That's it.

Why do people who have never read the Bible feel the need comment on it?

Well on the other end of the scale- people who apparently are "christians" know very little to nothing about the Bible- many skeptics know more about the Bible than your average Christian. People that havent read the Bible and comment on it probably want to learn- yet if its negative and they go by heresay they really need to sit down and read on some of its pages.

Maybe because we live in countries that have it as our state religion even though we did not choice it our self, and also i suppose it must be one of the most qouted pieces of writing around.

I was going to say that..LOL you beat me to it ramster

But a lot of NB's where once religious at one stage and have been taught the bible and those that havent read it do ask a lot of questiones and comment on the answers they recieve...this is true

I was once religious..I followed a faith..then dropped it..but I will always ask questions...it makes things intresting for me and I have learnt a lot on here would you believe...IMO this board is one of the most popular boards on UM

Looks like Ramster beat us all to it. I was going to say that as well

There are always people willing to comment on the Bible (Christians and non-Christians), who have never picked up a Bible in their lives......

Regards, PA

Well, I confess I've not read all of it


Then again, I've never read any of Darwin's On the Origin of Species .....

Because they are ignorant, stupid, and less intelligent than those who actually understand the Bible?

Another pointless question.

Well what Ramster said.

But to add a thought I think some people who have not read the bible and comment on it comment from the effects they see coming from it. I think most people get the jist of what it encompasses though.

I have read the Bilbe, many times, in fact. My question would be...Why do Christians want to comment on other religions and they have no idea what they are talking about???

If large numbers of Christians can hold faith in an invisible 'deity' and 'angels' without any form of proof, I doubt holding faith in a religious tome without actually reading it (only hearing what their religious authorities state) is a daunting task.

because there haters

Do you mean people that do not believe in the Bible and what it stand for?

I have read the Bilbe, many times, in fact. My question would be...Why do Christians want to comment on other religions and they have no idea what they are talking about???

That is a very good point. I wish the self proclaimed Christians out there would take a lesson from that statement.

I was once a little more hot headed and ignorant, and liked to comment of evolution, not really having done any serious study into it. Things have changed since then, however, and yet I still steer away from getting into another creation vs evolution debate.

Some arguments just can't be won.


because there haters

Yes, there seems to be a surplus of those. *chuckles*



But to add a thought I think some people who have not read the bible and comment on it comment from the effects they see coming from it.

But more often than not, it is either about the insanity of the Catholic Church, which people confuse with the Christian chruch. It also seems predominantly negative.

Why do people single out Chritianity when they refer to "religion"?

I think most people get the jist of what it encompasses though.

While I understand your point, I think that many people THINK they get the jist of it. But the Bible is a very large book, which covers over a very long time period, which was written in a very complex language.

It's difficult to get the real concept without doing the legwork. Unfortunately, as with Islam, people let the few bad apples spoil the bunch. *shrugs* Cest la vie.

Because we have had christianity as a subject in school for 9 years along with maths, language and anything else?
Get over yourself. It's possible to know alot of the bible without reading it. didn't you know?

oh wait, was it a joke again?


Yeah... now who's being ignorant?



Very good point

AMEN!!!!! The ignorance of most "Christians" is amazing to behold...not only do they have a remarkable lack of Biblical knowledge, most don't even have a clue as to the history of their own "church," nor do they have the foggiest inkling regarding the history of Christianity itself. IF, I repeat, "IF," one takes the time and effort to do a wee bit of research, one learns some rather unsettling truths regarding the Biblical text, Christian history in general, and the biased views of the "Church Fathers," both Catholic and Protestant! All is not well in Christianity! The average "Christian" has no clue as to how many times the Biblical text has been rewritten, edited, altered, added to, ommitted from, etc . . . . the average Christian actually believes he/she is reading an "accurate, authentic text," when they pull one of the HUNDREDS of Bible "versions" off the shelf today! Amazing!

In an attempt to revive the "Trinity debate," in view of some historical realities, I started a thread entitled "Trinity revisited." Feel free to jump in. This is but one of the doctrines that is not historically Biblical, but rather is a product of the later Roman Church. [Sheesh, even the Jehovah's Witnesses figured this out.....apparently mainstream Christianity is so entrenched in "tradition" they just will not admit the doctrine is about as valid as a $3 bill.]

Hey, the "churches" are so screwed up they can't even seem to get the day of the crucifixion correct.......one can only wonder how much else they have managed to mangle over the centuries.

They can't even get the year that Jesus was supposedly born in correct, so what do you expect from the religion?

How can you say they are haters??? A lot of them are loving people...judge not yet the be what now??? I forget

I guess not. WHen one person says it's a based on Fear, and another says it's based on Love - only one can be correct. I guess it depends what your pre-conceived opinion is, but it's obvious that people aren't getting the same "gist".....

yes, many may comment on the effects they see stemming from the bible.

consider the personal relevancy of comments.

people may well comment on the bible because there are people using it to create their virtual world and apply its "universal laws" onto others.

we would see just as much secondary commentary about any other work if it was being embraced and extended into an absolutist worldview. Imagine any other work being used the way the bible has been. Imagine people being persecuted for not believing in the care bears, or Spiderman, or Lion-O......

ramster:

I think you hit the nail right on the head!

As Christian people it is imperative that we "arm ourselves". In order to contradict those that challenge our perspective, you have to become knowledgeable & learn as much as you can about the Book of God.

UM has has surprised me in many ways. Despite the fact that you have detractors that don't believe in bible, still they are VERY knowledgeable about the information contained within. They also appear to be well-versed when it comes to other religions.

Since the non-believers are so educated on the subject, as a Christian, you have to do your due diligence before introducing an argument or persuasive piece to others.

I cannot stand having a conversation with someone who preaches about the Bible (but they haven't read it). And I agree that some skeptics are more knowledgeable on the subject than some Christians, Catholics, etc. I don't think people should always take someone else's word for it. It's not difficult to pick something up and read it imo.

Perhaps this is why some of the "skeptics" are more knowledgable than the "Christians." The skeptics have to actually read and research, while the "Christian" merely parrots whatever his/her church happens to be preaching?

With respect to the poster above who stated "they can't even get the year of his birth right" - - - -hell, they can't get the year of his DEATH right, either! [Or even the time of the year in which he was born!] Jeeeez...don't get me started.....there are SO MANY discrepancies and contradictions in the Bible it isn't even funny, and yet the Christians keep insisting there are NO discrepancies/contradictions.....makes one wonder if the Christians can even READ.

BTW.....the moniker tb4u has nothing to do with religion.....it merely indicates I would rather find the "truth," or what is "correct/accurate," than be taken in by fuzzy thinking and even fuzzier theories regarding "religion."

^^Just because one does not believe in the Bible does not mean they have researched and studied for themselves. There are just as many skeptic parrots - willing to spout back what they've been told, without any meaningful input of their own.

Regards, PA

In al fairness to christians...they CAN read....it's what they chose to read....its part of their faith..the bible...just like other faiths have a book to worship....whether they have gotten the DOB of Jesus correct or the time of his death correct or not...it doesnt matter to them...what really matters is their faith....is that so wrong??? I dont think it is....and I have news for you...I am not even a christian nor do I believe in the bible but geee I can understand as to why people feel strongly towards their bible....why cant you??


You could say the same for religious parrots they spout out what they have been told, without any meaningful input of their own...it's a two way street PA...dont forget it

Well, that's true enough.....I didn't mean to imply that "all" skeptics were doing their homework.....but the skeptics that DO their homework are pretty knowledgable.

Certainly much more so than the Christians who merely repeat what some preacher has told them.

How many "Christians" do you suppose, just for one example, are even aware that James, rather than Paul or Peter, was the leader of the early church, and that the emphasis was later changed and placed on Paul/Peter because their doctrines were more in agreement with the Roman Church, which literally "took over" Christianity in the late 3rd/early 4th century? [Feel good religion had its beginnings in the early Roman Church! Had to please those pagans, dontcha know! ]
http://www.vegsoc.org.au/religion_split.asp
http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/jamesleader.html

I know. I wasn't implying that it wasn't. The Christian parrot was already discussed, and put up against the all-knowing skeptic. So I thought I'd just even things up a bit, if ya know what I mean.

Of course And the CHristians that do their homework are pretty knowledgeable. Certainly much more so than the skeptic who merely repeats waht some website has told them.

Putting a knowledgeable person (regardless of their belief) up against an ignorant person (also regardless of their belief), you'll always tell the difference

Regards, PA

There are hypocrites on both sides of the coin. Case closed.

Wouldn't it be better to say...both christians and skeptics are equally as knowledgeable as eachother...and the same for the ones both christian and skeptics that haven't did much research!!?? its only fair to say it that way

But I just know there will be more and more that will say one is far more knowledgeable than the other...truth is...how the heck do you ALL know this for sure???

no

If you like. But the fact is, ignorance is the norm - on both sides. Sad as it may seem. Equally knowledgeable is sugar-coating that fact. Equal ignorance, perhaps......

But hey, who am I to stand in the way of positivity

Sorry, my cynical side is at the fore tonight

Regards, PA

Beckys_Mom: Fanatical "faith," based on false assumptions, deliberately altered Scripture, fraudulent doctrines, and socio-political preaching is pretty worthless. May make the "believers" happy, but it doesn't make them correct." In what is called "Christianity" today, there are over 1,000 denominations, sects, divisions, branches, groups...all teaching something different and claiming to be "correct," that the others are "wrong."
My grandpappy used to say: "If ya got 100 people telling ya different stories, at least 99 of 'em gotta be lying, and more than likely all 100 of 'em are." Seems applicable.

Perhaps Christians can "read," as you say......if so, they apparently aren't reading any "opposing views/material," and are just swallowing whatever it is that they are reading (probably recommended by their church)......with over 1,000 denominations, etc., I seriously doubt that ANY of them really know what the heck they are talking about.
Facts and evidence seem to mean little to "Christians." [For one example, the Roman Catholic Church itself has admitted the "trinity" doctrine is purely a fabricated 3rd/4th century theological church doctrine, not supported by original Scripture, and they CHANGED the "Scriptures" to make the Bible conform to their new doctrine......yet most of Christianity STILL falls all over itself trying to "defend" this ADMITTEDLY fabricated doctrine! Go figure! ]

CHristianity should not be measured by church attendance, or denominational belief. CHristianity should be measured in one's own heart, as the individual seeks to form relationship with the God-head, with the divine.

Forget statistics, they are meaningless. The pews are crammed full of hypocrite's, and those giving lip-service. Get a Bible. Get a Greek/Hebrew concordance. Read for yourself. Don't take another's word for it.

Regards, PA

tb4u, after you have been here awhile, you will see that we have very few fanatical Christians here. Many are like Paranoid Android (affectionately known as PA) and Irish, Christians with a strong Deistic leaning. Some are like Beckys mom, on the borderline of leaving the religion and forming her own belief sets. These 3 plus others like Ramster, Something Like Laughter, Bella Angelique and others are a pleasure to debate, agree with, disagree with, and in short be friends with. I think you will fit in here quite nicely. - Mako

tb4u - Listen to this man...he knows all what goes on within this board....I left religion behind many moons ago and I became the happier camper for doing so....I search for my own answers, I make up my own prayers...I dont believe in going to some church on a Sunday just to talk to God..why should I? when I can do so in my own home, when ever I feel its right and I dont need some book to tell me how I should live my life....I was taught right from wrong...so I am pretty fine with the way things are...besides to me IMO the bible is pure mythology...but bare in mind I am looking at it from a skeptics view...this is my belief and I have been knocked for it...but I laugh at those that do this....who are they to judge me huh LOL

Hmmm Pa I do recall you measuring at one stage...how many churches there are in the land down under ect ect...didn't you make a thread on church attendance??

I did. I was curious who actually attended religious gatherings. If you recall, the poll I started also included a question for non-Christian worship (Temple, Mosque, Coven, etc).

If the measure of Christianity is in the church with the largest attendance, then the "Suer churches" in the U.S are obviously the right one's

Yoiu know my views. i do attend church, but not because I have to, or that "God requires it". I go to meet up with other like-minded individual's. If there were a group outside of church taht offered the same, who knows?

I would hope it's obvious by now my stance on religon versus Faith/Belief.

Regards, PA

See in the gospel of Judas documentary (dont know if you have seen it) but it was amazing PA and what struck me was they say...Jesus did not wish for anyone to worship in temples or churches...he only wanted for his followers to go forth and spread the word...you may disagree with this...but others wont Its funny how I dropped the whole attendingh church thing...and worshiped God in my own way, thats when things got better for me...so I ask myself...could this be the right way after all??

The thing with the "Gospel of Judas" ... I am not saying that the papers are not authentic from 280 A.D.... but I don't think it is Judas' words.

You see.. after Judas betrayed Jesus... he killed himself (I know controversy overy exactly how he did it... but he did it)... and actually Judas diec before Jesus did.

Soooo... exactly who and when did Judas confide this so called "truth" to?...

It is no different... than someone writing their own gospel... and for them to write their account of something .. let's say the 9/11 attacks... then 1800 years from now... someone finding them... and saying that what was written changes history.

I did watch it with an open mind... and it was very interesting... but could have been written by anybody... and for any reason.

But I am not convinced that it was Judas' account.

Based on what I have learned through my own research (which admittedly may not be much!), I would have to say that Beckys_Mom is correct. Authenticized Scripture does not support an "organized church," but does very handily support the concept of small groups (meeting in each others homes actually) worshipping God (however one may understand Him)........I would agree completely that the "problem" with Christianity today stems from man's attempt to "organize/formalize" it......and so we end up with literally thousands of different versions of Christianity.

Personally, my own belief is that there IS something supremely intelligent "out there" (somewhere), and I think the "truth" probably lies in some type of combination of "evolution/creation." How to actually "define" that belief, I haven't the foggiest!

It just ticks me off that most "Christians" don't seem to have a clue that half the stuff they spout off is nothing more than "tradition" from (insert church of choice), and it doesn't even agree with what the Bible says. And then, of course, there is the problem of, "What does the Bible actually say?" With all the evidence of textual manipulation over the centuries, WHO KNOWS what the Bible originally said? This is something else that galls me.....I don't know how many "Christians" I have heard proclaim that "their version" (KJV, NIV, NABC, NASB, RSV, etc.) is the "only accurate Bible" in print today, when the fact is, there are NO Bibles in print today that have even a remote claim to being "accurate," and you can pick up ANY of them and count hundreds (if not thousands) of discrepancies and contradictions.

So yeah, I suppose I am just ranting, and probably should just crank open another Bud and chill out! Arrrrrrrrrggggghhhhhhhhhh!!!!!

Well I believe Judas only did what Jesus told him to do....it was Gods plan..to sacrafice his only son...Jesus knew it was coming and he told Judas to do it...but this is my own belief

The more I think about it the more sense it makes...I have a strong feeling Jesus did not wish for anyone to build any place of worship...after all he didnt enter a building and call it his own place to come and worship...did he??? Jesus preached to others where ever he felt was the right place and the right time...not in some building of worship


I believe in evolution...I believe that it was God that created the bacteria from which we elvolved



Well you will get all sort ...I have even seen those that have came on line and told other christians that they are not real true christians and called them a dying breed of christians......saying..they are a much better and truer christian than the other christian...lol stick around it gets better But IMO it dont matter how you practice your faith as a christian...if you believe you are doing it right...so be it

I have an accurate Bible at home. It's written in Biblical Greek and Ancient Hebrew. No subtitle's, no interpretations - just the writing as it appears on our earliest manuscripts.

That's about as accurate as you're going to get. The fact that I own this in the first place is, for me, proof that there has been very little textual editing. I mean, you can speak all you want about the church manipulating the text, but when you have a copy of the work that predates the church, really - what can you say?

That aside, if I so wished, I could write a list of what annoys me about ignorant skeptics (or indeed, about ignorant Christian's also), but what good would that do? Sit back tb4u, realise that ignorance is common everywhere, not just in religion.

Just a thought.

Regards, PA

Me too...I can tell you what annoys me about skeptics and the religious kind....how long have you got? LOL


Naw I wont bother getting into that

PA........what Bible do you have, and what is the time frame of its writing, if you don't mind my asking? The "Syriac," is the oldest existing N.T. text according to scholars (but just try and get a copy of it! ), while the Septuagint is said to be the oldest O.T. (though I myself prefer the Masoretic).

Also you said above "is, for me, proof that there has been very little textual editing." I have a bit of a problem with that statement in view of the many admissions of textual revision...for just a couple examples, I'll refer to Matthew 28:19; 1st John 5:7 and give you the background: http://www.apostolic.net/biblicalstudies/matt2819-willis.htm ; and
http://www.bibletexts.com/versecom/1jo05v07.htm Keep in mind these are just two examples of textual manipulation....I just want you to see what I am talking about. There may be a wee bit more "textual manipulation" than you are aware of.....depending on which Bible you have. What I would love to see, and have just about zero chance of ever obtaining, is a word-for-word English translation of the mid-2nd century Syriac (oldest complete N.T. in existence), or the mid-2nd century Old Latin (runner up for oldest N.T. in existence). The 4th/5th century Greek manuscripts are corrupted and reflect alterations which were made in the late 3rd/early 4th century.....ya gotta remember, it was the Roman Church that WROTE those later Greek manuscripts! Some of the "problems" are outlined here: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/don...rgan/intro.html , and I'm sure you could track down more.....I'm kinda "hit & miss" as I'm not nearly as computer literate as I'd like to be!

I won't even go into the discrepancies and contradictions inherent in the modern text....there are thousands of examples of those and we'd be here until we both died of old age!

Probably for the same reason those that have never seen Michael Moore's, "Fahrenheit 911", condemn it. In a world of conversations, some people just can not shut up or admit they are ignorant of a thing. Imagining speaking and proving that they are ignorant is preferable to remaining silent and dispelling all mystery that they are so.

The Gospel of Judas......see: http://www9.nationalgeographic.com/lostgospel/

Judas was much maligned, and is not the "villan" that is portrayed in church "traditions." Judas was, in fact, following Jesus' orders, and Jesus himself praised Judas (Kinda hard to figure why he would praise Judas if Judas was such a "bad guy!")
See: http://www.charleston.net/stories/?newsID=...ion=faithvalues