Are we gonna be the people that keep asking questions, knowing well that what we hear will never satisfy us? When it comes to believing in something; the very purpose of our existence, it seems that many just don't want to believe in something. Seeing that many believe in nothing, which is something with the lack of our understanding put to it, its apparent that not many question the 'purpose' as to why we 'exist.'

So why ask questions in the first place? Why encourage others to give up what they see to be a purposed filled life just to merely exist with the rest of mankind? Why shatter someone's dream of eternal life in peace and joy with the ones they love just to claim to better understand the concept of human life? What knowledge can anyone give that can help us appreciate this life that not all of us are satisfied with? To live a life in absence of the things we desire is not a fulfilled life, but a life we just settled for. Why have a problem with the Hebrew religion, Christian religion, or Muslim religion. All these beliefs encourage people through life and go in depth, but many seem to want to mingle and stir things up. A belief, after all, is a personal choice. If you choose not to believe, then what are you inquiring as to why others believe? Will what you have to say make sense of this contradicting life on earth?

How can we humans, who act so unnatural at times, testify only to the natural order of things? I think that if you are asking questions, you should ask them because you want to know, not because you think you already know and want flog the issue some more.

“I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.” Galileo Galilei ~Italian natural Philosopher, Astronomer and Mathematician who was threatened by the church, with the inquisition, for daring to think, like that.

I'll keep my right to think, to question and to speak. And I'd have faith that wouldn't scare or intimidate anyone that felt assured they had a right to do the same thing, and as such would example their god nor it's people, are frightened by that.

1) Why encourage others to give up what they see to be a purposed filled life just to merely exist with the rest of mankind?
2) Why encourage others to give up what they see to be a purposed filled life of just existing with the rest of mankind?

1) Why shatter someone's dream of eternal life in peace and joy with the ones they love just to claim to better understand the concept of human life?
2) Why shatter someone's concept of human life because they don't share in the dream of eternal life in peace and joy with the ones they love?

1) What knowledge can anyone give that can help us appreciate this life that not all of us are satisfied with?
2) What knowledge can anyone give that can help us not appreciate this life that some of us are satisfied with?

These questions can go both ways, depending on what you believe. And you're right, they only lead to more questions. No one can PROVE they are right and the other is wrong. We should all be able to believe what we want and not have to worry about being persecuted for it.

How do we learn if we don't question? Should we end where we begin? When we question we evolve.

Man should question all things. If man had never looked around him and questioned, we would still be living in caves and ploughing up fields with the a*se bone of a giraffe.

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 minuscule 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

Thats like being told - why question God?

Why NOT ask questions Blue..heck didn't you post up your OWN survey recently?? yet here you are asking - why ask questions??

Well again I say - WHY NOT??

How else are we going to learn anything without asking questions??

Not everyone ask's you questions to get you to change your mind...no...

There's a difference between inquiring to further one's knowledge and just plain teasing people. The impression that I get a lot of times is that some people are done questioning things, have become convinced of what they believe, and get so bored as to stir people's grits with questions that they feel they already know the answer to. It gets quite annoying.
My survey, I wanted to know what people thought to use in my studies. I had questions to those questions, mainly to explore possible results due to my inquiries. I was genuinely interested in what they said.

It seems inevitable, however, that someone will come in and stir things up for the fun of it. Doesn't that bother you?

blue, can you give a short list of the kind of annoying questions that you call - just plain teasing? just to give me an idea............thanks

what i meant, really is for those who debate something that they don't even care to be resolved. they just like getting a rise outta people. like this from a member who responded to a debate about the Mosaic Law and how Churches teach it today:
LET me translate that into English-
"Until you ignore any teachings of Jesus that are 180 degrees in opposition to Christianity as taught today, regardless of what common sense tells you, obeying blindly the propaganda of the church, no matter that Jesus himself said the law is to be followed, then and only then will you be a Christian."
You won't be a follower of Jesus. The church, however, will be very happy. Just do what the church says.

You see the waste of time that this poster did and how it can interfere with the progression of the debate. In his heart, he has made his choice, but for fun he likes to nag on others, whether it be a question or statement. Stating what you believe and asking questions is different than insulting other beliefs based on the way you view it. If you don't care to have a conflict resolved, then why even participate in the debate?

I have no problem with people who form their own opinions on the nature of this world. What I have a problem with is those who push their ideas on people who already have their own faith and don't want/need their belief's. That's the problem I have. and my problem is with the people of today doing this, not with what happened in the past. I'm not going to condemn the christians of today for what the christians did in the middle ages during the crusades.

Any belief that can get a person to live a just life, a life that doesn't value luxuries over humanity is a belief I want them to keep. Even if it's the flying-spaghetti monster.

lol bluefinger, lucky everyone is not like that!!
we would have a world full of people who actually believe in these religious text... now THAT would be a dangerous world.
religion is great for some people i dont deny that!!
but for us who like to think.. its in our nature to question the answers, its the only way we will develop.

So, you are saying that people who believe in religious texts don't think?

and if there were an athiest board putting forth the thoughts of jesus not being a real historical person you wouldn't come and stir things up ?

'stir' things up? No. I don't go out and start arguments just because it makes me feel better about myself. I speak as civil as possible and seek to speak my piece and hear another's view. Cuz the truth is that we can say whatever we want of Christ, but there is only one truth about him. As to what that truth is, is taken on a matter of faith; since none of us may never know for sure. Its not like they had video cameras and tape recorders. If you choose not to consider the testimony of His eye witnesses, then I don't know what to tell you.

No, they had historians instead...there were well over 40 historians writing at the time of Jesus, about the happenings in the Roman Empire and the various incidents both secular and religious that occured. Two of these historians were Jews, living in Palestine...Philo lived in Jerusalem at the time Jesus would have been preaching in the temple (Philo made a hobby of collecting information on the various Jewish sects, which Jesus followers would have been), yet never once mentioned Jesus or any of the various miracles that supposedly took place after his execution and, Justus of Tiberia (Tiberia being very close to Capernaum which Jesus supposedly often visited) makes no mention of him, even though he too was a contemporary of Jesus!

As I have stated over and over, any religion that requires "faith" because it has no evidence for it's truth is naught but a false and man-made religion...usually based on lies and deceptions.

And historians have allways changed their writtings to appease either their king/ruler, population unrest, and personal benifit. It is still going on today. Why do you think studies change almost day by day, especially when history or current events are in the mix. You take half a society that at the time didnt want Christ and take the other half of them who didnt believe he was who he was and you tell me you consider their historical writtings fact?
The Romans excluded Christ from documented execution because they wanted to erase all evidence that they were the ones who crucified him. They did the act but considered it a judgement and act created and condoned by the Jewish leaders.
And no the followers of Christ were not Jewish but maybe a few. The rest were pagan or outcast due to illnesses,(that he cured) occupations, or social status.

And as I have said over and over is that any belief requires faith in that belief or it will be doubted in our minds. For spiritual belief to belief in sience and the world around us. We hold a faith that what be believe is real. For example a person tells you about a country that you have never seen or perhaps a new scientific discovery you did not allready know about. They show you documents and testamonies of the factual basis of these two things. From what you have been shown you believe that such exists enough to even want to visit this new country. Now you have never seen this country aside from what this person has shown you and your personal beliefs that such exists. So see you have a faith that such exists because you have no on sight walked the land point of view that such exists.

And with the scientific discovery, Tell me this you believe what science has proven correct? Well how much of that have you actually studied and proven yourself? Or do you just take the scientists words for it?

Typical Christian response…how do you think historians draw their conclusions of past events? We normally take the works of various historians contemporary or contemporaneous to the event or person being studied, compare them, looking at the similarities and divergencies. Only then can any conclusions be made. In the case of JC, he just isn’t mentioned by any of the historians of the contemporary period. A conspiracy can’t be claimed because even Christians admit that if he existed, he would have been unimportant and consequently not noteworthy. Since these folk did report the purported miracles of Apollonius and divers other self-styled Messiahs (many whose miracles are so similar to JC’s that they could have been copied by his later followers for inclusion in the nascent gospels), they surely would have noticed a miracle worker in (contrary to Christian belief) an important province such as Judea (important because of the martial problems presented by the dissident Jews)! Yet, there is not ONE WORD on this Messiah reported, not even by those historians living in his own area! Almost as if he never existed, huh.


Another typical Christian response…by the time Romans would have wanted to erase their part in the execution of JC, the Christians controlled the administration of the Empire. They would have wanted to preserve the now Holy documents that showed the order of execution and the report of such execution taking place…They didn’t, once again almost as if he and the documents never existed, huh?


Again a typical Christian response and a wrong one at that. Many beliefs have evidence to support them. I believe that on earth, if I jump up, gravity will pull me down and guess what all evidence shows that this is true. Religions require faith and that is simply because they have no evidence for their veracity, hence they are man-made and totally false (I am even including my Deism since man will never know the Creator’s mind). Man should always doubt, never accept something as true without testing and verification, religion can never be verified and as such remains only pretty little morality stories much like Peter Rabbit and the Little Red Hen.


I accept that which shows it is valid, else I would not be communicating with you…as for the rest, mostly I do not understand the nuances of “hard sciences” and take their word with reservations (just as they do, since scientists always keep reservations on everything), but when it comes to the soft sciences I accept most because as a member of the soft sciences I am in the position to verify that which I need or am interested in.

Well people like that, aren't worth debating with...I wouldnt even call that a question..more like a stupid statement.

What he or she should have done was ASK questions, to try and come to an understanding .........


I thought when you were speaking about silly annoying question, you were sick of -- > What is a christian? ...Why do you believe in God?....Are you sure Jesus wasn't a muslim?? LOL those sort

What really gets to me now, more so than it ever did before, is those that make threads to attack your beliefs...ie christianity....and the threads from those that are posted to attack the non believers...thats just annoying

Mr Finger,

It’s that kind of statement that offends my non-christian/religious self. You assume that people that do not believe as you believe in nothing, like our lives are empty devoid of understanding, or purpose because we’re not christians.

I find my life much more enjoyable and interesting now, than when I was forced to listen to your christian mythology as a kid. Life and nature seems so much more wondrous, precious, and rare when you believe in evolution instead of some god that snapped his fingers and made a bunch of instant people that he requires to worship him. In my mind god would not be so insecure as to require praise and worship, those are strictly human qualities.

Wow typical "fence straddler" responses. Thanks for labeling me, shows your debate skills.

Funny how you picked and choosed pieces of my post, once again it shows your debate skills.

So now you deny that fact that history has been rewritten so much that none of it is technically true. Seeing how you are so much of a consipiracy junkie I would expect you to back up my reasoning. Oh wait it goes agianst your arguement this time so you cant. Once again this shows you debating abitlities when you trash something you post so much just to prove a point. With claims of evidence and belief you must look deeply into both sides of the story, not only the one your sided with. If you do you actually find out that both are pretty much full of BS. Key word here is cover-ups. There has been cover-ups since societies and governments were created.

Point is history is written by the rulers of a land not the simple little people. For example, a war is fought between two countries, country A and country B. Country A is starting a war with B so they can occupy their land. B considers A an enemy and vice versa. A crushes B no contest. Who do you think wrote the history of that war? Who do you think put themselves as good guys and the other country as bad guys? See my point? The simple little people followed Christ. The simple little people who were and still are silenced to cover up didnt write the history books. Those that followed Christ wrote about him in their form of historical text. But since their opinions didnt matter and what they wrote didnt work with what the big guys were writting and it was written more as religious text it was out casted and silenced aside from the little mass that wrote it. The simple little people or masses opinions didnt matter then and they dont matter now. It is the way its run.

For example if you solved a historical mystery covered up for centuries, do you think that you the "little person" would change that historical document with your own? Do you think that you would end up in history yourself with out the backing of the "big people"? No you wouldnt. You would be called a fool creating consipiracies to raise turmol. And more than likely you too would be Silenced.

The masses are allways being conned. They are even sadly conned into thinking they have been conned. You say do not take the words of others into consideration yet you do so much that you dont even realise it. You are no different than anyone else in this world you are a part of the mindless mass that allows yourself to be controlled.

For example look at how you described Gravity. You dont know for fact that gravity is what keeps us grounded. You have been TAUGHT that it is gravity. Gravity could just be another made up theory to keep your little mind at ease. Some one as skeptical as you claim you are, I would think that you would actually research exactly what gravity is. Is gravity even gravity? You are not 100% sure. You have been taught that and except it. You have FAITH that what you have been taught is factual. Just face it. Your life will go smoother if you do, I promise.

Oh, I didn't have to label you, your various posts have labelled you far beyond my own poor abillity to add or detract. LOL


Wrong, history is written by the educated, more often than not with a bias towards that person’s ruler/people/empire. It is the job of the modern historian to understand the culture of the writer and attempt to sort the truth from the bias. This is often done through the comparison of the writings of various historians of various cultures reporting on the same incident/person/period. In this manner we can extract an understanding of the subject being studied/researched. An imperfect understandig to be sure, but much better than taking the word of a single historian as the unbiased truth.


Documents have been changed…Christians made insertions into certain ancient historians’ works (i.e. the Testimonium Flavanium, the spurious insertion into Tacitus’ “History of the Caesarsâ€�, book 15, chapter 4 by Sulpicius Severus and others), but literary criticism allows these insertions to be identified as “non-originalâ€� material. A good example is that the Greek of the Testimonium is that of a highly educated Latin speaker and not the mediocre Greek of the Jewish Pharisee, Josephus. This would raise a flag and further criticism shows many other irregularities that say the entire Testimonium is a 4th century insertion. A good example of solving historical mysteries is demonstrated by the battle of Kadesh which took place in the 13th century BCE between the forces of Ramesses II of Egypt and Muwatalli II of the Hittite Empire. Once the Egyptian hieroglyphs were deciphered in the 19th century, we read Ramesses lurid description of the battle and subsequent victory at Kadesh, inscribed on the walls of the Karnak Temple! For nearly a century, history books carried Kadesh as a great Egyptian victory, but with the deciphering of Hittite shortly after the 1st World War and the translation of the Royal Hittite Archives from the capital Hattatsu, we got the Hittite version of the story. Comparison between the two stories tell us an entirely different story. The battle was not a victory for either side but rather a draw with both sides withdrawing from the area. Ramesses was nearly captured in an ambush, lost several crack battalions and was only saved by the actions of the Commander of his Chariots (who was subsequently rewarded with a token of gold collars and rings – the Egyptian equivalent of the Medal of Honor). Ramesses gave a different story as to why this man was rewarded but the Hittite documents identified him as the savior of Ramesses. This is how history works, we didn’t alter either the Egyptian or Hittite records, we critiqued them, compared them and arrived at what is the highly probable truth of the matter. We changed only our history books, no other alteration was necessary. This is how modern history works.


Well, to my understanding, gravity can be described mathematically and even measured, gravity can be observed on the surface of this planet, gravity can be observed both in interplanetary space and galactic space…I rather doubt if it is a made up theory to put our minds at ease. I submit that the myth of Jesus Christ is a made up theory to keep your little mind at ease. If you disagree, that is your right but I imagine you can not offer any verifiable evidence (such as can be offered for the theory of gravity) for Christianity. As for faith that gravity exists, no…no faith, I have evidence which is more than you have for Christianity…it is you that is being conned, you are no different than anyone else accepting Christianity, you are a part of the mindless mass that allows yourself to be controlled.

So you are saying that Christians are mindless?

No, ND-Dave did...I just paraphrased what he said about non-Christians...why did it strike too close to home?

No. I disagree. To you, in your interpretation of what Dave said, (and apparent lack of respect for his view) you made it sound the way it sounded to you; mindless. That would be your general opinion (not a very respectful one at that) and not a fact. The fact is, that its not your place to label or judge Christians as mindless because of your overall discussion with one or even a group of Christians. If you are all about the facts, or what seems to be more fact than fiction, then stick with it. If not, then at least show as much respect as you can please.

I show the respect that has been shown me for over 60 years....I judge people on an individual basis, if you are nice, I am nice...if you push I push back harder...with the exception of Irish, PA, SLL and a few others, the majority of Christians on this site push, so I push back, showing their ignorance of the history and past theology of their religion, the illogic of their present (and often past) dogma, and when insulted, I return the words to the one that utters them. If you don't like it, deal with it!

No, I won't deal with it and neither should anyone who speaks their belief. Its like saying that every American is blood thirsty and immoral. You're average American would take great offense to that and would demand an apology for that generalized judgment based on your stereotyped bias. You wouldn't have it if some one said that about you, and I wouldn't have it either. Its disrespectful and unchecked if you go on insulting mass amounts of Christians because of the way you interpret one Christian's opinion. I won't settle with you calling me mindless, blind, ignorant or what have you and neither should any Christian. If you are going to generalize then go on without apologies and receive the due result. However, if there are exceptions, then you need to specify that more often so that every Christian that comes here has the opportunity to gain respect instead of being shut down and insulted before they even speak their mind. If you want equality, you have to treat people the way you want to be treated; not treat people the way they are treating you. Theres a huge difference, and even the ignorant can see it.

You know, I am getting awfully tired of your constant whining...if you can't stand the heat, get the heck out of the kitchen. My beliefs are my property and I will damn well not change them because you take umbarge with them. As I said deal with it!

If you believe in bashing other Christians because of your opinion about them, then you are not following forum rules.

If you only said that it was your opinion when you said, I wouldn't take offense. I'm not fighting this issue because of your beliefs, I'm fighting so that none who read your beliefs would be easily swayed by their personal bias. I understand that many have misconceptions and painful experiences concerning the Christian religion and I'm only debating these issues to better reveal the true Christian teachings. You calling Christians a mindless mass when I'm debunking that accusation isn't defending the evidence of fact.

As I said, YOU (not Christians) whine way too much...wah wah...I merely took an insult that your buddy ND-Dave tossed at me and turned it back on him. If you don't like it - TOUGH - go somewhere and grow up! I am tired of pussyfooting around you and your thin skin. as I said if you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen.

Oh so, now its about me? Before it was about how Dave convinced you how mindless the mass Christian population was. Why? Because he challenged your debating skills? So you make attacks against Christian masses and then against me for defending the mass Christian population? You don't have to 'pussyfoot' with me. Just apologize for being disrespectful to my religion, and I will drop it. A Jew wouldn't have it. A Muslim wouldn't have it. A Hindu wouldn't have it. What makes you think Christians have to put up with it?

I just read the whole thing...I agree with him, all he did was return a disrespect to the person disrespecting him and you went ballistic...maybe he is right, maybe you should "get out of the kitchen" as he said, you seem too thin skinned. Why should he apologize for your temper tantrum?

He returned the disrespect to Dave and insulted the mass of Christians along with him. Read the post, especially the end, more carefully.

I read it and see no real difference between it and the insult offered by ND-Dave - basically an insult to all non-Christians. So it is your contention that it is horrible for non-Christians to insult Christians but okay for Christians to insult non-Christians? That is what you seem to be implying and I personally, as a follower of the Native American traditions, take that as a gross insult. Seems that you can talk the talk but not walk the walk. May Ne'saru have mercy on you and guide you in your ignorance of proper conduct towards others. - Je Su Teh

I must have missed that insult. Its not right to insult anyone. Our deeds do the talking. But on the basis of judgment; no one has the right to judge a mass amount of people, for we are all individually responsible for our own actions.

there is no testimony of his eye witnesses. it's all hearsay.

Bluefinger, just because one disagrees with your beliefs doesn't mean they have attacked your beliefs it means they disagree. I disagree with Abrahamic beliefs including Christ alleged existence. I trust in Mako's experience as a historian he has proved to me many times on the boards his qualifications as a historian. I have great respect for him. You on the other hand have proved nothing to me other than you are young, gullible and don't have a degree in history. Do you ever question your faith and look past the Bible and seek answers beyond it? I question everything and try to look beyond taints of my faith. I find it good mental exercise and it does no harm to my belief system.

Imagine if our ancestors never questioned.

Never to question "why?" or "how?", but only accepting what our father's father's father knew and believed.

we would still be living a primitive life without the knowledge we have gained over the centuries.

To merely sit and say "All knowledge resides in god, and the bible (koran, torah, etc) is all we need to know" denies the beauty and uniqueness of the human creature.

Well put JMPD.

will christians , like you , apologize for being disrespectful to other religions?Muslims? how about the women who are pro choice ? it's their belief after all. what about gays ? very disrespectful.

can you say honestly you respect muslims? it hasn't looked that way in past posts. not all muslims are terrorists or extremists yet you group them together.

can you say you respect a gay person without adding your belief that they have sinned and are going to hell if they don't convert or stop being who god made them to be ?

until you can do it how can you expect respect ? it's a 2 way street.

Yes I have questioned my faith. several times. Yes I have looked past our canonized Bible and sought answers beyond it. No, you don't need a degree in history to know your history. Thats just so people feel comfortable listening to you in today's society. Paper says Mako knows what he is talking. History, however, is subject to patriotic edit. My beef isn't that make insulted one, its that insulted many; many who did nothing to him. That would include me. But its whatever. I don't care anymore. If someone insulted the mass amount gay people for believing what they believed, they'd get destroyed on this forum. People insult a mass amount of Christians, and people justify it.

First, my brother is gay and I love him. I don't have a problem with Muslims either. I respect them all in fact. Its the extreme radicals that use violence to control the weak is what I have a problem with.

Mako has more than proven he is an expert in the subject of history and backs it up with data, yet its still on one to decide.....Is it you blue and no Dave that are in fear of seeing that what mako says may just make sense?? I read every word he wrote I see no insults i see a man that knows his position and presents it .....many on here take things to the personal level needlessly..its not personal to call info out on the falsity of the facts.....maybe the lesson is to do your homework.... :tu:when i read a psot by mako thats been done...

What I am saying if you take insult at someone questioning whether or not Christ lived then maybe your faith is on shaky ground. With religion you either take on faith or you question and seek the truth. If find your proof then no big deal, if you don't you must decide to go on with your faith as faith or learn and move on. Remember a government or a people can create a hero as well as erase one. What you believe is up to you.

Actually, we judge people all day long. Thats life.

VERY TRUE.........you cant call someone that disagree's with a belief, a form of attacking..thats twisting..and devious to say so..

I have been accused for attacking, because I disagreed with bible stories....the guy that constantly attacked me for it, called himself a christian...then changed his mind, and classed himself agnostic..he was confused...but he tried to make it out, that because I disagreed with bible stories, I was only attacking...it drove him crazy, ....enough to be banned in the end

served him right

Mass amount??? thats weird..cuz in my every day life..even my working life, I have rarely heard anyone speak about religion, let alone bash a christian ..and I am being serious. The only time I have EVER heard of christian bashing, is ON THIS FORUM..and ONLY this forum.........and if I might add, I have seen non christians get attacked on here also..not in real life..only on here

Every historian interprets history with their own bias; however it would be a poor historian that altered the documents of the ancients (as if that would be possible without the collusion of all historians and society). It would be only through the complete suppression of all previous historical reporting that rewriting history would be possible. This has happened few times in man’s existence and the most successful time was from about 350-1600 CE, under the auspices of the Christian religion. Luckily for us, not all ancient information was destroyed (as the Church hoped would be the case), enough survived and was later found that we can now come to a fair to good understanding of man’s recorded history.


As Mako pointed out, it is seldom (if ever) the rulers that write history. It is sometimes their lackeys that write it and sometimes their political enemies that write it. No competent historian will take the unsubstantiated word of a writer but will instead take a consensus of those historians contemporary, contemporaneous or with access to the documents and reports of those contemporary with an incident or person, before arriving at a conclusion.


Mako made a very good point about who is conning the masses….Da Wolf