manbearpigg, on 29 January 2013 - 08:16 AM, said:
I can't speak for the Almighty so i dunno but my problem with that logic is that a God whom a majority of religious believe in (or at least the concept of him) is even willing to create such a painful reality for the majority of us. Yes you and I are happy behind our computers but a huge portion of the world is already living in hell.
If you say that the God you believe in is ok with suffering and dying people for the "plan", I rest my case.
Suffering is transitory. Eternity is eternal. In that context, while suffering may be transitory, so also is joy only transitory. What is the point of a transitory joy if God has an eternal purpose in mind. As such, I am accepting of the fact that suffering is a necessity. After all, if suffering wasn't in our world, how could I (a Christian) ever understand the necessity for Jesus' suffering on the Cross (and yes, I believe it a necessity for eternal life that Jesus suffered and died and rose again).
manbearpigg, on 29 January 2013 - 08:16 AM, said:
I don't think its illogical at all. when you make a statement (any kind of statement) you should be able to back up with viable proof or at least credible testimonies.
It's the same as everything else, if you don't have proof then you don't know for sure so you can't make a statement about it.
I have no empirical proof. That does not, however, mean I do not have proof. Just because this proof won't convince you doesn't mean it has not convinced me. And I know you were asking for scientific proof in your last post, which is why I said I have none.
manbearpigg, on 29 January 2013 - 08:16 AM, said:
I believe every major religion has a great central message of peace and love so no i don't think it's "false". its actually the "opium of society" and we need drugs.
however some of the outrageous claims many religions and their holy books tend to make discredits a large portion of it yes. If you look at it logically, the more contradictions and un-scientific stands a holy book claims, the less truth is in that book itself thus credibility to what message that book preaches is also lost.
The Bible wasn't written as a scientific textbook. Why are you surprised that there is not much science in it? Many of the things supposedly scientific (eg, the Creation account/s in Genesis 1-2) are actually not written to be historical/scientific accounts of Creation but are in fact theological discourses on the nature of God.
manbearpigg, on 29 January 2013 - 08:16 AM, said:
you are right and i knew that as well. it didnt seem important to detail in the facts but that is the reason why i said the MODERN bible since the compilation of all those different books did not come to being until the council decided, thus creating the MODERN or standard bible we use today. Why you dissing my history yo? don't be a douche man.
So we're arguing semantics of the term "created" versus the term "codified". I think you'll find that our modern Bible was "codified" at Nicaea is far more consistent with terminology than "created". Created implies (though admittedly not explicitly states) a certain amount of invention, and is therefore a misleading term to describe what actually happened.
But it seems we are largely in agreement on the overall concept and just don't necessarily agree with the terminology used. I think "codified" better explains what actually happened.
manbearpigg, on 29 January 2013 - 08:16 AM, said:
Yes they do, and no i don't do conspiracies, only factual things I see.
So Horus had a virgin birth? I was under the impression that Osiris and Isis had sex and the outcome was Horus. True, ti was a clay penis because Isis was unable to find all the bits of Osiris that Seth had chopped up and spread around the world, but fashioning a clay penis in place of the real thing does NOT suggest a virgin birth. I'm not certain Isis was even a virgin when she had sex with Osiris (I'm no scholar). Sorry, I reject your statement that virgin births were present in both Jesus and Horus (and Ra, and whoever else you included in that list).
manbearpigg, on 29 January 2013 - 08:16 AM, said:
Its not hard to see that our money system is in chaos and there are the same people profiting at every turn. Its FACTUAL when i claim that AIG JP MORGAN G/S GM etc. funds both side of the political spectrum. Its real when i say that there are people who control the world and they don't mind breaking peace for profit. Are they reptiles, aliens, NWO, freemasons? I don't think so but I don't know.
and guess what, you don't know either. We may NEVER know.
nothing is 100%, just like god.
Ok, I'm not American, so AIG, JP Morgan, G/S, GM, etc.... don't mean anything. Funding both sides of the political spectrum, again it matters not to me as an Australian).
manbearpigg, on 29 January 2013 - 08:16 AM, said:
oh, and im not trying to an ass, sorry if i came off that way.
For the most part, you didn't come off as an ass, but your last comment in the OP in which you stated "Where's your God now?" did tread a fine line as to how I perceived your comments. Thanks for the clarification though, no need to apologise
~ Regards, PA
Edited by Paranoid Android, 29 January 2013 - 09:51 AM.