the same being. I think the only reason that they appear different is because its what the people needed. Its what they called for. I am technically a christian but I think the church is hypocritical to sit back and say "love one another" and then look the other direction and say that someone isn't good enough or is wrong because they belive differently. I get so angry when I hear someone say that Obama shouldn't be president of the US because he is muslim! WHO CARES! its not like our christian presidents have been very good anyway! but honestly....i think everyone is interconnected and that their respective dieties just appear differently.

[Angelofdarkness]

Religions are defined by their respective practitioners. A Christian preacher would NEVER say that "Christianity is basically the same as Islam" nor would a Buddhist Monk say "Buddhism is basically like Christianity". Ultimately it's the practitioners themselves that define the religion. Along with the doctrine.

For you to be telling different religions and religious practitioners what THEIR religion is...is INCREDIBLY arrogant.

[AnimeRayne]

ok I think you misunderstood me. I didn't mean that they believe the same. I clearly stated that the religions are what those specific people need. I am not saying that its the same practices or anything I just think they are all interconnected. and in fact many of the different religions of the world share the same basic belief system.

[Angelofdarkness]

Saying "many religions have same basic belief system" can mean one of two things

1) That the structure of religions and the system they employ are similar. In this case it's kind of like saying "all sodas are similar." Well yes, it's technically true to a degree; however, it's not particularly enlightening considering that's how we DEFINE religion. And how we can group these beliefs and people into "religion" rather than "philosophy" or "science". If this is your point, I agree with you.

2) That religions have similar beliefs. This brings me back to my original post. For you, an outsider, to tell other people what THEIR religion believes in, is arrogance to the utmost. If you tell a Hindi "You know maybe Krishna is like the same as Zeus" he would be highly indignant. Also if you told a Buddhist "Your beliefs are pretty much the same as a Christian's" he would refute your arguments over and over again. The beliefs of different religions are as diverse as individual humans are. You can't just group them all into one.

One example: Buddhists DON'T believe in a creator Diety at all. Buddha is no creator; he is merely an enlightened tathagata who's beyond the material world. He is omniscient, but he didn't create our Universe. (Although Pure Land Buddhism would have Buddhas such as Amitabha create pure lands but that's besides the point)

[Maiorem]

exile, the period where the jews wher exiled to babylonia by king nebaschanezarII(i know im spelling this wrong)
Oh, THAT exile.

psaumes is a book in the old testament, it was written by king solomon and its basicly a bunch of poems dedicated to yahweh.
It's Psalms, and they're written by David, NOT Solomon.

what i was saying about judaism being in babylonia, u have a minority wich is monetheism and a majority wich is polytheist. nevermidn the fact that youve lost your old home these influences are huge. granted judaism as we know it was defined in babylonia but im sure there were a few influences that warped the message.
Such as? It is already quite clear by archeological findings and historical studies that whatever is in the Old Testament reflects NOTHING of Babylonian culture. Could you please provide ample evidence of "Babylonian influences" to support your claims?

anyways what it all boils down to is a question of faith. if u believe thats good for u, if u dont thats good for you.wether islam or judaism is wrong or right doesnt matter as long as both parties respect each other.
You're like telling an architect "whether you believe the measurements of a structure is true it doesn't matter as long as your employees trust you and pay you". Regardless of perspective, there are absolute things in the universe which does not change with perspective. I can bring up the "Columbus vs. flat-earth theorists" example again, but that would be a waste of time.

Honestly I think that all religions are one. I think the greek gods and goddess, the egyptian gods and goddess, buddah, jesus, hare krishna, allah are all the same being.
The multitude of gods and goddesses killing each other in Greek, Egyptian, Hindu and Buddhist teachings isn't helpful in establishing that point...

I think the only reason that they appear different is because its what the people needed. Its what they called for.
I don't think you can say that widow-burnings (widow, NOT window) in Hindusim is called for...

I am technically a christian but I think the church is hypocritical to sit back and say "love one another" and then look the other direction and say that someone isn't good enough or is wrong because they belive differently.
Physician, heal thyself.
Consider the fact that no one is ever "good enough", and no one is ever right all the time. I don't care what your church teaches, but what Christ has taught is NOT what your church is teaching. True, Christ has said "love your neighbor as yourself", but he did not say that Christians are "good enough" compared to other people of different faiths. In fact, we received our salvation by faith and doing the will of God the Father, but that is a gift, not because we are "good enough".

I get so angry when I hear someone say that Obama shouldn't be president of the US because he is muslim! WHO CARES! its not like our christian presidents have been very good anyway! but honestly....i think everyone is interconnected and that their respective dieties just appear differently.
Interesting how Americans always complain about Christian presidents when they themselves support the "separation of church and state" policy; prayers are removed from school, discussing religion is strictly limited in school, and other things are laxed because they are more of religious code of ethics rather than "moral decisions", and then Americans ask God why things like school shootings and other such atrocities involving killer school children happen.

ok I think you misunderstood me. I didn't mean that they believe the same. I clearly stated that the religions are what those specific people need.
And who might you be to say that Hindu women wanted themselves burned when their husbands die before them?

I am not saying that its the same practices or anything I just think they are all interconnected.
This is New Age thinking, and it isn't new by the way. "Nothing is new under the sun". This ideology existed way back even before the first Christmas.

and in fact many of the different religions of the world share the same basic belief system.
How many religions do you actually know before you can even make statements like "many of the different religions of the world"? Same basic belief system? Can you tell me the similarities? If you're saying that all religions teach people to be good, then there is still the problem with the definition of "good", because each religion has its own definition.

Being a Christian doesn't make us perfect. Being a Christian just means having faith in the Christ and obeying the will of the Father. Apart from that, we are still human.

@Angelofdarkness:
Are you having a Bachelor of Theology? Thanks for all the explanations.

[Angelofdarkness]

Nah, I'm just very interested in a lot of things. One of those things being theology and religion. :)

I learned a lot from an Intro to Buddhism course, not just about Buddhism, but also about how to analyze Religion. :)

[kezmi]

religion is your way of life. choosing a religion meant u choose a rule of how your life should be, guided by God's rule, teach by His messenger. To say that Islam, Christian , Jew are of the same God is wrong cause the rules are different. When you change the rules, you change your path, meaning you are not following teaching. How can it be the same God if you chosse different teaching. So it is not wise to say all religions are of same God.

[Maiorem]

Origin of the Universe:
http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com/
(click the links at the bottom of the page too)

Seven Great Lies of Organized Religion: A Blast of Brutal Honesty
http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/
http://7.coffeehousetheology.com/

[AnimeRayne]

Saying "many religions have same basic belief system" can mean one of two things

1) That the structure of religions and the system they employ are similar. In this case it's kind of like saying "all sodas are similar." Well yes, it's technically true to a degree; however, it's not particularly enlightening considering that's how we DEFINE religion. And how we can group these beliefs and people into "religion" rather than "philosophy" or "science". If this is your point, I agree with you.

2) That religions have similar beliefs. This brings me back to my original post. For you, an outsider, to tell other people what THEIR religion believes in, is arrogance to the utmost. If you tell a Hindi "You know maybe Krishna is like the same as Zeus" he would be highly indignant. Also if you told a Buddhist "Your beliefs are pretty much the same as a Christian's" he would refute your arguments over and over again. The beliefs of different religions are as diverse as individual humans are. You can't just group them all into one.

One example: Buddhists DON'T believe in a creator Diety at all. Buddha is no creator; he is merely an enlightened tathagata who's beyond the material world. He is omniscient, but he didn't create our Universe. (Although Pure Land Buddhism would have Buddhas such as Amitabha create pure lands but that's besides the point)

Are you SERIOUSLY lecturing me about being arrogant?! Thats rich!! what exactly are you doing? It is MY BELIEF! I am not forcing it on anyone and I'm not saying I AM RIGHT all I have done is share my personal opinion and my belief system which is what this thread is about. How dare you judge me and tell me I am wrong just because I simply believe something different from everybody else. Yes I see connection between alot of religions maybe not the same exact and maybe not in bold print but I do believe there is an underlying connection so excuse me saying my beliefs...guess i didn't realize that this board was under strict belief policies of I have to believe whats already out there or I am wrong.

[Angelofdarkness]

Me pointing out to you that what you SAID -"Religions are all the same"- was arrogant, is hardly the same as me trying to impose my beliefs onto you.

You believe what ever you want. But this thread is about discussions about religion. And I'm pointing out the wrongness and arrogance in what you stated about it. If you want to defend your point, then by all means you are allowed to do it. See that's what a discussion is, you make a point, then I make a point. Then we both back them up. From our mutual perspectives we may both gain something in return.

I'm not COMMANDING you to believe what I said. I just BELIEVE that your BELIEF is arrogant. Obviously everything I say, is from my point of view. I don't think I need to put "I believe" in front of very sentence I write. Don't take this personally.

If you just want to write an opinion and not be bothered, then state in your first post that you are not here to discuss anything. Seeing as how this is a discussion thread, I assumed you were here to discuss. Sorry.

[BalrogLord]

Honestly I think that all religions are one. I think the greek gods and goddess, the egyptian gods and goddess, buddah, jesus, hare krishna, allah are all the same being. I think the only reason that they appear different is because its what the people needed. Its what they called for.

its called jainism my friend

also animerayne if u compared krishna to zeus, i dunt thinka hindou would be angered as to hindus God=Gods (simply put)

[QUOTE=Maiorem;799769]Oh, THAT exile.


It's Psalms, and they're written by David, NOT Solomon.[quote]
i go to a french schoo ther wirriten psaumes my bad, and i ddint score to high on the history part of judaism exam

[QUOTE=Maiorem;799769]
Such as? It is already quite clear by archeological findings and historical studies that whatever is in the Old Testament reflects NOTHING of Babylonian culture. Could you please provide ample evidence of "Babylonian influences" to support your claims?[quote]

ok ive just done a brief research and some of it goes agaisnt my notes, therefore i withdraw my previous statements until i can talk to my teacher again.


I don't think you can say that widow-burnings (widow, NOT window) in Hindusim is called for...

sati is part of the religion, although it isnt very widespread it is done by women who are very zealous about their dharma.

[Crapface122333]

Proof that Christianity is just a ripoff of Egyptian religion.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=rs9br09jGoc

[BalrogLord]

... since when is youtube a reliable source? maybe if the author of that video could cut out his lame ass introduction that has nothing to do with theme. this video would be half decent.

let me quote the opening minute as im not gona bother listeing to some ignorants rant

"weve be lied to by every single instution what make su think the religious institution is any different? the religious institutions are at the bottom of the dirt, the religions of this world are put ther by the same people that gavbe you your goverment your corrupt education system"

"and all religions care about controlling the whole dam world"
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f39/Det-Chris/Anime%20and%20Manga/Ohboy.jpg

...
and after hearing this im not gona waste my time listening to 30 minutes of this drivel.

and honestly christianity a ripoff of egyptian paganism? where you born yesterday?

[Crapface122333]

First of all, the opening angry guy has almost nothing to do with what the rest of the video is explaining. It's just some pissed off dude that they felt like excerpting because he's about to talk about religion.

The opening represents the movie entirely. It shows war scenes, relating to part 2; a 9/11 revelation. The opening showing stars is about the first part; linking ancient religion and christianity to astrology.

The video is NOT a rant.

[Maiorem]

This video FAILS.

Just because it shows pretty little pictures does NOT link it with another totally unrelated religion.

If the person claims that all institutions ar lying to us, then what makes us so sure that the author himself is not a lying himself?

The education system was not set up by religious groups; in fact, the anti-Christian groups set up the "separation of church and state" policy, and the same people who advocate that policy are the ones asking God "what the hell is happening with the corrupt education system?" when the education system that was corrupted by these people FAILED.

This is what is known as HYPOCRISY.

And what does anything said in the opening of the video have to do with Christianity being a ripoff of Egyptian religion? Does this guy even know what does "Egyptian religion" mean?

Either the author of the video doesn't know what he's talking about or he's lying.

[MicroHustler]

Ahh yes religion, what a wonderful subject. I just cannot get myself to believe in any religion. I dream of something after I am dead, but I do not believe in anything that I have read or seen from any religion ever. I really could not care less what religion someone wants to follow and I think that is in part due to the fact that I don't follow a religion and because my parents have two different religions. One of them is Muslim and the other Christian. And you know what their two families hate each other. I do not lay the blame with one or the other family but ya know even when they are getting along deep down they do not like each other and it is only because they believe in different things.

That is why I pray (ironic I know) for the day that human beings evolve past the point of needing any religions mainly because of the rift in my family. I am sure some people will come at me with this "Yeah but if there wasn't religion I am sure they would find something else not to agree on."

Well you know what.........LET THEM FIND SOMETHING ELSE. Not only would it be immensely interesting but also very entertaining because you can laugh of almost any other argument or difference in men but one shall not laugh at another's religion. And you know that is true, I mean come on it is more socially acceptable to make fun of each others races than each others religion because GOD FORBID we do that.

[Maiorem]

The problem is not with Man needing religion; Man needs God, NOT Religion.

[BalrogLord]

maiorem i totally agree with you.

[Swabb]

As I have witnessed faith and fanaticism are separated by a really thin line where does faith ends and fanaticism stars is really difficult to say exactly, and for me fanaticism is when you put faith in the wrong things, but is just my way to see things maybe I’m right maybe I’m wrong.

Religion: a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

And who regulates religion?

A: Men.. just simple mortals, I’m not saying that I understand god better than them but I can see that their “guidance” is not working, and is really sad that the alternative isn’t working ether, the Muslims doesn’t have a regulatory organism like Catholic church for example, for most of them works but they also have the mad bombers sects.


Examples of religion corruption (Catholic... because is the most familiar to me, but that doesn't mean that the other religions don't have their own faults):

1.- The pope selling indulgencies(one of the main reason why Martin Luther made his thesis)
2.- The crusades (it wasn't to take the holly land from infidels hands, anyone watched the movie? is the easiest way I can find to explain my point, and the holly land was conveniently in the middle of the silk trade route... what a coincidence)
3.- The Inquisition ( a way to control the free thinking and the flow of ideas that where diminishing the church's power over the common people)

4.- The Borgias (one of the reasons why the church started with the celibacy vote, and those are the most famous because it was common that all ecclesiastic charges where inherited)

And mainly the church was a rich people club to keep power, and don't let me star with the beginnings of Catholic church, is "coincidence" that Catholic Church has the “same” rank system that the Roman empire had (of course with different names but works the same).


In the end all I see is a conflict of ideas, everyone claims to have the absolute truth, but no one has it, that’s the only truth I know and sometimes I doubt of it.

(Sorry if don’t make myself clear, if I find very difficult to express my ideas the way I would like in my native language, now imagine how hard it is to me to express myself in a foreign language.)
I'm going to easily refute the first 3 of your silly arguments against the catholic Chuch

1. The Pope has never "sold" indulgences. Thye act of "selling" indulgences is called simony, the reason it is called this is because Simon Magnus asked St. John and St. Peter to give him the Gifts of the Holy Ghost in The acts of the Apostles 8:18-24. The Popes never said "GIVE US MONEY AND WE WILL GIVE FREE TICKETS TO HEAVEN!!" indulgences require the reciever to be in the state of santifing grace, meaning that the have to be clean of mortal sin. Indulgences help only to decrease the amount of time we need to spend in purgatory for temporal punishment, that is punishment still imposed to use after our sins are forgiven, just as there is jail for those who break the law.

2. The crusades had nothing to do about infidels having the Holy Land it was about the Muslums forcfully taking the Holy Land from us and killing pilgrims as they came by for religious indiffernce, yes there were corrupt nobles who saw the oppertunity to gain land but in the long run it was a defensive war to pervent the Muslums to advancing farther west, just as any country runs to protect its land when it is attacked.

3. The inquisition was not to stop free thought, it was to stop heresy form corrupting individuals, heresy is the removal of certain beliefs in the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church. This is like going through the American Constition and removing certain amendments because you don't like them. THese people were indiffernt to those who belived the doctrines of the faith and often commited crimes or wars (Its called the protestant REVOLUTION for a reason) Since it is the Church's responsibility to protect the souls of its followers the inquistion was moslty tring to bring those back to the faith, seldom was the death penelty used and torture was only instituted because these heresies were mostly run by secert socities and the only way to completely destroy the heresy was to reveal the socities running it.

4. Yes Alexander VI was a corrupted, I can give you that, but he was only a man, not a god, and just like any man in any offfice he was corrupt.

And well of course the ROMAN[U] Catholic church would have the same build as the [U]ROMAN Empire but constantine moved the WHOLE Capital to Constantinople while the Church stayed in Rome. As the years went by Rome was constantly pressured to move the Chuch to constantinople but didn't and was ransacked mutiple times by barbarians. This is a Histrical Fact, seriously look it up.

[Subtitled]

Ahh yes religion, what a wonderful subject. I just cannot get myself to believe in any religion. I dream of something after I am dead, but I do not believe in anything that I have read or seen from any religion ever. I really could not care less what religion someone wants to follow and I think that is in part due to the fact that I don't follow a religion and because my parents have two different religions. One of them is Muslim and the other Christian. And you know what their two families hate each other. I do not lay the blame with one or the other family but ya know even when they are getting along deep down they do not like each other and it is only because they believe in different things.

That is why I pray (ironic I know) for the day that human beings evolve past the point of needing any religions mainly because of the rift in my family. I am sure some people will come at me with this "Yeah but if there wasn't religion I am sure they would find something else not to agree on."

Well you know what.........LET THEM FIND SOMETHING ELSE. Not only would it be immensely interesting but also very entertaining because you can laugh of almost any other argument or difference in men but one shall not laugh at another's religion. And you know that is true, I mean come on it is more socially acceptable to make fun of each others races than each others religion because GOD FORBID we do that.

Ya know, my family is similar. My dad is Muslim, and my mom is Catholic. However, my families get along great on both sides. I guess it could be because they're both a little lax on how practicing they are. I myself am Christian, but non-denominational, so I'm kind of oddballed out. But there's no dissent because of different beliefs.

As far as religion and faith are concerned, I do believe in the Christian viewpoint. I really have no choice. Which isn't to say I'm forced to, but with everything I've seen and experienced, I would be fooling myself to say there's no God, that it's all a lie. I've seen wheelchair ridden people dance about as if they've been walking their whole life. I've seen a badly misaligned spine snap back into place. Having witnessed what I have, I can't just write it off as "coincidence."

This by no means means you have to, or even should, believe the same as me. What I do mean, is that all you have to do is look for it, shoot, even try praying to experience something, or find something that you can say in your heart, "This, this is it." It's all about you believing for yourself, not just believing because someone told you too.

[Omnikar]

My my my, so many things to respond to, but really? Where do I start?

Religion killing more people than any other cause.
Every year, between 1/2 to 3 million people die of malaria. The Black Death (not including the other outbreaks of the plague) killed between 75-100 million people.
Thats just two diseases, if you include war into the mix.
WW1- 40 million, WW2-70 million, Russo-Japanese War- 130,000, American Civil War- +1/2 million, Vietnam War- Between 3 1/2 to 7 1/2 million and so on.
Do any of you really think that the numbers here are dwarfed by the Witch Hunts, Inquisition and general persecutions that religions have partook in?

World War 2 was not about religion. Lemme say that one more time. World War 2 was not about religion.
As it was said, Hitler did hate the Jews, but the Jews are an ethnic group as much as they are a religion. And what about the Slavs? Africans? You have to remember that Hitler purpose was to create an ideal world populated by his "Master Race", which coincidentally was a largely German people.

The influence of the Babylonian Captivity on the Jewish religion is a bit more profound than you might imagine. Prior to the event, the Jews didn't have Angels, Devils and so forth. The only thing they had was the original incarnation of Satan, who was ironically a lawyer whose main purpose was to argue against why you should be allowed into Heaven. As for the numerous names for Shai'tan , the vast majority of them were gods of other cities and countries. Beelzebub was a god of Ekron, Dagon was an ancient god of agriculture and so forth.

The events surrounding the creation of the world. People often use the explanation that if Earth had just a few changes, it wouldn't be able to support life, and that is proof of God. But how many planets are in the Universe? There are an estimated 300 billion stars in the Milky Way alone. How many of those have multiple planets orbiting them? Though statistical probability some of these planets in the impossibly vast Universe would have to be capable of creating life. To say otherwise isn't just unreasonable, but arrogant.

But enough countering other people's posts for the moment, I suppose I should make my thoughts clear on the matter. I am an Pragmatic Agnostic, and to be sure no one misunderstands what it means to be Agnostic, I'll explain it. I believe that there is no way to prove or disprove the existence of any Higher Being or Afterlife, because how could you do so? The only way to prove an Afterlife is to die, and to prove God (or Gods) exist, they would have to come before all of humanity in a way that leaves not a shadow of doubt. On the reverse, how could you disprove the existence of either? If you die and there is no Afterlife, how could you tell someone you were right? And how could you even attempt to disprove a deities existence? With that in mind, the heart of my belief is that if the subject is impossible to be solved, then it is not worth the time spent on it.

[Maiorem]

Then again, to correct your statement about the Babylonian influence on Judaism.

Before the Jews were captured by Babylon, the belief of the existence of angels have existed in Judaism from the beginning.
Judaism never even believed in "devils"; the word "devil" appears only in the New Testament, and it is only a word that refers to Satan.
The word "Satan" came from the Hebrew word for "accuser", so yes, you are right in saying that Satan is like a lawyer, a prosecuter.
You are mixing Judaism with Christianity. In Judaism, there is no Beelzebub at all. Beelzebub is only mentioned in the New Testament, and it is NOT another name for Satan, but a separate entity altogether.
Dagon was never associated with Satan either. Dagon was referred to as a false god, or literally translating, a no-god.

You have little to no knowledge of the Jewish religion, much less any religion at all. Perhaps that is why you consider yourself an Agnostic, since you don't even dare look into anything for truth.

[Omnikar]

Ouch, my pride. Such a scathing attack.
After rummaging around in my memories I do recall that I was incorrect concerning the appearance of Angels after the Babylonian Captivity, I'm dreadfully sorry.
And while the usage of devils wasn't taken to the written word until the New Testament, that doesn't mean it was a foreign concept until then.
I was well aware that Beelzebub was a separate entity from Satan, but most people are under the false impression that he is one and the same, so I felt no need to differentiate the two, since it isn't a core subject. I suppose I should have separated the paragraphs concerning the "borrowing" of other religions deities. As for Dagon, I only recalled him because of his placement in the hierarchy of Hell in one of the lower ranks of Devils. As for his name meaning "No God", that is a new one to me, the only translation I've heard of his name is variances of the word "Grain" or "Fish."

And my not recalling the exact details of religions that I have only a passing interest in makes me someone who has no interest in the "truth" eh? I suppose I could point out that my philosophical bent has me follow fact, as opposed to truth, so I won't take what you said as too much of an insult.

[Maiorem]

I did not say that you dared not venture into truth because of your mistakes in not knowing the difference or your false assumption that you know how religion works; I said that you are a coward that has not dared to seek truth because you proclaim yourself agnostic and never even bothered looking up historical fact, if facts are all you cared about. What you are doing is a complete cop-out.

Once again, you keep forgetting what I said concerning the word 'Devil'; the usage of 'Devil' in Judaism AND Christianity both refer to one and only one entity, that is Satan.
You made the false assumption that in Judaism and Christianity we use Beelzebub as another name for Satan. WRONG.
Concerning "borrowing" deities from other religions, I have already explained that in the Scriptures it has always been clear that these so-called deities are exposed as false gods. I did NOT say that the name 'Dagon' means no-god; I said that these false deities are said to be no-gods instead of what we today say as "false gods".

What is this about "hierarchy of Hell"? There is no "ranking of Devils".

As Pontius Pilate once asked himself, "what is truth?", there is a difference between "personal truth", which in other words is "perception", and "absolute truth", which you call "fact".
Next time, be responsible enough to be factually accurate instead of blaming your mistakes on "passing interest". It sickens me that irresponsible people go about telling rubbish as though they're fact, leading to falsehood. People like Kersey Graves should never be allowed to publish fiction as non-fiction.

[Omnikar]

Calling me a coward isn't all that nice you know. But get fired up all you wish, you'll not stir my ire.
I sought the truth many years ago, and after delving into the various religions in the world I could not find what I sought. The spiritual connection was lacking, and I came to the conclusion that I lacked the faith to believe in what I could not observe, but at the same time I was not willing to disregard something simply because it could not be directly seen at the time. At the time I was an agnostic, but without being aware of such a thing, I did not call myself that. It wasn't until about a year or so later that I heard the word for the first time. I tested my faith; have you?
Heh, I suppose I'll have to restate myself, which is a touch annoying I suppose. I am fully aware of the differences of Satan and Beelzebub, but as I said before, most people use the names interchangeably without the knowledge of what they are.
You're statement about Dagon was written in a way that sounded like you had said that the name Dagon itself was translated as "No God." I apologize for the misunderstanding.
In the middle ages, Christians devised an elaborate hierarchy of demons with Satan at the top and continuing down in a fashion similar to the noble system.

But since you seem so utterly intent on showing how I am completely ignorant about religion I suppose I could correct you once.
Judaism never even believed in "devils"; the word "devil" appears only in the New Testament, and it is only a word that refers to Satan.
What about Lilith? She appears in the Book of Isaiah and is one of the boogeymen in Judaic folklore. Oh I'm not talking about the crazy twists that Ben Sirrah put her through, but just the old myths about her being a monster that steals and kills babies.

Now bear in mind one thing, if I am shown to be wrong I am willing to amend and correct myself. While I try and be as accurate as possible, it is up to the reader to not assume everything they hear and see as utter truth. That is why we should always question and never take something at face value.

A final question I suppose. Why would you assume that I have anything to do with this Kersey fellow? I had never even heard his name until you mentioned him.

[Maiorem]

You make it sound as though I have never tested my faith.
You have enough faith already, but what's hindering you now is not lack of faith; it is your pride.

No matter what nonsense may have come up during the Middle Ages, we Protestants only adhere to what is already in the Bible, nothing more.

The word 'Lilith' does not even appear once in the entire Bible, and well said that it is folklore, though it should be rendered Jewish folklore, not Judaic (unless you consider certain Jewish mystic sects as "Judaic").
Apparently you are meaning to say "demons" instead of "devils".

I did not assume you had anything to do with Kersey Graves; I used him as an example of a person who publishes certain things without proper research, which leads to people being misled by half-truths and whole lies.

Next time, consider that anything you put up may be believed by people who do not care to look up the facts for themselves. And we know that there is a large number of people in that category.

[himurabattotsai]

Thread is already a disaster before it was thought of.

[himurabattotsai]

I don't even understand what the fuss is about? You're not happy enough with yourself and your life that you have to try and belong to a religion? I just consider religion a hindrance to my life. I stopped going to mass, ate without saying grace, slept without praying before bed. I was brought into this world Roman Catholic, and I plan on leaving it as worm food. What comes after life? It's inconceivable because you no longer have that brain of yours to think with, that's how I interpret it anyway. We just go back to the darkness that never was, nothingness, it's hard to think about because our entire existence, we've been conscious, what's it like to no longer have that? Nothing I'd guess

[Maiorem]

And you just have the audacity of double-posting just to prove nothing.

In the first place, it has NOTHING to do with "belonging to a religion", but to belong to God.

Who actually gives a damn what you came into this world as? As long as you MADE A DIFFERENCE in your own life and the life of others, THAT'S what COUNTS.

[BalrogLord]

settle down maiorem ur gona get this locked, this is a place for civilised discussion.

[Maiorem]

Exactly, but some people just don't seem to get the idea.

[BalrogLord]

so what are everyones thoughts on hinduism?

[Aveo]

I believe religion was a tool to explain the unexplainable...those explanations evolved into legends, which evolved into religions. Zeus explained lighting, Aten explained the sun, Humans as made in gods image explained why the earth was the center of the universe-----anyone notice how since empiricism has taken over these FACTS about religions become outdated?

The original tenets of religions are beliefs of philosophers of the day on how one should live. Obviously based entirely on that philosophers specific socialization (which is based on their locality and era), and are setup (very practically/ingeniously) in a way that they must be followed for your own good (playing off of peoples self interest to get them to do good to others such as in the case of Christian Paternalistic Ethic, i.e. dont wanna go to hell, help ur fellow man)


--Keep in mind much of ^ is considering Ideal types, not necessarily in practice (too many variables for me to talk about unless someone wishes too)

--If anyone chooses to respond ill continue discussion but im writing two papers right now and dont feel like putting in a full argument unless someone cares for more of an explanation

[BiOCaAM]

I don't think there's anything wrong with religion, I see it as a way to find peace within myself. Personally, I'm Muslim, but I'm very liberal lulz. I'm very grateful to my parents, who didn't bring me up as any religion but just taught me to believe in God. My father is Muslim and my mom is Catholic, so they just let me choose what I wanted to be. That's definitely something I want to promote with my children. I want them to decide for themselves.

[Maiorem]

I believe religion was a tool to explain the unexplainable...those explanations evolved into legends, which evolved into religions. Zeus explained lighting, Aten explained the sun, Humans as made in gods image explained why the earth was the center of the universe-----anyone notice how since empiricism has taken over these FACTS about religions become outdated?
Not all religions say the same thing, and not all religions are a result of human understanding or attempt at explaining the unexplanable.
I really wonder which "religion" actually taught that the reason why the earth is the center of the universe is because humans are made in God's image.
Then again, science doesn't explain everything, nor does it disprove most things.

The original tenets of religions are beliefs of philosophers of the day on how one should live. Obviously based entirely on that philosophers specific socialization (which is based on their locality and era), and are setup (very practically/ingeniously) in a way that they must be followed for your own good (playing off of peoples self interest to get them to do good to others such as in the case of Christian Paternalistic Ethic, i.e. dont wanna go to hell, help ur fellow man)
It is not everyday that we get philosophers living in our time. On the other hand, God is not separate from His people, so obviously He understands their way of life and sets up laws and commandments accordingly.
As for the case of the "Christian Paternalistic Ethic", that's not Christian at all. As we Christians believe, we help our neighbors nor because of our fear of Hell, but because of our love for God.

--Keep in mind much of ^ is considering Ideal types, not necessarily in practice (too many variables for me to talk about unless someone wishes too)
Actually what you talked about is the ones in practice; the so-called "ideal" types are those that follow by the book without any influence from outside sources.

--If anyone chooses to respond ill continue discussion but im writing two papers right now and dont feel like putting in a full argument unless someone cares for more of an explanation
If you don't mind answering the question, what papers are you writing?

[BalrogLord]

hinduism is the one religion with sciences in its holy book

so basicly saying all religions trie to substitue science isnt at all factual

[Aveo]

Not all religions say the same thing, and not all religions are a result of human understanding or attempt at explaining the unexplanable.
I really wonder which "religion" actually taught that the reason why the earth is the center of the universe is because humans are made in God's image.
Then again, science doesn't explain everything, nor does it disprove most things.

No one here is arguing religions say the same thing, in fact, their vast differences just proves my point more--Since they are all so different, yet they all make attempts to explain the unknown--they all end with different results based on their specific socialization.

The Christian Church taught the earth is the center of the universe based on their logic and understanding of the tenets of their faith, it was --issues occur here because are u gonna consider the tenets of the organizational Churches/Temples/Mosques (dont know the names of any more, sorry) 1 and the same with the religion or not?

Science is almost the religion of the modern era. It is made trying to use a modern logic, based on a different socialization (our logic=the wind blows, therefore some deducible (physical) force must be discovered, old logic=the wind blows so there must be an enormous being blowing) Since our logic is different, the result is different. Science has disproved many beliefs propagated by religions. The sun is a chariot? Thor is in the clouds hammering out lighting? Hell was the center of the earth? (then when modern people got a hold of it, and it wouldn't make sense to them with science, their socialization got in the way, they adapted it to their new outlook on life, and made hell some other universe--helping my point more) Genesis is kinda out the window unless u heavily adapt it to a more modern view (which doesn't count) The bible must then be considered story telling (which personally i believe it is) explaining the unknown with stories, and giving people a thing to fear/look forward too after life to propagate beliefs a religious leader believes are good,

It is not everyday that we get philosophers living in our time. On the other hand, God is not separate from His people, so obviously He understands their way of life and sets up laws and commandments accordingly.
As for the case of the "Christian Paternalistic Ethic", that's not Christian at all. As we Christians believe, we help our neighbors nor because of our fear of Hell, but because of our love for God.

You are an idealist aren't u :P
Why would u need a philosopher living in your time to a create a religion if the religions is already around?
Now comes the problems with arguing about religion when people begin to use god as part of their argument >.< But what is different between a god setting up laws and commandments for the best of his people based on their way of living, vs a philosopher creating the same based on how he believed people should live.

Also, these philosophers really did believe in their gods, they believed that if there was a god this (the philosophies dictated by the religion) is what that god would believe in because it was the truth and right way to live (different according to the different philosophers of the different religions)

About the paternalistic ethic, it is 100% Christian, you help your brother/sisters (those around you) because if you do you go to heaven, or if you don't you go to hell--it doesn't seem Christian because the way i transcribe it (based on my views) The paternalistic ethic itself is that you are SUPPOSED to assist those around you, as a father to his children
Even that has changed as society has, it isnt very good for profits so we modified this for the modern era...first it went to the Protestant ethic (individualism vs the catholic/paternalistic collectivism), and now to a modern mix of the two.

Actually what you talked about is the ones in practice; the so-called "ideal" types are those that follow by the book without any influence from outside sources.

Im saying ideal types based on my view, however u are right :P

If you don't mind answering the question, what papers are you writing?
im writing a satire against Boston/Boston University (where i go to school)
and a Research paper on an artist Fitz Hugh Lane


Hinduism is the one religion with sciences in its holy book

so basicly saying all religions trie to substitute science isnt at all factual

You really really should understand what someone is saying or ask a question if you dont cause this is how flaming starts. Just a friendly reminder..

ALL religions make attempts to explain the world around them...Hinduism uses science...thats still explaining the world around them useing a different deduction method, the Greeks deduced it must be a god blowing for wind, where as Hindus (for the sake of argument) deduced the low pressure system...my point is that they both are making attempts to explain the unknown--also who is to say their science, or even our science is correct? Just because it makes sense doesnt work because appolo made perfect sense to the greeks as to why the sun moves in the sky. Maybe all of our science does is preserves the appearance but because we are missing some crucial other perspective we cant actually see the true workings of something

If someone finds a RELIGION not way of life, that does not attempt to explain the world then please bring it up. When i say all religions its to my knowledge of course and i dont assume to be infallible...i dont feel like correcting my entire thing so heres the disclaimer...

if i missed something/made a mistake im sure you guys will tell me
Ill worry about any mistakes then...ima go grab a bite to eat.

[Maiorem]

No one here is arguing religions say the same thing, in fact, their vast differences just proves my point more--Since they are all so different, yet they all make attempts to explain the unknown--they all end with different results based on their specific socialization.
Not all are attempts at explaining the unknown though.

The Christian Church taught the earth is the center of the universe based on their logic and understanding of the tenets of their faith, it was --issues occur here because are u gonna consider the tenets of the organizational Churches/Temples/Mosques (dont know the names of any more, sorry) 1 and the same with the religion or not?
That so-called "Christian Church" wasn't teaching from the doctrine based on the Bible, so you couldn't really consider it "Christian" but actually just based on human reasoning. If you want to take everything the church taught as "Christian" then you might as well say that the majority of modern science is also "Christian" since the majority was due to contributions from Christians such as Isaac Newton and the Father of Genetics was a Catholic monk.

Science is almost the religion of the modern era. It is made trying to use a modern logic, based on a different socialization (our logic=the wind blows, therefore some deducible (physical) force must be discovered, old logic=the wind blows so there must be an enormous being blowing) Since our logic is different, the result is different. Science has disproved many beliefs propagated by religions. The sun is a chariot? Thor is in the clouds hammering out lighting? Hell was the center of the earth? (then when modern people got a hold of it, and it wouldn't make sense to them with science, their socialization got in the way, they adapted it to their new outlook on life, and made hell some other universe--helping my point more) Genesis is kinda out the window unless u heavily adapt it to a more modern view (which doesn't count) The bible must then be considered story telling (which personally i believe it is) explaining the unknown with stories, and giving people a thing to fear/look forward too after life to propagate beliefs a religious leader believes are good,
Now if you say that "science is the religion of the modern era", that would be misleading, because you sound as if science and religion clashes. Well that's true in most religions such as the reincarnation doctrine, and the doctrine of "karma" cannot be proven scientifically, but apart from myths such as those you have mentioned, the rest are neither proven true nor disproven, and this is the limitation of science. A few hundred years ago, the popular "science" dictates that the earth was flat. Well this is in conflict with what the Bible says about the earth being a sphere, but "scientists" argued that the Bible was wrong; now we know who was wrong.
Additionally, the Bible never said that Hell was the center of the earth.
As for the Genesis account, it is still heavily disputed although "science" (but actually atheists) has argued without proof that evolution is the way. If you are interested, have a look at www.cosmicfingerprints.com, a website by Perry Marshall. If you don't know who he is, look him up.
Also, Christianity was never dependent upon religious leaders (apart from Roman Catholics, who look up to the Pope for dictation).

You are an idealist aren't u :P
Why would u need a philosopher living in your time to a create a religion if the religions is already around?
Now comes the problems with arguing about religion when people begin to use god as part of their argument >.< But what is different between a god setting up laws and commandments for the best of his people based on their way of living, vs a philosopher creating the same based on how he believed people should live.
I am not an idealist, but a realist.
Well by your logic, a philosopher seems to be born every minute to either continue or start a religion; unless you are saying that philosophers are born only at a point of time e.g. 5000 years ago, but that is unrealistically speaking.
The difference between God giving the Laws and the Commandments and philosophers making up his own laws and commandments is exactly as you have pointed out: philosophers do so by basing on how he believed people should live, and philosophers generally tend to follow public opinion quite loosely. God set standards that seem absurd to us, and philosophers generally don't set such impeccable standards. Note the Levitical laws.

Also, these philosophers really did believe in their gods, they believed that if there was a god this (the philosophies dictated by the religion) is what that god would believe in because it was the truth and right way to live (different according to the different philosophers of the different religions)
In saying, you are creating an endless cycle of philosophers because you said that religion is ignited with the birth of philosophers who imagine a deity that exists to explain natural phenomena, but the problem begins with how the first philosopher was born, and from who did he get his philosophy from.

About the paternalistic ethic, it is 100% Christian, you help your brother/sisters (those around you) because if you do you go to heaven, or if you don't you go to hell--it doesn't seem Christian because the way i transcribe it (based on my views) The paternalistic ethic itself is that you are SUPPOSED to assist those around you, as a father to his children
Even that has changed as society has, it isnt very good for profits so we modified this for the modern era...first it went to the Protestant ethic (individualism vs the catholic/paternalistic collectivism), and now to a modern mix of the two.
That's still not the Christian view of helping others. In the Christian view, we help others because we want to, not because we are forced to. And this is because God judges us by our hearts, and even if we force ourself to do good due to fear of being punished, it is nothing but obedience to the Law, but it doesn't save you.
And the way we are supposed to help others is not paternalistic, but we Christians are taught to love our neighbors as ourselves i.e. whatever we wish to be done to ourselves, we must do it to others as well e.g. if we want to be treated with respect, we must respect those around us. This is clearly different from the "paternalistic ethic".
Now I don't understand what has profits anything to do with this. Perhaps you are having the wrong views of Christian values.

Im saying ideal types based on my view, however u are right :P
Sorry, but I fail to find anything ideal in what you said.

im writing a satire against Boston/Boston University (where i go to school)
and a Research paper on an artist Fitz Hugh Lane
Interesting, but not exactly what I was thinking. I thought you were going to write a research paper on ethics and religion.

ALL religions make attempts to explain the world around them...Hinduism uses science...thats still explaining the world around them useing a different deduction method, the Greeks deduced it must be a god blowing for wind, where as Hindus (for the sake of argument) deduced the low pressure system...my point is that they both are making attempts to explain the unknown--also who is to say their science, or even our science is correct? Just because it makes sense doesnt work because appolo made perfect sense to the greeks as to why the sun moves in the sky. Maybe all of our science does is preserves the appearance but because we are missing some crucial other perspective we cant actually see the true workings of something
This is first assuming that either God doesn't exist or that He is impersonal and never communicates with His creation, therefore Man has no guidance to begin with and makes his own assumptions concerning the universe and the world surrounding himself.

If someone finds a RELIGION not way of life, that does not attempt to explain the world then please bring it up. When i say all religions its to my knowledge of course and i dont assume to be infallible...i dont feel like correcting my entire thing so heres the disclaimer...
Well you can consider the purest aspect of Buddhism (since Asian Buddhism has mixed with local folklores including but not limited to aspects of Hinduism, Taoism, and Confucianism) in that category, but it really isn't satisfying.
Christianity may be considered "explaining the world", but so far, in my opinion, I find it to be the best possible explanation, and even compliments science.

if i missed something/made a mistake im sure you guys will tell me
Ill worry about any mistakes then...ima go grab a bite to eat.
Thank you for your time.

[Amata]

I think in its pure form, Religion could be used to spread knowledge about the metaphysical and philosophical and this spread of knowledge could help mankind. But too many people want to just corrupt it and use it for personal gain. :sad: In the end it's not religion itself that's flawed, but man. Like fire, people often misuse it to commit crimes, but it's a very useful tool when used properly.=/ That's my view anyways.

Pretty much. The most common arguement I hear against religion is how it is responsible for wars and so on. But as I always say whenever I hear that, religion doesn't preach war, it is imperfect man. If we humans could simple accept that others believe differently than us, then there would be no "Holy Wars" (hah!). Every mainstream religion, i.e Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, preaches peace and yet somehow people overlook this.

[Aveo]

Not all are attempts at explaining the unknown though.

You keep saying that without giving an example, give me an example...and i mean religion NOT a way of life, the 2 are very similar but not the same


That so-called "Christian Church" wasn't teaching from the doctrine based on the Bible, so you couldn't really consider it "Christian" but actually just based on human reasoning. If you want to take everything the church taught as "Christian" then you might as well say that the majority of modern science is also "Christian" since the majority was due to contributions from Christians such as Isaac Newton and the Father of Genetics was a Catholic monk.

Actually, since the bible is used not literally but through interpretation they were teaching with the bible useing their interpretation of its different writings, just like you are disagreeing based on yours or someone who taught you's interpretation.
That correlation does not work at all. And even if it did its wrong inherantly, because just as you say we couldnt be where we are today without them, they couldnt have been were they were without the pagans that came before them, euclide-socrates-aristotle etc

Now if you say that "science is the religion of the modern era", that would be misleading, because you sound as if science and religion clashes. Well that's true in most religions such as the reincarnation doctrine, and the doctrine of "karma" cannot be proven scientifically, but apart from myths such as those you have mentioned, the rest are neither proven true nor disproven, and this is the limitation of science. A few hundred years ago, the popular "science" dictates that the earth was flat. Well this is in conflict with what the Bible says about the earth being a sphere, but "scientists" argued that the Bible was wrong; now we know who was wrong.
Additionally, the Bible never said that Hell was the center of the earth.
As for the Genesis account, it is still heavily disputed although "science" (but actually atheists) has argued without proof that evolution is the way. If you are interested, have a look at www.cosmicfingerprints.com, a website by Perry Marshall. If you don't know who he is, look him up.
Also, Christianity was never dependent upon religious leaders (apart from Roman Catholics, who look up to the Pope for dictation).

Science and religion very much do clash in their basic principles, while religion is based on faith, science is based on hard imperical data, that is an irreoncilable difference, and to set this aside would be to discount them both
...by the way...the only reason the Greek pantheon has been disproved and the Christian god has not is that the myths around the Christian god have evolved to continue to work with our knowledge as the old myths are disproved, the pantheon does not work with out modern scientific principles because there were no people trying to apply it to modern day because there were no believers.

YOUR COMMENT ABOUT THE EARTH BEING ROUND IS COMPLETELY OFF BASE AND INCORRECT. Science dictated that the earth was round starting with the Egyptians and continuing down the line. The MYTH that people believed the earth was flat during this time period was propagated by Washington Irving's fantasy The Life and Voyages of Christopher Columbus that asserted the people then believed the earth was flat.

Hell being the center of the earth was a belief by all Christians that then became an outdated myth as it got disproved. It was from an interpretation of the bible, and therefore part of Christianity. Evolution is heavily disputed by religious authorities that cant adapt it to their religions. Many scientists actually BECAME atheists because of the logic behind evolution, not argue for it because they are atheist. Christianity was never dependent on religious leaders? is that a joke? Jesus, the apostles, all religious leaders. The catholic church was the single christian doctrine and final say in all interpretation for a very long time, your downplaying a major part of the evolution of christianity


I am not an idealist, but a realist.
Well by your logic, a philosopher seems to be born every minute to either continue or start a religion; unless you are saying that philosophers are born only at a point of time e.g. 5000 years ago, but that is unrealistically speaking.
The difference between God giving the Laws and the Commandments and philosophers making up his own laws and commandments is exactly as you have pointed out: philosophers do so by basing on how he believed people should live, and philosophers generally tend to follow public opinion quite loosely. God set standards that seem absurd to us, and philosophers generally don't set such impeccable standards. Note the Levitical laws.


It is subjective i guess, but in my eyes your an idealist, and i am a realist, where it might be reversed the other way around, but i couldnt know.
What the hell are you talking about, im saying original the religions are created by philosophers based specifically on their socialization and therefore belief it what is good. Philosophers are known to put up standards that are impeccable as well. Robes Pierre believed in a society far beyond what he lived in, and ended up killing thousands of people in the belief he would achieve this greater society, but the standards were too impeccable as you state only a god can do -.-
I also could pull what u are doing and use my argument for proof aka Christianity was created by a philosopher and therefore you are sitting on your answer.

In saying, you are creating an endless cycle of philosophers because you said that religion is ignited with the birth of philosophers who imagine a deity that exists to explain natural phenomena, but the problem begins with how the first philosopher was born, and from who did he get his philosophy from.


Through socialization, through their experiences they gain beliefs.
--do you understand this term?


That's still not the Christian view of helping others. In the Christian view, we help others because we want to, not because we are forced to. And this is because God judges us by our hearts, and even if we force ourself to do good due to fear of being punished, it is nothing but obedience to the Law, but it doesn't save you.
And the way we are supposed to help others is not paternalistic, but we Christians are taught to love our neighbors as ourselves i.e. whatever we wish to be done to ourselves, we must do it to others as well e.g. if we want to be treated with respect, we must respect those around us. This is clearly different from the "paternalistic ethic".
Now I don't understand what has profits anything to do with this. Perhaps you are having the wrong views of Christian values.


in the modern Christian view of your particular sect*, which evolved because a philosopher did not agree with the old Christian view. Do you understand that your so called infallible bible has been modified multiple times for every different sect so something you think is Christian can be very different from the guy with the Lutheran bible next door. You are acting like a spokesperson for all Christianity when you are clearly basing your argument from your singular sects viewpoint.
Your realism just went down the drain. You believe that people do everything out of the warm and goodness of their heart, and their desire to do the good of god? To understand your religion you should also study the history which helped make it what it is. Christian paternalism did not allow profits in society. You were supposed to get enough money for subsistence living and not make a profit off of someone, profit as in surplus. The newly arriseing Burgeosie wanted profits, so they helped push for reformation because now they are allowed to make profit with the new sects because, based on the ideals of predestination, surplus must be a sign from god you are going to heaven. This idea spread to those that did not believe in Calvinism as well tho (surplus=good cause its a sign of gods favor, not predestination)

Sorry, but I fail to find anything ideal in what you said.

The word ideal has a different connotation in this situation. You are just starting to detract from the argument. It is ideal because it is unrealistic base idea that when put into practice does not keep its form, like ideal communism, and practice communism.


This is first assuming that either God doesn't exist or that He is impersonal and never communicates with His creation, therefore Man has no guidance to begin with and makes his own assumptions concerning the universe and the world surrounding himself.


Yea pretty much, and your argument is the reverse so whats your point?

Well you can consider the purest aspect of Buddhism (since Asian Buddhism has mixed with local folklores including but not limited to aspects of Hinduism, Taoism, and Confucianism) in that category, but it really isn't satisfying.
Christianity may be considered "explaining the world", but so far, in my opinion, I find it to be the best possible explanation, and even compliments science.

exactly, it isnt satisfying because its base form is a way of life, not a religion
and again, that is exactly my point it IS explaining the world, and to you its the best explanation and that is fine with me, but it still goes along with my point.
And it cannot complement science based on my argument listed somewhere above that one is entirley faith and the other is testing and empirical data (where faith is not wanted or allowed) and that is a base ireconcilable difference that prevents the two from working together

[Maiorem]

You keep saying that without giving an example, give me an example...and i mean religion NOT a way of life, the 2 are very similar but not the same
Trouble is, once a way of life starts to explain the unknown, you call it a religion, and when a religion is not attempting to explain the unknown via "supernatural" means, you call it a way of life. But seriously, science is also an attempt at explaining the unknown, to turn unknowns to knowns.

Actually, since the bible is used not literally but through interpretation they were teaching with the bible useing their interpretation of its different writings, just like you are disagreeing based on yours or someone who taught you's interpretation.
The Bible was used literally from the beginning till now, except where certain characters use metaphors.

That correlation does not work at all. And even if it did its wrong inherantly, because just as you say we couldnt be where we are today without them, they couldnt have been were they were without the pagans that came before them, euclide-socrates-aristotle etc
I did not say that, actually. I was using your point and showing you the flaws in your point. So assuming that the point was valid anyhow, who was before the pagans?
And just a recap, Judaism began a long time before any of these people you have mentioned were even born.

Science and religion very much do clash in their basic principles, while religion is based on faith, science is based on hard imperical data, that is an irreoncilable difference, and to set this aside would be to discount them both
Not necessarily. Science also requires an immense amount of faith, a faith that science is infallible but we all know now that science isn't entirely infallible, as more and more corrections come and go. Science isn't always about hard empirical data either, but presuppositions; you presuppose that something is a fact, then you attempt to work your way from that point to find facts to support it. That is science, as opposed to the more rational logic of not believing until it is experienced or evidenced.
By the way, miracles do happen, and science doesn't explain them; they are called miracles for a reason.

...by the way...the only reason the Greek pantheon has been disproved and the Christian god has not is that the myths around the Christian god have evolved to continue to work with our knowledge as the old myths are disproved, the pantheon does not work with out modern scientific principles because there were no people trying to apply it to modern day because there were no believers.
First off, there are no myths surrounding the God of the Bible. In fact, the Bible is basically Jewish History up to the point of the New Testament, where it remains as historical fact but straying from the Jewish perspective.

YOUR COMMENT ABOUT THE EARTH BEING ROUND IS COMPLETELY OFF BASE AND INCORRECT.
There is no need to be so "loud" about this. Be reminded that the more loudly you show off a mistake, the more you would receive rebuke and correction.

Science dictated that the earth was round starting with the Egyptians and continuing down the line. The MYTH that people believed the earth was flat during this time period was propagated by Washington Irving's fantasy The Life and Voyages of Christopher Columbus that asserted the people then believed the earth was flat.
You're not talking about science; that's archeology. And it is true that the Ancient Egyptians did talk about the earth as round, but their idea of a round earth was a disc like how they viewed the sun and moon as 2-Dimensional objects, not a sphere. Regardless, people really thought that the earth was flat up until a few centuries ago due to their lack of understanding of gravity. Can you imagine that if gravity did not exist, how do people keep from falling off a spherical earth? Thus it takes an amount of faith to believe in that too.

Hell being the center of the earth was a belief by all Christians that then became an outdated myth as it got disproved. It was from an interpretation of the bible, and therefore part of Christianity.
Christianity is not about interpretations. Not all Christians believe that Hell was the center of the earth, as this was only the belief of European Christians. Would it surprise you to find out that Christianity began in the Middle East? This is historical fact, mind you. Europeans generally don't take some story involving the Middle East, and make it their own religion.
Also, there are three different "hells" in Christianity, of which the meaning is lost when the original Scriptures were translated from Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic into English. Take Christianity in its undefiled form, not the "interpreted form".

Evolution is heavily disputed by religious authorities that cant adapt it to their religions. Many scientists actually BECAME atheists because of the logic behind evolution, not argue for it because they are atheist.
Would it concern you if you had noticed that in the past, "evolution" was used as an excuse by Europeans to kidnap and force Africans into slavery? I am not making a joke. Hitler also used the same ideology to "cleanse" the human race to retain the "strongest", which coincidentally comprises of Germans.
Evolution is not only disputed by religious authorities, but also by scientists themselves. It is true that during Darwin's time, many scientists turn into atheists because evolution seemed right at the time, but the reverse is observed today, where scientists are gradually turning to religion to understand science and the world. You can take, for example, the one who mapped the entire human genome. In fact, Stephen Hawking presents substantial evidence that challenges the previous presupposition that evolution can take place because the earth is infinitely old; he has proved that the earth had a starting point, which most scientists call the "Big Bang". But then again, ex nihilo, nihil fit: out of nothing, there can only be nothing; so what caused the "Big Bang"?

Christianity was never dependent on religious leaders? is that a joke? Jesus, the apostles, all religious leaders. The catholic church was the single christian doctrine and final say in all interpretation for a very long time, your downplaying a major part of the evolution of christianity
It is not a joke. Jesus was not a "religious leader" in your terms; he was God, or so it is in the Christian belief. As for the Apostles, they never led the church. You might want to try reading the Bible to gain more insight into the actual roles of the Apostles.
The Catholic church was only established a few centuries after the death and believed resurrection of Jesus, and as such, could not be accounted as the actual propagator of the Christian doctrine. Before the existence of the Roman Catholic church, Rome itself persecuted Christians, up until the rise of Constantine I, first "Christian" Emperor of Rome. Even then, the Roman Catholic church was not set up until a long time after. Before Constantine came into the scene, the Apostles went all over and spread the Gospel, even to India where the Romans had no influence to this day.
It would help if you actually studied some church history before commenting on what seems to be Roman Catholic dictatorship.

It is subjective i guess, but in my eyes your an idealist, and i am a realist, where it might be reversed the other way around, but i couldnt know.
In this respect, you are labeling yourself as an agnostic, I believe.

What the hell are you talking about, im saying original the religions are created by philosophers based specifically on their socialization and therefore belief it what is good. Philosophers are known to put up standards that are impeccable as well. Robes Pierre believed in a society far beyond what he lived in, and ended up killing thousands of people in the belief he would achieve this greater society, but the standards were too impeccable as you state only a god can do -.-
The Hell that I am talking about is not the same Hell that you think I believe in.
Please don't involve real-life situation with fictious works such as David Weber's Honorverse; it doesn't work that way in real life. If a person were to impose strict moral laws and seemingly absurd rules, there would surely be a revolt among the people. Without divine intervention, the unruly would prevail, and the laws and commandments of these philosophers would be rendered as nothing. If you say that these philosophers are "protected" by claiming to be a delegate of God or some similar position, history has shown that it does not work. Egyptian Pharaohs were believed to be sons of one of the Egyptian gods, but time and again they were assasinated or murdered and were replaced by their murderer; similar cases have happened in Ancient China, where the emperor was believed to be a delegate of the supreme god of heaven.

I also could pull what u are doing and use my argument for proof aka Christianity was created by a philosopher and therefore you are sitting on your answer.
It is not as simple as you would think.

Through socialization, through their experiences they gain beliefs.
--do you understand this term?
I understand it but I have to disagree with it.

in the modern Christian view of your particular sect*, which evolved because a philosopher did not agree with the old Christian view. Do you understand that your so called infallible bible has been modified multiple times for every different sect so something you think is Christian can be very different from the guy with the Lutheran bible next door.
By "modified" what do you mean? Sure, the Bible was translated over and over in different versions, but what changes is not the content nor the meaning, but the level of language and style of writing. You can't realistically expect a modern audience to understand Jacobean English fluently, nor could you ask a person from the King James I's era to read our English; it would be gibberish to him as is old English to us.

You are acting like a spokesperson for all Christianity when you are clearly basing your argument from your singular sects viewpoint.
Sorry, but I don't suppose you know the meaning of "sect"?
I am basing my statement on Christianity regardless of what the majority of "Christians" claim to believe in.

Your realism just went down the drain. You believe that people do everything out of the warm and goodness of their heart, and their desire to do the good of god?
I do not remember saying that people would naturally obey all or even parts of the Bible. Well it seems like I am saying that when people obey God, they are forced to do things that they naturally would not do, which is true in some cases but not all cases.

To understand your religion you should also study the history which helped make it what it is.
Good idea, you should listen to yourself sometimes.

Christian paternalism did not allow profits in society. You were supposed to get enough money for subsistence living and not make a profit off of someone, profit as in surplus.
Never heard of that one in my life. Sounds like a Catholic doctrine.

The newly arriseing Burgeosie wanted profits, so they helped push for reformation because now they are allowed to make profit with the new sects because, based on the ideals of predestination, surplus must be a sign from god you are going to heaven.
Whoa now that is going too far from history.
Before the Reformation, people had to accept the doctrine of the Roman Catholic church word-for-word because the majority of the peoples couldn't afford a Bible as Bibles are handwritten during that time since Gutenberg did not invent the European printing press yet (interestingly, the first book to be printed in Europe is a Bible). After that problem was solved, people began reading the Bible and found that the Roman Catholic church wasn't preaching what the Bible says, and this was catalyzed by the emergence of Martin Luther (not King), who
nailed the objections against Roman Catholic teachings on the church door for everyone to see so that they may discern for themselves.
Additionally, Reformation had nothing to do with profit, other than profiting the soul.

This idea spread to those that did not believe in Calvinism as well tho (surplus=good cause its a sign of gods favor, not predestination)
This was never part of Christian doctrine. This "prosperity Gospel" is dangerous as it is misleading, and thus no church has ever preached this sort of message. Then again, deviant "pastors" cannot be controlled such as the gay Anglican bishop.

The word ideal has a different connotation in this situation. You are just starting to detract from the argument. It is ideal because it is unrealistic base idea that when put into practice does not keep its form, like ideal communism, and practice communism.
I do not detract from arguments, if you have really conversed with me. Interestingly, China is currently practicing what they themselves term as "ideal communism", which is no longer true communism. In that sense, "ideal" strays away from general perception, and is not necessarily perfect. Kubo Tite used that same philosophy about idealism vs. perfection in one of the more recent chapters in the manga; it is very interesting.

Yea pretty much, and your argument is the reverse so whats your point?
My point is that you are starting out with an assumption, just as you suppose that I am.

exactly, it isnt satisfying because its base form is a way of life, not a religion
Hm...so you are saying that this "way of life" can never be satisfying because it doesn't attempt to explain the unknown? Not quite my point. My point was that it is not satisfying because of its nature itself, the way it is saying that everything is nothing.

and again, that is exactly my point it IS explaining the world, and to you its the best explanation and that is fine with me, but it still goes along with my point.
Well I don't put words into quotation marks for nothing, you know. As far as my beliefs is concerned, it is not an attempt at explaining the world, but that it is a factual account of the world and the Jewish culture (at least up until the New Testament).

And it cannot complement science based on my argument listed somewhere above that one is entirley faith and the other is testing and empirical data (where faith is not wanted or allowed) and that is a base ireconcilable difference that prevents the two from working together
Sorry but as I have pointed out, science does require a tremendous amount of faith to work as well. I think you have the wrong idea of what "faith" is. I can give a general example, like say, you are having faith that the chair you are sitting in is not going to break under you. Another good example of faith is that I hold out my palm, and I put a quarter in it and I clench my fist then tell you that there is a quarter in my cleched fist. I ask if you believe it. If you had faith, you would, but I would merely shatter your faith by opening my palm and revealing that a quarter is indeed in my palm. Don't know what faith is yet? Never mind.

[Aveo]

Well i wrote a full response but lost it when my browser fucked up.

I will respond to a point of interest or 2.

Trouble is, once a way of life starts to explain the unknown, you call it a religion, and when a religion is not attempting to explain the unknown via "supernatural" means, you call it a way of life. But seriously, science is also an attempt at explaining the unknown, to turn unknowns to knowns.

Is not the difference between a way of life and religion that religion also trys to explain ways some things unknown in life? (actual question because im not quite sure myself) And i did liken science to religion so...

Your disagreement with socialization I can accept, even though it has quite allot of proof, it is still an uknown

You could label me an agnostic if you wish, my viewpoint is more of a sociological one then a religious one but it works either way.


I will leave you with some honest food for thought, this is not a flame.

--You should look up some of the points about science, history, the bible, and the process of socialization that i made. Find some reputable sources (the internet for the most part is crap) and cross reference them with eachother from multiple viewpoints. You would be surprised what you find. Even talking to multiple priests from different sects, and/or different religions, and some professors on sociology, archeology, theology, and definitely science since you do not understand its assumptions at all (there are like 5 of them)

And while you do that i will reread the bible/torah cause im pretty rusty about the actual stories.

[Maiorem]

Well i wrote a full response but lost it when my browser fucked up.

I will respond to a point of interest or 2.

I know how you feel. That's why I always press Ctrl+A, Ctrl+C, then Alt+S when posting something.

Is not the difference between a way of life and religion that religion also trys to explain ways some things unknown in life? (actual question because im not quite sure myself) And i did liken science to religion so...

Not exactly. The atheistic view of the term "way of life" seeks to make it devoid of the spiritual and anything "supernatural" to them, hence anything that they see as "unscientific" and involving a deity or a supreme being or higher power they would automatically call "religion" or at the very least, a "cult"; the religious view of "way of life" simply treats the religious beliefs as their "way of life", that is to say, they do not view what they have been taught as "extraordinary" or "illogical" because all that is part of the life they are living.

Your disagreement with socialization I can accept, even though it has quite allot of proof, it is still an uknown

There are simply things that are unknown to those who cannot or do not wish to accept them, but are known to those who are open to them. By any chance, do you watch Discovery Channel?

You could label me an agnostic if you wish, my viewpoint is more of a sociological one then a religious one but it works either way.

The term "agnostic" doesn't simply refer to religion; it basically means "unable to know".

I will leave you with some honest food for thought, this is not a flame.

--You should look up some of the points about science, history, the bible, and the process of socialization that i made. Find some reputable sources (the internet for the most part is crap) and cross reference them with eachother from multiple viewpoints. You would be surprised what you find. Even talking to multiple priests from different sects, and/or different religions, and some professors on sociology, archeology, theology, and definitely science since you do not understand its assumptions at all (there are like 5 of them)

I did. And that's why I made the points in my previous replies to you pertaining to history and science and religion. And no, I don't take the internet seriously unless it has proof and citation of proper sources (some do cite a lot, but you find out they take things out of context when you actually refer to the source of their citation).
I was surprised, when I first faced the facts before I became a Christian (for I did not come from a Christian background, but basically an Asian Buddhist family+ancestry). It was not in spite of the facts, but due to the facts, that I became a Christian. I am not trying to sound preachy here, nor am I attempting at converting you; my responsibility here is to tell you the truth and show you what really goes on in the life about us.

And while you do that i will reread the bible/torah cause im pretty rusty about the actual stories.
Please do, but in any case I would advise you to avoid the older versions such as the King James Version, not because it is not accurate in its translation, but because I am afraid the English in it might bore or tire you out in frustration.

[Aveo]

I know how you feel. That's why I always press Ctrl+A, Ctrl+C, then Alt+S when posting something.

yea i forgot to do it this time >.<


The atheistic view of the term "way of life" seeks to make it devoid of the spiritual and anything "supernatural" to them, hence anything that they see as "unscientific" and involving a deity or a supreme being or higher power they would automatically call "religion" or at the very least, a "cult"; the religious view of "way of life" simply treats the religious beliefs as their "way of life", that is to say, they do not view what they have been taught as "extraordinary" or "illogical" because all that is part of the life they are living.


So, another definition that is completely subjective eh, :P


do you watch Discovery Channel?

not in a while..dont have a tv in my dorm


The term "agnostic" doesn't simply refer to religion; it basically means "unable to know".

I can live with that


I did. And that's why I made the points in my previous replies to you pertaining to history and science and religion. And no, I don't take the internet seriously unless it has proof and citation of proper sources (some do cite a lot, but you find out they take things out of context when you actually refer to the source of their citation).
I was surprised, when I first faced the facts before I became a Christian (for I did not come from a Christian background, but basically an Asian Buddhist family+ancestry). It was not in spite of the facts, but due to the facts, that I became a Christian. I am not trying to sound preachy here, nor am I attempting at converting you; my responsibility here is to tell you the truth and show you what really goes on in the life about us.


I have had my viewpoint on these matters for about 4 years, but they have just been heavily confirmed recently because this past semester i have been required to take courses (really easy/boring ones ill grant you) many of which i have used in this argument...All the science i have used is based off of what i have gone over within the last 2 semesters, all the sociology/history/some religion as well--all just recently reviewed and reinforced by multiple professors/essays/textbooks

My religious beliefs comes from my own experience
I grew up in a split house, father is jewish, mother Christian
I went to church for 13 years and went through 4 different churchs (3 different denominations)
I also went to a Christian school of another sect for a year
I also went to Hebrew school for 5 years, and had a bar-mitzva/mikva (i am jewish atm, albeit in a crisis of faith)
I have attended 3 Temples of 3 different denominations (3 years in reformed during high school--lived away from home, 8 in the conservative from middle school till present--and when i was home from highschool, 1 year in orthodox)
I also grew up with mostly Muslims/Buddhists so i always had to look at things as objectively as I could without getting tangled in my own prejudice.


im not as much of an outsider looking in as you might think :tongue:

[2dumb2live]

(\_/)
(O.o)
(> <)
\
Bunnyism is teh truth.

[Maiorem]

yea i forgot to do it this time >.<

So, another definition that is completely subjective eh, :P

Not entirely.

not in a while..dont have a tv in my dorm

Too bad; there are some documentaries on it that I think you should watch.

I can live with that

I have had my viewpoint on these matters for about 4 years, but they have just been heavily confirmed recently because this past semester i have been required to take courses (really easy/boring ones ill grant you) many of which i have used in this argument...All the science i have used is based off of what i have gone over within the last 2 semesters, all the sociology/history/some religion as well--all just recently reviewed and reinforced by multiple professors/essays/textbooks

What a coincidence; I had these things in mind for about 4 years too, and they are also confirmed more and more because of new books and information. Then again, the science that I use isn't based on the science that I learn, but science that is outside of school curriculum. As for sociology and history, I study them in my own free time since I was about 12, no kidding; I'm a kid who loves to learn, especially history (except for local history, for some reason...).
Then again, what people teach you and tell you might not be entirely accurate, because it is coming from people who have a restriction as to what they can teach (this is especially true in the US and in China), so it is always better to listen to both sides of the argument and judge for yourself. That is what I did.

My religious beliefs comes from my own experience
I grew up in a split house, father is jewish, mother Christian
I went to church for 13 years and went through 4 different churchs (3 different denominations)
I also went to a Christian school of another sect for a year
I also went to Hebrew school for 5 years, and had a bar-mitzva/mikva (i am jewish atm, albeit in a crisis of faith)
I have attended 3 Temples of 3 different denominations (3 years in reformed during high school--lived away from home, 8 in the conservative from middle school till present--and when i was home from highschool, 1 year in orthodox)
I also grew up with mostly Muslims/Buddhists so i always had to look at things as objectively as I could without getting tangled in my own prejudice.

Excuse me if I am touching on a raw nerve here, but have you considered if your family is actually hindering your own beliefs? Well it's just that regardless of your parents' beliefs, your faith is your own, and no one can believe in something for you nor can anyone determine your beliefs.
In my neighborhood, 60% of the total population is officially Muslim (that is to say, if you are born Malay, you are automatically a Muslim without any choice due to the government, but of course some go underground to avoid persecution...), and Christians form only a minority. I only became a Christian 4 years ago and how my life has changed for the better!

im not as much of an outsider looking in as you might think :tongue:

Based on personal observation, it is an irony that most children that are born in Christian families don't quite understand their own faith and have no bother about it while those born in non-Christian families are drawn to it and would even go so far as to defy their parents due to their conviction. This happens a lot in my youth group.

[Sesshoumaru]

I stumbled onto this post and thought I might spare a few words on the subject. I have taken many classes on metaphysics, philosophy of religion, and many other upper division and lower division philosophy classes concerning this topic. After reading many books, philosophy and history related, I have come to the conclusion that there may be a truthful religion; however, the intent behind the creation of most religion consists upon resolving bad moral judgement, including, but not limited to crime. Picture this... it's thousands of years ago, where there are no police officers in sight. Most people are running a muck, doing whatever they please. People have nothing to fear in death, except for the absence of life. UNTIL, someone realized the best way to get people to adhere (or follow) the rules is by showing them that if you do not live a good life you shall be eternally damned. Catholicism states that if you do not follow commandments you shall recieve punishment, and if you commit suicide you shall be eternally damned.
On the subject of whether trying to control people's immoral decisions using religion is a bad or good thing is another matter. Take a look at it from both sides. Without religion people are less afraid of what might happen to them if they do bad things. On the other hand, when religion is taught to people, they may reconsider committing a crime. Unfortunately, not all people are geniuses and can make morally right decisions all the time. However, in the past, extremely intelligent people put in place rules so that stupid people would make less immoral decisions, that could hurt themselves or others. (Yes, "stupid people" usually commit more unjust decisions, that's why jails are not crowded with people who have 150+ IQs).

To summarize what I have just said, is it better to frighten people, and minimize immoral decisions (like stealing and murder), or is it better to not mislead people into believe such things and let them believe whatever they want.
To explain by use of analogy: is it better to let a child steal whatever he or she pleases, or to lie and tell them that if they get caught stealing they will go to prison (even though children can never go to prison).

Please let me know if this has helped in anyway, I like feedback/criticism.

[Sesshoumaru]

I'd also like to add that my theory on the subject which I have explained above is missing a lot of context so that people can actually finish reading it.

In addition to that, it is widely known that religions have been used to control people many times in the past. I don't see why it isn't the same for most if not all religions.

[Maiorem]

Interesting idea, but consider for the most part of "religion", Christianity was basically a death sentence during the first few centuries A.D. until Rome started accepting Christianity. By the above presupposition that all religions are made to control its adherents, Christianity wouldn't have made much sense.

Regardless of what Catholicism may or may not have preached, there is always Sola Scriptura; Only Scripture, practiced by Protestants, which adhere only to the Bible and not the words of the Pope. And just in case some people have this misconception, Catholicism did not exist up until after Rome accepted it; the first Christians weren't Catholic by default, and did things very differently.

As for the imagery used, I would rather tell my child the truth, that if he steals he wouldn't be put into prison but instead would disappoint me. Children are easily impressionable and if you lie to them at a young age, chances are they would not develop any trust in the lying parent. I know; I speak from experience. (not that I have ever been a parent...)

[b3p]

Who wants to join my religion?
its called do what the fuck you want and dont listen to anything anyone tells you about beleifs because there is no solid proof for any of themism.
I cant be arsed being all deep and explaining my full views on religion it would take up several pages of a3 paper, and you dont want that, no one does, let me just say so far ive made 4 catholics become athiests and seriously pissed off a protestant who preaches in the centre of town.
People are stupid and ignorant, be it the christians who slaughtered every fucking religion during the crusades or too the muslim extremists who suicide bomb people, or even the satanists who beleive in being there own gods (please before anyone argues a point on satanism, make sure which branch your talking about, there very different)
Everyone has stupid opinions on beleifs because no one truly knows if there religion exsists, i to quote carlin was christian, which i was until the age of reason.
but lets set aside my own beleifs as brilliant as they are and examine the facts, in this country (i know alot of you are american and such) we have scallys, girls and boys who are cunts dress in tracksuits and hate everyone, the majority of the girls are pregnant before there 20, and a large percentage of them before there 18, infact on tv just last night was a documentry about a 13 year old mum, so point is, why do the majority of them say there raised catholic? if you ask a majority of people who say there religious except of course preachers etc etc they wont know the base principles and rules of there religions, at least thats the way ive found it, and i argue about religion alot

[Maiorem]

And the Crusades was to take back what the Muslims had taken by force from the Jews and Christians. Perhaps you're thinking of the Inquisition? That's nowhere "Christian" even though the perpetrators do claim to be doing so in the name of "Christianity". Heck, I can do anything in the name of whatever religion, but that doesn't mean that that specific religion is actually responsible for what I did. In any case, people have been blaming religion for far too long when it is man who kills, not religion.

[Maiorem]

People don't need religion; people need God.

[b3p]

No the vast majority need a bullet, embedded in their brain, via a gun, especially anyone who preaches religion

[MicroHustler]

religion is a mythical creation by humans to attempt to make connections between things that are hard to connect. It is completely disillusion and it is made in complete ignorance of common sense. And god counts as a mythical creation.

[TigerStripedTeaPot]

I am not religious, in fact I hate religion with a passion, but I can understand why people believe in it...it gives them the idea that there is something after death, and death is something nearly everyone is afraid of.
I mean, why wouldn't you believe in an all mighty invisible man who has power over all and yet still gives children cancer, has people in poorer countries starving to death, allows natural disasters to distroy innocent people's homes and has pedo's working in churches!?

If Religious people stopped preaching to everyone then it wouldn't be such a big deal, I hate it when you say you don't believe in god and they get all nasty on your ass and full on complain about how you're going to hell. God should respect others opinions ;D

Also, religious people do not follow their own rules. I hate it when they say they believe in god and yet they still smoke, swear, have sex before marriage, live with their partner before marriage etc.
Also you can't say that religion isn't one of the major causes of war in the world!

Anyways, that is my opinion.
Sorry if it offended anyone, but by making this thread I am assuming it is open for anyone to add their two cents in?
And don't bother trying to argue with me about it. I don't know the ins and outs of the bible so I wouldn't know what you're talking about ;D

[Maiorem]

No the vast majority need a bullet, embedded in their brain, via a gun, especially anyone who preaches religion

Why don't you practice what you preach?

religion is a mythical creation by humans to attempt to make connections between things that are hard to connect. It is completely disillusion and it is made in complete ignorance of common sense. And god counts as a mythical creation.

As much as this is not contributing to the discussion, the same can be said of science as a mere labelling tool.

I am not religious, in fact I hate religion with a passion, but I can understand why people believe in it...it gives them the idea that there is something after death, and death is something nearly everyone is afraid of.

The irony is that Christianity calls for its adherents to die. And this is especially true during the time when Nero blamed all the Christians for burning Rome while he played the fiddle. Perhaps Rome was burned because he played the fiddle.

I mean, why wouldn't you believe in an all mighty invisible man who has power over all and yet still gives children cancer, has people in poorer countries starving to death, allows natural disasters to distroy innocent people's homes and has pedo's working in churches!?

Man has to live with the consequences of their own actions. To simply be rid of all that is not justice; it is injustice. If you say that God does not exist because of the condition of all these people, I can say that barbers don't exist because I see people on the streets that has not had a haircut for that matter.

If Religious people stopped preaching to everyone then it wouldn't be such a big deal, I hate it when you say you don't believe in god and they get all nasty on your ass and full on complain about how you're going to hell. God should respect others opinions ;D

True, that's why you're not going to Hell just because you chose not to believe in God; everyone is going to Hell because of what they have done.

Also, religious people do not follow their own rules. I hate it when they say they believe in god and yet they still smoke, swear, have sex before marriage, live with their partner before marriage etc.
Also you can't say that religion isn't one of the major causes of war in the world!

These so-called "religious people" only have their mouths working, but they are by no means saved. They are practicing one of two faiths: dead faith and demonic faith. Faith without works is dead, and demonic faith is when they only believe but does not obey God, because even the demons believe and tremble.
People like to point out that "religious people" are all hypocrites but seriously, who in this world isn't? Even Mahatma Ghandi was a hypocrite when he ate beef "just to see how it tastes like". Some people take religion as their excuse, but some others use religion as a mark of blame.

Anyways, that is my opinion.
Sorry if it offended anyone, but by making this thread I am assuming it is open for anyone to add their two cents in?
And don't bother trying to argue with me about it. I don't know the ins and outs of the bible so I wouldn't know what you're talking about ;D
No worries; I am not offended, but I am thankful for your honesty. In any case, I've been dealing with all sorts of people discussing religion, including atheists, agnostics, Muslims, etc. so this is really not new to me.

[dyne]

I could go on and counter every aspect of religion, but, even if I do religious people won't change there mind and quite frankly I don't care enough to gone on rambling about how incredibly stupid you must be to even fathom the idea of there being a God; that walked this earth and then abandon you.

This is one topic that I will not argue on it truly is a pointless agreement.

[Angelofdarkness]

I'm pretty sure that you can fathom this "idea" of there being a God since you made a value judgment on it and called it "retarded" (in effect calling yourself retarded?). Well I suppose maybe you are insulting what you can't fathom in which case that's pretty retarded.

Maybe instead of fathom you mean believe? Fathom just means you can understand it.

Understanding is one root of knowledge, not of stupidity.

[dyne]

I'm pretty sure that you can fathom this "idea" of there being a God since you made a value judgment on it and called it "retarded" (in effect calling yourself retarded?). Well I suppose maybe you are insulting what you can't fathom in which case that's pretty retarded.

Maybe instead of fathom you mean believe? Fathom just means you can understand it.

Understanding is one root of knowledge, not of stupidity.

"how incredibly stupid you must be to even fathom the idea of there being a God; that walk this earth and then abandon you"

1. To penetrate to the meaning or nature of; comprehend.

Let me put that in a sentence which someone so primitavely educated, like you, can understand.

"how incredibly stupid you must be to even begin to understand that there once was a 'God'; that walked this earth and then abandon you."

[Maiorem]

Considering that the people who lack the ability to comprehend the existence of God is accusing those who actually do comprehend of being "stupid" or "retarded", I'd say that the logic of Man is intrigueing...

And to think, it was not God who abandoned us, but us who abandoned God.

[Angelofdarkness]

lol dictionary.com ftw! Notice how I actually used the word "understand" in my sentence, so I don't need you to quote me. Thank you. :amused:

My point was that the understanding of anything doesn't lead to stupidity but to knowledge (whether useful or not).

So, you are saying you actually don't understand the concept of "God"? In which case, if you don't understand it how can you criticize it as stupid?

If I don't understand how quantum mechanics works, can I just go up to a physicist and say "lol you can fathom quantum mechanics; therefore you are stupid." Wouldn't I at least have to know what quantum mechanics entails before I criticize it?

[TigerStripedTeaPot]

I could go on and counter every aspect of religion, but, even if I do religious people won't change there mind.

They won't change their minds and they will counter attack with random readings from the bible that make no sense to anyone in hopes of conferting you.

I just find it funny that it is incredibly hard to get along with anyone religious because they are so closed minded.
Sure they believe in god but if anything strays from what the bible says, it is utter bullshit and should not be brought up ever again.

[Angelofdarkness]

They won't change their minds and they will counter attack with random readings from the bible that make no sense to anyone in hopes of conferting you.

I just find it funny that it is incredibly hard to get along with anyone religious because they are so closed minded.
Sure they believe in god but if anything strays from what the bible says, it is utter bullshit and should not be brought up ever again.

Hurray for gross over-generalizations! :amused:

[dyne]

They won't change their minds and they will counter attack with random readings from the bible that make no sense to anyone in hopes of conferting you.

I just find it funny that it is incredibly hard to get along with anyone religious because they are so closed minded.
Sure they believe in god but if anything strays from what the bible says, it is utter bullshit and should not be brought up ever again.

I got into an absolute massive war with a member named Jesus_Christ. Which went of for weeks of posts that were almost essays each time. It went no where and was a complete waste of time.

[TigerStripedTeaPot]

Hurray for gross over-generalizations! :amused:

haha well half my family are Jehovah Witnesses, and ALL of them do that. So, sorry if I am 'over-generalising' but when you're force-fed the bible from everyone you know, it is kind of hard to think any different.
Just this weekend I was told off by some old man for not believing in god...sorry but i think that is counted as 'retarded'!

[Maiorem]

I got into an absolute massive war with a member named Jesus_Christ. Which went of for weeks of posts that were almost essays each time. It went no where and was a complete waste of time.

Right...like you can count on a person who uses the username "Jesus_Christ" to actually have a nice dialog instead of an unrealistic debate...

haha well half my family are Jehovah Witnesses, and ALL of them do that. So, sorry if I am 'over-generalising' but when you're force-fed the bible from everyone you know, it is kind of hard to think any different.
Just this weekend I was told off by some old man for not believing in god...sorry but i think that is counted as 'retarded'!

Funny how ironic that sounds, considering that Jehovah's Witnesses are the sort of people who come to your door, knock on it and start firing away with their doctrine vs. the doctrine of mainstream Christianity. This frequency of intrusions is increased especially during Christmas Eve and Easter, which I find really annoying.

[Nocturne' Ichigo]

but should religious ppl really 'change their minds'? granted if ur goin to be religious and speak about ur religion atleast be open-minded and accept ppl's views instead of being a soo ignorant and stuck within your traditions to even see to fails within their own logic, i've battle with some interesting ppl and all their arguments end with "well i'm right cuz thats wut God says" despite it not being anywhere in their bibles...

[dyne]

lol dictionary.com ftw! Notice how I actually used the word "understand" in my sentence, so I don't need you to quote me. Thank you. :amused:

My point was that the understanding of anything doesn't lead to stupidity but to knowledge (whether useful or not).

So, you are saying you actually don't understand the concept of "God"? In which case, if you don't understand it how can you criticize it as stupid?

If I don't understand how quantum mechanics works, can I just go up to a physicist and say "lol you can fathom quantum mechanics; therefore you are stupid." Wouldn't I at least have to know what quantum mechanics entails before I criticize it?

You IQ is plummeting like a rock in water. Before you hit rock bottom just shut up.

[dyne]

Right...like you can count on a person who uses the username "Jesus_Christ" to actually have a nice dialog instead of an unrealistic debate...



Funny how ironic that sounds, considering that Jehovah's Witnesses are the sort of people who come to your door, knock on it and start firing away with their doctrine vs. the doctrine of mainstream Christianity. This frequency of intrusions is increased especially during Christmas Eve and Easter, which I find really annoying.

The guy knew tens more about the bible than you.

If you look over the 2000 years what good has religion done for us? When did it ever do anyone any good? The bible contradicts it's self all the time and what do priest do...they then come up with bullshit, they think of on top of there head, to back themselves up that's why more and more people each year believe in science because cold hard facts and theory are much more believable than some contradicting book of faith.

I don't care what you believes are. But I will inform now that when you die you're not going anywhere.

[TigerStripedTeaPot]

Except a wooden box and a nice dug up hole in the ground made specially for you ;)

[Angelofdarkness]

You IQ is plummeting like a rock in water. Before you hit rock bottom just shut up.

But, sadly, you can't even write out a simple insult without grammatical errors. :unsure:

[dyne]

But, sadly, you can't even write out a simple insult without grammatical errors. :unsure:

O NOES I donts proof read. Sorry but you ain't worth my time, Bible Thumper.

[b3p]

@ Maiorem, cause it would be an insanely heavy amount of bullets to carry round, and dont think im one of these people who says they hates religion and then stands idley by when someone goes round handin out jesus flyers and crap.
And can i point out about this specifying branches of christianity thing, its not exactly smart, they all centre around the beleif in god the devil heaven and hell, and in specifics any protestant could be beaten by one simple comment, they beleive there were dinosaurs on the ark, end of, its fucking retarded to think that religion has a point, people have faith because theyre weak, ooooh ill believe in this so that i feel i have a purpose in life, well let me point out something pointed out by george carlin a comedian and genious,

Religion has convinced people that there’s an invisible man…living in the sky, who watches everything you do every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a list of ten specific things he doesn’t want you to do. And if you do any of these things, he will send you to a special place, of burning and fire and smoke and torture and anguish for you to live forever, and suffer and burn and scream until the end of time. But he loves you. He loves you and he needs money.

[Maiorem]

The guy knew tens more about the bible than you.
You'll never know.

If you look over the 2000 years what good has religion done for us? When did it ever do anyone any good? The bible contradicts it's self all the time and what do priest do...they then come up with bullshit, they think of on top of there head, to back themselves up that's why more and more people each year believe in science because cold hard facts and theory are much more believable than some contradicting book of faith.
Religion brings order. Religion helps us appreciate the blessings in our lives. Religion helps us understand why we must suffer due to the consequences of our own actions.
You can just simply say that the Bible contradicts itself, but there is no evidence of this. On the other hand, science has contradicted itself many times, and over the years many corrections have been made. Even Darwin's original theory had to be subject to manipulation and countless presuppositions before it could even pull of as "valid" by the scientific community. Stephen Hawking had to make many corrections to the earlier understanding of physics, which is all detailed in his book "A Brief History of Time". And who knows, maybe in the future someone smarter might come up to correct any mistakes that Stephen Hawking might have made in his corrections.
Science has solved problems only to create other problems.

I don't care what you believes are. But I will inform now that when you die you're not going anywhere.
If that is what you wish, by all means.

@ Maiorem, cause it would be an insanely heavy amount of bullets to carry round, and dont think im one of these people who says they hates religion and then stands idley by when someone goes round handin out jesus flyers and crap.
I meant that you should begin with yourself. Your anti-religious sentiment is almost the same as the irritating way how "religious people" shove their religion into other peoples' mouths.

And can i point out about this specifying branches of christianity thing, its not exactly smart, they all centre around the beleif in god the devil heaven and hell, and in specifics any protestant could be beaten by one simple comment, they beleive there were dinosaurs on the ark, end of, its fucking retarded to think that religion has a point, people have faith because theyre weak, ooooh ill believe in this so that i feel i have a purpose in life, well let me point out something pointed out by george carlin a comedian and genious,
You just mentioned a few out of the many misunderstandings of religion.
Additionally, the main reason why the Bible never mentioned dinosaurs was not because the authors didn't know about the existence of dinosaurs, but because the word "dinosaur" never existed until a few centuries after the first English Bible came to be. Obviously, dinosaurs would be listed as creatures and therefore not subject to distinction like how we determine what is and isn't a "dinosaur" now. And today the term "dinosaur" is used very loosely.

Religion has convinced people that there’s an invisible man…living in the sky, who watches everything you do every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a list of ten specific things he doesn’t want you to do. And if you do any of these things, he will send you to a special place, of burning and fire and smoke and torture and anguish for you to live forever, and suffer and burn and scream until the end of time. But he loves you. He loves you and he needs money.
This is completely off-base.

[b3p]

Ok, im done, seriously and completley through simpley on the basis that you are not presenting any reasonable arguments, this is a religious discussion thread clearly im going to express my views dont get me wrong if i know someone christian (which i do) as long as they dont start going on about i dont say anything but if someone starts preaching what makes you think i have any less of a right to annoy the fuck out of people by preaching back?
Off base? do you know shit about religion let me put that statement in a less comedic format,
God is omnipetent,
the ten commandments,
just read any description of hell and see the ten commandments for references as too why people are there,
yet god claims hes loving and forgiving? and do not even fucking tell me the church doesnt have money and doesnt ask for cause if you do your insulting every person here and on a much grander scale yourself

[TigerStripedTeaPot]

You'll never know.


Religion brings order. Religion helps us appreciate the blessings in our lives. Religion helps us understand why we must suffer due to the consequences of our own actions.
You can just simply say that the Bible contradicts itself, but there is no evidence of this. On the other hand, science has contradicted itself many times, and over the years many corrections have been made. Even Darwin's original theory had to be subject to manipulation and countless presuppositions before it could even pull of as "valid" by the scientific community. Stephen Hawking had to make many corrections to the earlier understanding of physics, which is all detailed in his book "A Brief History of Time". And who knows, maybe in the future someone smarter might come up to correct any mistakes that Stephen Hawking might have made in his corrections.
Science has solved problems only to create other problems.


At least when Science makes a mistake it starts over to find a new meaning.
When someone points something out in the bible that makes no sense, religious people don't think "hmmm maybe this is wrong, maybe there is another way this could have happened, perhaps not everything written in this book is the truth." they end up ranting and spilling out bullshit or going onto a whole other topic in the book. Religious people have no common sense, they have no regard for others opinions, if I stated that I hated god, you would ask why, I would tell you why and you would counter attack with why I should (Preaching.)
It is like a package, you can't be religious without being mentally unstable.

[Nocturne' Ichigo]

The guy knew tens more about the bible than you.

If you look over the 2000 years what good has religion done for us? When did it ever do anyone any good? The bible contradicts it's self all the time and what do priest do...they then come up with bullshit, they think of on top of there head, to back themselves up that's why more and more people each year believe in science because cold hard facts and theory are much more believable than some contradicting book of faith.

I don't care what you believes are. But I will inform now that when you die you're not going anywhere.

I wouldn't say the bible contradicts itself as much as the people who 'preach its word' contradicts themselves...But i've looked through a bunch of different bibles and things in each bible are different, commas in different places,etc which changes the meaning of the text, for example(not sure of the exact wording), when jesus said "truly i say to you today, you will be with me in paradise"(meaning he's saying that at that moment, that he would be in paradise some time in the future as regard to, "truly i say to you, today you will be with me in paradise"(which i believe the reason religion base the everyone is goin to hell or heaven theory from, saying that the dude died and went to heaven right then), which is completely different....as it states in some bibles to say....

Using the latter contradicts several different statements in the bible, and also makes other 'miracles' utterly pointless(resurrection), which, according to the bible, jesus demonstrated, by dying(bible states dead are conscious of nothing at all)...being dead for 3 days and being 'resurrected' to heaven,

I personally think that if u believe in the bible that there would be a new heaven and a new earth as the bible states in 2nd Peter...which would complete contradict the whole everyone goin to heaven and hell theory. Which i think people just ignore because they want to 'hope' for the best.....i will say this......"NOT EVERYONE IS GOING TO HEAVEN" because, from my studies of the bible have lead me to understand, ppl like Moses and Noah CAN'T be in heaven....

Sooo i agree with Dyne, when u die, ur dead(for those religious ppl, until IF ur resurrected)

[Maiorem]

Ok, im done, seriously and completley through simpley on the basis that you are not presenting any reasonable arguments, this is a religious discussion thread clearly im going to express my views dont get me wrong if i know someone christian (which i do) as long as they dont start going on about i dont say anything but if someone starts preaching what makes you think i have any less of a right to annoy the fuck out of people by preaching back?
If you really want to talk about reasonable arguments first take a look at yourself before trying to make false accusations against others; it would at least give yourself some credibility if you are not being a hypocrite.
I am not against you expressing your views, but consider that you express very anti-religious sentiments, which also tend to show your lack of understanding about what religion is about.

Off base? do you know shit about religion let me put that statement in a less comedic format,
God is omnipetent,
the ten commandments,
just read any description of hell and see the ten commandments for references as too why people are there,
yet god claims hes loving and forgiving? and do not even fucking tell me the church doesnt have money and doesnt ask for cause if you do your insulting every person here and on a much grander scale yourself
In that case if I have done anything to insult you, believe me, I tried my utmost.
But of course, it is not the case.
There is no "omnipetent", but if you're trying to say "omnipotent" it's not really unique to Christianity now, is it?
Yes, the Ten Commandments are there. No, you don't know exactly why they were placed there to begin with, nor do you understand their role. The Ten Commandments are not there to condemn anybody, but to show us that none of us are perfect, and that's failing God's standard. And clearly, only by God alone can we be saved.
And just what description of Hell can you find in the Bible? No, I am not asking for the opinions of so-called "church leaders" or pastors, but what is in the Bible itself.
And yeah, God is loving and forgiving, but if people don't come to Him what's the use? It's like I'm offering you some cash that can, say, pay your bills, but if you don't come and get it, it's not like you're going to get it anytime soon, is it?
And I am not saying that the church doesn't have money, but then again they don't demand money from the congregation, the money comes from freewill. It is not as though God needs the money; only, it is to practice your faith, and if you're not willing to part with your money it is fine. Even Jesus paid taxes for goodness' sake.

At least when Science makes a mistake it starts over to find a new meaning.
When someone points something out in the bible that makes no sense, religious people don't think "hmmm maybe this is wrong, maybe there is another way this could have happened, perhaps not everything written in this book is the truth." they end up ranting and spilling out bullshit or going onto a whole other topic in the book. Religious people have no common sense, they have no regard for others opinions, if I stated that I hated god, you would ask why, I would tell you why and you would counter attack with why I should (Preaching.)
It is like a package, you can't be religious without being mentally unstable.
You're looking at "religious" from behind very biased views.
Then again, you make the assumption that there are no answers to the so-called "mistakes" in the Bible when people point out what looks like a discrepiency. And when people actually do give the answers you accuse them of "ranting and spilling out bullshit". Now why don't you think "hmmm maybe it isn't a contradiction/mistake, maybe there is another way to the meaning of this, perhaps not everything is what it appears to be".
In the same way, I can simply say that atheists have no common sense as they too have no regard for the opinions of others. If I stated I believe in God you would ask why, I would tell you why and you would simply insult me for believeing in what your opinions are telling you not to believe (bashing).
In a crazy world, only the crazies are sane.

@Nocturne:
The Bible was originally in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. There are two words translated as "heaven" and two words translated as "hell" in English, so that's where the confusion starts.
Basically, after death the soul enters into either one of "sheol" or "gehenna", a sort of heavenly and hellish purgatory respectively. Sheol was described by Jesus as the "bosom of Abraham" while "gehenna" was a place of torment. After this, the soul is then judged on the Day of Judgment, and then it either goes to the New Heaven or the Lake of Fire.

[Nocturne' Ichigo]

@Nocturne:
The Bible was originally in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. There are two words translated as "heaven" and two words translated as "hell" in English, so that's where the confusion starts.
Basically, after death the soul enters into either one of "sheol" or "gehenna", a sort of heavenly and hellish purgatory respectively. Sheol was described by Jesus as the "bosom of Abraham" while "gehenna" was a place of torment. After this, the soul is then judged on the Day of Judgment, and then it either goes to the New Heaven or the Lake of Fire.

soo ur saying that the human soul travel to a 'purgatory' and awaiting judgment to enter either heaven or hell? wut about this soo called 'new earth'....or 'the meek shall inherit the earth' talks, all of which would be pointless if everyone dies and goes to heaven or hell....even still it makes no sense to even have a hell if the bible talk about throwing Satan and his crew into an abyss then destroying them.....y would god maintain an inferno? i don't believe all good people go to heaven.....for example....Moses nor Noah should not be in heaven....period tho

[cryper900]

well the main question remains that would the world will be aa better place if there were no such thing as a religeon?

[dyne]

You'll never know.
Religion brings order. Religion helps us appreciate the blessings in our lives. Religion helps us understand why we must suffer due to the consequences of our own actions.
You can just simply say that the Bible contradicts itself, but there is no evidence of this. On the other hand, science has contradicted itself many times, and over the years many corrections have been made. Even Darwin's original theory had to be subject to manipulation and countless presuppositions before it could even pull of as "valid" by the scientific community. Stephen Hawking had to make many corrections to the earlier understanding of physics, which is all detailed in his book "A Brief History of Time". And who knows, maybe in the future someone smarter might come up to correct any mistakes that Stephen Hawking might have made in his corrections.
Science has solved problems only to create other problems.

lol!

If you really want to talk about reasonable arguments first take a look at yourself before trying to make false accusations against others; it would at least give yourself some credibility if you are not being a hypocrite.
I am not against you expressing your views, but consider that you express very anti-religious sentiments, which also tend to show your lack of understanding about what religion is about.


In that case if I have done anything to insult you, believe me, I tried my utmost.
But of course, it is not the case.
There is no "omnipetent", but if you're trying to say "omnipotent" it's not really unique to Christianity now, is it?
Yes, the Ten Commandments are there. No, you don't know exactly why they were placed there to begin with, nor do you understand their role. The Ten Commandments are not there to condemn anybody, but to show us that none of us are perfect, and that's failing God's standard. And clearly, only by God alone can we be saved.
And just what description of Hell can you find in the Bible? No, I am not asking for the opinions of so-called "church leaders" or pastors, but what is in the Bible itself.
And yeah, God is loving and forgiving, but if people don't come to Him what's the use? It's like I'm offering you some cash that can, say, pay your bills, but if you don't come and get it, it's not like you're going to get it anytime soon, is it?
And I am not saying that the church doesn't have money, but then again they don't demand money from the congregation, the money comes from freewill. It is not as though God needs the money; only, it is to practice your faith, and if you're not willing to part with your money it is fine. Even Jesus paid taxes for goodness' sake.


You're looking at "religious" from behind very biased views.
Then again, you make the assumption that there are no answers to the so-called "mistakes" in the Bible when people point out what looks like a discrepiency. And when people actually do give the answers you accuse them of "ranting and spilling out bullshit". Now why don't you think "hmmm maybe it isn't a contradiction/mistake, maybe there is another way to the meaning of this, perhaps not everything is what it appears to be".
In the same way, I can simply say that atheists have no common sense as they too have no regard for the opinions of others. If I stated I believe in God you would ask why, I would tell you why and you would simply insult me for believeing in what your opinions are telling you not to believe (bashing).
In a crazy world, only the crazies are sane.

@Nocturne:
The Bible was originally in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. There are two words translated as "heaven" and two words translated as "hell" in English, so that's where the confusion starts.
Basically, after death the soul enters into either one of "sheol" or "gehenna", a sort of heavenly and hellish purgatory respectively. Sheol was described by Jesus as the "bosom of Abraham" while "gehenna" was a place of torment. After this, the soul is then judged on the Day of Judgment, and then it either goes to the New Heaven or the Lake of Fire.


You sure are quick to point out that people are being biased. Yet you keep referring back to the bible. Science is based on knowledge, whereas religion is based on ancient books and faith. There has never been any evidence of there being a god. Science is continuously improving and all you religion people say is it's the devil work.

There's a quote that describes religion perfectly:
"Religion has always had one very useful role, it keeps the poor from murdering the rich." Napoleon Bonaparte

[BiOCaAM]

I have a feeling that every religion other than Christianity is being ignored here. ._.

[Nocturne' Ichigo]

There's a quote that describes religion perfectly:
"Religion has always had one very useful role, it keeps the poor from murdering the rich." Napoleon Bonaparte

LOL nice

[TigerStripedTeaPot]

You're looking at "religious" from behind very biased views.
Then again, you make the assumption that there are no answers to the so-called "mistakes" in the Bible when people point out what looks like a discrepiency. And when people actually do give the answers you accuse them of "ranting and spilling out bullshit". Now why don't you think "hmmm maybe it isn't a contradiction/mistake, maybe there is another way to the meaning of this, perhaps not everything is what it appears to be".
In the same way, I can simply say that atheists have no common sense as they too have no regard for the opinions of others. If I stated I believe in God you would ask why, I would tell you why and you would simply insult me for believeing in what your opinions are telling you not to believe (bashing).
In a crazy world, only the crazies are sane.

Uhm, I have never bashed a religios person for loving god. I have never even asked them why they believe in god (coz I don't give a shit) unless they ask me why I don't believe first.
You on the other had have picked at every little thing I have written and found any possible way of inserting God loving catchphrases and trying to turn anything I have said into something bad.
When have you ever looked at something a 'non believer' has said and thought "ZOMG actually that's pretty true!" ? I have looked at everything you've said and to be honest none of it makes any sense to me.
it all sounds like "Blah, blah, god is good, he loves us, we need to learn from our mistakes blah, blah. God tortures us because he loves us"

Also, I have realised that God is like a nazi, he has punished every single person on this earth becaues 1000q023404 years ago someone at some forbidden fruit.
(Wow he holds a grudge doesn't he!?)
He punishes his believers who pray for him everyday with illness etc, he punishes innocent children who don't know any better with I'llness and poverty. If someone has their own opinion they are apparently going to be damned to hell, but if you pray for him and preach to others then you get to go to heaven/paradise.
He is like some cult leader who needs mindless pawns to tell him how good he is or he is going to wreak havoc over the world.
Seriously, why would someone who 'loves' everyone do this to everyone!? it makes no sense. And don't tell me we are "learning from our mistakes" because that then gives me the right to go and inject a murderer with AIDS (AIDS because god gives us illness) to teach him a lesson for doing wrong.

[Nocturne' Ichigo]

Also, I have realised that God is like a nazi, he has punished every single person on this earth becaues 1000q023404 years ago someone at some forbidden fruit.
(Wow he holds a grudge doesn't he!?)
He punishes his believers who pray for him everyday with illness etc, he punishes innocent children who don't know any better with I'llness and poverty. If someone has their own opinion they are apparently going to be damned to hell, but if you pray for him and preach to others then you get to go to heaven/paradise.
He is like some cult leader who needs mindless pawns to tell him how good he is or he is going to wreak havoc over the world.
Seriously, why would someone who 'loves' everyone do this to everyone!? it makes no sense. And don't tell me we are "learning from our mistakes" because that then gives me the right to go and inject a murderer with AIDS (AIDS because god gives us illness) to teach him a lesson for doing wrong.

If ur going to compare God to a nazi, compare him to a king rather since, well u obey him or u don't, regardless of wut he wants...if u disobey him u face the consequences....that just how rulership is...

Wut makes u think that God is causing all of these problems...God didn't tell man to eat from the tree, soo man cursed himself, God didn't do that, and since man did that TO THEM SELVES... Sooo i don't understand wut that has to do with him....especially since the bible says that the earth is lying in the power of the wicked one and Satan and his crew were hurled here...soooooo those problems....seems best to blame the devil for that.....Man dies due to imperfection....soo if u think God is doin this to 'teach a lesson'....i would think ur wrong...

Not saying im religious or anything

[TigerStripedTeaPot]

If ur going to compare God to a nazi, compare him to a king rather since, well u obey him or u don't, regardless of wut he wants...if u disobey him u face the consequences....that just how rulership is...

Wut makes u think that God is causing all of these problems...God didn't tell man to eat from the tree, soo man cursed himself, God didn't do that, and since man did that TO THEM SELVES... Sooo i don't understand wut that has to do with him....especially since the bible says that the earth is lying in the power of the wicked one and Satan and his crew were hurled here...soooooo those problems....seems best to blame the devil for that.....Man dies due to imperfection....soo if u think God is doin this to 'teach a lesson'....i would think ur wrong...

Not saying im religious or anything

....god is punishing us for something someone did thousands of years ago, you think that is ok?

and I compared him to a nazi because they punished people for doing the opposite to what they wanted, as is god. (plus they torture etc.)
That is my opinion, and I guess no matter what I say, someone is going to quote me and try to convince me other wise.

:P

[Nocturne' Ichigo]

....god is punishing us for something someone did thousands of years ago, you think that is ok?

and I compared him to a nazi because they punished people for doing the opposite to what they wanted, as is god. (plus they torture etc.)
That is my opinion, and I guess no matter what I say, someone is going to quote me and try to convince me other wise.

:P

o no im not trying to convince...just letting u know its not all God's fault :-D

[dyne]

I have a feeling that every religion other than Christianity is being ignored here. ._.

No all religions are the same with the exception of one; Buddhism.

If ur going to compare God to a nazi, compare him to a king rather since, well u obey him or u don't, regardless of wut he wants...if u disobey him u face the consequences....that just how rulership is...

Wut makes u think that God is causing all of these problems...God didn't tell man to eat from the tree, soo man cursed himself, God didn't do that, and since man did that TO THEM SELVES... Sooo i don't understand wut that has to do with him....especially since the bible says that the earth is lying in the power of the wicked one and Satan and his crew were hurled here...soooooo those problems....seems best to blame the devil for that.....Man dies due to imperfection....soo if u think God is doin this to 'teach a lesson'....i would think ur wrong...

Not saying im religious or anything


it's not man it's one.

[Angelofdarkness]

Do you even know all religions to make that statement?

Please elaborate on how Islam is the same as Sikhism or Jainism or Hindu

[TigerStripedTeaPot]

Do you even know all religions to make that statement?

Please elaborate on how Islam is the same as Sikhism or Jainism or Hindu

Oh, Oh can I answer this question too!!?!

My answer is: They all believe in something that isn't real ;D

[Angelofdarkness]

At best that's finding a similarity. That's not saying they are the same. I have a brown house and a brown chair, I don't say my chair is the same as my house because they are both brown.

[dyne]

Please elaborate on how Islam is the same as Sikhism or Jainism or Hindu

I've already told you I have better things to do then talk to you, Bible thumper.

[Angelofdarkness]

So because I said knowledge doesn't equal stupidity, I'm a bible thumper? When have I even referred to the bible when talking to you? When have I ever tried to convert anyone in this thread? I've only ever questioned some of your extreme negative beliefs about religion or spirituality in general.

Is your logic so weak that it's either I'm in total agreement with you, or I'm a "bible thumper"?

[TigerStripedTeaPot]

Sorry but that was the dodgiest example ever.

A brown chair and a brown house has nothing to do with anything. All those religions are based on the same thing, based on the same god, based on things that have no proof!

[Angelofdarkness]

So somehow Hindu's 10,000 gods are the same as the 1 in Christianity? Ancient Norse religion's idea of the all life tree Yggdrasil is somehow the same as the Islamic idea of what?

Jainism's Karma (the physical body which constrains the Jiva) is equivalent to ...?

What is this SAME thing they are all based off of? Not all religions believe in God. Nor do all religions have creator gods.

[TigerStripedTeaPot]

LOL I don't understand a word of any of that.

and actually I should have said that all religions are based on 'A' God.

[Angelofdarkness]

1) Do you know for a fact every religion has a "god"? Buddhism has no creator "gods". They do have gods, but they are not ultimate; nor are they really any better off than you are except they have more power and they live longer (they die too, eventually). There are probably others, but I can't think of one off the top of my head.

2) Even if all religions believes in "gods", can we agree that their methods and specific beliefs vary vastly? For example Hinduism has 10,000+ gods while Christianity has 1. Hindu, Buddhism, Jainism, and many others believe in reincarnation while Judeo-Christian faiths do not. Also They promote differing values. Buddhism promotes looking within yourself for salvation (no one can ultimately save you except yourself), while Christianity says there is no way to salvation outside of Jesus. Would this discrepancy not make the religions different?

Maybe If I used a physics problem it'd be easier to understand:

Would you say that the theories of Newton and Einstein (special relativity) are the same? They both describe the time-evolution of particles with some initial conditions. Heck, Einstein's laws are the same as Newtons when the speeds are much less than the speed of light. They both make MANY of the same assumptions; for example, that the time derivative of the momentum of a particle is the force acting on it. Would you say "they are the same"?

[b3p]

Did you know that any religious beleif which forces you to follow any set of rules sucks mammoth bollocks?

[dyne]

lol

[Angelofdarkness]

That helps this discussion...how?

If "any" set of religious rules are so bad, what about societal rules? Would you say following the law is like sucking "mammoth bollocks"?

[TigerStripedTeaPot]

1) Do you know for a fact every religion has a "god"? Buddhism has no creator "gods". They do have gods, but they are not ultimate; nor are they really any better off than you are except they have more power and they live longer (they die too, eventually). There are probably others, but I can't think of one off the top of my head.

2) Even if all religions believes in "gods", can we agree that their methods and specific beliefs vary vastly? For example Hinduism has 10,000+ gods while Christianity has 1. Hindu, Buddhism, Jainism, and many others believe in reincarnation while Judeo-Christian faiths do not. Also They promote differing values. Buddhism promotes looking within yourself for salvation (no one can ultimately save you except yourself), while Christianity says there is no way to salvation outside of Jesus. Would this discrepancy not make the religions different?

Maybe If I used a physics problem it'd be easier to understand:

Would you say that the theories of Newton and Einstein (special relativity) are the same? They both describe the time-evolution of particles with some initial conditions. Heck, Einstein's laws are the same as Newtons when the speeds are much less than the speed of light. They both make MANY of the same assumptions; for example, that the time derivative of the momentum of a particle is the force acting on it. Would you say "they are the same"?

LOL WHUT!?


Didn't you just say you weren't trying to preach to people?
You're trying awefully hard to prove me wrong.
I don't give a shit if you are a god botherer and don't agree with me. My opinion is I think religion is the biggest load of bullshit ever created 'by man.'

All religion is a waste of time. I have never met a religious person who accepts the fact that not everyone believes in god, you're helping to prove me right by spazzing everytime I write something.

I didn't bother to read that shit you posted, it makes no sense to me, I don't study the bible, I don't study every religion on the planet, I have better things to do with my life. I don't go to church ever Sunday to pray to someone who will end up giving me cancer somewhere down the track.
If you want to believe it then go ahead but don't try to push that onto other people.
Although I guess this is kind of a debate thread and I got myself into it. It is just hilarious that you cannot help but preach to me.

[Angelofdarkness]

How the hell have I been preaching to you? I've never asked you to change your views. I just asked you questions on your views, and how you can reconcile "all religions are the same" with the vastly different practices of different people.

I didn't say any religions is better than any other; nor did I say believing in religion is better than not. I was only arguing one simple fact. That not all religions are in fact the same. Which is my opinion, and you don't have to believe that if you don't want. But seeing as how this is a discussion thread, I thought I'd discuss it with you. But if you don't want to, I don't have to lol, just tell me.

Why do you think that if I don't agree with you, I am automatically trying to convert you?

Last thing...I haven't even MENTIONED the bible in ANY Of my recent posts...<_<

[TigerStripedTeaPot]

Bible comes with religion, it is all the samething LOL. (YES I THINK IT IS THE SAME THING. HUSH PLZ)

[Angelofdarkness]

Ok, that makes sense...all religions follow the bible? But sure, if you don't want to discuss, we won't discuss. :)

[Maiorem]

soo ur saying that the human soul travel to a 'purgatory' and awaiting judgment to enter either heaven or hell? wut about this soo called 'new earth'....or 'the meek shall inherit the earth' talks, all of which would be pointless if everyone dies and goes to heaven or hell....even still it makes no sense to even have a hell if the bible talk about throwing Satan and his crew into an abyss then destroying them.....y would god maintain an inferno? i don't believe all good people go to heaven.....for example....Moses nor Noah should not be in heaven....period tho

The New Heaven (note: in most contexts where the English translation has rendered "heaven", it is referring to the sky) and the New Earth represent Paradise.
And no, Satan and his lackeys wouldn't be "destroyed" but tormented eternally. There is no mention of the destruction of Satan.
God wouldn't need to "maintain" the Inferno; it is eternal punishment.
Why shouldn't Moses or Noah be in heaven? As for Moses, he's at least confirmed to be with Elijah. Then again, Noah did warn the people but they wouldn't listen. So much for being a helpful neighbor.

You sure are quick to point out that people are being biased. Yet you keep referring back to the bible. Science is based on knowledge, whereas religion is based on ancient books and faith. There has never been any evidence of there being a god. Science is continuously improving and all you religion people say is it's the devil work.
As I have pointed out before, science has depended on a large degree of faith as well. Science is not all based on facts. Until science proves that there isn't a God, there remains the large possibility. Look, even "scientists" of a few centuries ago believed and dictated that the earth was flat, yet the Bible has mentioned earth as a sphere at least a few millennia before their time. True, science is continually improving, but to what extent, and how many problems are being created with each advancement of science? No, we don't call it "the Devil's work"; this is the 21st century where we no longer blindly listen to a Pope or priest without checking what really is in the Bible.

There's a quote that describes religion perfectly:
"Religion has always had one very useful role, it keeps the poor from murdering the rich." Napoleon Bonaparte
"Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind"
- Albert Einstein

Uhm, I have never bashed a religios person for loving god. I have never even asked them why they believe in god (coz I don't give a shit) unless they ask me why I don't believe first.
You on the other had have picked at every little thing I have written and found any possible way of inserting God loving catchphrases and trying to turn anything I have said into something bad.
When have you ever looked at something a 'non believer' has said and thought "ZOMG actually that's pretty true!" ? I have looked at everything you've said and to be honest none of it makes any sense to me.
it all sounds like "Blah, blah, god is good, he loves us, we need to learn from our mistakes blah, blah. God tortures us because he loves us"
Excuses again? Admittedly, you have never bashed a religious person for loving God; you bash religion itself and that is a slap to all "religious people" and that would include your own parents if they are what you claim to be, Jehovah's Witnesses.
It is not called "picking", but answering relatively. What "God loving catchphrases"? I don't turn things that are bad into something worse.
So ask yourself the same question, when have you ever looked at something a 'believer' has said and thought "ZOMG actually that's pretty true!" yourself? Hypocrite, much? And you have the audacity to actually admit right after that question that you don't think any of my words make sense. It is not my responsibility to convince you, but only to tell you the facts. Quite frankly, I don't give a damn if you believe or not, but for goodness' sake, know what you are talking about. And I've never said such absurd things as "God tortures us because he loves us".

Also, I have realised that God is like a nazi, he has punished every single person on this earth becaues 1000q023404 years ago someone at some forbidden fruit.
(Wow he holds a grudge doesn't he!?)
Wrong.

He punishes his believers who pray for him everyday with illness etc, he punishes innocent children who don't know any better with I'llness and poverty.
God doesn't punish people with illnesses or poverty; these are direct consequences of the actions of their own or people around them, not the result of some non-existent curse that passed down through Adam. That is Roman Catholic teaching, and perhaps Jehovah's Witness teaching as well.

If someone has their own opinion they are apparently going to be damned to hell, but if you pray for him and preach to others then you get to go to heaven/paradise.
Wrong. Doing any of that will not earn a person heaven or hell.

He is like some cult leader who needs mindless pawns to tell him how good he is or he is going to wreak havoc over the world.
Ridiculous.

Seriously, why would someone who 'loves' everyone do this to everyone!? it makes no sense. And don't tell me we are "learning from our mistakes" because that then gives me the right to go and inject a murderer with AIDS (AIDS because god gives us illness) to teach him a lesson for doing wrong.
He did it to no one. He wants us to be free from all that, but at the same time we must live with the consequences of our own actions. If we live in a world without consequences, then nothing can ever be achieved because the result of an achievement is the consequence of a previous action. If we live in a world devoid of punishment then there can be no justice; imagine rapists and murderers getting away scot-free, environmental polluters destroying the very earth they live in while the people can do nothing to complain. God never gave any person illnesses. This is preposterous.

Did you know that any religious beleif which forces you to follow any set of rules sucks mammoth bollocks?
What a relief; Christianity isn't one that forces anyone to follow rules.

[TigerStripedTeaPot]

The New Heaven (note: in most contexts where the English translation has rendered "heaven", it is referring to the sky) and the New Earth represent Paradise.
And no, Satan and his lackeys wouldn't be "destroyed" but tormented eternally. There is no mention of the destruction of Satan.
God wouldn't need to "maintain" the Inferno; it is eternal punishment.
Why shouldn't Moses or Noah be in heaven? As for Moses, he's at least confirmed to be with Elijah. Then again, Noah did warn the people but they wouldn't listen. So much for being a helpful neighbor.


As I have pointed out before, science has depended on a large degree of faith as well. Science is not all based on facts. Until science proves that there isn't a God, there remains the large possibility. Look, even "scientists" of a few centuries ago believed and dictated that the earth was flat, yet the Bible has mentioned earth as a sphere at least a few millennia before their time. True, science is continually improving, but to what extent, and how many problems are being created with each advancement of science? No, we don't call it "the Devil's work"; this is the 21st century where we no longer blindly listen to a Pope or priest without checking what really is in the Bible.


"Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind"
- Albert Einstein


Excuses again? Admittedly, you have never bashed a religious person for loving God; you bash religion itself and that is a slap to all "religious people" and that would include your own parents if they are what you claim to be, Jehovah's Witnesses.
It is not called "picking", but answering relatively. What "God loving catchphrases"? I don't turn things that are bad into something worse.
So ask yourself the same question, when have you ever looked at something a 'believer' has said and thought "ZOMG actually that's pretty true!" yourself? Hypocrite, much? And you have the audacity to actually admit right after that question that you don't think any of my words make sense. It is not my responsibility to convince you, but only to tell you the facts. Quite frankly, I don't give a damn if you believe or not, but for goodness' sake, know what you are talking about. And I've never said such absurd things as "God tortures us because he loves us".


Wrong.


God doesn't punish people with illnesses or poverty; these are direct consequences of the actions of their own or people around them, not the result of some non-existent curse that passed down through Adam. That is Roman Catholic teaching, and perhaps Jehovah's Witness teaching as well.


Wrong. Doing any of that will not earn a person heaven or hell.


Ridiculous.


He did it to no one. He wants us to be free from all that, but at the same time we must live with the consequences of our own actions. If we live in a world without consequences, then nothing can ever be achieved because the result of an achievement is the consequence of a previous action. If we live in a world devoid of punishment then there can be no justice; imagine rapists and murderers getting away scot-free, environmental polluters destroying the very earth they live in while the people can do nothing to complain. God never gave any person illnesses. This is preposterous.


What a relief; Christianity isn't one that forces anyone to follow rules.

LMFAO! You have too much time on your hands.

[Maiorem]

LMFAO! You have too much time on your hands.
That response only took less than ten minutes; it is because it lacks quality, that is why it doesn't consume much of my time.

[dyne]

The New Heaven (note: in most contexts where the English translation has rendered "heaven", it is referring to the sky) and the New Earth represent Paradise.
And no, Satan and his lackeys wouldn't be "destroyed" but tormented eternally. There is no mention of the destruction of Satan.
God wouldn't need to "maintain" the Inferno; it is eternal punishment.
Why shouldn't Moses or Noah be in heaven? As for Moses, he's at least confirmed to be with Elijah. Then again, Noah did warn the people but they wouldn't listen. So much for being a helpful neighbor.


As I have pointed out before, science has depended on a large degree of faith as well. Science is not all based on facts. Until science proves that there isn't a God, there remains the large possibility. Look, even "scientists" of a few centuries ago believed and dictated that the earth was flat, yet the Bible has mentioned earth as a sphere at least a few millennia before their time. True, science is continually improving, but to what extent, and how many problems are being created with each advancement of science? No, we don't call it "the Devil's work"; this is the 21st century where we no longer blindly listen to a Pope or priest without checking what really is in the Bible.


"Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind"
- Albert Einstein


Excuses again? Admittedly, you have never bashed a religious person for loving God; you bash religion itself and that is a slap to all "religious people" and that would include your own parents if they are what you claim to be, Jehovah's Witnesses.
It is not called "picking", but answering relatively. What "God loving catchphrases"? I don't turn things that are bad into something worse.
So ask yourself the same question, when have you ever looked at something a 'believer' has said and thought "ZOMG actually that's pretty true!" yourself? Hypocrite, much? And you have the audacity to actually admit right after that question that you don't think any of my words make sense. It is not my responsibility to convince you, but only to tell you the facts. Quite frankly, I don't give a damn if you believe or not, but for goodness' sake, know what you are talking about. And I've never said such absurd things as "God tortures us because he loves us".


Wrong.


God doesn't punish people with illnesses or poverty; these are direct consequences of the actions of their own or people around them, not the result of some non-existent curse that passed down through Adam. That is Roman Catholic teaching, and perhaps Jehovah's Witness teaching as well.


Wrong. Doing any of that will not earn a person heaven or hell.


Ridiculous.


He did it to no one. He wants us to be free from all that, but at the same time we must live with the consequences of our own actions. If we live in a world without consequences, then nothing can ever be achieved because the result of an achievement is the consequence of a previous action. If we live in a world devoid of punishment then there can be no justice; imagine rapists and murderers getting away scot-free, environmental polluters destroying the very earth they live in while the people can do nothing to complain. God never gave any person illnesses. This is preposterous.


What a relief; Christianity isn't one that forces anyone to follow rules.

That's a nice post, too bad I'm not reading it.

[Nocturne' Ichigo]

The New Heaven (note: in most contexts where the English translation has rendered "heaven", it is referring to the sky) and the New Earth represent Paradise.
And no, Satan and his lackeys wouldn't be "destroyed" but tormented eternally. There is no mention of the destruction of Satan.
God wouldn't need to "maintain" the Inferno; it is eternal punishment.
Why shouldn't Moses or Noah be in heaven? As for Moses, he's at least confirmed to be with Elijah. Then again, Noah did warn the people but they wouldn't listen. So much for being a helpful neighbor.


Where is paradise?

If i recall the gates to heaven weren't opened until after Jesus died and was resurrected to heaven, if thats the case, that would mean that the ppl who died before Jesus would be sh*t out of luck, unless everyone wasn't intended to go to heaven but for some to be resurrected to a paradise, thus the purpose of the resurrection hope....

[Maiorem]

That's a nice post, too bad I'm not reading it.
I see. Did I ask you?

Where is paradise?

If i recall the gates to heaven weren't opened until after Jesus died and was resurrected to heaven, if thats the case, that would mean that the ppl who died before Jesus would be sh*t out of luck, unless everyone wasn't intended to go to heaven but for some to be resurrected to a paradise, thus the purpose of the resurrection hope....
There will be a resurrection for all people. There are to "gates to heaven" to begin with, but Jesus did mention that the gates of Hell shall not prevail over his church. In case many of you are underinformed, "church" in the original sense never referred to a building, but a congregation of believers.
After the resurrection, all will be judged by God, and will be rewarded/punished accordingly. Before the resurrection, however, the souls of the dead remain in either sheol or gehenna. Those who kicked the bucket before Jesus came to the world in the form of a man do have hope, if they actually listened to God. The Levitical Laws were there as a "shadow of things to come" (as said by Paul), which is revealed to be Jesus coming as the ultimate sacrifice.
As for those who have given up the ghost before they heard of Jesus, they will be judged according to their life on earth, but as for those who have heard the message, they decide what happens next.

[Nocturne' Ichigo]

I see. Did I ask you?


There will be a resurrection for all people. There are to "gates to heaven" to begin with, but Jesus did mention that the gates of Hell shall not prevail over his church. In case many of you are underinformed, "church" in the original sense never referred to a building, but a congregation of believers.
After the resurrection, all will be judged by God, and will be rewarded/punished accordingly. Before the resurrection, however, the souls of the dead remain in either sheol or gehenna. Those who kicked the bucket before Jesus came to the world in the form of a man do have hope, if they actually listened to God. The Levitical Laws were there as a "shadow of things to come" (as said by Paul), which is revealed to be Jesus coming as the ultimate sacrifice.
As for those who have given up the ghost before they heard of Jesus, they will be judged according to their life on earth, but as for those who have heard the message, they decide what happens next.

wut hope do the ppl that died before jesus have, for example Mosas?

[zangetsuclan]

accually in the i remeber reading once that the 3 days jesus body was in the cave his soul was in hell get the soul that were SOL until then

[MicroHustler]

Why don't you practice what you preach?



As much as this is not contributing to the discussion, the same can be said of science as a mere labelling tool.



The irony is that Christianity calls for its adherents to die. And this is especially true during the time when Nero blamed all the Christians for burning Rome while he played the fiddle. Perhaps Rome was burned because he played the fiddle.



Man has to live with the consequences of their own actions. To simply be rid of all that is not justice; it is injustice. If you say that God does not exist because of the condition of all these people, I can say that barbers don't exist because I see people on the streets that has not had a haircut for that matter.



True, that's why you're not going to Hell just because you chose not to believe in God; everyone is going to Hell because of what they have done.



These so-called "religious people" only have their mouths working, but they are by no means saved. They are practicing one of two faiths: dead faith and demonic faith. Faith without works is dead, and demonic faith is when they only believe but does not obey God, because even the demons believe and tremble.
People like to point out that "religious people" are all hypocrites but seriously, who in this world isn't? Even Mahatma Ghandi was a hypocrite when he ate beef "just to see how it tastes like". Some people take religion as their excuse, but some others use religion as a mark of blame.


No worries; I am not offended, but I am thankful for your honesty. In any case, I've been dealing with all sorts of people discussing religion, including atheists, agnostics, Muslims, etc. so this is really not new to me.


Science is also a labeling tool exactly but science allows me to drive a car and watch television and cools my food in a refrigerator. Religion and/or God do not really do shit for or for anyone else. And what are you gonna come back with, "oh you can't tell when god helps", well shit if I cannot tell it is like it does not happen. At least I know that scientist make my life easier even if their bullshit, religion only hurts the overall value of life on the planet, sure some people might find it helps them but the vast majority it does not.

[dyne]

http://www.tubearoo.com/articles/87975/Futurama_Dr_Zoidberg_Is_Jesus.html

[Maiorem]

wut hope do the ppl that died before jesus have, for example Mosas?

Hope in God.

accually in the i remeber reading once that the 3 days jesus body was in the cave his soul was in hell get the soul that were SOL until then

18For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit, 19through whom also he went and preached to the spirits in prison 20who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, 21and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22who has gone into heaven and is at God's right hand—with angels, authorities and powers in submission to him.
1 Peter 3:18-22

Science is also a labeling tool exactly but science allows me to drive a car and watch television and cools my food in a refrigerator. Religion and/or God do not really do shit for or for anyone else. And what are you gonna come back with, "oh you can't tell when god helps", well shit if I cannot tell it is like it does not happen. At least I know that scientist make my life easier even if their bullshit, religion only hurts the overall value of life on the planet, sure some people might find it helps them but the vast majority it does not.
And science at the exact same moment created things called "automobile accidents", "tasteless television", and "Ozone-killing CFC".
If you're saying that God did not do anything for you, you are ignoring all the good things in life that has ever happened to you. God gave you life, and you should appreciate it. If someone simply gives you a wedgie without you knowing who it is who did it, it is not like that wedgie did not happen.
Scientists may have made life easier in one way, but consider then who are the scientists who actually helped make life better. They are mostly Christians.
If you say that religion only hurts the overall value of life on the planet, what evidence do you have? I, on the other hand, have evidences that show that science is the perpetrator behind the destruction of nature and the decay of flora and fauna. Please, at least consider your accusations wisely next time.

[TigerStripedTeaPot]

Hope in God.



18For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit, 19through whom also he went and preached to the spirits in prison 20who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, 21and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22who has gone into heaven and is at God's right hand—with angels, authorities and powers in submission to him.
1 Peter 3:18-22


And science at the exact same moment created things called "automobile accidents", "tasteless television", and "Ozone-killing CFC".
If you're saying that God did not do anything for you, you are ignoring all the good things in life that has ever happened to you. God gave you life, and you should appreciate it. If someone simply gives you a wedgie without you knowing who it is who did it, it is not like that wedgie did not happen.
Scientists may have made life easier in one way, but consider then who are the scientists who actually helped make life better. They are mostly Christians.
If you say that religion only hurts the overall value of life on the planet, what evidence do you have? I, on the other hand, have evidences that show that science is the perpetrator behind the destruction of nature and the decay of flora and fauna. Please, at least consider your accusations wisely next time.

LOL god, you're like the worst preacher I have ever met! You're worse than a Jehova's Witness.
stfu.

[Maiorem]

LOL god, you're like the worst preacher I have ever met! You're worse than a Jehova's Witness.
stfu.
And that's really insulting your parents.
I never said I was going to preach to begin with.

[TigerStripedTeaPot]

And that's really insulting your parents.
I never said I was going to preach to begin with.

You never said you were going to preach and here you are doing it ;D

[Angelofdarkness]

@Maiorem

How can you say that science "did" all those things when you go back and argue that it's the users of religion who "do" bad things not religion itself. Would it not be true vice versa that the blame should not be placed on science, but the people who perpetrated the wrongs?

Science is the accumulation of knowledge based on mathematical and empirical proof. It is not a positive nor negative force without the people who use it. If we followed your view and tried to completely not affect our environment, we'd be stuck in pre-industry, heck even pre-agriculture times.

[b3p]

That helps this discussion...how?

If "any" set of religious rules are so bad, what about societal rules? Would you say following the law is like sucking "mammoth bollocks"?

Does the law stop me legally doing what i want Eg: sex before i was 16 and drinking alcohol before 18 and taking drugs? yes it does therefore it is a load of shit i beleive in anarcho primitivism because very few ways of life religious or political including democracy doesnt work

oh and how the hell would it be like sucking mammoth bollocks? how the hell would anyone now, i said it does and always has sucked mammoth bollocks well i am now anyways........what normal people suck mammoth bollocks, religious people excluded

[Maiorem]

You never said you were going to preach and here you are doing it ;D

Too bad for you.

@Maiorem

How can you say that science "did" all those things when you go back and argue that it's the users of religion who "do" bad things not religion itself. Would it not be true vice versa that the blame should not be placed on science, but the people who perpetrated the wrongs?

Good question. However, I am merely saying that science created the opportunity for these problems to exist. Sorry for not being clear. Without cars, do you think there would be automobile accidents?
With each "answer" that science has put forth, a question or a few questions arise from it.

Science is the accumulation of knowledge based on mathematical and empirical proof. It is not a positive nor negative force without the people who use it. If we followed your view and tried to completely not affect our environment, we'd be stuck in pre-industry, heck even pre-agriculture times.

I would have to disagree with you there. Science actually begins with lots of presuppositions, and scientists work their way from there. It's not like science began with facts, but observations, which may or may not lead to facts. For example, Newton discovered gravity by first observing an apple fall to the ground, and then presupposes that a magnetic force exists in the first place, then begins his experimentation towards proving that gravity exists. And of course, as with all presuppositions, there is the danger of jumping to conclusions too soon, and Stephen Hawking had to clear some of these ill-conceived conclusions, and we now have A Brief History of Time.
There's a price to pay for everything, and it is whether you can afford or are willing to pay that price for comfort.

Does the law stop me legally doing what i want Eg: sex before i was 16 and drinking alcohol before 18 and taking drugs? yes it does therefore it is a load of shit i beleive in anarcho primitivism because very few ways of life religious or political including democracy doesnt work

If everyone thought the same way as you, that whole society would be a failure, since everyone would just take what they want and without legal action all sorts of things can happen like revenge-killings, people wouldn't be learning from their mistakes, and justice would never be served.

oh and how the hell would it be like sucking mammoth bollocks? how the hell would anyone now, i said it does and always has sucked mammoth bollocks well i am now anyways........what normal people suck mammoth bollocks, religious people excluded
Well what would you be able to do under those circumstances if you were to be robbed? You only have yourself as a supporter of your own cause since everyone else doesn't give a damn about you, just as you never gave a damn about others. You could try pursuing the robber and demanding your money back, but it doesn't stop the robber from just giving you what you deserve: a sucker punch.

[Nocturne' Ichigo]

Hope in God.

that doesn't tell me wut will happen to Moses...if u don't know thats cool...cuz i have my ideas


lol @ dyne - http://www.tubearoo.com/articles/4338/Family_Guy_Stewie_Talks_About_Jesus_Powers.html

[b3p]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-primitivism

*Smiles politley and raises middle finger*
Yer, the police are fucking great like oh god youll laugh this one time i got my throat burnt open and heres the punch line they did shit all....... wanna know what id do, i say do, ive been mugged and done this, break the mother fuckers jaw, and dont say the whole what if they had a knife, ive got a knife scar they guy still ended up on the floor, dont assume i dont care about people, i do, they just happen to not be cunts,
and failure how? you ever seen someone smoke a splif n try to fight, you just forget what your talking about, wanna know something really cool, ive never had a bad experience on alcohol or drugs, ive never gone to the police about a fight (bare in mind i only fight in self defence, for a very very good reason) and ive still never had any comeupence and thats in a society that pretty much ignores the law unless its right there next to them or in my case tells them to get fucked

[Angelofdarkness]

Did that entire post not have one period? How can anyone read any of that? <_<

[b3p]

Yes, i apoligse i didnt realise this board was moderated by members of the oxford admittance board.......like grammar matters? and please dont make me start using proper grammar because in high school i handed in no coursework to any subject and the 2 exams i did pass even with half my coursework missing was english, so i could point out flaws with every post here, but this is a RELIGIOUS discussion not a grammatical one

[Nocturne' Ichigo]

but if u expect ppl to understand wut ur trying to say CLEARLY.....it'll help if u make it readable, otherwise ppl will ignore ur thoughts, and ur point

[Maiorem]

that doesn't tell me wut will happen to Moses...if u don't know thats cool...cuz i have my ideas


lol @ dyne - http://www.tubearoo.com/articles/4338/Family_Guy_Stewie_Talks_About_Jesus_Powers.html

All I know about Moses is that he appeared together with Elijah to Jesus, and according to the Bible, Elijah was caught up to heaven in a chariot of fire. I assume that Moses is in the same place as Elijah.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-primitivism

*Smiles politley and raises middle finger*
Yer, the police are fucking great like oh god youll laugh this one time i got my throat burnt open and heres the punch line they did shit all....... wanna know what id do, i say do, ive been mugged and done this, break the mother fuckers jaw, and dont say the whole what if they had a knife, ive got a knife scar they guy still ended up on the floor, dont assume i dont care about people, i do, they just happen to not be cunts,
and failure how? you ever seen someone smoke a splif n try to fight, you just forget what your talking about, wanna know something really cool, ive never had a bad experience on alcohol or drugs, ive never gone to the police about a fight (bare in mind i only fight in self defence, for a very very good reason) and ive still never had any comeupence and thats in a society that pretty much ignores the law unless its right there next to them or in my case tells them to get fucked
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-primitivism#Rejection_of_science
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-primitivism#Hypocrisy
http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/Anarchy

[Nocturne' Ichigo]

All I know about Moses is that he appeared together with Elijah to Jesus, and according to the Bible, Elijah was caught up to heaven in a chariot of fire. I assume that Moses is in the same place as Elijah.


If Moses was in heaven before Jesus got there..it would've been utterly pointless to resurrect his friend Lazarus from the dead...

[b3p]

but if u expect ppl to understand wut ur trying to say CLEARLY.....it'll help if u make it readable, otherwise ppl will ignore ur thoughts, and ur point

Yes clearly grammar is important to you

[TigerStripedTeaPot]

Yes clearly grammar is important to you

LMFAO!!! I love you for that.

[Nocturne' Ichigo]

Yes clearly grammar is important to you

correct

[b3p]

correct

I have said i would do this before if anyone recalls
869

[Maiorem]

If Moses was in heaven before Jesus got there..it would've been utterly pointless to resurrect his friend Lazarus from the dead...

I think you missed the whole point on the resurrection of Lazarus. It was to show that Jesus even had power over life itself, just as how Jesus raised the only son of the widow at Nain.

21"Lord," Martha said to Jesus, "if you had been here, my brother would not have died. 22But I know that even now God will give you whatever you ask."

23Jesus said to her, "Your brother will rise again."

24Martha answered, "I know he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day."

25Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; 26and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?"
John 11:21-26

38Jesus, once more deeply moved, came to the tomb. It was a cave with a stone laid across the entrance. 39"Take away the stone," he said.
"But, Lord," said Martha, the sister of the dead man, "by this time there is a bad odor, for he has been there four days."

40Then Jesus said, "Did I not tell you that if you believed, you would see the glory of God?"

41So they took away the stone. Then Jesus looked up and said, "Father, I thank you that you have heard me. 42I knew that you always hear me, but I said this for the benefit of the people standing here, that they may believe that you sent me."

43When he had said this, Jesus called in a loud voice, "Lazarus, come out!" 44The dead man came out, his hands and feet wrapped with strips of linen, and a cloth around his face.
Jesus said to them, "Take off the grave clothes and let him go."
John 11:38-44




I have said i would do this before if anyone recalls
869
http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/3/36/I_detect_fail.jpg

[b3p]

Really? because tigerstripedteapot seems to have the capability to understand it.......

[Nocturne' Ichigo]

I think you missed the whole point on the resurrection of Lazarus. It was to show that Jesus even had power over life itself, just as how Jesus raised the only son of the widow at Nain.

21"Lord," Martha said to Jesus, "if you had been here, my brother would not have died. 22But I know that even now God will give you whatever you ask."

23Jesus said to her, "Your brother will rise again."

24Martha answered, "I know he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day."

25Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; 26and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?"
John 11:21-26

38Jesus, once more deeply moved, came to the tomb. It was a cave with a stone laid across the entrance. 39"Take away the stone," he said.
"But, Lord," said Martha, the sister of the dead man, "by this time there is a bad odor, for he has been there four days."

40Then Jesus said, "Did I not tell you that if you believed, you would see the glory of God?"

41So they took away the stone. Then Jesus looked up and said, "Father, I thank you that you have heard me. 42I knew that you always hear me, but I said this for the benefit of the people standing here, that they may believe that you sent me."

43When he had said this, Jesus called in a loud voice, "Lazarus, come out!" 44The dead man came out, his hands and feet wrapped with strips of linen, and a cloth around his face.
Jesus said to them, "Take off the grave clothes and let him go."
John 11:38-44





correct i know all about the resurrection and its purpose and yea Jesus is the key but don't u think there was more to resurrecting Lazarus. My whole point with Lazarus is that y would jesus(Lazarus' friend) bring Lazarus from heaven back to the earth to live with all the sicknesses and pains of imperfect mankind, seems really stupid. Unless, in fact, the gates of heaven aren't open until after Jesus died and was resurrected. Jesus resurrecting Lazarus would allow Lazarus the hope of going to heaven instead of the "new earth".

i think there is a bigger picture to certain things...

[The Hyena]

http://www.elimin8.net/cpr/31wd1_1189450450582.jpg

Seriously though....I don't understand how anyone can talk about relgion being something that brings order. Have you seen the Gaza strip? Ever heard of the Crusades, witchunts?

I would be fine with people who can believe their thing and just let other do whatever they do and thats that. The problem is it just never seems to work out that way. Things tend go very differently when someone finds enlightememnts in their respective belife system.
You get all "hey if I feel this way then everyone should" and people just can't leave other people and what they personaly believe well enough alone.
The problem with faith is that even though you may go so far as to let someone have their beliefe, you still think they ae wrong, because if they were right, you'd be wrong, and you can't be wrong wright?
The whole thing is a mess.

[Maiorem]

Really? because tigerstripedteapot seems to have the capability to understand it.......

If she has the ability to understand fail that's not my problem.

correct i know all about the resurrection and its purpose and yea Jesus is the key but don't u think there was more to resurrecting Lazarus. My whole point with Lazarus is that y would jesus(Lazarus' friend) bring Lazarus from heaven back to the earth to live with all the sicknesses and pains of imperfect mankind, seems really stupid. Unless, in fact, the gates of heaven aren't open until after Jesus died and was resurrected. Jesus resurrecting Lazarus would allow Lazarus the hope of going to heaven instead of the "new earth".

i think there is a bigger picture to certain things...

Not quite. People don't immediately go to heaven after they die. Remember that there is still sheol and gehenna.
The New Earth is Heaven.

http://www.elimin8.net/cpr/31wd1_1189450450582.jpg

This accurately presents most of the misconceptions of Christianity.

Seriously though....I don't understand how anyone can talk about relgion being something that brings order. Have you seen the Gaza strip? Ever heard of the Crusades, witchunts?

That's due to people. And in the event where there are two conflicting religions, fights break out, usually beginning with the more aggressive party.
The Gaza Strip is not about religion; it is about reclaiming land.
The Crusades is not about religion; it is also about reclaiming land.
The witchhunts were absurd; that's not following Christ's teachings at all.

I would be fine with people who can believe their thing and just let other do whatever they do and thats that. The problem is it just never seems to work out that way. Things tend go very differently when someone finds enlightememnts in their respective belife system.
You get all "hey if I feel this way then everyone should" and people just can't leave other people and what they personaly believe well enough alone.
The problem with faith is that even though you may go so far as to let someone have their beliefe, you still think they ae wrong, because if they were right, you'd be wrong, and you can't be wrong wright?
The whole thing is a mess.

It applies to all, including yourself. So just in case you are wrong, would you want to take that risk?

[TigerStripedTeaPot]

[QUOTE=Maiorem;962635]If she has the ability to understand fail that's not my problem.
QUOTE]


I understand that you fail. ;D

[Maiorem]

quote=Maiorem;962635]If she has the ability to understand fail that's not my problem.
QUOTE]


I understand that you fail. ;D
For one that doesn't know how to quote, you fail it (it is quoting).

[TigerStripedTeaPot]

For one that doesn't know how to quote, you fail it (it is quoting).

LOL! You're religious AND study the bible, which automatically makes you fail.

Plus, being religious means that you understand that we are human and god didn't make us perfect. ;D

[The Hyena]

That's due to people. And in the event where there are two conflicting religions, fights break out, usually beginning with the more aggressive party.
The Gaza Strip is not about religion; it is about reclaiming land.
The Crusades is not about religion; it is also about reclaiming land.
The witchhunts were absurd

These things were carried out in the name of religion even if that's not what they were about.
Religion isnt my huge problem, but the people who don't know how to just shut the fuck up, believe what they believe and leave it at that.
When two religions decide that they are right and will not be parlayed then fight indeed break out. In the name of their respected religion. Inocents get caught in the middle. Anything based on absolute faith that its true leaves no room for anyone elses belief to also be true.

The image I posted was because I found it funny, and as far as teachings of the bible, I guess it depends on what version you believe and the fact that there are different versions, some include and exclude things voted on by politicians with specific agendas, makes no sense to me.

[Maiorem]

LOL! You're religious AND study the bible, which automatically makes you fail.

So for someone who lacks the capability of doing two simple things at the same time, you're not saying much.

Plus, being religious means that you understand that we are human and god didn't make us perfect. ;D

Wrong. God did make us perfect, but it is by our own foolishness that we fail.

These things were carried out in the name of religion even if that's not what they were about.
Religion isnt my huge problem, but the people who don't know how to just shut the fuck up, believe what they believe and leave it at that.
When two religions decide that they are right and will not be parlayed then fight indeed break out. In the name of their respected religion. Inocents get caught in the middle. Anything based on absolute faith that its true leaves no room for anyone elses belief to also be true.

Anything and everything can be carried our in the name of religion, but it doesn't mean that they're necessarily following the tenets of the respective religions.
There's always that problem, and it's not limited to the religious as well; scientists are pushing "facts" down our throats as well, in case you have not noticed. Atheists are constantly arguing that there is no god, and that would be equivalent to promoting their "religion".
Then again, who are truly innocent? Apart from children, no one is righteous, not even Ghandi (he admitted it himself).

The image I posted was because I found it funny, and as far as teachings of the bible, I guess it depends on what version you believe and the fact that there are different versions, some include and exclude things voted on by politicians with specific agendas, makes no sense to me.

All versions virtually say the same thing, with the difference being the level of English, and where some use direct translations based on the manuscript in their original languages (Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic), others prefer to use paraphrases to better accomodate the English-speaking group.

And then there are the Jehovah's Witnesses who have evidently distorted the Bible when compared to the original manuscripts.

[TigerStripedTeaPot]

So for someone who lacks the capability of doing two simple things at the same time, you're not saying much.

All I can do is LOL at how me messing up a quote has made you feel so superior.

Wrong. God did make us perfect, but it is by our own foolishness that we fail.

LOL I don't like calling people retarded because that is Dyne's payout and I hate it and think it is degrading... but... after reading that I can't help but say...you really are retarded....

[Maiorem]

All I can do is LOL at how me messing up a quote has made you feel so superior.

Wrong. I don't feel superior simply because you messed up a quote. That's not the only thing that you've been doing wrong.

LOL I don't like calling people retarded because that is Dyne's payout and I hate it and think it is degrading... but... after reading that I can't help but say...you really are retarded....

So what are you going to do about it?

[MCAV]

...God...made us...perfect?
Then why was I born...imperfect, with a highly defected right eye, poor vision?
Why the hell am I allergic to...ugh to lame for words...grass pollen

[Maiorem]

...God...made us...perfect?
Then why was I born...imperfect, with a highly defected right eye, poor vision?
Why the hell am I allergic to...ugh to lame for words...grass pollen

You're living with the consequences of death and decay brought into the world by man's actions.

[TigerStripedTeaPot]

Wrong. I don't feel superior simply because you messed up a quote. That's not the only thing that you've been doing wrong.

what have I done that is wrong?
Not believing in god?

So what are you going to do about it?

LOL

[Maiorem]

what have I done that is wrong?
Not believing in god?

Is that all you can think of?

LOL

I suppose you only know how to laugh at people you think are "retards".

[Nocturne' Ichigo]

Not quite. People don't immediately go to heaven after they die. Remember that there is still sheol and gehenna.
The New Earth is Heaven.


That doesn't make any sense...why would the bible mention a new heaven AND a new earth if there the same thing?

i don't believe ppl go to a purgatory state....when they died they're just dead, conscious of nothing...and await a resurrection...

Maiorem is correct about the perfection thing