This post is generated as the polar opposite of the thread: why don't you believe in god?
Why believe? While science is based on theoretical models, at least there are lab's and other such articles of research that can present a cogent hypothesis for the claims made. However the same can not be said for articles of faith. Because, by definition, faith precludes articles of proof or fact. It's literally a confidence that what is posited to the believer about the characteristics of any give deific model, is true. God created, Goddess gave birth to, etc... Be it monotheistic , polytheistic, pluralistic. Faith in no wise can ever be proved true. And while there are many believers that will say their god has pr oven it's existence to them, what exactly does that mean!? Something they already can not explain has been sufficiently clarified so that they feel confident something they can not see, is responsible for their now feeling fulfilled? Satisfied? Comforted? Etc... ? But is that proof or is that a semblance of desperation, seeking to assuage it's fears and so what occurs to remove that feeling is considered a sign!? Who knows? And who's right is it to judge if holding faith makes someone a better person for it?! Though that's not always the case as is witnessed in secular and religious persons.
So the question stands. Why believe in god!? And what they feel, what they can not explain, is a sign of god? Why believe when all that compels one to is idiosyncratic!?When what that means is someone is accepting what someone else tells them is meant by god. Be that article of communication ministry or holy writ.
Why believe?
Full Version: Why believe in god?
People need a reason to live, science doesn't give us that. People want to know the answers to the big questions like what happens when we die? and Where did we come from? Science hasn't given us an answet to that yet.
People have the need to think that they are part of something bigger and grander. People want to think that perfection and immortality is achievable. Peole ant to believe that one day all their problems will be solved and that good and evil exist.
People can't accept that they are just specs of dust on the backdrop of the universe. They can't accept that after they die that nothing special happens. They can't accept that existence was created out of the randomness of the Big Bang. They can't accept Evolution because they can't accept that humans aren't anything special. They can't accept that their is no such thing as right or wrong but perspective and opinion.
People can't accept that maybe, for once they will have to think for themselves.
The definition of faith goes hand in hand with the definition of hope.
People have the need to think that they are part of something bigger and grander. People want to think that perfection and immortality is achievable. Peole ant to believe that one day all their problems will be solved and that good and evil exist.
People can't accept that they are just specs of dust on the backdrop of the universe. They can't accept that after they die that nothing special happens. They can't accept that existence was created out of the randomness of the Big Bang. They can't accept Evolution because they can't accept that humans aren't anything special. They can't accept that their is no such thing as right or wrong but perspective and opinion.
People can't accept that maybe, for once they will have to think for themselves.
The definition of faith goes hand in hand with the definition of hope.
QUOTE(Cadetak47 @ Dec 13 2006, 01:17 AM) [snapback]1460284[/snapback]
People need a reason to live, science doesn't give us that. People want to know the answers to the big questions like what happens when we die? and Where did we come from? Science hasn't given us an answet to that yet.
People have the need to think that they are part of something bigger and grander. People want to think that perfection and immortality is achievable. Peole ant to believe that one day all their problems will be solved and that good and evil exist.
People can't accept that they are just specs of dust on the backdrop of the universe. They can't accept that after they die that nothing special happens. They can't accept that existence was created out of the randomness of the Big Bang. They can't accept Evolution because they can't accept that humans aren't anything special. They can't accept that their is no such thing as right or wrong but perspective and opinion.
People can't accept that maybe, for once they will have to think for themselves.
The definition of faith goes hand in hand with the definition of hope.
People have the need to think that they are part of something bigger and grander. People want to think that perfection and immortality is achievable. Peole ant to believe that one day all their problems will be solved and that good and evil exist.
People can't accept that they are just specs of dust on the backdrop of the universe. They can't accept that after they die that nothing special happens. They can't accept that existence was created out of the randomness of the Big Bang. They can't accept Evolution because they can't accept that humans aren't anything special. They can't accept that their is no such thing as right or wrong but perspective and opinion.
People can't accept that maybe, for once they will have to think for themselves.
The definition of faith goes hand in hand with the definition of hope.
Right. I think if we are made just from science and all that, even science had to start from somewhere. The big bang had to have came from somewhere. The universe couldnt just create itself out of nowhere.
Also, there are many things in this world that just don't seem fair. Why should a criminal win the lottery when a struggling family are more deserving?
Oh, I know this is chance and all that, but I suppose having a belief in a god - and that there is a plan and, perhaps, a higher justice for all the unfairness we see - helps us overcome what would otherwise be despair. We want things to be fair and just, this is the framework of morals/ethics we have built up for the society we live in, so we create a (supposedly) fair and just god to compensate for the unfairness and injustice around us.
Oh, I know this is chance and all that, but I suppose having a belief in a god - and that there is a plan and, perhaps, a higher justice for all the unfairness we see - helps us overcome what would otherwise be despair. We want things to be fair and just, this is the framework of morals/ethics we have built up for the society we live in, so we create a (supposedly) fair and just god to compensate for the unfairness and injustice around us.
I believe faith is a necessary function. IMO, there should be a clause associated with faith-- open-mindedness and a willingness to evolve your faith. I think a lot of people who go around hating a God, have put restrictions on their God (*my god should do this and this for me), instead of evolving their concept or faith about what their god's function really is.
Why believe in God? That is up to that person to answer. Does it enhance your life? If it does, then why not have faith in God? If it makes sense to you that a god can work hand and hand with you, then keep believing.
Why believe in God? That is up to that person to answer. Does it enhance your life? If it does, then why not have faith in God? If it makes sense to you that a god can work hand and hand with you, then keep believing.
QUOTE(Shadow09 @ Dec 13 2006, 02:50 AM) [snapback]1460333[/snapback]
Right. I think if we are made just from science and all that, even science had to start from somewhere. The big bang had to have came from somewhere. The universe couldnt just create itself out of nowhere.
I truely believe that a self-creating universe is no less likely than a God who created her/himself, or always existed, then decided to create everything else just because he/she got lonely and wanted someone to boss around.
Anyway, this is a nice topic.
I think there are several reasons that so many people end up clinging to a God/dess or Gods.
Cadetak summed it up quite nicely, but there are a couple other reasons I know of:
- Missing deceased family members and friends.
- Simply Ego. Let's face it, many people want to be special, but how can you be special for long if you'll no longer exist in a few decades? I, being a "non-theist," think it's in humanity's best interest to preserve the earth for as long as possible. You may not be able to slap your name on the good deeds of your life, but they can last after you're dead, regardless. (no, I'm not talking about any kind of "after-life reward.")
Science may know 0.00000001% of what is to be known. God can claim 100%.
Is it possible for human to have all the answers and proof or must we rely a certain amount to hope and faith? Science is continually changing as new discoveries are made on a daily basis, the answers occasionally send us back to the drawing board and sometimes open an entirely new form science and reasoning. For instance quantum physics was for the longest time pure speculation and theory and now is receiving the credit and attention it deserves. We have a tendency to except scientific principles as dogma and in essence it has become a form of religion unto it self. With some adherents, so dogmatic that they reject anything to the contrary as being foolish and born of ignorance. Our personal view is blinded by our own arrogance and self worth to the point of actually stiffening our scientific progress as well as neutralizing our spirituality. We place our faith in proof and speculation and give little credit toward old wisdom and ancient knowledge, New and Improved has become the god of the twentieth century.
In reality if a man was to know all there is to know about this planet we call home we would consider him to be a genius among men. Yet even if it were possible to have all that knowledge we must also consider that this planet of ours is but a grain of sand in the vastness of the universe and that knowledge is extremely limited and miniscule leaving us right back were we started with speculation and faith.
Although I admire science and appreciate the strides it has taken us I personally have more faith in the Creator than I do in the sciences. If it is not possible to know everything there is to know then I believe a foundation of faith is greater than a foundation of uncertainty to build my life upon.
Irish
Is it possible for human to have all the answers and proof or must we rely a certain amount to hope and faith? Science is continually changing as new discoveries are made on a daily basis, the answers occasionally send us back to the drawing board and sometimes open an entirely new form science and reasoning. For instance quantum physics was for the longest time pure speculation and theory and now is receiving the credit and attention it deserves. We have a tendency to except scientific principles as dogma and in essence it has become a form of religion unto it self. With some adherents, so dogmatic that they reject anything to the contrary as being foolish and born of ignorance. Our personal view is blinded by our own arrogance and self worth to the point of actually stiffening our scientific progress as well as neutralizing our spirituality. We place our faith in proof and speculation and give little credit toward old wisdom and ancient knowledge, New and Improved has become the god of the twentieth century.
In reality if a man was to know all there is to know about this planet we call home we would consider him to be a genius among men. Yet even if it were possible to have all that knowledge we must also consider that this planet of ours is but a grain of sand in the vastness of the universe and that knowledge is extremely limited and miniscule leaving us right back were we started with speculation and faith.
Although I admire science and appreciate the strides it has taken us I personally have more faith in the Creator than I do in the sciences. If it is not possible to know everything there is to know then I believe a foundation of faith is greater than a foundation of uncertainty to build my life upon.
Irish
QUOTE(Shadow09 @ Dec 13 2006, 08:50 AM) [snapback]1460333[/snapback]
Right. I think if we are made just from science and all that, even science had to start from somewhere. The big bang had to have came from somewhere. The universe couldnt just create itself out of nowhere.
So it's easier to slap a human-like ruler onto it all to make it more understandable? You're trying to explain the rules and you don't even know what game you're playing. Many believe that instead of 3 dimensions, our universe has up to 12 dimensions, we simply cannot percieve the others with our human minids. You can't explain existance with current human knowledge, making up Gods is not the right way to try to do so.
Irish: Good post, but I would prefer the foundation of "uncertainty," because at least it leaves room to grow... With the Christian faith, everything is absolute and laid out for you. "Accept Jesus and spend eternity in heaven, don't and don't." maybe you think it's a challenge because people try to challenge your faith, but in reality, it's no challenge to rely on faith and ignore any challenges.
I respect you, but I like making it very clear that I disagree with you.
I respect you, but I like making it very clear that I disagree with you.
QUOTE(Irish @ Dec 13 2006, 04:27 PM) [snapback]1460669[/snapback]
Science may know 0.00000001% of what is to be known. God can claim 100%.
Is it possible for human to have all the answers and proof or must we rely a certain amount to hope and faith? Science is continually changing as new discoveries are made on a daily basis, the answers occasionally send us back to the drawing board and sometimes open an entirely new form science and reasoning. For instance quantum physics was for the longest time pure speculation and theory and now is receiving the credit and attention it deserves. We have a tendency to except scientific principles as dogma and in essence it has become a form of religion unto it self. With some adherents, so dogmatic that they reject anything to the contrary as being foolish and born of ignorance. Our personal view is blinded by our own arrogance and self worth to the point of actually stiffening our scientific progress as well as neutralizing our spirituality. We place our faith in proof and speculation and give little credit toward old wisdom and ancient knowledge, New and Improved has become the god of the twentieth century.
In reality if a man was to know all there is to know about this planet we call home we would consider him to be a genius among men. Yet even if it were possible to have all that knowledge we must also consider that this planet of ours is but a grain of sand in the vastness of the universe and that knowledge is extremely limited and miniscule leaving us right back were we started with speculation and faith.
Although I admire science and appreciate the strides it has taken us I personally have more faith in the Creator than I do in the sciences. If it is not possible to know everything there is to know then I believe a foundation of faith is greater than a foundation of uncertainty to build my life upon.
Irish
Is it possible for human to have all the answers and proof or must we rely a certain amount to hope and faith? Science is continually changing as new discoveries are made on a daily basis, the answers occasionally send us back to the drawing board and sometimes open an entirely new form science and reasoning. For instance quantum physics was for the longest time pure speculation and theory and now is receiving the credit and attention it deserves. We have a tendency to except scientific principles as dogma and in essence it has become a form of religion unto it self. With some adherents, so dogmatic that they reject anything to the contrary as being foolish and born of ignorance. Our personal view is blinded by our own arrogance and self worth to the point of actually stiffening our scientific progress as well as neutralizing our spirituality. We place our faith in proof and speculation and give little credit toward old wisdom and ancient knowledge, New and Improved has become the god of the twentieth century.
In reality if a man was to know all there is to know about this planet we call home we would consider him to be a genius among men. Yet even if it were possible to have all that knowledge we must also consider that this planet of ours is but a grain of sand in the vastness of the universe and that knowledge is extremely limited and miniscule leaving us right back were we started with speculation and faith.
Although I admire science and appreciate the strides it has taken us I personally have more faith in the Creator than I do in the sciences. If it is not possible to know everything there is to know then I believe a foundation of faith is greater than a foundation of uncertainty to build my life upon.
Irish
Without science our world would still be somewhat primitive. Without a God.. our world would be.. our world as it is now. It would be very obvious if someone was speaking the words of a God. They would make it very obvious. We would not see contradictions, questionable wording, anger and rage towards humans, these are not perfect traits. Where is your god to claim 100% of the knowledge? Because he has not done so.
And yes, science is open to new facts as they come to light and as reality changes. Religion keeps all of its mistakes and contradictions as time goes on. Why is this supreme creator unable to talk through himself and not through other humans who will be distrusted? We make a lot of claims as to who or what God is, there is no God making any claims.
QUOTE(MadMachine @ Dec 13 2006, 09:45 AM) [snapback]1460691[/snapback]
Irish: Good post, but I would prefer the foundation of "uncertainty," because at least it leaves room to grow... With the Christian faith, everything is absolute and laid out for you. "Accept Jesus and spend eternity in heaven, don't and don't." maybe you think it's a challenge because people try to challenge your faith, but in reality, it's no challenge to rely on faith and ignore any challenges.
I respect you, but I like making it very clear that I disagree with you.
I respect you, but I like making it very clear that I disagree with you.
Thank you Mad Machine, I respect others beliefs also, but like a good Irishman I like a good fight for what I believe is right and am not shy in stating my opinion.
Having a reliable foundation is far more important then what you build upon it.To put it another way.
Life is a gift of God you have chosen to accept the finite version of it or you would not still be with us. If you like the gift you have an opportunity to keep it, you just have to return to the original dealership and sign the contract. But you are under no obligation to do so if you choose.
Irish
My reasoning is this no mater what you are building it is best to have the best foundation you have available to you to build upon. As I explained in the other post what we really know for sure is very miniscule compared to what we all would like to know, with all the scientific knowledge in the world we really know very little of what is to be known? So much of science has to be taken on faith and speculation and as science is always in a state of flux by its inherent nature it becomes to me a less stable foundation than faith in a Creator because of the constant changes and returns to the drawing boards.
Irish
Irish
QUOTE(Irish @ Dec 13 2006, 05:03 PM) [snapback]1460711[/snapback]
Thank you Mad Machine, I respect others beliefs also, but like a good Irishman I like a good fight for what I believe is right and am not shy in stating my opinion. Having a reliable foundation is far more important then what you build upon it.
To put it another way.
Life is a gift of God you have chosen to accept the finite version of it or you would not still be with us. If you like the gift you have an opportunity to keep it, you just have to return to the original dealership and sign the contract. But you are under no obligation to do so if you choose.
Irish
Having a reliable foundation is far more important then what you build upon it.To put it another way.
Life is a gift of God you have chosen to accept the finite version of it or you would not still be with us. If you like the gift you have an opportunity to keep it, you just have to return to the original dealership and sign the contract. But you are under no obligation to do so if you choose.
Irish
No obligation is a bit of an understatement. If you tell someone you'll shoot them if they don't give you money, you're tipping the scale. All you have to do is read revelation and know what it contains to know what I mean with that metaphor. If I were to choose a religion currently, it would at least be one whose God was not so violent and hateful.
QUOTE(Irish @ Dec 13 2006, 05:06 PM) [snapback]1460718[/snapback]
My reasoning is this no mater what you are building it is best to have the best foundation you have available to you to build upon. As I explained in the other post what we really know for sure is very miniscule compared to what we all would like to know, with all the scientific knowledge in the world we really know very little of what is to be known? So much of science has to be taken on faith and speculation and as science is always in a state of flux by its inherent nature it becomes to me a less stable foundation than faith in a Creator because of the constant changes and returns to the drawing boards.
Irish
Irish
True enough, although we know that science is rigorously tested. If something is wrong, it will be changed. This is not the case in religion, because nothing in religion is under an obligation to be correct.
I think science is a good foundation. If it weren't for science, we'd still believe the earth was flat, and that every other rock in our solar system (including the sun) revolved around it.
Science is in no way anti-christianity, but some forms of Christianity may very well be anti-science.
It (Science) is not so much a "faith" as it is a way of reasoning. The proper way, in my opinion. But I'm not against others' right to hold a different opinion.
Science is in no way anti-christianity, but some forms of Christianity may very well be anti-science.
It (Science) is not so much a "faith" as it is a way of reasoning. The proper way, in my opinion. But I'm not against others' right to hold a different opinion.
I Belive god existed once, several thousand years ago. Created Humans by cross breeding his spieces with ape man.
God then told human how he was created, in his form. The story has been added to over the years.
He created us because God was a scientist. and we where an experiment.
God came from the stars probably "Orian" . Belive in God as he once did exist. but long gone now.
God then told human how he was created, in his form. The story has been added to over the years.
He created us because God was a scientist. and we where an experiment.
God came from the stars probably "Orian" . Belive in God as he once did exist. but long gone now.
All the religious crap is just as stupid as the atheist crap. The fact is that no one knows any more than the other one. If religion is wrong, so is science.They were both created by men. So how can one be higher than the other one. Science has produced nothing that lasts. Neither has religion. The religious leaders are just as cunning as the atheists.
I am not a relgious person, but I try to give credit where credit is due.
As you get older and wiser you will begin to understand these last words of whomever it was that was "crucified".
"FATHER INTO THY HANDS I INTRUST MY SPIRIT" That covers it. Past that no one knows what the future holds for us as individuals.
I am not a relgious person, but I try to give credit where credit is due.
As you get older and wiser you will begin to understand these last words of whomever it was that was "crucified".
"FATHER INTO THY HANDS I INTRUST MY SPIRIT" That covers it. Past that no one knows what the future holds for us as individuals.
QUOTE(KBA @ Dec 13 2006, 10:07 AM) [snapback]1460722[/snapback]
No obligation is a bit of an understatement. If you tell someone you'll shoot them if they don't give you money, you're tipping the scale. All you have to do is read revelation and know what it contains to know what I mean with that metaphor. If I were to choose a religion currently, it would at least be one whose God was not so violent and hateful.
Did you feel pain and suffering before you were created within the womb? If God brought you in to existence, He has a divine right to take you out of it. Fortunately He gives us a choice in the matter and provided a way to reach Him if we want to. But it is not mans way, it’s His way.
Mans way would be to earn the salvation through accomplishments and ladder climbing.
The Old Testament shows us that this is impossible to do; the New Testament provides a way that every human being is capable, because it’s a free gift that is either accepted or rejected.
We can turn our backs on eternity and walk away into oblivion (hell).
Many view this gift as a charity and it is their egos that prevent them from accepting handouts.
Irish
QUOTE(Irish @ Dec 14 2006, 04:27 AM) [snapback]1460669[/snapback]
Science may know 0.00000001% of what is to be known. God can claim 100%.
Forgive me, but how can a being that exists only as a faithful interpretation to explain plausible reality be said to know anything at all!?
Science, while not absolute, at least postulate explanations for natural phenomena via/ application of accepted methods of research, principles, etc...that assist mortal comprehension of the natural world. To claim mythology is more credible than the field of the sciences, in the face of that, is representative of discrimination in it's own right that is no more valid than the theoretical science, but rather is an example of partisan bias in itself.
QUOTE(GoddessWhispers @ Dec 13 2006, 10:49 AM) [snapback]1460793[/snapback]
Forgive me, but how can a being that exists only as a faithful interpretation to explain plausible reality be said to know anything at all!?
Science, while not absolute, at least postulate explanations for natural phenomena via/ application of accepted methods of research, principles, etc...that assist mortal comprehension of the natural world. To claim mythology is more credible than the field of the sciences, in the face of that, is representative of discrimination in it's own right that is no more valid than the theoretical science, but rather is an example of partisan bias in itself.
Science, while not absolute, at least postulate explanations for natural phenomena via/ application of accepted methods of research, principles, etc...that assist mortal comprehension of the natural world. To claim mythology is more credible than the field of the sciences, in the face of that, is representative of discrimination in it's own right that is no more valid than the theoretical science, but rather is an example of partisan bias in itself.
Again it comes down to faith, I believe God created everything therefore He would know 100% about creation.
Many can quote the Bible word for word (including the devil himself) but few understand its meaning.
There are two keys to understanding, one is in the heart of man and the other is held by the Holy Spirit of God. The first key is attained by free will and a desire to know the truth (the heart). The Holy Spirit holds the second key to protect it from corruption by the deceiver until they are delivered to the born again soul shortly after acceptance of redemption.
Acts 26:18 To open their eyes, [and] to turn [them] from darkness to light, and [from] the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.
This is the mystery of Christianity. Much to the chagrin of those. that choose to not believe. Is that you must first come to Christ by faith alone and then the truth is revealed to the individual with no doubts.
The facts are revealed within our hearts, but we are only able to show others with words and deeds.
All the best
Irish
Irish,
So then it's all about choice. Some choose not to believe in that which is unreal. Some choose to believe in what can not be proven as absolute, yet hold faithful allegiance to it's existence, yes!?
So then, if one chooses to believe how then can truth, by definition, be revealed!? When faith is not contingent on tangible evidence!? What then is "proven" by subscribing to that, save that which is partial to what is already (and again by definition not to impart a slur) illogical?! i.e. subscribing to the principles that what is incorporeal?!
Truth by definition:
Conformity to fact or actuality.
2. A statement proven to be or accepted as true.
3. Sincerity; integrity.
4. Fidelity to an original or standard.
5. a. Reality; actuality.
b. often Truth That which is considered to be the supreme reality and to have the ultimate meaning and value of existence.
So then it's all about choice. Some choose not to believe in that which is unreal. Some choose to believe in what can not be proven as absolute, yet hold faithful allegiance to it's existence, yes!?
So then, if one chooses to believe how then can truth, by definition, be revealed!? When faith is not contingent on tangible evidence!? What then is "proven" by subscribing to that, save that which is partial to what is already (and again by definition not to impart a slur) illogical?! i.e. subscribing to the principles that what is incorporeal?!
Truth by definition:
Conformity to fact or actuality.
2. A statement proven to be or accepted as true.
3. Sincerity; integrity.
4. Fidelity to an original or standard.
5. a. Reality; actuality.
b. often Truth That which is considered to be the supreme reality and to have the ultimate meaning and value of existence.
QUOTE(Irish @ Dec 13 2006, 10:07 AM) [snapback]1460816[/snapback]
Again it comes down to faith, I believe God created everything therefore He would know 100% about creation.
Many can quote the Bible word for word (including the devil himself) but few understand its meaning.
There are two keys to understanding, one is in the heart of man and the other is held by the Holy Spirit of God. The first key is attained by free will and a desire to know the truth (the heart). The Holy Spirit holds the second key to protect it from corruption by the deceiver until they are delivered to the born again soul shortly after acceptance of redemption.
Acts 26:18 To open their eyes, [and] to turn [them] from darkness to light, and [from] the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.
This is the mystery of Christianity. Much to the chagrin of those. that choose to not believe. Is that you must first come to Christ by faith alone and then the truth is revealed to the individual with no doubts.
The facts are revealed within our hearts, but we are only able to show others with words and deeds.
All the best
Irish
Many can quote the Bible word for word (including the devil himself) but few understand its meaning.
There are two keys to understanding, one is in the heart of man and the other is held by the Holy Spirit of God. The first key is attained by free will and a desire to know the truth (the heart). The Holy Spirit holds the second key to protect it from corruption by the deceiver until they are delivered to the born again soul shortly after acceptance of redemption.
Acts 26:18 To open their eyes, [and] to turn [them] from darkness to light, and [from] the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.
This is the mystery of Christianity. Much to the chagrin of those. that choose to not believe. Is that you must first come to Christ by faith alone and then the truth is revealed to the individual with no doubts.
The facts are revealed within our hearts, but we are only able to show others with words and deeds.
All the best
Irish
Irish it sounds as if you are trying to make sense of it all yourself....It seems too that you think 'god' too is in a growth process " I believe God created everything therefore He would know 100% about creation" based on this statement or am i interpretting it in error???.. how then does the omnipresent all there is, the alpha the omega fit in to this????
it almost seems as if this is the way it is heck with it I'm only one man i can't change it so why fight it, just let me enjoy my life in peace the least amount of aggravation, pour me a rum ....lol I get this sort of vibe from your posts Irish.......I have a joke for you , Ram Dass (a jewish guy turned Guru) said "listen if you think you are enlightened spend a week with your parents," or in my case the 'inlaws' ...ha ha ha ha ha ha....
QUOTE(Irish @ Dec 13 2006, 05:42 PM) [snapback]1460774[/snapback]
Did you feel pain and suffering before you were created within the womb? If God brought you in to existence, He has a divine right to take you out of it. Fortunately He gives us a choice in the matter and provided a way to reach Him if we want to. But it is not mans way, it’s His way.
Mans way would be to earn the salvation through accomplishments and ladder climbing.
The Old Testament shows us that this is impossible to do; the New Testament provides a way that every human being is capable, because it’s a free gift that is either accepted or rejected.
We can turn our backs on eternity and walk away into oblivion (hell).
Many view this gift as a charity and it is their egos that prevent them from accepting handouts.
Irish
Mans way would be to earn the salvation through accomplishments and ladder climbing.
The Old Testament shows us that this is impossible to do; the New Testament provides a way that every human being is capable, because it’s a free gift that is either accepted or rejected.
We can turn our backs on eternity and walk away into oblivion (hell).
Many view this gift as a charity and it is their egos that prevent them from accepting handouts.
Irish
That would depend on the manner of my exit. Because a mother has a child, does that make it fair for her to torture her baby and throw him in say, a lava pit?
QUOTE(KBA @ Dec 13 2006, 02:42 PM) [snapback]1460986[/snapback]
That would depend on the manner of my exit. Because a mother has a child, does that make it fair for her to torture her baby and throw him in say, a lava pit?
Your mother?
This is a trick question isn't it?
(it was too irresistable)
Do you get this hysterical and way out over people who blow a huge part of their paychecks for lottery tickets in the belief that they have a system that will make them win?
QUOTE(Bella-Angelique @ Dec 13 2006, 07:49 PM) [snapback]1461004[/snapback]
Your mother?
This is a trick question isn't it?
(it was too irresistable)
Do you get this hysterical and way out over people who blow a huge part of their paychecks for lottery tickets in the belief that they have a system that will make them win?
This is a trick question isn't it?
(it was too irresistable)
Do you get this hysterical and way out over people who blow a huge part of their paychecks for lottery tickets in the belief that they have a system that will make them win?
It has nothing to do with MY mother. I was using it as an analogy, Irish said that because God created humans he has the right to destroy humans. Although, his manner of removing humans is not exactly caring. I'm not hysterical, I just take this subject seriously.
I'm sorry. I do not think you have to worry about God dumping you in a lava pit if that helps you feel better any.
QUOTE(Bella-Angelique @ Dec 13 2006, 07:56 PM) [snapback]1461018[/snapback]
I'm sorry. I do not think you have to worry about God dumping you in a lava pit if that helps you feel better any.
rev 20:15
15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire
Close enough.
Sheri and GW, it is somewhat off a paradox that one must first arrive by faith alone. But I can assure you that after completing that initial leap of faith the missing pieces of the puzzle are revealed to the heart. What appears as faith to you is a proven reality to me and other Christians. I can no more deny His existence than my own because now I have experienced both.
I cannot prove my reality to you because that is not possible, the evidence I have is of a personnel nature, which is what is meant when a Christian speaks of a personal relationship with God. I can tell you that the God I know is very active very much involved in His creation in a loving way, He would never force Himself on His creation but waits patiently for every individual soul to return to Him. He approaches each soul in a way that is unique to each of us and in a way that is best understood by the individuals need.
That is why the written words of scriptures convey different messages to different people some need to be approached in a gentle loving manner while some others need a sterner aggressive approach. In my case He approached me with both love and a lot of humor as well as intellectual knowledge because He new what would work best for me as an individual.
There is a purpose in our individual personality traits and the creator loves us because of this uniqueness, in fact the angels are jealous of these differences that God has imparted within mankind.
The bible was written as a framework for a collective race and contains elements that are understood in parts by some. To look at it as a whole becomes confusing because it was written for all and we are all different. I am sure both of you having read and fully comprehended parts of the bible that speak to you as an individual because that is the way it was meant to be. If it were not so than only the elite intelligent humans would have any hope of an eternal existence.
And Sheri you are some what right in the vibes you get from me, but that peace and contentment was a gift I received when I took that leap of faith. And when I arrive in heaven and all the dust is settled I may ask for a demonstration of the water into wine thing
and hope to sit next to a few of you and I shall pour us all a glass or two or maybe even three, but stop me after that or I might start to sing and God might change His mind (that’s his feminine nature). 
Cheers Irish
I cannot prove my reality to you because that is not possible, the evidence I have is of a personnel nature, which is what is meant when a Christian speaks of a personal relationship with God. I can tell you that the God I know is very active very much involved in His creation in a loving way, He would never force Himself on His creation but waits patiently for every individual soul to return to Him. He approaches each soul in a way that is unique to each of us and in a way that is best understood by the individuals need.
That is why the written words of scriptures convey different messages to different people some need to be approached in a gentle loving manner while some others need a sterner aggressive approach. In my case He approached me with both love and a lot of humor as well as intellectual knowledge because He new what would work best for me as an individual.
There is a purpose in our individual personality traits and the creator loves us because of this uniqueness, in fact the angels are jealous of these differences that God has imparted within mankind.
The bible was written as a framework for a collective race and contains elements that are understood in parts by some. To look at it as a whole becomes confusing because it was written for all and we are all different. I am sure both of you having read and fully comprehended parts of the bible that speak to you as an individual because that is the way it was meant to be. If it were not so than only the elite intelligent humans would have any hope of an eternal existence.
And Sheri you are some what right in the vibes you get from me, but that peace and contentment was a gift I received when I took that leap of faith. And when I arrive in heaven and all the dust is settled I may ask for a demonstration of the water into wine thing
and hope to sit next to a few of you and I shall pour us all a glass or two or maybe even three, but stop me after that or I might start to sing and God might change His mind (that’s his feminine nature). Cheers Irish
QUOTE(KBA @ Dec 13 2006, 12:42 PM) [snapback]1460986[/snapback]
That would depend on the manner of my exit. Because a mother has a child, does that make it fair for her to torture her baby and throw him in say, a lava pit?
Many Christians believe as I do that hell is place reserved for the devil and his angels and it is a place of eternal separation from God. I do not believe it is for mankind, our final destination is either eternity or from whence we came into this world a non-existence.
The fire and brimstone is a metaphor of the mental anguish that is felt from that eternal separation.
Eternity must be desired before you reach it.
Irish
Because humans are capable of abstract thought, it is our nature to question things. Science cannot answer all of our questions. That's where science ends and religion begins - religion fills in the blanks.
QUOTE(Irish @ Dec 13 2006, 08:16 PM) [snapback]1461053[/snapback]
Many Christians believe as I do that hell is place reserved for the devil and his angels and it is a place of eternal separation from God. I do not believe it is for mankind, our final destination is either eternity or from whence we came into this world a non-existence.
The fire and brimstone is a metaphor of the mental anguish that is felt from that eternal separation.
Eternity must be desired before you reach it.
Irish
The fire and brimstone is a metaphor of the mental anguish that is felt from that eternal separation.
Eternity must be desired before you reach it.
Irish
Why must Christians always turn these things into metaphors when you find something inhumane in the Bible? It is not a metaphor. It is a prophecy, and it says that people WILL be scorched with the sun, given giant boils, crushed with huge rocks, and thrown into the lake of fire. It says that they will go in there, with the Devil and the false prophet.
And then there's this in Rev. 20:10:
And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
It's pretty clear, those are not written as metaphors.
And as such, are all blanks able to be filled by only one filler!? I agree that humans are the only animal known to be capable of abstract thought. And by the very nature of abstraction, is it not then able to be said that there are many fillers, for many blanks!? All representative of that what uniquely appeals to those that first identify blanks and as such choose to apply faith as the filler!? And what about that first recorded fill? The goddess faith!? Is that just as viable as that of the patriarchal ideology!?
What gave birth to god. Human history of fillers, would lend evidence it was a female in the heavens. Eww, I gotta admit, I like that filler very muchy. But then again I'm fundamentally disposed to an affinity with boobs in heaven. Since I have a pair of my own so as to rightly say, if I were to consider such a myth, that be one that made me in it's image indeed. 
What gave birth to god. Human history of fillers, would lend evidence it was a female in the heavens. Eww, I gotta admit, I like that filler very muchy.
But then again I'm fundamentally disposed to an affinity with boobs in heaven. Since I have a pair of my own so as to rightly say, if I were to consider such a myth, that be one that made me in it's image indeed.
QUOTE(GoddessWhispers @ Dec 13 2006, 01:36 PM) [snapback]1461083[/snapback]
And as such, are all blanks able to be filled by only one filler!? I agree that humans are the only animal known to be capable of abstract thought. And by the very nature of abstraction, is it not then able to be said that there are many fillers, for many blanks!? All representative of that what uniquely appeals to those that first identify blanks and as such choose to apply faith as the filler!? And what about that first recorded fill? The goddess faith!? Is that just as viable as that of the patriarchal ideology!?
What gave birth to god. Human history of fillers, would lend evidence it was a female in the heavens. Eww, I gotta admit, I like that filler very muchy. But then again I'm fundamentally disposed to an affinity with boobs in heaven. Since I have a pair of my own so as to rightly say, if I were to consider such a myth, that be one that made me in it's image indeed.
What gave birth to god. Human history of fillers, would lend evidence it was a female in the heavens. Eww, I gotta admit, I like that filler very muchy.
But then again I'm fundamentally disposed to an affinity with boobs in heaven. Since I have a pair of my own so as to rightly say, if I were to consider such a myth, that be one that made me in it's image indeed. Why would a deity that creates not pro-creates need a sexual orientation to begin with? Sexuality would be redundant if they were the sole creator. God is neither male nor female because He/she does not reproduce.
Irish
QUOTE(GoddessWhispers @ Dec 14 2006, 09:36 AM) [snapback]1461083[/snapback]
And as such, are all blanks able to be filled by only one filler!? I agree that humans are the only animal known to be capable of abstract thought. And by the very nature of abstraction, is it not then able to be said that there are many fillers, for many blanks!? All representative of that what uniquely appeals to those that first identify blanks and as such choose to apply faith as the filler!? And what about that first recorded fill? The goddess faith!? Is that just as viable as that of the patriarchal ideology!?
What gave birth to god. Human history of fillers, would lend evidence it was a female in the heavens. Eww, I gotta admit, I like that filler very muchy. But then again I'm fundamentally disposed to an affinity with boobs in heaven. Since I have a pair of my own so as to rightly say, if I were to consider such a myth, that be one that made me in it's image indeed.
What gave birth to god. Human history of fillers, would lend evidence it was a female in the heavens. Eww, I gotta admit, I like that filler very muchy.
But then again I'm fundamentally disposed to an affinity with boobs in heaven. Since I have a pair of my own so as to rightly say, if I were to consider such a myth, that be one that made me in it's image indeed. You've lost me. Are you arguing for or against what I said?
I'm affording a measure of respect to your analogy about fillers.
And Irish, while god is supposed to be a spirit and genderless, one would be hard pressed to find that is a universal ideology among believers in the patriarch in heaven. Especially given the verbiage in the xtian bible and koran. Wherein jehovah and allah are described in the masculine tense. And especially given that the christian tenets ascribed to patriarchy or, "rule of the fathers" which by definition denotes the male sex. Further supported by the biblical passage that god made man in his image, though in Genesis there is a reference to the plural. i.e. let us make man in our image and our likeness. One wonders at that as well. Perhaps a hold over or reference to the earlier polytheism of the pagan faiths.
And Irish, while god is supposed to be a spirit and genderless, one would be hard pressed to find that is a universal ideology among believers in the patriarch in heaven. Especially given the verbiage in the xtian bible and koran. Wherein jehovah and allah are described in the masculine tense. And especially given that the christian tenets ascribed to patriarchy or, "rule of the fathers" which by definition denotes the male sex. Further supported by the biblical passage that god made man in his image, though in Genesis there is a reference to the plural. i.e. let us make man in our image and our likeness. One wonders at that as well. Perhaps a hold over or reference to the earlier polytheism of the pagan faiths.
QUOTE(GoddessWhispers @ Dec 14 2006, 10:01 AM) [snapback]1461123[/snapback]
I'm affording a measure of respect to your analogy about fillers.
And Irish, while god is supposed to be a spirit and genderless, one would be hard pressed to find that is a universal ideology among believers in the patriarch in heaven. Especially given the verbiage in the xtian bible and koran. Wherein jehovah and allah are described in the masculine tense. And especially given that the christian tenets ascribed to patriarchy or, "rule of the fathers" which by definition denotes the male sex. Further supported by the biblical passage that god made man in his image, though in Genesis there is a reference to the plural. i.e. let us make man in our image and our likeness. One wonders at that as well. Perhaps a hold over or reference to the earlier polytheism of the pagan faiths.
And Irish, while god is supposed to be a spirit and genderless, one would be hard pressed to find that is a universal ideology among believers in the patriarch in heaven. Especially given the verbiage in the xtian bible and koran. Wherein jehovah and allah are described in the masculine tense. And especially given that the christian tenets ascribed to patriarchy or, "rule of the fathers" which by definition denotes the male sex. Further supported by the biblical passage that god made man in his image, though in Genesis there is a reference to the plural. i.e. let us make man in our image and our likeness. One wonders at that as well. Perhaps a hold over or reference to the earlier polytheism of the pagan faiths.
Well put!
QUOTE(KBA @ Dec 13 2006, 02:34 PM) [snapback]1461078[/snapback]
Why must Christians always turn these things into metaphors when you find something inhumane in the Bible? It is not a metaphor. It is a prophecy, and it says that people WILL be scorched with the sun, given giant boils, crushed with huge rocks, and thrown into the lake of fire. It says that they will go in there, with the Devil and the false prophet.
And then there's this in Rev. 20:10:
And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
It's pretty clear, those are not written as metaphors.
And then there's this in Rev. 20:10:
And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
It's pretty clear, those are not written as metaphors.
I know it's easier to argue against absolutes because then one doesn't have to worry about all of the actual exceptions.
Christians do not "always turn these things into metaphors," just like atheists do not always oppose the rights of others to believe as they want, just as pagans do not always worship seeking personal power, etc.
Some things in the Bible are taken as metaphors because of the context in which they are said. Additionally, because we are interpreting translations (Greek, Hebrew, Latin, Aramaic) which require not just a knowledge of the language, but also of the culture in which they were spoken and written and despite great amounts of research and study some things still remain unclear we have ended up with different interpretations of particular passages.
However, what is not in doubt is that:
QUOTE
11"Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know and testify of what we have seen, and you do not accept our testimony. 12"If I told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things? 13"No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man. 14"As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; 15so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life. 16"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. 17"For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. 18"He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19"This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil. 20"For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. 21"But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God."
QUOTE(IamsSon @ Dec 13 2006, 01:06 PM) [snapback]1461126[/snapback]
I know it's easier to argue against absolutes because then one doesn't have to worry about all of the actual exceptions.
Christians do not "always turn these things into metaphors," just like atheists do not always oppose the rights of others to believe as they want, just as pagans do not always worship seeking personal power, etc.
Some things in the Bible are taken as metaphors because of the context in which they are said. Additionally, because we are interpreting translations (Greek, Hebrew, Latin, Aramaic) which require not just a knowledge of the language, but also of the culture in which they were spoken and written and despite great amounts of research and study some things still remain unclear we have ended up with different interpretations of particular passages.
However, what is not in doubt is that:
Christians do not "always turn these things into metaphors," just like atheists do not always oppose the rights of others to believe as they want, just as pagans do not always worship seeking personal power, etc.
Some things in the Bible are taken as metaphors because of the context in which they are said. Additionally, because we are interpreting translations (Greek, Hebrew, Latin, Aramaic) which require not just a knowledge of the language, but also of the culture in which they were spoken and written and despite great amounts of research and study some things still remain unclear we have ended up with different interpretations of particular passages.
However, what is not in doubt is that:
i think religion can take credit for the car salesman, you know the one who convinces you, you are getting a really good deal on a lemon nad both know you aren't.................
Son there are few exceptions in relgion as KBA sais it is very clear the fate of one who doesn't belive or who dares have a thought by himself........
QUOTE(Supra Sheri @ Dec 13 2006, 03:18 PM) [snapback]1461141[/snapback]
i think religion can take credit for the car salesman, you know the one who convinces you, you are getting a really good deal on a lemon nad both know you aren't.................
Son there are few exceptions in relgion as KBA sais it is very clear the fate of one who doesn't belive or who dares have a thought by himself........
Son there are few exceptions in relgion as KBA sais it is very clear the fate of one who doesn't belive or who dares have a thought by himself........
Supra, if you will actually read the posts you will see that what I am replying to is the "Christians always..." statement. You know there are many different types of Christians, some are Christians because someone told them they were, others are Christians because they go to a Christian church, others are Christians simply because--in their belief-- all humans are christians. Even among those of us who call ourselves "little Christs" (that's what the term originally meant) there are varying beliefs--outside of the KNOWLEDGE of the Saving Grace of Christ-- some believe that Hell is a literal place, others believe that Hell is only for Satan and the angels (demons) who rebelled with him, etc. etc. So to say "Christians always..." is actually a ridiculous and obviously untrue statement.
If you are going to insist on quoting me, at least read what I write and what I'm replying to, it will help your posts make more sense
While we're at it, why should we believe in love or compassion? Unless it's scientifically verifiable, of course. Because of course the only thing worth believing in can be measured by experiment. Otherwise, we shouldn't waste our times on such things. I mean, please, feelings? All rubbish unless we can print out a data sheet filled with statistics.
QUOTE(IamsSon @ Dec 13 2006, 01:43 PM) [snapback]1461156[/snapback]
Supra, if you will actually read the posts you will see that what I am replying to is the "Christians always..." statement. You know there are many different types of Christians, some are Christians because someone told them they were, others are Christians because they go to a Christian church, others are Christians simply because--in their belief-- all humans are christians. Even among those of us who call ourselves "little Christs" (that's what the term originally meant) there are varying beliefs--outside of the KNOWLEDGE of the Saving Grace of Christ-- some believe that Hell is a literal place, others believe that Hell is only for Satan and the angels (demons) who rebelled with him, etc. etc. So to say "Christians always..." is actually a ridiculous and obviously untrue statement.
If you are going to insist on quoting me, at least read what I write and what I'm replying to, it will help your posts make more sense
If you are going to insist on quoting me, at least read what I write and what I'm replying to, it will help your posts make more sense
one as astute and insightful as you by now we undersntand each other it would seem, what no syntax or spelling comments ...son I'm offended and feeling forgotten lol...seriously i think its good to revisit old ground I don't want anyone assuming they think they know what you mean..i actually didn't know this is what you meant.....i was on another page altogether.....Do you know what you mean my friend?????
QUOTE(Supra Sheri @ Dec 13 2006, 03:53 PM) [snapback]1461169[/snapback]
one as astute and insightful as you by now we undersntand each other it would seem, what no syntax or spelling comments ...son I'm offended and feeling forgotten lol...seriously i think its good to revisit old ground I don't want anyone assuming they think they know what you mean..i actually didn't know this is what you meant.....i was on another page altogether.....Do you know what you mean my friend?????
I'm getting used to the spelling and syntax...what I can't get used to is the name change...Why'd you change the first name?
Yes, I do know what I mean. What I am trying to point out is that saying things like "you always..." or "you never..." is a very weak way to make a point, because no one always does or doesn't do anything and to try to imply that whole, distinct groups of people who happen to somehow all fall under the broad label of "Christian" (when even among themselves they do not agree on what constitutes a Christian) all do or don't so something is ludicrous.
QUOTE(Supra Sheri @ Dec 13 2006, 03:53 PM) [snapback]1461169[/snapback]
one as astute and insightful as you by now we undersntand each other it would seem, what no syntax or spelling comments ...son I'm offended and feeling forgotten lol...seriously i think its good to revisit old ground I don't want anyone assuming they think they know what you mean..i actually didn't know this is what you meant.....i was on another page altogether.....Do you know what you mean my friend?????
Hello Sherri! Long time no see
I haven't really read the previous posts, but I am of the opinion that religion started out with good intentions but around the 1100's (1200's?) the Church used its influence to place excommunications on the Kings of Western Europe. With such great power they started taking advantage of everyone, and the people, being ignorant as to believe not following the Chruch's rules would lead to great consequence, started doing everything they were told. Now it is just ridiculous and the entire main theme of Christianity has been forgotten. By the way, Sherri, did you ever get your son that Donald Duck math movie? QUOTE(IamsSon @ Dec 13 2006, 02:07 PM) [snapback]1461184[/snapback]
I'm getting used to the spelling and syntax...what I can't get used to is the name change...Why'd you change the first name?
Yes, I do know what I mean. What I am trying to point out is that saying things like "you always..." or "you never..." is a very weak way to make a point, because no one always does or doesn't do anything and to try to imply that whole, distinct groups of people who happen to somehow all fall under the broad label of "Christian" (when even among themselves they do not agree on what constitutes a Christian) all do or don't so something is ludicrous.
Yes, I do know what I mean. What I am trying to point out is that saying things like "you always..." or "you never..." is a very weak way to make a point, because no one always does or doesn't do anything and to try to imply that whole, distinct groups of people who happen to somehow all fall under the broad label of "Christian" (when even among themselves they do not agree on what constitutes a Christian) all do or don't so something is ludicrous.
Son have you ever heard of Peta??the organization that cares for the welfare of animals?????this really does fit in to the OP........as you know I am a full on Vegan who also cares for the welfare of animals...ask me why i would not affiliate myself with them???
I won't hold you in suspense son, there reputation is to tainted , they have done things that are very violent in an attempt to make a point , mainly have used violence to solve conflict.... and as a vegan who lives in Ahimsa i can't support that , i understand it, i see why, I emphathize.... but it doesn't speak of who i am and it would lead me to always have to defend myself thus wasting valuable time on being a non violent person who really does care for animals... is not the message i want to give with my life...so in line with your poiint you may and very well are the christian that no more stands for violence than the vegan, but the path to show that is one of such blood shed, and the its not the relgion its the people dosen't fly it wouldn't for me either back to the peta thing.... , violence and non violence can't be in the same sentence....I see your efforts and its true always and never, apply but the label has a history that can't be undone only renewed relanguaged, do you understand a bit better our point now???????
QUOTE(IamsSon @ Dec 13 2006, 09:43 PM) [snapback]1461156[/snapback]
Supra, if you will actually read the posts you will see that what I am replying to is the "Christians always..." statement. You know there are many different types of Christians, some are Christians because someone told them they were, others are Christians because they go to a Christian church, others are Christians simply because--in their belief-- all humans are christians. Even among those of us who call ourselves "little Christs" (that's what the term originally meant) there are varying beliefs--outside of the KNOWLEDGE of the Saving Grace of Christ-- some believe that Hell is a literal place, others believe that Hell is only for Satan and the angels (demons) who rebelled with him, etc. etc. So to say "Christians always..." is actually a ridiculous and obviously untrue statement.
If you are going to insist on quoting me, at least read what I write and what I'm replying to, it will help your posts make more sense
If you are going to insist on quoting me, at least read what I write and what I'm replying to, it will help your posts make more sense
What I'm saying is that it's all too common for people to take the path of least resistance. If it doesn't sound fair, it must be a metaphor. If it sounds ungodly, well they were probably just making an analogy, etc.
I'm saying that when something is written as a prophecy, it is not written as a prophecy for you to reinterpret and skew until you have some loving holy message. It's written to be read exactly how they said it. If they want to give you metaphors or lessons, it will be a parable. If every last word of a document is up for interpretation, you don't have much of a text do you?
QUOTE(Supra Sheri @ Dec 13 2006, 04:24 PM) [snapback]1461218[/snapback]
Son have you ever heard of Peta??the organization that cares for the welfare of animals?????this really does fit in to the OP........as you know I am a full on Vegan who also cares for the welfare of animals...ask me why i would not affiliate myself with them???
I won't hold you in suspense son, there reputation is to tainted , they have done things that are very violent in an attempt to make a point , mainly have used violence to solve conflict.... and as a vegan who lives in Ahimsa i can't support that , i understand it, i see why, I emphathize.... but it doesn't speak of who i am and it would lead me to always have to defend myself thus wasting valuable time on being a non violent person who really does care for animals... is not the message i want to give with my life...so in line with your poiint you may and very well are the christian that no more stands for violence than the vegan, but the path to show that is one of such blood shed, and the its not the relgion its the people dosen't fly it wouldn't for me either back to the peta thing.... , violence and non violence can't be in the same sentence....I see your efforts and its true always and never, apply but the label has a history that can't be undone only renewed relanguaged, do you understand a bit better our point now???????
I won't hold you in suspense son, there reputation is to tainted , they have done things that are very violent in an attempt to make a point , mainly have used violence to solve conflict.... and as a vegan who lives in Ahimsa i can't support that , i understand it, i see why, I emphathize.... but it doesn't speak of who i am and it would lead me to always have to defend myself thus wasting valuable time on being a non violent person who really does care for animals... is not the message i want to give with my life...so in line with your poiint you may and very well are the christian that no more stands for violence than the vegan, but the path to show that is one of such blood shed, and the its not the relgion its the people dosen't fly it wouldn't for me either back to the peta thing.... , violence and non violence can't be in the same sentence....I see your efforts and its true always and never, apply but the label has a history that can't be undone only renewed relanguaged, do you understand a bit better our point now???????
Yes, I understand the point which is why I keep pointing out that I am not part of any denomination or organized Christian religion. I am a Christian because of my relationship with God, not because of my relationship or allegiance with the philosophy, doctrine, or leadership of any man or man-made organization.
This is why I keep pointing out that it is invalid to try to say things like "All Christians do this..." or "All Christians say this..." because under the label of "Christian" there is a WIDE variety of people with whom I completely disagree.
Obviously, knowing what PETA does and being in complete disagreement with their tactics, you would not agree if someone said, "All vegans go around throwing paint on people's fur coats, or all vegans destroy private property to free animals... etc." In the same way, I also do not agree that all Christians should be painted with the broad brush of "All Christians ...."
QUOTE(RamboIII @ Dec 13 2006, 02:17 PM) [snapback]1461208[/snapback]
Hello Sherri! Long time no see I haven't really read the previous posts, but I am of the opinion that religion started out with good intentions but around the 1100's (1200's?) the Church used its influence to place excommunications on the Kings of Western Europe. With such great power they started taking advantage of everyone, and the people, being ignorant as to believe not following the Chruch's rules would lead to great consequence, started doing everything they were told. Now it is just ridiculous and the entire main theme of Christianity has been forgotten. By the way, Sherri, did you ever get your son that Donald Duck math movie?
I haven't really read the previous posts, but I am of the opinion that religion started out with good intentions but around the 1100's (1200's?) the Church used its influence to place excommunications on the Kings of Western Europe. With such great power they started taking advantage of everyone, and the people, being ignorant as to believe not following the Chruch's rules would lead to great consequence, started doing everything they were told. Now it is just ridiculous and the entire main theme of Christianity has been forgotten. By the way, Sherri, did you ever get your son that Donald Duck math movie? Rambo (((hugs)) ong time no see my freind, i'll Pm you so irish doen't get on us, excellent point i too think they may of started with good intentios and went really wrong, I'd actaullyam open to the idea of a new spirituality based on intentions that benefit all, a non violent unconditionalloving diety that is secure and not on prozac, maybe even a bit wise and interesting... lol.....
QUOTE(KBA @ Dec 14 2006, 07:34 AM) [snapback]1461078[/snapback]
Why must Christians always turn these things into metaphors when you find something inhumane in the Bible? It is not a metaphor. It is a prophecy, and it says that people WILL be scorched with the sun, given giant boils, crushed with huge rocks, and thrown into the lake of fire. It says that they will go in there, with the Devil and the false prophet.
This is where you are wrong, KBA. There is a place set aside for the devil and the false prophet, and this will be a place of misery and woe, but that is NOT the Lake of Fire. No human is ever documented as going to the same place as the devil. The Lake of Fire is (and I quote) the "Second Death" - ya know, like the first death where you die and are no more, except this one is permanent. It's not the "Second place of eternal punishment". This isn't a matter of the passage being a "metaphor", though I realise Irish used the phrase as such. Simply put, where the Devil is ascribed to go is not the same place as where humans go. Even were it to be so, the idea of the Lake of Fire comes from Revelation, an apocryphal text filled with imagery, metaphor, symbology. It is utterly impossible to come to a direct and literal interpretation of most anything in this book of the Bible. As much as people like to say "everything must be literal", when it comes to Revelation in particular, this is just impossible, really - not because I want it to be so, but because that's the nature of the text.
So, just out of curiosity, when people are saying "religion" in this thread, they mean "Christianity," right? Because if I'm going to take part in discussions in this forum, I should know if we really are talking about religion in totality or if we're just talking about Christianity. It's confusing to those of us who know that there are more religions in the world than one.
Why not believe in God ?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.