FC Community
Discussion Boards => Off-Topic => Debate & Discuss => Topic started by: 502mania on September 02, 2010, 06:50:29 am
-
him being half man half god and all. christianity seems like a big pile of stolen beliefs ofom other religons anyone agree??
-
Man made religions thats what they all are.
-
religion is just a way for us to seperate and judge each other.
-
religion is just a way for us to seperate and judge each other.
Damn your on a roll!! ;D
-
:thumbsup:
-
If you haven't, watch the Clash of the Gods. Lots of comparisons to Christianity on that show. It's interesting.
-
If you haven't, watch the Clash of the Gods. Lots of comparisons to Christianity on that show. It's interesting.
im not familiar with it. wat channel?
-
wow I never really noticed before LMAO everyday what I think makes more and more sense..Religion is a great story with villains and all kinds of mystery LMAO
-
wow I never really noticed before LMAO everyday what I think makes more and more sense..Religion is a great story with villains and all kinds of mystery LMAO
i believe in god but not religion. the bible is a book of lessons rather than what happened. every thing going on today is covered in the bible. but lots of religious groups take it way out of context and cancel their beliefs out by doing so. ex. - christians preach to always forgive but speak of eternal demise for those without christ.
-
:thumbsup:
-
If you haven't, watch the Clash of the Gods. Lots of comparisons to Christianity on that show. It's interesting.
im not familiar with it. wat channel?
Lol Sorry. The History Channel.
-
If you haven't, watch the Clash of the Gods. Lots of comparisons to Christianity on that show. It's interesting.
im not familiar with it. wat channel?
Lol Sorry. The History Channel.
I LOVE the History channel :thumbsup:
-
If you haven't, watch the Clash of the Gods. Lots of comparisons to Christianity on that show. It's interesting.
im not familiar with it. wat channel?
Lol Sorry. The History Channel.
I LOVE the History channel :thumbsup:
One more reason why you rock. ;)
-
Thank you thank you ;D I try lmao :peace:
-
You think Hercules is the only vague link to the story of Jesus? I'll respond in length to this thread later unless someone beats me to it.
-
You think Hercules is the only vague link to the story of Jesus? I'll respond in length to this thread later unless someone beats me to it.
there are numerous similar, i just chose hercules because, i thought more people would know about him than any other
-
???
-
him being half man half god and all. christianity seems like a big pile of stolen beliefs ofom other religons anyone agree??
You WILL FIND OUT-----come JUDGEMENT DAY.
-
him being half man half god and all. christianity seems like a big pile of stolen beliefs ofom other religons anyone agree??
You WILL FIND OUT-----come JUDGEMENT DAY.
there is NO true religion. there is one god. and i've said this before. he's not making a list and checking it twice for who accepted christ. And if he did. tell me this -the native americans weren't christain, they never heard of jesus. did god make them suffer for eternity for not knowing? and if so then you're saying he is a demon
-
You WILL FIND OUT-----come JUDGEMENT DAY.
Did anyone else immediately get a picture of Arnold as the Terminator in their head?
there is NO true religion. there is one god. and i've said this before. he's not making a list and checking it twice for who accepted christ. And if he did. tell me this -the native americans weren't christain, they never heard of jesus. did god make them suffer for eternity for not knowing? and if so then you're saying he is a demon
You seem to define god though. And yes, the Christian god Yahweh is a very evil deity despite what the worshipers say. I could go into it if you wish-- right after I make a post about the original post.
-
um maybe just died for millions of people and hercules help me so kinda
-
was Jesus Christ just a CopyCat Savior Myth?
If you are interested in the TRUTH click the link. :)
http://www.christian-thinktank.com/copycatwho1.html
-
was Jesus Christ just a CopyCat Savior Myth?
If you are interested in the TRUTH click the link.
Skimmed it. Typical creationist work-arounds. Take advantage of potential flaws in stories that don't fit Jesus' tale, capitalize on those and then unlink them and use those as cannon-fodder, and then preach about the love the Christ figure gave by saying the things that did and do not happen. To anyone who is skeptical of the supernatural claims of this mythical character, here is a breakdown of the mythical paradigm (Lord Raglan's hero pattern)-
1. Hero's mother is a royal virgin;
2. His father is a king, and
3. Often a near relative of his mother, but
4. The circumstances of his conception are unusual, and
5. He is also reputed to be the son of a god.
6. At birth an attempt is made, usually by his father or his maternal grand father to kill him, but
7. he is spirited away, and
8. Reared by foster -parents in a far country.
9. We are told nothing of his childhood, but
10. On reaching manhood he returns or goes to his future Kingdom.
11. After a victory over the king and/or a giant, dragon, or wild beast,
12. He marries a princess, often the daughter of his predecessor and
13. And becomes king.
14. For a time he reigns uneventfully and
15. Prescribes laws, but
16. Later he loses favor with the gods and/or his subjects, and
17. Is driven from the throne and city, after which
18. He meets with a mysterious death,
19. Often at the top of a hill,
20. His children, if any do not succeed him.
21. His body is not buried, but nevertheless
22. He has one or more holy sepulchres.
Now obviously this isn't a perfect fit for Jesus' tale, but many elements fit so well that they are inarguable. Many characters throughout history (many of them far before Christianity) use this set and many of the aspects in them are given different emotions and meanings, but overall this pattern is still at the foundation. The coolest thing is that you see this story structure even used today.
"When we say that Jesus was produced without sexual union, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended to heaven, we propound nothing new or different from what you believe regarging those who you call the sons of Jupiter"
- Justin Martyr, Church Father
But for more information of problems with the myth, check out this video- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Od2aRld-jvo (special thanks to Queenofnines for posting it in another thread).
-
Skimmed it. Typical creationist work-arounds
Typical atheistic/agnostic statement. Use the word creationist as an insult and cloud the issue materialistic philosophy.
-
Typical atheistic/agnostic statement. Use the word creationist as an insult and cloud the issue materialistic philosophy.
Clouding the supernatural (the impossible) with logic does not make sense-- reality removes the fog. It works the other way.
-
You WILL FIND OUT-----come JUDGEMENT DAY.
Did anyone else immediately get a picture of Arnold as the Terminator in their head?
lol. that's exactly what i saw when i read that. But i believe at one time. a messiah may have came to earth. i believe all the hero stories originate from his or vice-versa. or maybe every religion just has a messiah/profit that they follow the teachings of.
-
Typical atheistic/agnostic statement. Use the word creationist as an insult and cloud the issue materialistic philosophy.
Clouding the supernatural (the impossible) with logic does not make sense-- reality removes the fog. It works the other way.
Claiming that the supernatural is the impossible is materialistic philosophy not fact.
-
[/quote]
Claiming that the supernatural is the impossible is materialistic philosophy not fact.
[/quote]
i definately agree with this. not everything without explanation is impossible
-
<<Today's "God" is just as imaginary as were the historical gods. The fact that millions of people worship a god is meaningless.
The "God" and the "Jesus" that Christians worship today are actually amalgams formed out of ancient pagan gods. The idea of a "virgin birth", "burial in a rock tomb", "resurrection after 3 days" and "eating of body and drinking of blood" had nothing to do with Jesus. All of the rituals in Christianity are completely man-made. Christianity is a snow ball that rolled over a dozen pagan religions. As the snowball grew, it freely attached pagan rituals in order to be more palatable to converts. You can find accounts like these in popular literature:
-- "The vestiges of pagan religion in Christian symbology are undeniable. Egyptian sun disks became the halos of Catholic saints. Pictograms of Isis nursing her miraculously conceived son Horus became the blueprint for our modern images of the Virgin Mary nursing Baby Jesus. And virtually all the elements of the Catholic ritual - the miter, the altar, the doxology, and communion, the act of "God-eating" - were taken directly from earlier pagan mystery religions."
-- "Nothing in Christianity is original. The pre-Christian God Mithras - called the Son of God and the Light of the World - was born on December 25, died, was buried in a rock tomb, and then resurrected in three days. By the way, December 25 is also the birthday or Osiris, Adonis, and Dionysus. The newborn Krishna was presented with gold, frankincense, and myrrh. Even Christianity's weekly holy day was stolen from the pagans.>>
http://www.godisimaginary.com/i3.htm
-
10 Reasons why Superman is better than Jesus
I’ve made a comparative list so that I can definitively prove that the last son of Krypton is superior to the King of Kings in almost every way.
1) Superman has saved the planet for destruction numerous times. Jesus has threatened to return and bring upon the end of the earth with him, but so far is a f**king “no-show”.
2) Jesus performed a few miracles, but Superman can shoot laser beams out of his eyes, he can fly, is indestructible, and can see through everything except lead. In one movie he turned back time. How awesome is that?
3) Jesus may have died for your sins, but Superman died to protect us from an intergalactic killing machine called Doomsday.
4) When Jesus died, he was resurrected 3 days later and then abruptly left, telling his disciples he’d be back within their lifetimes (an obvious lie). Superman died, was in stasis for a while, and emerged with long glorious 90’s hair. Unlike Jesus, however, Superman stuck around and has been busy keeping the world safe from evil.
5) Although not a God, Superman still risks his life all the time trying to combat super villains. Jesus, on the other hand, is apparently all powerful, and yet refuses to do something as basic as healing amputees.
6) Superman can move mountains. Jesus claims praying to him will accomplish the same feat, but no noticeable effects from prayer have ever been measured.
7) Superman is an expert in dozens of languages, and is an accomplished journalist. Jesus never left any writings, or evidence of any of his works.
8 ) Superman hooked up with the insanely hot Lois Lane, while the only women that showed any interest in Jesus were all prostitutes.
9) Jesus said “But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me” (Luke 19:27). Superman, on the other hand, has a strict code of conduct that forbids him to kill anyone.
10) If you fell out of your apartment window and cried for help, Superman would try and save you. Not only will Jesus not even bother to save you; he will send you to hell for all eternity if you don’t believe in him.
BY http://www.thegoodatheist.net/2009/06/superman-better-than-jesus/
-
queenofnines, if there isn't a god, then explain the creation of the universe. even the laws of physics tells you there must be an action for a raction. so what was the action that made the universe
-
Mitrhas
This investigation of Mithraism will mainly focus on the critics assertion that Christianity borrowed the resurrection myth from Mithra. The reason that we will be zooming in on the resurrection and not similarities in sacraments is because the very heart of the Gospel rests in the resurrection narrative. If the resurrection was borrowed from pagan influences and did not historically happen, then as Paul says: "...if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain" (1 Corn. 15:14).
This subject basically comes down to who is more informed in Mithriac origins, and my intentions are to equip you with adequate critical information. What some critics seem to be unaware of is that attempts to reconstruct the beliefs and practices of Mithraism face enormous challenges because of the lack of information that has survived. In fact, we posses no existing texts of their belief system that come from the Mithraic devotees themselves (one is left wondering what sources Chishti knows about that the rest of Mithraic scholars are unaware of). The only references that we have concerning the beliefs of Mithraism are found in early Church fathers (for the reason of defending Christ’s uniqueness) and Platonic philosophers who used Mithraic symbolism for their own philosophical ideas.
To read the rest of the article click here.
http://www.frontline-apologetics.com/Mithras.html
Also for an more in depth comparison of the Egyptian deites Horus and Osiris click here.
http://tektonics.org/copycat/osy.html
-
10 Reasons Jesus is Awesome
1. Jesus saved all of mankind from creation to his second coming.
2. Jesus made blind people see, lame people walk, dead people live, and he fed thousands of people with a few loaves and fishes.
3. Jesus died for your sins.
4. Jesus died, was ressurrected 3 days later, visited his disciples and foretold that some of them would witness his transfiguration.
5. Jesus, God, will heal amputees and everybody else who wants to be healed spiritually, to receive perfect spiritual bodies in heaven.
6. Jesus claimed, if you pray with faith, you will overcome many things.
7. Jesus left The Comforter to give us power to overcome sin
8. Jesus showed mercy to those who were bound in sin.
9. Jesus told a parable in Luke 19 accentuating a second coming.
10. If you fell out of your window and cried for help, Superman isn't real and couldn't save you. If you cried out to Jesus even with your last breath, he would take you with him to paradise. :heart:
-
10 Reasons Jesus is Awesome
1. Jesus saved all of mankind from creation to his second coming.
2. Jesus made blind people see, lame people walk, dead people live, and he fed thousands of people with a few loaves and fishes.
3. Jesus died for your sins.
4. Jesus died, was ressurrected 3 days later, visited his disciples and foretold that some of them would witness his transfiguration.
5. Jesus, God, will heal amputees and everybody else who wants to be healed spiritually, to receive perfect spiritual bodies in heaven.
6. Jesus claimed, if you pray with faith, you will overcome many things.
7. Jesus left The Comforter to give us power to overcome sin
8. Jesus showed mercy to those who were bound in sin.
9. Jesus told a parable in Luke 19 accentuating a second coming.
10. If you fell out of your window and cried for help, Superman isn't real and couldn't save you. If you cried out to Jesus even with your last breath, he would take you with him to paradise. :heart:
:cat: Sherna I am glad you also added this in here.
-
Sherna I am glad you also added this in here.
:) Gotta keep it real for the truth seekers :thumbsup:
-
Claiming that the supernatural is the impossible is materialistic philosophy not fact.
Natural proofs require evidence. Supernatural/extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence. We can agree to that, yes? I have failed to see anything in my life beyond the stretch of emotional claims of this one god among many others. And (no insult directed at you personally-- i understand this word can be taken harshly and I direct it at the masses) to claim the supernatural without the extraordinary evidence balances on a delusion.
not everything without explanation is impossible
Well obviously! But the claims of the Christian god and his doings are so filled-out and yet there is no viable proof free of even the most basic skepticism.
10 Reasons Jesus is Awesome
Wellllll since this has turned into a trend, I only post this as a joke! Not sure if you saw it yet--
http://churchofprime.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/vschart.jpg
-
Supernatural/extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence
Your statement is based on a philosophy of materialism/naturalism. The fact is that there IS evidence for Intelligent Design (and I stated on another thread) Intelligent Design is falsifiable. Intelligent Design doesn't necessarily equate to creationism, however....when the reality of the supernatural is accepted, it becomes irrational to debate the resurrection of Christ and the claims of the bible. Therefore the Christian God gets top billing for the position of Designer. That's exactly the reason that materialists refuse to budge in their position and you have swallowed their philosophy hook line and sinker.
Still it's philosophy, not fact.
Wellllll since this has turned into a trend, I only post this as a joke! Not sure if you saw it yet-
No, I had not seen it but thanks for sharing lol. ;)
-
when the reality of the supernatural is accepted, it becomes irrational to debate the resurrection of Christ and the claims of the bible
This is completely delusional though. ID is pseudoscience because the claims of supernatural intervention in the origin of life are not testable by the methods of science. Call it a materialist philosophy, but your position equates to nothing more than "Accept the supernatural. God did it. You can't prove it because there just isn't viable proof pointing to my personal god yet." For a god to be so well defined and that you wish to allow us to 'wait indefinately for your supernatural proof because it's not impossible', has absolutely no logical stance in an argument.
Edit:
Still it's philosophy, not fact.
Can we agree that a fact is an isolated piece of information about nature? A measurement? Data? Then wouldn't they be facts?
-
when the reality of the supernatural is accepted, it becomes irrational to debate the resurrection of Christ and the claims of the bible
This is completely delusional though. ID is pseudoscience because the claims of supernatural intervention in the origin of life are not testable by the methods of science. Call it a materialist philosophy, but your position equates to nothing more than "Accept the supernatural. God did it. You can't prove it because there just isn't viable proof pointing to my personal god yet." For a god to be so well defined and that you wish to allow us to 'wait indefinately for your supernatural proof because it's not impossible', has absolutely no logical stance in an argument.
Edit:
Still it's philosophy, not fact.
Can we agree that a fact is an isolated piece of information about nature? A measurement? Data? Then wouldn't they be facts?
Materialists can't prove that evolution creates information. My quote from the other thread ...
The design position is falsifiable, since advocates of naturalism could discover a natural process capable of creating the necessary information if such a process exists. If Neo-Darwinism were true as a general theory of biological creation, it would falsify the claim that some additional information-creating mechanism is necessary. The "design is religion, not science" position is not falsifiable because it decides the disputed question by the manipulation of words rather than by empirical investigation. Hence, by the standard of falsifiability the intelligent design hypothesis is scientific, and the refusal to consider it on its merits is unscientific.
The fact is that there is evidence to suggest that there is design in the laws and composition of the universe, and possibly in the biochemical pathways and molecular machines of living beings. Naturalistic materialism2 says that this evidence is really just "appearance of design," and not real design. Accordingly, the appearance of design is just a natural function of the human brain in looking for patterns. According to naturalistic materialism, this appearance of design will disappear as more evidence is revealed. In essence, all design arguments are of the "God of the gaps" variety. However, in several areas of research (e.g., design of the universe, origin of life, and genetics), the "gaps" are increasing as more evidence is uncovered.3 This fact suggests that the "gaps" are not really gaps, but actual evidence of design, since God of the gaps implies that the evidence should decrease the number of gaps as more evidence accumulates.
http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/intelligent_design_religion_science.html
-
queenofnines, if there isn't a god, then explain the creation of the universe. even the laws of physics tells you there must be an action for a raction. so what was the action that made the universe
I don't know why you believers always end with this. How am I to explain to you what caused the Big Bang when scientists themselves aren't sure (but they're working on it)? Y'all sure put me on a high and lofty status for answering these unknowable questions... All I can give you is the peace that we DO have a good deal of our 14.5 billion year history figured out, and we DO know every single thing that came after the Big Bang had a natural cause.
It's grasping at straws to point out in taunts: "Well Team Reality doesn't know what caused X yet, aha! God did it!" Like that answers anything, people...where is your scientifically-sound evidence that "god did it"? Spoiler: there is none.
Note to Sherna: there are many, many more gods that Jesus copied besides just Mithras. Research it sometime...and don't just rely on biased sources (before you say I did with my quote, I was being lazy. The facts on Jesus being a copy-cat exist outside of sites dubbed atheist...like in our history books ;) ).
-
technically the scientific theory and the god and creation theory are both THEORIES neither can be proven or explained. so they both pose an argument and actually creation makes more sense than science which cancels itself out in is own theory
-
1. Jesus saved all of mankind from creation to his second coming.
But only if you believe in him amidst contradictory accounts and a lack of reliable historical evidence. Otherwise you'll scream and burn and cry and moan and feel pain and be tortured, forever and ever!
2. Jesus made blind people see, lame people walk, dead people live, and he fed thousands of people with a few loaves and fishes.
Funny how he doesn't do that anymore...it's almost like all of these events are fabricated mythology.
3. Jesus died for your sins.
I didn't ask him to. Plus, being dead for a mere 3 days doesn't really count as dying OR a sacrifice, now does it? It would have been a sacrifice if Jesus was left to burn in hell forever, equal to what billions of others will have to go through.
4. Jesus died, was ressurrected 3 days later, visited his disciples and foretold that some of them would witness his transfiguration.
And there is no solid proof for this whatsoever. Such a shame to waste one's only life being hung up on the myths of our superstitious, 2000-year-old ancestors!
5. Jesus, God, will heal amputees and everybody else who wants to be healed spiritually, to receive perfect spiritual bodies in heaven.
Um yeah, if I ever lost a limb, I'd want to be healed PHYSICALLY, thanks. What a cop-out for god; your glossing over the fact that god CAN'T heal amputees! But he can do it for some fish, WTF?!
6. Jesus claimed, if you pray with faith, you will overcome many things.
Quote from my awesome hubby: "You can have faith the size of a mountain, but you won't be able to move a mustard seed."
7. Jesus left The Comforter to give us power to overcome sin
Jesus has a Snuggie?
10. If you fell out of your window and cried for help, Superman isn't real and couldn't save you. If you cried out to Jesus even with your last breath, he would take you with him to paradise. :heart:
Fact: gravity will take you to the sidewalk. SPLAT! Wishful thinking with zero tangible evidence: you go to happyland after you go splat. Nevermind the fact that your whole physical body will be dead, and you kind of need that to perceive/experience ANYTHING.
-
technically the scientific theory and the god and creation theory are both THEORIES neither can be proven or explained. so they both pose an argument and actually creation makes more sense than science which cancels itself out in is own theory
You sound like you don't know what the word theory means (in science). And god DOESN'T make more sense when we observe common DNA, evolutionary changes among species, traces of our origins within our bodies, and all of the logical problems.
-
I definately agree queenofnines, you are right, but religion isn't meant to be what people make it. sad how it turned out. christianity without a doubt needs maybe look at some of this. but god is lik santa claus in christianity : making a list and checking it twice. ;)
-
that last post was to when you said the jesus stuff. but im saying, everything came from something, the big bang theory has so many holes as do religions, niether can be proved by science, and right now there is no proof of either.
-
Quote from queenofnines:
<<Today's "God" is just as imaginary as were the historical gods. The fact that millions of people worship a god is meaningless.
:cat: That is just an opinion. The fact that I and millions of people worship our Lord, is not meaningless to us. Maybe to you, in your heart of hearts, but not our heart of hearts.
-
Quote from queenofnines:
<<Today's "God" is just as imaginary as were the historical gods. The fact that millions of people worship a god is meaningless.
:cat: That is just an opinion. The fact that I and millions of people worship our Lord, is not meaningless to us. Maybe to you, in your heart of hearts, but not our heart of hearts.
The fact that there are atheists is also meaningless lol.
-
that last post was to when you said the jesus stuff. but im saying, everything came from something, the big bang theory has so many holes as do religions, niether can be proved by science, and right now there is no proof of either.
The big bang has been proven though with overwhelming evidence that can be seen with technology. It's absolutely amazing how they figured it out in the last 80 or so years. I cannot begin to explain it in depth as it would render this post huge but, if you're interested, this video explains it very well- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PqJ2eEzD3o I know it's 11 minutes, but I highly implore you to watch it if you have the time. It's very cool stuff and I guarentee you'll learn a lot.
Let me also say that I'm glad you're asking these types of questions. Good for you. I hope we're helping and being clear.
That is just an opinion. The fact that I and millions of people worship our Lord, is not meaningless to us. Maybe to you, in your heart of hearts, but not our heart of hearts.
Emotionally no, it is not meaningless. I totally agree that people can find comfort in your beliefs and it can help them which is totally fine (unless it is out of fear). But you can do this without religion too. When applying it to anything out of that emotional context, it is meaningless and sparks many irrelevent debates that always fall to the claims of artificial stories.
the "gaps" are increasing as more evidence is uncovered
This happens with many things though. As usual, this does not mean your defined god exists-- if anything it would seem to push the focus away from a defined god. I admit it leaves space for an undefined metaphysical entity that is beyond a universal/naturalistic view, but putting faith in one man-made god and folding my arms at the other infinite possiblities is absolutely ludicrous. It would seem more wise to 'twiddle my beard' at the thought during the search and not throw all of my chips on one number because I have an emotional focus on it. I'd like to hear Queens thoughts on this too as I might be missing something major here.
-
That is just an opinion. The fact that I and millions of people worship our Lord, is not meaningless to us. Maybe to you, in your heart of hearts, but not our heart of hearts.
Emotionally no, it is not meaningless. I totally agree that people can find comfort in your beliefs and it can help them which is totally fine (unless it is out of fear). But you can do this without religion too. When applying it to anything out of that emotional context, it is meaningless and sparks many irrelevent debates that always fall to the claims of artificial stories.
We are both entitled to agree to disagree here. I have a problem when people speak for others with their own opinions instead of fact. I don't bash anyone's faith, but a few on here simply refuse to acknowledge that there is a difference between opinion and fact. To call my faith meaningless is ridiculous. I don't call someone's belief in atheism meaningless to their "face." I don't believe that way but I accept their choice to believe that way. They should my accept my choice to believe my way, as well, even though they don't believe my way. Either way, we need to be extremely careful what we say and do, because one day each and every person will be accountable for their words (regarding religion/faith/etc.)
-
The fact that I and millions of people worship our Lord, is not meaningless to us.
The point is, strength in numbers isn't a "proof" for god. And I would advise you all to really consider all of the ancient gods that are now dead. Those people believed just as strongly as you do.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pmZupCM8q8 --> non-offensive vid that points out how a lot of the dead gods now show up in our products (lol)
I don't call someone's belief in atheism meaningless to their "face."
Everything is ultimately meaningless...I'll own that. ;)
-
I'd like to hear Queens thoughts on this too as I might be missing something major here.
What you are missing is what every field of science is missing....a natural explanation for the "gaps". Because there isn't one. And queen has already said she isn't a scientist, but it appears that since you can't effectively argue against what I said you are seeking help from someone else who can.
But queen, we are waiting.....how does evolution create information to effectively fill the gaps that God is forbidden to take residence in, and falsify Intelligent Design?
-
The fact that I and millions of people worship our Lord, is not meaningless to us.
The point is, strength in numbers isn't a "proof" for god. And I would advise you all to really consider all of the ancient gods that are now dead. Those people believed just as strongly as you do.
I don't need to consider all of the ancient gods. I consider only God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (3-in-one; Trinity.) I believe the Bible is God's Word, written by men that God chose to put His words into written form for us that become His. There is so much evidence, especially in Israel, Egypt, Greece, etc. that even today have places preserved and marked where people from the Bible actually walked, preached, worked, killed, etc.
-
What you are missing is what every field of science is missing....a natural explanation for the "gaps". Because there isn't one.
Every field of science is missing? That's quite a statement. Ugh...again...if there are gaps, it does not mean your defined Yahweh exists. It just means a viable explanation hasn't presented itself yet due to current limitations. This seems even too defined to label as ID as it states " one which purposefully avoids specifying the nature or identity of the designer" in it's definition. Simply put- what I take as you saying is a rainbows end is where leprechauns hide their pot of gold. Since we don't have decent technology to study a rainbow light spectrum, leprechaun gold is a logical conclusion and should be given scientific scrutiny.
And queen has already said she isn't a scientist, but it appears that since you can't effectively argue against what I said you are seeking help from someone else who can.
No...? I just wanted to hear her opinion. I admit I'm not a scientist either, but I consider looking at things rationally as being a step up from following unoriginal mythology as an explanation of the universe. I'll get back to you later on the evolution question-- it's a nice day out here!
-
you have a point there falconer....
-
About it being a nice day? I know!
-
4) When Jesus died, he was resurrected 3 days later and then abruptly left, telling his disciples he’d be back within their lifetimes (an obvious lie)....
4. Jesus died, was ressurrected 3 days later, visited his disciples and foretold that some of them would witness his transfiguration.
And there is no solid proof for this whatsoever. Such a shame to waste one's only life being hung up on the myths of our superstitious, 2000-year-old ancestors!
Funny how you glossed over the fact that you, yet again, misinterpreted scripture. You accused Jesus of lying, but turns out he wasn't. Nice try though.
3. Jesus died for your sins.
I didn't ask him to.
I hope if I am ever about to be run over by a car, I won't have to ask bystanders to save me. I hope that my husband loves me enough that if my life were in danger I won't have to ask him to save me, that he will save me without even thinking of his own life because he loves me that much.
-
great point sherna.... :thumbsup:
-
Funny how you glossed over the fact that you, yet again, misinterpreted scripture. You accused Jesus of lying, but turns out he wasn't. Nice try though.
<<Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
Matthew 16:28
The language is clear. Jesus told his disciples that some of them would not die before he returned, but that's obviously not how things went down, now is it?
But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.
Matthew 10:22-23
The cities of Israel were not so numerous that it would have taken a fleeing man 2000 years to go over or through them. No man could live that long. Christ said before a fleeing man could go through all the cities, he would come. Again, Christ was speaking of his return in that generation.
What I mean, brothers, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they had none; those who mourn, as if they did not; those who are happy, as if they were not; those who buy something, as if it were not theirs to keep; those who use the things of the world, as if not engrossed in them. For this world in its present form is passing away.
(1 Corinthians 7:29-31 - NIV)
Paul tells the Corinthians that time is short and that the world in its present form is passing away. His words have a strong sense of urgency, rather than being a mere suggestion. Paul believes the world is presently passing away. He is not speaking of some event which could take place 2000 years in the future.
Source: http://www.angelfire.com/pa/greywlf/comingagain.html >>
But I suppose you're just going to reply something like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PK7P7uZFf5o
I hope if I am ever about to be run over by a car, I won't have to ask bystanders to save me. I hope that my husband loves me enough that if my life were in danger I won't have to ask him to save me, that he will save me without even thinking of his own life because he loves me that much.
Let me get this straight -- you're comparing your husband to Jesus? That isn't a proper analogy because you can prove your husband exists; you can prove your husband isn't invisible; you can prove your husband loves you without it being all in your head.
Also, your hubby's sacrifice would be PERMANENT whereas Jesus's wasn't.
-
wow, i'm totally starting to see the other side of this argument. queenofnines you sure did bring things to light. :thumbsup: to you
-
queenofnines: If you do not believe in God, and the Scriptures, then how can you quote (above post) from it just to try and prove points?
-
queenofnines: If you do not believe in God, and the Scriptures, then how can you quote (above post) from it just to try and prove points?
Maybe you meant this in some way I am not getting, but this makes NO sense to me.
(Obviously not on the same 'level' as god vs no god, but here is why I say that)
a) I state that I believe solar power to be the best type and the future of renewable resources. I back up my idea by citing experiments, proof of output, etc., from the person or company who is on the leading edge of it, with the most proof behind them to back it up.
b) queenofnines states that no, the best type of renewable resource is wind powered and that is where the future lies. She also cites experimental data, proof of output, etc., from the person/company she finds to be on the leading edge and with proof to back her statement up.
Now, I don't know how you would approach it, but I would take her proof and material on wind powered and use it to refute what she is saying and give more power to my side of the debate. I am fairly sure she would in turn do the same, but by using MY sources in order to show the fallacy in my thinking.
In any debate/discussion each side will use the other's view, source material, anything they have, to sway the 'argument' to their side. There have been times when references to and citings of atheist/agnostic material was put to use by believers/christians on here as a counter point to an atheist post. That's why your post confused me. I don't see why references to the bible and the scriptures is odd to use.
-
Thanks jordandog!
queenofnines: If you do not believe in God, and the Scriptures, then how can you quote (above post) from it just to try and prove points?
Because the proof is in the pudding. The Bible is a testament against the Christian god due to the countless errors, contradictions, horrific descriptions, historical and scientific inaccuracies, fairytale fables, etc.
"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived." - Isaac Asimov
-
you have to go somewhere to come back, marie
-
Funny how you glossed over the fact that you, yet again, misinterpreted scripture. You accused Jesus of lying, but turns out he wasn't. Nice try though.
<<Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
Matthew 16:28
The language is clear. Jesus told his disciples that some of them would not die before he returned, but that's obviously not how things went down, now is it?
He was speaking of his transfiguration, not his second coming.
But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.
Matthew 10:22-23
The cities of Israel were not so numerous that it would have taken a fleeing man 2000 years to go over or through them. No man could live that long. Christ said before a fleeing man could go through all the cities, he would come. Again, Christ was speaking of his return in that generation.
He was speaking of rejoining the disciples after their mission, not his second coming.
What I mean, brothers, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they had none; those who mourn, as if they did not; those who are happy, as if they were not; those who buy something, as if it were not theirs to keep; those who use the things of the world, as if not engrossed in them. For this world in its present form is passing away.
(1 Corinthians 7:29-31 - NIV)
Paul tells the Corinthians that time is short and that the world in its present form is passing away. His words have a strong sense of urgency, rather than being a mere suggestion. Paul believes the world is presently passing away. He is not speaking of some event which could take place 2000 years in the future.
There is an urgency. Our time for Christian service is short. The world since it's creation is passing away. The minute you are born, you are dying. It is a message to believers to always live for God is if it were your last breath. Always make it count.
I hope if I am ever about to be run over by a car, I won't have to ask bystanders to save me. I hope that my husband loves me enough that if my life were in danger I won't have to ask him to save me, that he will save me without even thinking of his own life because he loves me that much.
Let me get this straight -- you're comparing your husband to Jesus? That isn't a proper analogy because you can prove your husband exists; you can prove your husband isn't invisible; you can prove your husband loves you without it being all in your head.
Also, your hubby's sacrifice would be PERMANENT whereas Jesus's wasn't.
This has nothing to do with proving Jesus' existence. You said you didn't ask him to die for you. I compared that to the absurdity of some one who loves me standing by and waiting to be asked to save my life.
And I guess unless my husband died in the act of saving me then no amount of pain he endured in such an act would matter? Later when retelling the story I guess I should make sure and let everyone know....I didn't ask him to save me, sure he suffered greatly and endured pain beyond imagination........but he lived, so who cares.
-
Funny how you glossed over the fact that you, yet again, misinterpreted scripture. You accused Jesus of lying, but turns out he wasn't. Nice try though.
<<Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
Matthew 16:28
They did didn't they? He came back in 3 days. Or some people believe you stay in your grave until the return of Christ which you don't taste death, I already know what you will say but I don't feel like going into more detail.
The language is clear. Jesus told his disciples that some of them would not die before he returned, but that's obviously not how things went down, now is it?
Came back in 3 days
Very good, Marie!!!!!
-
you have to go somewhere to come back, marie
Resurrected....he died on the cross! He went to Heaven. He came back in 3 days.
Once again, great work, Marie! Great proof!
-
Funny how you glossed over the fact that you, yet again, misinterpreted scripture. You accused Jesus of lying, but turns out he wasn't. Nice try though.
<<Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
Matthew 16:28
The language is clear. Jesus told his disciples that some of them would not die before he returned, but that's obviously not how things went down, now is it?
He was speaking of his transfiguration, not his second coming.
But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.
Matthew 10:22-23
The cities of Israel were not so numerous that it would have taken a fleeing man 2000 years to go over or through them. No man could live that long. Christ said before a fleeing man could go through all the cities, he would come. Again, Christ was speaking of his return in that generation.
He was speaking of rejoining the disciples after their mission, not his second coming.
What I mean, brothers, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they had none; those who mourn, as if they did not; those who are happy, as if they were not; those who buy something, as if it were not theirs to keep; those who use the things of the world, as if not engrossed in them. For this world in its present form is passing away.
(1 Corinthians 7:29-31 - NIV)
Paul tells the Corinthians that time is short and that the world in its present form is passing away. His words have a strong sense of urgency, rather than being a mere suggestion. Paul believes the world is presently passing away. He is not speaking of some event which could take place 2000 years in the future.
There is an urgency. Our time for Christian service is short. The world since it's creation is passing away. The minute you are born, you are dying. It is a message to believers to always live for God is if it were your last breath. Always make it count.
Sherna, I couldn't have phrased it better myself. :)
I was going to address this, but you did it best.
-
Thanks jordandog!
queenofnines: If you do not believe in God, and the Scriptures, then how can you quote (above post) from it just to try and prove points?
Because the proof is in the pudding. The Bible is a testament against the Christian god due to the countless errors, contradictions, horrific descriptions, historical and scientific inaccuracies, fairytale fables, etc.
"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived." - Isaac Asimov
God's Word (Bible) is perfect. It is not as you say it is. There is no "proof in the pudding." Also, that quote of Asimov's is not true and defies the Lord God openly.
-
Thanks jordandog!
queenofnines: If you do not believe in God, and the Scriptures, then how can you quote (above post) from it just to try and prove points?
Because the proof is in the pudding. The Bible is a testament against the Christian god due to the countless errors, contradictions, horrific descriptions, historical and scientific inaccuracies, fairytale fables, etc.
"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived." - Isaac Asimov
God's Word (Bible) is perfect. It is not as you say it is. There is no "proof in the pudding." Also, that quote of Asimov's is not true and defies the Lord God openly.
Improperly read is more like it.
-
He came back in 3 days.
Sorry, that's not what Jesus meant.
Or some people believe you stay in your grave until the return of Christ which you don't taste death
Um, if you're in a grave you're dead!! Unless we have a whole lotta buried alive Christians out there...scary!
He was speaking of his transfiguration, not his second coming.
<<If you've been mistakenly taught that the verses above refer to Christ's Transfiguration, read Revelation 20:12 which coincides with Matthew 16:27 in describing a Judgment Day scenario:
And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened:and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
Revelation 20:12
Christ was, again, clearly referring to his second coming before that present generation passed.
Again, Jesus tells his disciples:
And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the cloudsof heaven with power and great glory.
And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.
Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass*, till all these things be fulfilled.
Matthew 24:30-34
Again, Christ describes certain events and warns those who are listening to him that "This generation shall not pass*, till all these things be fulfilled". He is speaking about their PRESENT generation.
Although the above scriptures clearly convey that Christ was talking about his present generation, there are many other references in the New Testament indicating that the writers of the Gospels and Epistles as well as the followers of Christ firmly believed that Jesus was speaking of their present generation and not some future time hundreds or thousands of years down the road.>>
Source: http://www.angelfire.com/pa/greywlf/comingagain.html
-
This has nothing to do with proving Jesus' existence. You said you didn't ask him to die for you. I compared that to the absurdity of some one who loves me standing by and waiting to be asked to save my life.
And I guess unless my husband died in the act of saving me then no amount of pain he endured in such an act would matter?
I already explained you are using an improper analogy!! I didn't say you were trying to prove Jesus, I said you are using a fallacious comparison!
Of course it would be great if you want to live and all for your hubby to step in and try to save you (no dying on his part necessary). The BIG DIFFERENCE between that situation and Jesus's is that you can witness it before your very eyes; you don't have to take some superstitious goat herder's word for it from 2,000 years ago that your husband would do this for you.
Also, your hubby wouldn't be jumping in to save you because he feared you would burn forever for being inherently "bad" (when you're NOT)...he's jumping in to save you because life is precious and he knows if he doesn't do something, he'll never see you again. Again I go back to how funny I find it that Xtians are some of the most desperate to live...if you're so convinced you're going to get heaven when you die, why try to artificially prolong this life if you get in a car accident or cancer? IF GOD DOESN'T WANT YOU TO DIE, YOU WON'T...right?
And here come the excuses of: "I like life" (really? I heard it's pretty sucky compared to Divine Disneyland), "God isn't done with me yet" (well what are you worried about, then? god won't let you die), or "Well it's just foolish to refuse medical care" (oh really? so you're god isn't as all-powerful as you claim, then?).
In reality, you don't want to risk dying too early if this is indeed the only life you get. ;)
-
God's Word (Bible) is perfect. It is not as you say it is.
No offense, but people who say this either haven't read the whole Bible, or are kidding themselves.
Care to take a crack at some of the inconsistencies if you think it's "perfect", then? http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html (http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html)
Atrocities: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/atrocity.html
Vulgarities: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/vulgar.html
Also, that quote of Asimov's is not true and defies the Lord God openly.
It's true for me and many other atheists I know of! It was a big part of the puzzle in my waking up from religion. You know, when I actually started to sit down and read it straight through like a good Christian should. ;)
-
I was always told to pray to God before I read the bible for wisdom and understanding to be able to properly read the bible..Asking for the holy spirit to interpet the passages...maybe you could try that before you read the bible. :wave:
So god's so incompetent that he couldn't manage to write a book that's easily understandable by all?
-
I was always told to pray to God before I read the bible for wisdom and understanding to be able to properly read the bible..Asking for the holy spirit to interpet the passages...maybe you could try that before you read the bible. :wave:
So god's so incompetent that he couldn't manage to write a book that's easily understandable by all?
He never promised it would be easy to understand.
-
God's Word (Bible) is perfect. It is not as you say it is.
No offense, but people who say this either haven't read the whole Bible, or are kidding themselves.
Care to take a crack at some of the inconsistencies if you think it's "perfect", then? http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html (http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html)
Atrocities: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/atrocity.html
Vulgarities: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/vulgar.html
Also, that quote of Asimov's is not true and defies the Lord God openly.
It's true for me and many other atheists I know of! It was a big part of the puzzle in my waking up from religion. You know, when I actually started to sit down and read it straight through like a good Christian should. ;)
I will get back to you on this (after work later today or tomo., thanks)
-
In reference to Asimov's quote, how can anyone say another person's opinion "is not true"?! That's taking it ('it' being anything that is seen as non-bible/christian support) way too far in my opinion. :(
Thanks jordandog!
Hey queen, waaay late on this one, but you're welcome. ;)
-
I already explained you are using an improper analogy!! I didn't say you were trying to prove Jesus, I said you are using a fallacious comparison!
It's not a fallacious comparison. If we are not talking about proving Jesus' existence then it's a completely relevant and acceptable comparison.
You said you didn't ask Jesus to die for you and he didn't stay dead so it wasn't a sacrifice. I say, I'm glad I didn't have to ask, and I don't put a condition of death on the validity of the sacrifice. Jesus is just as real to me as my husband is. I don't have to see Jesus get tortured and hung on a cross before my eyes to know that it happened. Therefore, for me it is a completely acceptable comparison.
So god's so incompetent that he couldn't manage to write a book that's easily understandable by all?
Please, oh competent one, explain how God would have a book written in a language that would be understood by the biblical age people and us, the people of the 21st century, and people of how many other future centuries there are ahead of us?
-
Care to take a crack at some of the inconsistencies if you think it's "perfect", then?
From http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html
GE 1:3-5 On the first day, God created light, then separated light and darkness.
GE 1:14-19 The sun (which separates night and day) wasn't created until the fourth day.
God created the sun and stars on the first day. When, on the fourth day, it says 'God made two great lights', the word used for 'made' is again 'asah', which means 'appointed' (the same way we would use it in the sentence 'they made me their leader'). On the fourth day, God appointed the sun and stars to be the dividers of day and night, and for seasons and time-telling. In the 'he made the stars also' passage, no word for 'made' really appears there (Strong's Concordance gives it the number 9999, which implies a word which is not in the original Hebrew). It's basically saying 'The stars, also'. Not a contradiction.
GE 1:11-12, 26-27 Trees were created before man was created.
GE 2:4-9 Man was created before trees were created.
Genesis 1:11. And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
Genesis 1:27. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Genesis 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.
Genesis 1 is referring to the Earth itself (the Hebrew 'Erets'), while 2:5 is referring to "the field" (the Hebrew 'Sadeh'). Sadeh is always used in the Bible to refer to a specific area. In fact, in reading 2:5 you can see what the author was talking about - about plants that needed man's help to thrive as opposed to wild plants. Essentially, God created wild plants, but held back on creating those that needed man's help to thrive, until man was created.
GE 1:20-21, 26-27 Birds were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before birds were created.
Genesis 1:20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. (KJV)
Genesis 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. (KJV)
Actually, 1:20 speaks of all creatures, and 2:19 speaks of everything except sea creatures. As science has shown us, all creatures are ultimately made up both of water and of 'ground'. Not a contradiction.
For anyone who is actually interested in studying scripture, I suggest getting a concordance to help with the interpretation of the original language. Also the information here is from http://kingdavid8.com/Contradictions/Home.html
Additionally, searching apologetics materials can help interpretation when trying to understand the culture of the peoples being written to and about in certain passages.
Never be afraid to search out truth and don't ignore claims from people like queenofnines and other skeptics. The truth you find will only serve to strengthen your faith, seek truth always with prayer and supplication and you will find God.....because God IS truth.
-
<<If you've been mistakenly taught that the verses above refer to Christ's Transfiguration, read Revelation 20:12 which coincides with Matthew 16:27 in describing a Judgment Day scenario:
And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened:and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
Revelation 20:12
Firstly, the verse you originally quoted was not Mat 16:27 it was 16:28. 16:27 is referring to the Second Coming. 16:28 is referring to the transfiguration. Note the proximity to Mark 9:1-2
And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power. (2) And after 6 days Jesus taketh with him Peter, and James and John, and leadeth them up into an high mountain apart by themselves: and he was transfigured before them.
Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.
Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass*, till all these things be fulfilled.
Matthew 24:30-34
The fig tree in this proverbial passage was a way of assuring believers that although they cannot know the specific eschatological times, they can know the general time. The fig tree put out its leaves early and everyone
knew spring was close.
24:32-33 When the last generation comes, the Bible’s prophetic passages will fit exactly the history of that day. This knowledge will strengthen the believers’ trust in God amidst end time persecution. The problem with every generation of believers is that they force the Bible into the history of their own day! All attempts have so far have been wrong!
Verse 34: This verse referred to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 by the Roman legion under Titus. Jesus was merging the questions of 24:3: (1) the destruction of the temple, (2) the sign of His return at the end of the age, and (3) the end of the age.
http://freebiblecommentary.org/pdf/EN/VOL01.pdf
-
him being half man half god and all. christianity seems like a big pile of stolen beliefs ofom other religons anyone agree??
No I don't agree.
-
No I don't agree.
http://www.illuminati-news.com/origin-of-christianity.htm
Sunday from pagan Romans,
Easter from the pagan Egyptians,
Christmas from the pagan Babylonians,
the truingod from the Gnostics; immortality from the pagan Greeks,
and some from the teaching of the Messiah,
and with many other doctrines were combined,
and thus the religion of Christianity was formed, which, eventually, became the state religion of the Roman Empire.
i suggest you read the entire page, just follow the link above
-
No I don't agree.
http://www.illuminati-news.com/origin-of-christianity.htm
Sunday from pagan Romans,
Easter from the pagan Egyptians,
Christmas from the pagan Babylonians,
the truingod from the Gnostics; immortality from the pagan Greeks,
and some from the teaching of the Messiah,
and with many other doctrines were combined,
and thus the religion of Christianity was formed, which, eventually, became the state religion of the Roman Empire.
i suggest you read the entire page, just follow the link above
Much of what is pagan about "Christianity" applies to the Catholic Church.
For the first 280 years of Christian history, Christianity was banned by the Roman empire, and Christians were terribly persecuted. This changed after the “conversion” of the Roman Emperor Constantine. Constantine “legalized” Christianity at the Edict of Milan in A.D. 313. Later, in A.D. 325, Constantine called together the Council of Nicea, in an attempt to unify Christianity. Constantine envisioned Christianity as a religion that could unite the Roman Empire, which at that time was beginning to fragment and divide. While this may have seemed to be a positive development for the Christian church, the results were anything but positive. Just as Constantine refused to fully embrace the Christian faith, but continued many of his pagan beliefs and practices, so the Christian church that Constantine promoted was a mixture of true Christianity and Roman paganism.
Constantine found that with the Roman Empire being so vast, expansive, and diverse – not everyone would agree to forsake their religious beliefs and instead embrace Christianity. So, Constantine allowed, and even promoted, the “Christianization” of pagan beliefs. Completely pagan and utterly unbiblical beliefs were given new “Christian” identities.
The origin of the Catholic Church is the tragic compromise of Christianity with the pagan religions that surrounded it. Instead of proclaiming the Gospel and converting the pagans, the Catholic Church “Christianized” the pagan religions, and “paganized” Christianity. By blurring the differences and erasing the distinctions, yes, the Catholic Church made itself attractive to the people of the Roman empire. One result was the Catholic Church becoming the supreme religion in the “Roman world” for centuries. However, another result was the most dominant form of Christianity apostatizing from the true Gospel of Jesus Christ and the true proclamation of God’s Word.
http://www.gotquestions.org/origin-Catholic-church.html
I suggest reading the whole article, as it cites specific examples of pagan tradition integrated into the church.
-
catholicism is a sect of christianity. if i'm not mistaken, they are the same ones that used to sell gods forgiveness
-
Please, oh competent one, explain how God would have a book written in a language that would be understood by the biblical age people and us, the people of the 21st century, and people of how many other future centuries there are ahead of us?
So you're admitting he's not all-powerful? He's god -- can't he do anything?! Does he not write sequels? lol
-
No I don't agree.
http://www.illuminati-news.com/origin-of-christianity.htm
Sunday from pagan Romans,
Easter from the pagan Egyptians,
Christmas from the pagan Babylonians,
the truingod from the Gnostics; immortality from the pagan Greeks,
and some from the teaching of the Messiah,
and with many other doctrines were combined,
and thus the religion of Christianity was formed, which, eventually, became the state religion of the Roman Empire.
Yep. Now watch the Xtians dance to try and rationalize all this. ;)
Note to Sherna -- the Catholics ARE the original Christians!
-
catholicism is a sect of christianity. if i'm not mistaken, they are the same ones that used to sell gods forgiveness
It is a sect of Christianity, there are many sects...and any that deviate from biblical teachings are false religion; whether they call themselves Christian or not. If you are really interested in figuring out who Jesus really was, what the true teachings of Christianity entail, and a better understanding of scriptures then please let me know. I have a lot of materials I can refer you to. If you are not interested and you think you have the answers, please let me know so I don't waste time trying to help you.
-
Please, oh competent one, explain how God would have a book written in a language that would be understood by the biblical age people and us, the people of the 21st century, and people of how many other future centuries there are ahead of us?
So you're admitting he's not all-powerful? He's god -- can't he do anything?! Does he not write sequels? lol
I'm saying God did just fine with the bible we have. With such a diverse amount of language and culture in the world it has been translated in part or in whole into over 2000 languages and dialects. And it is the largest seller of ALL books published.
God can do anything. We today have the ability to interpret languages that once existed based on history. We do just fine. Why would God have people writing things in a language that didn't exist 1500 years ago?? That's an illogical argument.
Note to Sherna -- the Catholics ARE the original Christians!
No they are not. The churches in the NT were the original Christians and they didn't worship the virgin or saints, or wear beads or any other such nonsense in the Catholic church. If you bothered to read the article I posted from you would see how the Catholic church came into being and how it veered off the original apostolic churches of the NT.
-
catholicism is a sect of christianity. if i'm not mistaken, they are the same ones that used to sell gods forgiveness
It is a sect of Christianity, there are many sects...and any that deviate from biblical teachings are false religion; whether they call themselves Christian or not.
I don't understand how you can say that, sherna. I saw in a post (don't ask me what thread it was, too many to keep track of right now ;)) you stated Jehovah's Witnesses were a 'false religion'. Who are you, or anyone, to say that just because they deviate from the exact premises set out in the bible? I'm fairly sure they would say the same thing about your's, that it was a 'false' belief/religion, and I would question that also. It is like you all want to think that you have the corner on what god wants. It would be like taking the NFL Playbook and Rules, set up by the league and followed since it started, but with a few rule changes along the way. Then because one team wants to stick with the old rules, and another wants to modify the way IT sees things, all of a sudden you have teams telling each other that THEY are NOT 'real' football teams, but 'false' ones. Before you know it, the fans (parishioners/followers) don't have a clue what is going on because it has all become one huge, confusing, and muddled mess. The thing is, the fans and the players all still want to reach the ultimate goal - a win (peace, love, truth) and if they are really good at what they do, they will get to the absolute ultimate, the Super Bowl (heaven).
That scenario may sound very silly and/or stupid, but all the back and forth on who is following the correct religion, the correct interpretation of the word of god, etc., has become just as silly to watch, in my opinion. You all say you want the same thing, but no one seems to know or be able to agree on how to get it. That in itself causes more of an uproar than all the atheists and agnostics put together. And we don't seem hell bent on arguing which one is right or blowing each other up in 'non-religious' wars.
-
That is a great and hilarious metaphor. Har har har harrrrrr! If I may quote the Damned Human Race-
"Man is the Religious Animal. He is the only Religious Animal. He is the only animal that has the True Religion, several of them"
-
catholicism is a sect of christianity. if i'm not mistaken, they are the same ones that used to sell gods forgiveness
It is a sect of Christianity, there are many sects...and any that deviate from biblical teachings are false religion; whether they call themselves Christian or not.
I don't understand how you can say that, sherna. I saw in a post (don't ask me what thread it was, too many to keep track of right now ;)) you stated Jehovah's Witnesses were a 'false religion'. Who are you, or anyone, to say that just because they deviate from the exact premises set out in the bible? I'm fairly sure they would say the same thing about your's, that it was a 'false' belief/religion, and I would question that also. It is like you all want to think that you have the corner on what god wants. It would be like taking the NFL Playbook and Rules, set up by the league and followed since it started, but with a few rule changes along the way. Then because one team wants to stick with the old rules, and another wants to modify the way IT sees things, all of a sudden you have teams telling each other that THEY are NOT 'real' football teams, but 'false' ones. Before you know it, the fans (parishioners/followers) don't have a clue what is going on because it has all become one huge, confusing, and muddled mess. The thing is, the fans and the players all still want to reach the ultimate goal - a win (peace, love, truth) and if they are really good at what they do, they will get to the absolute ultimate, the Super Bowl (heaven).
That scenario may sound very silly and/or stupid, but all the back and forth on who is following the correct religion, the correct interpretation of the word of god, etc., has become just as silly to watch, in my opinion. You all say you want the same thing, but no one seems to know or be able to agree on how to get it. That in itself causes more of an uproar than all the atheists and agnostics put together. And we don't seem hell bent on arguing which one is right or blowing each other up in 'non-religious' wars.
I see what you're trying to get at but the bible isn't meant to be changed or added to or altered (like a playbook). There are some issues with attempts at correctly interpreting the original language because language is constantly changing with every generation, words are added and words become extinct. So, interpreting the original Hebrew Aramaic and Greek to relevant current language is an ongoing mission. BUT it is not meant to CHANGE the original meaning.
Mormons, Catholics, Jehovah's Wittness, Muslims, they have all ADDED their own books in addition to bible. Not explanatory books, but books they say are "inspired" like the bible itself...this contradicts the bible they are adding to when it says:
Revelation 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
I do not have a denomination, I am Christian by definition because I believe in the deity of Christ. But I have no "sect" to which I belong. I don't claim to have a corner on what God wants (I am constantly learning new things in the scriptures). But I know what contradicts bible teachings; and those aforementioned sects and beliefs contradict the bible. Islam says that Jesus was only a prophet...well either the Koran is right or it's wrong....but Christianity and Islam can't both be right. JW say Christ is God's literal son and is inferior to God himself, the bible clearly says Jesus IS God...well either the New World Bible used by JW is right or the Holy Bible in it's many translations is right. Mormons say there is a council of Gods...the bible says there is only one God. Well they can't both be right! Catholics pray to statues and saints, the bible calls this idolatry......well since I believe the bible I'm going to have to say that a religion that teaches idolatry is false religion.
With a playbook....there is no right or wrong play, it's whatever works for that team to win. That's not how the Word of God works. It is what it is and God was very clear about the consequences of false teachings of His Word.
With so many different teachings being spread throughout the Christian church today, how can we tell true Bible doctrine from false Bible doctrine. There is one way that is the best to know truth from error. That is to be grounded in God's word the Bible. If you know what the Bible is teaching you will have a clearer view of false doctrine when it is presented to you. No matter who the person is teaching the doctrine. As the late Donald Gray Barnhouse taught in his audio message "Counterfeits" that when new bank tellers are trained, they spend weeks on end touching and handling real money. When they are well acquainted with the feel and texture of real money they know the instant a counterfeit bill hits their fingers without even looking. They know it is a counterfeit just by the feel of the paper. This is how we should know true Bible doctrine so we can tell something is false teaching the minute we hear it.
Knowing the Bible and what sound Christian doctrine is, will prepare us for defending the faith and arm us to stand up for the truth when false doctrine is presented as true Bible doctrine.
http://www.testthespirit.com/true/
-
This debating has got me to think and brought me back to how I feel deep down inside. When I really think about it, I find that the bible is false, Jesus is false, prophets are false, religion is false and basically everything you ever thought was false.
I do however believe there is a creator, a higher power, something larger but we don't know who that is...if I were to try to define this power, this intelligence...I would believe that it created everything and when we die, we are not destroyed but change into an energy and live in another realm/dimension.
I don't think there is a hell (that is made up) and I don't think the creator has anything to do with us while we are alive...we have free will and we fend for ourselves and when we die then we go to our creator...that is what I believe, I will in no way contradict this because it is my real belief...that is why I am no religion, because I think they are all false anyways.
This is a step in the right direction. :thumbsup:
-
it is the largest seller of ALL books published.
Just because it's been bought doesn't mean it's been read. ;D Think of how many Bibles have been wasted on hotel rooms...you people inflate your numbers, no fair!
Why would God have people writing things in a language that didn't exist 1500 years ago?? That's an illogical argument.
So why didn't god inspire people in this day-and-age to come up with an updated version? Psh, because we would think these "prophets" were crazy, of course! Yes, it's much better to rely on ancient, anonymous, pre-scientific texts that can't be verified to get our "truth"...har har.
If you bothered to read the article I posted from you
Girl, I was right there with you when I was Christian. Those silly Catholics. Praying to Mary and saints, eating wafers, going to confession...don't they know non-denominational, white supremacist Christianity is the ONLY true religion?! Someone needs to send a memo to like, 2/3 of all the Jesus believers...they're doing it wrong!! And they will BURN!
/ sarcasm
-
Please, oh competent one, explain how God would have a book written in a language that would be understood by the biblical age people and us, the people of the 21st century, and people of how many other future centuries there are ahead of us?
So you're admitting he's not all-powerful? He's god -- can't he do anything?! Does he not write sequels? lol
God is all-powerful, we, however, are not perfect. Certain cultures and dialects have, through the years, have been hard to understand at face value. There are translations that help us to understand more. Just as a student has to study and research in school, we have to study and research from and about our Master Teacher. Otherwise, we were be perfect like God, and then there would be no reason to study God's Word, because we would know it all. We are to study and develop our spiritual lives with His Word. Please don't make a mountain out of a mole hill.
-
This debating has got me to think and brought me back to how I feel deep down inside. When I really think about it, I find that the bible is false, Jesus is false, prophets are false, religion is false and basically everything you ever thought was false.
I do however believe there is a creator, a higher power, something larger but we don't know who that is...if I were to try to define this power, this intelligence...I would believe that it created everything and when we die, we are not destroyed but change into an energy and live in another realm/dimension.
I don't think there is a hell (that is made up) and I don't think the creator has anything to do with us while we are alive...we have free will and we fend for ourselves and when we die then we go to our creator...that is what I believe, I will in no way contradict this because it is my real belief...that is why I am no religion, because I think they are all false anyways.
Marie, please stop yo-yoing about "Yes, I'm a Christian,"; "no, I'm not." You are making me carsick. One minute you back the Christians, and the next you are saying the opposite. That doesn't help your credibility one way or the other.
-
Please, oh competent one, explain how God would have a book written in a language that would be understood by the biblical age people and us, the people of the 21st century, and people of how many other future centuries there are ahead of us?
So you're admitting he's not all-powerful? He's god -- can't he do anything?! Does he not write sequels? lol
I'm saying God did just fine with the bible we have. With such a diverse amount of language and culture in the world it has been translated in part or in whole into over 2000 languages and dialects. And it is the largest seller of ALL books published.
God can do anything. We today have the ability to interpret languages that once existed based on history. We do just fine. Why would God have people writing things in a language that didn't exist 1500 years ago?? That's an illogical argument.
Note to Sherna -- the Catholics ARE the original Christians!
No they are not. The churches in the NT were the original Christians and they didn't worship the virgin or saints, or wear beads or any other such nonsense in the Catholic church. If you bothered to read the article I posted from you would see how the Catholic church came into being and how it veered off the original apostolic churches of the NT.
Sherna is correct. They were the Christians of Antioch.
-
Girl, I was right there with you when I was Christian. Those silly Catholics. Praying to Mary and saints, eating wafers, going to confession...don't they know non-denominational, white supremacist Christianity is the ONLY true religion?! Someone needs to send a memo to like, 2/3 of all the Jesus believers...they're doing it wrong!! And they will BURN!
/ sarcasm
There is no one TRUE religion. There is only truth according to the bible.
But go ahead with your sarcasm ;) It is only a tactic to poke fun and isn't a legitimate argument. :thumbsup:
-
In reference to Asimov's quote, how can anyone say another person's opinion "is not true"?! That's taking it ('it' being anything that is seen as non-bible/christian support) way too far in my opinion. :(
Thanks jordandog!
Hey queen, waaay late on this one, but you're welcome. ;)
Fact is something that is true. His opinion is based on ideas that do not match with God's creation and the Bible. And like you said, it's your opinion that what I'm saying is taking it way too far. All I can really say is one day people will know the truth and will find out that God is real. I agree it's hard to believe in something other than how something can or cannot be proved through science. But that is where "faith" comes in and believes in something (in this case, God) who is real, but cannot be seen (yet.)
-
God's Word (Bible) is perfect. It is not as you say it is.
No offense, but people who say this either haven't read the whole Bible, or are kidding themselves.
Care to take a crack at some of the inconsistencies if you think it's "perfect", then? http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html (http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html)
Atrocities: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/atrocity.html
Vulgarities: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/vulgar.html
Also, that quote of Asimov's is not true and defies the Lord God openly.
It's true for me and many other atheists I know of! It was a big part of the puzzle in my waking up from religion. You know, when I actually started to sit down and read it straight through like a good Christian should. ;)
First of all, I read through this, but this is what makes the writer opinionated. Here's his beginning quote:
"NOTE: These lists are meant to identify possible problems in the Bible, especially problems which are inherent in a literalist or fundamentalist interpretation. Some of the selections may be resolvable on certain interpretations--after all, almost any problem can be eliminated with suitable rationalizations--but it is the reader's obligation to test this possibility and to decide whether it really makes appropriate sense to do this. To help readers in this task, these lists are aimed at presenting examples where problems may exist given certain allowable (but not always obligatory) assumptions. It should be kept in mind that a perfect and omnipotent God could, should, and likely would see to it that such problems did not exist in a book which s/he had inspired. It should also be kept in mind that what is and is not an inconsistency or contradiction is to some extent a matter of opinion. You are entitled to disagree with the author that these are, in fact, inconsistencies or contradictions."
He says "possible problems" and he also says "test this possibility and to decide...," and "...where problems may exist." He is not even sure himself of these "possible" problems. God's Word is perfect meaning there are no possible problems to decide on.
-
He says "possible problems" and he also says "test this possibility and to decide...," and "...where problems may exist." He is not even sure himself of these "possible" problems. God's Word is perfect meaning there are no possible problems to decide on.
Excellent jcrib! :thumbsup:
Queen, I hope you don't take offense to this but you seem nearly as obsessed with hell as marie!
Message ID: 234150 they're doing it wrong!! And they will BURN!
Message ID: 233800 because he feared you would burn forever for being inherently "bad"
Message ID: 232132 It would have been a sacrifice if Jesus was left to burn in hell forever
Message ID: 231914 he will send you to hell for all eternity
Message ID: 232132 you'll scream and burn and cry and moan and feel pain and be tortured, forever and ever!
Message ID: 225661 you're sinful and will burn in hell if you don't devote your life to Jesus)
Message ID: 224476 Wow, don't you know you would have gone straight to hell and suffered forever by ending your own life?
Message ID: 224476 you might STILL not pass the test and end up in hell rather than the good place
Message ID: 223556 They're still going to burn in agony, for ever and ever!
Message ID: 221678 no longer have to fear the awful invention called hell.
Message ID: 221678 I was involved in several church groups, went to revivals, had a MySpace and book started about Jesus, and even wrote on dollar bills directing people to a site about hell.
Message ID: 221333 Worship me or burn
And this is only within the last month. Granted some of these were taken from the thread Hell is an Unattended Stove...but you started a thread about hell! Did you go to a church where hell was used to scare people? I'm not trying to pick on you but I'm curious as to why it always goes back to the hell issue when you are debating. Also the statement I bolded seems to imply that that is how you yourself witnessed to people....using the reality of hell as a scare tactic. Ironically, it seems you're now using the unreality of hell to veer people away from Christianity?
-
Quote from jcribb:
He says "possible problems" and he also says "test this possibility and to decide...," and "...where problems may exist." He is not even sure himself of these "possible" problems. God's Word is perfect meaning there are no possible problems to decide on.
quote from Sherna:
Excellent jcrib!
Thank you Sherna!
-
I don't understand how you can say that, sherna. I saw in a post (don't ask me what thread it was, too many to keep track of right now ;)) you stated Jehovah's Witnesses were a 'false religion'. Who are you, or anyone, to say that just because they deviate from the exact premises set out in the bible? I'm fairly sure they would say the same thing about your's, that it was a 'false' belief/religion, and I would question that also. It is like you all want to think that you have the corner on what god wants.
All sects of Christianity think everyone else is wrong and they're the only ones who are right. The funny thing is, they're all wrong! ;)
What does it say about god when there are tens of thousands of different ideas about him? Hmm, maybe that he doesn't exist?
-
Queen, I hope you don't take offense to this but you seem nearly as obsessed with hell as marie!
How can I be obsessed about something that doesn't exist?
Did you go to a church where hell was used to scare people?
No. Churches don't like to talk about the parts of their religion/Bible that are uncomfortable or bad, you know. I think more churches SHOULD talk about it, though. Then maybe some more people would come to their senses...
I'm not trying to pick on you but I'm curious as to why it always goes back to the hell issue when you are debating.
Because it's pretty horrible for your religion to go around telling people that they're going to be burned and tortured and punished FOREVER if they don't become a slave to an invisible, inaudible deity. You really don't know how much harm that's doing, do you?
it seems you're now using the unreality of hell to veer people away from Christianity?
Yes, because it's a major way to reason with people. Consider these points, folks:
#1 - First of all, how exactly are you going to be able to feel pain in hell without any nerve endings? Your physical body will be dead, remember.
#2 - The concept of free will is a lie because if you don't believe in and sacrifice your only life to Jesus, you're sentenced to hell. That's blackmail, people. Good video on this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0wSjJAsrAk
#3 - The Xtians can blow smoke all they want, making excuses about "ultimate justice", but it is NOT justice to punish people INFINITELY for FINITE crimes. That is not logical, that is not perfect, that is not just. Hitler could only cause a limited amount of suffering in his lifetime; therefore, there's no point and it is beyond cruel to have him tortured FOREVER.
#4 - Again, Xtians like to proclaim how "god is love", but it is most certainly NOT love to inflict cruel and unusal punishment on one's children for billions upon billions of years (and then billions more) for ANY reason. THINK ABOUT THAT.
#5 - So a serial killer rapist is allowed into heaven if he says, "Oops, my bad! I believe in you, Jesus!" but a sweet old lady scientist who donated to charity and lived a good life (but just so happened to be a skeptic) deserves to burn? Again, THINK ABOUT THAT.
#6 - The concept of a "good" place and a "bad" place after you die just sounds like a total fairytale. Like something our primitive ancestors who didn't understand how the world works came up with.
** Hell is a vile human invention meant to control, oppress, and garner obedience. **
-
thanks for bringing that to light queenofnines, i was starting to think i was the only one who didn't buy the whole hell thing/... :angel12:
-
There is definitely a misconception about hell and it's purpose.
People who wind up in hell, get there for one reason and one reason only. They chose to reject God. It's not a place you suffer for being bad. People who have been presented with the gospel, understand the message, and reject it have made a choice.
We went over this before queen. To force people to be with God forever against their will isn't loving. The atheist Kelly from the RRS, when asked...."what if you're wrong" said she would rather go to hell than spend eternity with a megalomaniacal god. She has clearly made a choice. God does love her, and He loves you. But you have made a choice to reject Him, and the place that is set aside for the people who don't want God is called hell.
Why should hell be preached in churches when these people who go to church are there because they are choosing God? Hell doesn't wait for them, it's not even something they need to concern themselves with, because they made a choice to accept Him. Hell is not for sinners, it is for the people who don't want God. There is no amount of performance of good or bad that will take you to either place, it's a simple choice.....do you want to spend eternity with God or away from Him?
In trying to witness to people about Christ and His sacrifice, the message is that of good news. The good news is that sin no longer has to be a burden, you don't have to be slave to it anymore. Once people understand the love of God, there should no longer be fear of hell. There is no place in hell for the people who love God.
-
either heaven or hell would be eternal life. and i really don't think there is a heaven or hell. there has to be something more complex. and even satan BELIEVES in god, what im trying to say is, its important to make the most out of life and love ALL other forms of life and respect everyones thoughts and views. :wave:
-
Not that I believe in Hell but in my warped screwed head we are in hell!! Really look at the world this is possible hell and maybe we are fighting to get to heaven maybe satan runs the world LMAO Religion is so silly to me..Back and forth..Hypocritical..Fairy Tale like,used in screwed up ways,and some hide the fact they are nuts running a cult.But I respect real people with beliefs..Heartfelt beliefs not taught beliefs..
-
Not that I believe in Hell but in my warped screwed head we are in hell!! Really look at the world this is possible hell and maybe we are fighting to get to heaven maybe satan runs the world LMAO Religion is so silly to me..Back and forth..Hypocritical..Fairy Tale like,used in screwed up ways,and some hide the fact they are nuts running a cult.But I respect real people with beliefs..Heartfelt beliefs not taught beliefs..
:thumbsup: ;) :peace:
-
either heaven or hell would be eternal life. and i really don't think there is a heaven or hell. there has to be something more complex. and even satan BELIEVES in god, what im trying to say is, its important to make the most out of life and love ALL other forms of life and respect everyones thoughts and views. :wave:
Of course satan believes in God! Hence my entire post about "choosing" God. And saying, there is no place in hell for people that "love" God.
That's why Pascals wager is erroneous. It implies that one simply has to believe in God's existence to go to heaven. That's not what God asked of us, we accept Him or reject Him. We want Him or we don't want Him. This life is temporary, this universe is temporary but God created man in Him image; meaning He endowed us with a spirit. Our spirit does not die, once our physical bodies have long decayed our spirits live on. You make a choice while in your physical body to love God or not. When your time is up, God sends you on to your place of choice.
No one knows EXACTLY what heaven or hell entails and it's probably not anything we could wrap our limited human logic around since these places exist outside the physical laws of this world. So it is complex.
Here are a couple of articles from one of my favorite websites
http://www.godandscience.org/doctrine/hell.html
http://www.godandscience.org/doctrine/heaven.html
-
Not that I believe in Hell but in my warped screwed head we are in hell!! Really look at the world this is possible hell and maybe we are fighting to get to heaven maybe satan runs the world ..
I could almost agree with that at times lol. ;)
-
There is definitely a misconception about hell and it's purpose.
Why? Because I totally logically demonstrated that it can't exist?
People who wind up in hell, get there for one reason and one reason only.
FACT: We have zero evidence that any part of you "lives on" after death (and why the hell should you? you've already not-existed for 13.7 billion years before your birth!). You are making this bold assertion without any credibility.
Super happy, catchy song about heaven (you'll even like this one Sherna ;) ): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9bMi4s_yOE ;D ;D
They chose to reject God.
No, I studied the evidence for a god's existence and didn't find it compelling.
It's not a place you suffer for being bad.
So wait, I won't suffer? And I thought I WAS bad because of sin?! Remember -- Christianity teaches that we're ALL destined for hell because of being "bad". Stop saying it's just atheists who "deserve" it.
We went over this before queen. To force people to be with God forever against their will isn't loving.
And having demons torture me forever IS?!
she would rather go to hell than spend eternity with a megalomaniacal god.
Don't use her words as some kind of justification that atheists secretly WANT to be punished forever. I don't want to be!! What she means is something you can't understand as a believer; that if in the astronomically small chance a malevolent personal god exists, the alternative of worshiping his evil *bleep* in heaven doesn't exactly sound like a picnic, either!
the place that is set aside for the people who don't want God is called hell.
And the fact that you're okay with this unimaginable absurdity shows what a stranglehood religion has over you.
Hell doesn't wait for them, it's not even something they need to concern themselves with, because they made a choice to accept Him.
Oh really? There seem to be plenty of Scripture verses and schools of thought that say merely believing in Jesus isn't good enough. You are also assuming that no one will ever walk away like I did...surely using a scare tactic like hell may prevent this for some!!
Hell is not for sinners, it is for the people who don't want God.
Yes it IS for sinners because if you break even ONE commandment, you go there. That is incredibly offensive to say it's "just for us" benign, disbelievers of bullsh*t.
The good news is that sin no longer has to be a burden, you don't have to be slave to it anymore.
I'm not a slave to "sin" and neither are you. Have you watched Nonstampcollector's vids on this??
-
Why? Because I totally logically demonstrated that it can't exist?
No, you didn't.
No, I studied the evidence for a god's existence and didn't find it compelling.
Rejected Him
So wait, I won't suffer? And I thought I WAS bad because of sin?! Remember -- Christianity teaches that we're ALL destined for hell because of being "bad". Stop saying it's just atheists who "deserve" it.
Yes we are bad because of sin and in that sense we all "deserve" hell. Christ remitted our sins on the cross. No more need to fear hell because we can't not sin.
And having demons torture me forever IS?!
You make the choice
that if in the astronomically small chance a malevolent personal god exists, the alternative of worshiping his evil *bleep* in heaven doesn't exactly sound like a picnic, either!
He's not malevolent and you make a choice
And the fact that you're okay with this unimaginable absurdity shows what a stranglehood religion has over you.
I'm not the one going around screaming about hell to everyone like you have been doing in this forum 8)
Yes it IS for sinners because if you break even ONE commandment, you go there. That is incredibly offensive to say it's "just for us" benign, disbelievers of bullsh*t.
Nope, you break a commandment and God is faithful to forgive. This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief. 1Timothy 1:15
You either went to a nut job church or you weren't paying attention to the message of the cross.
I'm not a slave to "sin" and neither are you.
You're right, I'm not. :thumbsup:
Romans 6:6
For I know that my old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be done away with, that I should no longer be slave to sin—
-
Quote from: shernajwine on Today at 08:39:57 am
There is definitely a misconception about hell and it's purpose.
Quote from: queenofnines:
Why? Because I totally logically demonstrated that it can't exist?
You have not logically demonstrated or proved that hell doesn't exist.
-
Why should hell be preached in churches when these people who go to church are there because they are choosing God? Hell doesn't wait for them, it's not even something they need to concern themselves with, because they made a choice to accept Him.
Not buying that. There are countless numbers of people sitting in churches for reasons that have little to do with choosing God. They are there because the feel they have to be to fit in with the rest of their community, one party in a marriage is a devout believer and the other could care less, but it keeps peace in the marriage, teenagers (who are old enough to make a conscious choice about what they DO believe) are 'forced' to go because that's what their parents want/expect of them, couples who want to be married in many churches are required to attend services and again, one or the other may not choose God, but won't defy the requirements, and there are more reasons I could add, but these are sufficient. Just because you occupy the pew, it does NOT mean proof of 'choosing God'.
In my 25+ years of actually believing and actively choosing/seeking God, I saw and heard plenty of people who were NOT there for the same reasons, but most were too afraid or too ashamed to voice it. I am willing to bet we have all known families that have the classic member(s) who makes it look good on Sunday, whatever days they attend, but outside those church walls they live anything BUT the life of a true religious person who is choosing to live in the way God wants. They are also well enough doctrinated to know, without a doubt, that their actions and thoughts do not line up with God's wishes and that when they pray it is NOT sincere. If Pascals wager is 'erroneous', then so is that idea of why people go to church - x10.
-
Why should hell be preached in churches when these people who go to church are there because they are choosing God? Hell doesn't wait for them, it's not even something they need to concern themselves with, because they made a choice to accept Him.
Not buying that. There are countless numbers of people sitting in churches for reasons that have little to do with choosing God. They are there because the feel they have to be to fit in with the rest of their community, one party in a marriage is a devout believer and the other could care less, but it keeps peace in the marriage, teenagers (who are old enough to make a conscious choice about what they DO believe) are 'forced' to go because that's what their parents want/expect of them, couples who want to be married in many churches are required to attend services and again, one or the other may not choose God, but won't defy the requirements, and there are more reasons I could add, but these are sufficient. Just because you occupy the pew, it does NOT mean proof of 'choosing God'.
In my 25+ years of actually believing and actively choosing/seeking God, I saw and heard plenty of people who were NOT there for the same reasons, but most were too afraid or too ashamed to voice it. I am willing to bet we have all known families that have the classic member(s) who makes it look good on Sunday, whatever days they attend, but outside those church walls they live anything BUT the life of a true religious person who is choosing to live in the way God wants. They are also well enough doctrinated to know, without a doubt, that their actions and thoughts do not line up with God's wishes and that when they pray it is NOT sincere. If Pascals wager is 'erroneous', then so is that idea of why people go to church - x10.
Well, you are right about that Jordan. Not all people sitting in church have chosen God. But that doesn't mean that hell should be preached. For whatever reason people are sitting in church, they are there; and ministry should use this opportunity to share with them why God has chosen them. When people understand how much God loves them, they choose Him. God does not want service from fear. The bible doesn't say to go into all the world and preach the message of hell.
Thanks for calling me on that ;)
-
You have not logically demonstrated or proved that hell doesn't exist.
The existence of hell is illogical in itself because it allows for the impossible. Even if we apply sciences to hell it still makes no sense!
http://willthomasonline.wordpress.com/2009/03/25/finally-proof-that-hell-does-not-exist/ (just read below the HELL EXPLAINED BY CHEMISTRY STUDENT part...lol)
Also remember we do not have to prove it exists. The burden of proof is on you since they're your beliefs and not ours. Try to do it without falling within these parameters- http://www.youseedrybones.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/Real_Logic_vs_Religious_Logic.jpg
I'm not the one going around screaming about hell to everyone like you have been doing in this forum
I think there's a point being missed here...it is rude to tell people that they're going to hell even if they bring it up. It's such a primitive tactic and there's no reason to assume anyone has it down because their mythological beliefs tell them so. They are putting a curse upon people. Understand this next example is way off par to the real belief-- What if I were to tell you that if you don't accept agnosticism soon, your children are doomed to be born with rat tails and it will be stuck within their children and their childrens children indefinitely? An obvious physical difference between hell and rat-rails, but the same primitive curse-structure aligns perfectly.
...and no. I would never wish that upon you! lol
-
Well, you are right about that Jordan. Not all people sitting in church have chosen God. But that doesn't mean that hell should be preached. For whatever reason people are sitting in church, they are there; and ministry should use this opportunity to share with them why God has chosen them. When people understand how much God loves them, they choose Him. God does not want service from fear. The bible doesn't say to go into all the world and preach the message of hell.
Thanks for calling me on that ;)
You're welcome. :) I had an opportunity to do a program along the lines of "Doctors Without Borders" here in the US in West Virginia and the Appalachian regions. I went to some 'hellfire and brimstone' old fashioned Baptist services while there, partly to get the word out on our free healthcare (that is one place you WILL find lots of people together at one time!), and I could not wait to get out. I actually thought I was going to have one of my panic attacks - that would have looked real inviting ;D - because ALL I heard was burning in hell. :P That is not any way to raise a child.
-
Well, you are right about that Jordan. Not all people sitting in church have chosen God. But that doesn't mean that hell should be preached. For whatever reason people are sitting in church, they are there; and ministry should use this opportunity to share with them why God has chosen them. When people understand how much God loves them, they choose Him. God does not want service from fear. The bible doesn't say to go into all the world and preach the message of hell.
Thanks for calling me on that ;)
You're welcome. :) I had an opportunity to do a program along the lines of "Doctors Without Borders" here in the US in West Virginia and the Appalachian regions. I went to some 'hellfire and brimstone' old fashioned Baptist services while there, partly to get the word out on our free healthcare (that is one place you WILL find lots of people together at one time!), and I could not wait to get out. I actually thought I was going to have one of my panic attacks - that would have looked real inviting ;D - because ALL I heard was burning in hell. :P That is not any way to raise a child.
I do agree with that!
-
I went to some 'hellfire and brimstone' old fashioned Baptist services while there, partly to get the word out on our free healthcare (that is one place you WILL find lots of people together at one time!), and I could not wait to get out
I don't even understand how believers find that kind of church service appealing.
Some red faced screaming, sweaty preacher runnin around yelling:
OH Yes there is HELL waiting for you sinners! And the LORD says, you will BURN in its fiery depths for ETERNITY for all your sin. Hallelujah! PRAISE THE LORD for the torture of hell! :confused1:
What?! Completely ridiculous. >:(
-
The existence of hell is illogical in itself because it allows for the impossible
Materialist philosophy says it's impossible. Not science. ;)
-
The existence of hell is illogical in itself because it allows for the impossible
Materialist philosophy says it's impossible. Not science. ;)
Uh, did you read the article he posted? It does describe it in scientific terms to some extent.
Falconer -- "Oh my god!" that blog entry was awesome!
Another scientific explanation of why hell isn't possible: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7ggUpyLSpc
-
A christian man once told me hell is in the core of the earth. i though "if a volcano erupts, it woul free millions of people. so that definately is not valid... :angel12:
-
The existence of hell is illogical in itself because it allows for the impossible
Materialist philosophy says it's impossible. Not science. ;)
Uh, did you read the article he posted? It does describe it in scientific terms to some extent.
Falconer -- "Oh my god!" that blog entry was awesome!
Another scientific explanation of why hell isn't possible: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7ggUpyLSpc
Let me get this straight. You are going to say that since science can't observe God, He doesn't exist. Heaven can't be observed, doesn't exist...but science can disprove hell with chemistry?? If you are going to use materialist philosophy to deny the existence of God, devil, and anything else supernatural, due to it's untestablility; why all the sudden try to use science do disprove the supernatural existence of hell? That makes no sense.
Either by your natural world view hell doesn't exist due to it's invisible nature OR the supernatural ISN'T impossible and now science can use it's natural method to falsify it. Which is it gonna be?
-
Either by your natural world view hell doesn't exist due to it's invisible nature OR the supernatural ISN'T impossible and now science can use it's natural method to falsify it. Which is it gonna be?
Well first let me state that the article I posted was more of a 'gag argument' because it's applying the natural to the mythological. It does not compute-- I just found it funny. Sorry about that; I should have made it more clear. Secondly it just bluntly covered both ends-- hell cannot exist naturally because of it going against the testable evidence nor can it exist supernaturally due to it pointing to an evil and/or imperfect god.
A christian man once told me hell is in the core of the earth. i though "if a volcano erupts, it woul free millions of people. so that definately is not valid
We had a user here a long time ago that said those exact things and posted all these nutjob articles. He. Was. Nuts. He had his myspace in his sig and it had videos of him screaming at people on the streets at night saying they were sinners. Cars were just slowly going by-- I imagine the drivers were just going "...wth?" Holy crap it was hilarious and scary at the same time. Just as Sherna stated, it's people like those who give present Christians a horrible name. I'm kicking myself for not bookmarking that myspace though. It was one for the books! I guess I'll have to settle and show you...THIS! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPiMhPL4vmc&feature=related I'd pay to hear this guy go "BONESAW IS RRREEEAAADDDYYYYY!"
-
Well first let me state that the article I posted was more of a 'gag argument'
LOL You took away my fun. I was ready to tear that one UP! :D
-
If you are going to use materialist philosophy to deny the existence of God, devil, and anything else supernatural, due to it's untestablility; why all the sudden try to use science do disprove the supernatural existence of hell?
What is this "materialist philosophy" catchphrase you keep using? Clearly it's something you got from one of your sites to try and sound smart and authoritative. I am not to be labeled with what you speak of...my reasons for hell being an impossibility are much simpler.
Hell can can be dismissed on BOTH ethical/logical grounds *and* scientific ones. I've already listed the at least 6 reasons why hell can't exist, but the top 2 are: it is NOT just nor loving to have billions of people tortured forever for finite crimes (that is just SICK) and how exactly are we to see/feel/hear/smell ANYTHING without physical bodies??
My words explaining this all don't do this subject matter justice. It won't sink in unless you allow it to sink in. I was you once; I didn't really think about hell because I wasn't going there! And guess what? That is an incredibly SELFISH position to be in. Once one actually starts to THINK about the absurdity of a "loving" god allowing someone who merely told a white lie or stole a candy bar to be in pain FOREVER, it's clear that this so-called omni-benevolent, omnipotent god cannot logically exist.
Would it still be satisfying to all of you believers if hell didn't exist? You know, if things went down how they ACTUALLY should with Yahweh: you can choose to follow him and get heaven, or you can choose to live your own life and then just die, because it is YOUR CHOICE after all, why should you be punished for exercising that free right? I think a lot of people are just sick and would be disappointed if there wasn't a hell. And this is because they mostly just don't think about HOW horrible an eternity of suffering really would be.
-
And this is because they mostly just don't think about HOW horrible an eternity of suffering really would be.
People don't think about how living for eternity would be absolute hell in itself either. The Greek gods envied mortals for their ability to die. And so did the Q from Star Trek! :-B
Also, adding to your post, remember the old metaphor for a little kid disobeying his parents and them sending him to his room for the rest of his life? How fair and loving is that?
-
What is this "materialist philosophy" catchphrase you keep using? Clearly it's something you got from one of your sites to try and sound smart and authoritative. I am not to be labeled with what you speak of...my reasons for hell being an impossibility are much simpler.
Lol, actually I didn't get it off of ANY website and I'm not trying to "sound" like anything. I also read books ;)
Science does not deal with the supernatural, it's method can only observe and test natural things. Scientific method cannot prove or disprove anything supernatural. Materialism/naturalism/physicalism says that BECAUSE science can't test the supernatural, it does not exist. Science has to be able to falsify something for it to be reality.
You cannot try to use science to falsify supernatural places, beings, or events. And since you have stated everything is physical, you stated a philosophical idea.
Once one actually starts to THINK about the absurdity of a "loving" god allowing someone who merely told a white lie or stole a candy bar to be in pain FOREVER, it's clear that this so-called omni-benevolent, omnipotent god cannot logically exist.
You REALLY don't understand ANYTHING regarding the purpose of the Christs sacrifice or any sacrifice made in the OT for remission of sin. People do NOT go to hell for sinning. The blood of the perfect sacrifice of Jesus Christ, did away with the bondage of sin, once and for all. Only-people-who-reject-that-will go to hell.
And I don't even believe they will be in hell forever....going to hell is actually referred to several times in scripture as a "second death". I believe this is spiritual death and there are several scriptures saying that hell, devil, and all souls there will eventually be destroyed. But the bible doesn't give a lot of detail about hell, because that is not God's and shouldn't be our focus.
I didn't really think about hell because I wasn't going there! And guess what? That is an incredibly SELFISH position to be in
No it isn't. I am not concerned about hell. I am concerned about the people that may go there so my focus is on praying them through to salvation and being a good representative of Christ in my own life.
You know, if things went down how they ACTUALLY should with Yahweh: you can choose to follow him and get heaven, or you can choose to live your own life and then just die, because it is YOUR CHOICE
Cheer up then. ;) As I stated above there is reason to believe, based on scripture, that the torment doesn't last for eternity. I know you take issue with where I get some of my information especially godandscience, however Rich Deem gives scriptural backing to what he says about hell.
http://www.godandscience.org/doctrine/hell.html
If you prefer to maintain that it lasts for eternity so you can continue to try and save people from Christianity though, I understand :P
-
You cannot try to use science to falsify supernatural places, beings, or events. And since you have stated everything is physical, you stated a philosophical idea.
You're completely right. The magical purple cabbage-eating gnome in my car tells me this every morning. And here I am refusing to listen. Shame on me :(
Only-people-who-reject-that-will go to hell.
I reject it and will never accept it. Please tell your god through telepathy this and hopefully he'll spare me!
If you prefer to maintain that it lasts for eternity so you can continue to try and save people from Christianity though, I understand
I think the problem here is your god plays with a stacked deck. I play my games straight and without some player shifting the odds in his favor. Cheaters are jerks even if they start the game.
-
"Oh, woe is us..." Neither of us is going to sway the other. But, at least we are all trying. Sorry, I am just too plain tired to debate much today. Keep up the great work!!!! :cat:
-
"Oh, woe is us..." Neither of us is going to sway the other. But, at least we are all trying. Sorry, I am just too plain tired to debate much today. Keep up the great work!!!! :cat:
Lol, I'm exhausted myself. My son was up all night throwing up and I'm only surviving off of coffee right now!
I'm not trying to sway anyone really though. I think it's important that all sides are represented for the people that are reading these posts, whether they are commenting on them or not. Like queen saying the catholics are the original christians. That is a false statement and she can believe that if she wants but I want other people who may not otherwise research that for themselves, to recognize that that isn't the truth.
-
"Oh, woe is us..." Neither of us is going to sway the other. But, at least we are all trying. Sorry, I am just too plain tired to debate much today. Keep up the great work!!!! :cat:
Lol, I'm exhausted myself. My son was up all night throwing up and I'm only surviving off of coffee right now!
I'm not trying to sway anyone really though. I think it's important that all sides are represented for the people that are reading these posts, whether they are commenting on them or not. Like queen saying the catholics are the original christians. That is a false statement and she can believe that if she wants but I want other people who may not otherwise research that for themselves, to recognize that that isn't the truth.
That's actually what I mean. Thanks much!! Hope your son is doing better today. :)
-
Science does not deal with the supernatural, it's method can only observe and test natural things. Scientific method cannot prove or disprove anything supernatural. Materialism/naturalism/physicalism says that BECAUSE science can't test the supernatural, it does not exist. Science has to be able to falsify something for it to be reality.
This is one of my least favorite "arguments" for god. So god's not testable, you say? We just have to "believe"...kind of like magic? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UezK1ouBenU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UezK1ouBenU)
You cannot try to use science to falsify supernatural places, beings, or events.
We sure can for 2 out of 3 of those. Compare your supernatural being of choice to any other that humans have truly believed in that is now extinct. You also have to ask if your god being passes the test of logic, and any personal god that has been presented thus far doesn't (http://www.evilbible.com/Impossible.htm). And so you are left with, "Well god isn't 'logical' - you just got to have faith!" That notion doesn't fly in any other aspect of your life, so why does an all-powerful being get a free pass?
As for supernatural "events", most anything said to have come about by prayer can be explained naturally. I've broken down several people's examples of "answered prayer" on here before. It's really not that hard to do, but it IS hard for them to accept it. They really want to believe they're "special" and "protected"...when statistics show, "god" favors NO ONE (that is, good/bad things happening are pretty much equal for everybody).
The only one I can sort of give you is supernatural places...y'all used to say heaven was in the sky and hell was in the earth, but we can prove this isn't the case through SCIENCE. So now heaven and hell conveniently reside in some alternate dimension...untouchable, untestable, but also unprovable. Believing in things for which you have no good evidence is BAD...and you have no good evidence for heaven or hell.
Like I said before, the problems of how exactly am I to feel pain without a physical body comes in to play, and that relates to science.
since you have stated everything is physical, you stated a philosophical idea.
Everything being physical isn't philosophical...it's reality.
Only-people-who-reject-that-will go to hell.
So Hitler's in heaven, yes or no? He was a Catholic. Oh wait, you think Catholics are fake Christians... :angry7:
And I don't even believe they will be in hell forever....
Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast [them] from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire. - Matthew 18:8
And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal. - Matthew 25:46
Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels. - Matthew 25:41
But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation. - Mark 3:29
Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. Likewise also these [filthy] dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities. - Jude 1:7-8
And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched. - Mark 9:43
...these are just a few of the MANY examples from the Bible on how this made-up place called hell is FOREVER.
But whatever; I expect nothing less of Christianity to rewrite what the Bible actually says. It's already been done thousands of times, what's a few more, eh? Especially if they can make it more palatable to the masses...
-
Cheer up then. ;) As I stated above there is reason to believe, based on scripture, that the torment doesn't last for eternity.
Are you being serious? ???
Okay, let's make it personal: even IF this hell place was only "temporary", let's imagine for a sec that one of your 3 kids dies at the age of 20 and they only kinda/sorta believed the Jesus thing, so they go to hell. Imagine the worst pain you've ever been in in your life and amplify that to the Nth degree. That is what your daughter will be going through 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, for possibly thousands or even MILLIONS of years.
As her mother, are you really going to care that her suffering will eventually end in 19573 A.D.? "Hell" no!!! You're going to be pissed and distraught that your baby is being tortured AT ALL simply for having not yet been convinced of god before she died. She was a sweet girl, but now you're wishing you had never had her so you could have spared her from such an awful state. And when you die, you never get to see her again.
How could you possibly revere a god where such an occurrence is mandated not just for your daughter, but BILLIONS of other (mostly innocent) people?? It's not just atheists you say are going there, but the other 2/3 of the planet that hold a *different* religion.
-
Everything being physical isn't philosophical...it's reality.
Naturalism is a metaphysical doctrine, which means simply that it states a particular view of what is ultimately real and unreal. According to naturalism, what is ultimately real is nature, which consists of the fundamental particles that make up what we call matter and energy, together with the natural laws that govern how those particles behave. Nature itself is ultimately all there is, at least as far as we are concerned. To put it another way, nature is a permanently closed system of material causes and effects that can never be influenced by anything outside of itself-by God, for example. To speak of something as "supernatural" is therefore to imply that it is imaginary, and belief in powerful imaginary entities is known as superstition. Reason In The Balance
So god's not testable, you say?
No He isn't. There is evidence in nature to support the claim that there is a Creator based of evidence for design. But you cannot use scientific method to determine who that creator is....that goes into the realm of theology.
You also have to ask if your god being passes the test of logic
Logic is a way of getting from premise to conclusion. Logic works from metaphysical assumptions, or pictures of reality, and it leads to very different directions depending on the starting point.
Believing in things for which you have no good evidence is BAD...and you have no good evidence for heaven or hell.
There is no good evidence to support the claim that the cause of the universe was natural. There is no good evidence to support chemical origins...in fact there is significant problems with that theory. But despite the lack of observational evidence for a naturalistic cause for the universe, and despite the lack of evidence for an evolutionary mechanism to create the information necessary for life in a single cell, (correct me if I'm wrong) you believe the universe had a natural cause and that SOMEHOW there is an evolutionary mechanism capable of creating information so that life itself is caused by purposeless natural processes.
So back to your statement? Believing in things for which you have no good evidence is bad?
So Hitler's in heaven, yes or no? He was a Catholic. Oh wait, you think Catholics are fake Christians..
Hitler committed atrocities that go against the bible, it doesn't matter what religion he claimed to be. And again, merely having a belief in God does not save you. You have to accept Him, you accept the sacrifice of Jesus for your sin and you love God with all your heart mind soul and strength. Obviously Hitler did not love God. What he did love was Darwin's idea that inferior races of human beings should be eliminated. :o
And I never said catholics were fake Christians, I said the catholic doctrine contradicts the bible. I know many people who call themselves catholic but do not follow the doctrine. I don't know why they still call themselves catholic but I don't really care what they call themselves or what sect of Christianity someone belongs to, if they (in their own personal life) know and love Jesus. God has the patience to reveal His true nature to people as they grow spiritually.
Are you being serious?
Yes and no. I care deeply whether my children would go to hell or not. It is disturbing to think of any harm coming to my babies. However, as they grow older and make choices....as with anything, they will have to deal with the consequences of their choice. It is a choice that they will make, it is my job to raise them so they know how much God loves them and how important they are to Him and even when they hit those rebellious teen years, that knowledge will never leave them.
And you and Falconer both have made false statements about heaven. Such as getting bored and having sinful thoughts in heaven.
Although the Bible discusses heaven, it is not possible to understand the full nature of heaven from a human perspective. Since heaven is where God lives, it must contain more physical and temporal dimensions than those found in this physical universe that God created. We cannot imagine, nor can we experience in our current bodies, what these extra dimensions might be like. Even so, we are given enough information in the Bible to understand many of the things that will be different in heaven compared to our lives today.
http://www.godandscience.org/doctrine/heaven.html
I expect nothing less of Christianity to rewrite what the Bible actually says
My referenced author did not rewrite what the bible actually says. The scriptures referenced in the site I linked to are not changed scriptures. As I said, the bible does not focus on hell and there are different interpretations of what little scripture we have to go on. I can't say I know for sure yet, I'm still praying and learning plenty about the bible and I am constantly learning where I used to believe wrongly about something the bible said.
-
To speak of something as "supernatural" is therefore to imply that it is imaginary, and belief in powerful imaginary entities is known as superstition.
As I've pointed out before, you do realize believing in the 'defined supernatural' without the evidence damages your stance, right?
There is evidence in nature to support the claim that there is a Creator based of evidence for design. But you cannot use scientific method to determine who that creator is....that goes into the realm of theology.
I could give you credit for looking for a creator within the realms of science, however looking for your own god with pre-defined notions is completely biased.
you believe the universe had a natural cause and that SOMEHOW there is an evolutionary mechanism capable of creating information so that life itself is caused by purposeless natural processes.
Define purposeless. Because all life, sentient or non-sentient, strives to stay alive and add to itself. All except the emos.
Hitler committed atrocities that go against the bible, it doesn't matter what religion he claimed to be. And again, merely having a belief in God does not save you. You have to accept Him, you accept the sacrifice of Jesus for your sin and you love God with all your heart mind soul and strength. Obviously Hitler did not love God. What he did love was Darwin's idea that inferior races of human beings should be eliminated.
You didn't answer the question. Given the idea that if he killed all of those people and then near his death he repented, accepted god, prayed for forgiveness, etc., would he go to heaven? You obviously have your defined god down pretty well-- I don't know why this would be hard to answer. And linking the holocaust to Charles Darwin is left to the non-questioning close-minded masses who follow the misinformed Kirk Cameron and Ben Stein around like they're the Beatles. Please tell me you don't really think Hitler based his views on Darwins writings-- you seem much smarter then pulling that ol' "Answers-in-Genesis" B+W junk. If so, I would suggest we end the argument here.
Although the Bible discusses heaven, it is not possible to understand the full nature of heaven from a human perspective. Since heaven is where God lives, it must contain more physical and temporal dimensions than those found in this physical universe that God created. We cannot imagine, nor can we experience in our current bodies, what these extra dimensions might be like. Even so, we are given enough information in the Bible to understand many of the things that will be different in heaven compared to our lives today.
Like above, this is biased reasoning to argue your stance. Talking dimensions is one thing, but talking dimensions which hold mythological places is completely different.