Religion (1 Viewer)

[Archy]

Not really sure if I'm Protestant or Christian, Other

I believe in the Bible but I don't believe in going to Heaven if you're good or going to hell Hell if you're bad or Free Will to do good or bad in the first place or any other man-made doctrine "proven" with scripture out of context.

I am a bit lost as to what you mean by the above statement. I am a Christian. And the Bible cleary states that there is a Heaven and a Hell. There is no one in "Hell" at this point in time, however there is alot of people in Hades... two seperate places. Hell is where the people in Hades will be placed during the tribulation. It is stated clearly that if Jesus Christ is your Lord and Savior and you have repented of your sins, that when you die you will be immediately in the presence of God.

Yes, There are MANY religions out there. And there are many books that state all kinds of facts and points as to what might happen, what people think will happen and so on.

As for the Bible, it is the only book in history that dares to predict the future, not one, not two, but hundreds of times. The future still to come is predicted in there today. I know research is time consuming and difficult, but the Bible has stood the test of time. There has never been offered 1 piece of evidence that "clearly" contridicts what the Bible has to say. Some have made it a point in their life to find something to contradict what it says and they become believers. People thought there were contradictions. People say that Pontius Pilate of Caesarea (Luke 23, John 18-19) never existed, but then archeoligists do digs in the area that the Bible points to Caesarea to be and find a pillar that has carved into the top of it "Pontius Pilate". There has been other points on the earth that "we", as a society, say never existed but BAM! there is is, just as the Bible said, like the pools of Bethesda (John 5) .

If you do your homework and take the time to read the Bible, the truth will be revealed to you. Hope this was of to help to someone that may read it.

 

[BlackObsidian]

Black,

Do you personally believe that man has a soul? Some inner moral agent that knows the difference between right and wrong?

I don't believe in souls I'm afraid... And right/wrong are nothing but a state of mind based on the knowledge and opinions of others passed down through generations.

If you had spent your life fending for yourself in every respect, killing and eating your own food, never learning to read/write/speak and you'd had a particularly harsh few months for food and saw a baby lying in the woods, what's to say that you would immediately know that it's a new-born human child (you've never seen one remember?) and also think, "hey, I mustn't eat this because it's morally "wrong"?

 

[RedBema]

Just trying to understand you Black,

So basically, what you are saying is that right and wrong is only in the eye of the beholder? So if I was born into a family who just slapped each other across the face for the heck of it, and was to come and slap you across the face, and I personally didn't see anything wrong with it, then that would be okay? And you would have no right to get mad? Or what if I was born into a family that shot innocent victims for fun, and then I shot your wife, then that would be okay?

And Hitler, because he personally didn't see anything wrong with killing all of those Jews, it is okay, because it is, "his state of mind based on the knowledge and opinions of others passed down through generations."

This is how I understand your logic, but please let me know if I am wrong.

 

[BlackObsidian]

Kinf-of what I was getting at Bema...

Had you been born into a family who slapped each other for the heck of it and you slapped me across the face I'd get mad. But the only reason I'd get mad is because I'd have been brought up in a family who don't slap each other.

Morally *I* believe it's wrong but you believe it's right; If I told you it was wrong you'd laugh and tell me not to be stupid because you really truely believe otherwise.

If I then start spreading the word and 1,000,000 people end up thinking that it's wrong and you only teach 5,000 that it's right, generally the main way of thinking is that it's wrong. Eventually through want of not being outcasts the majority will win.
Had it been the other way around and 1,000,000 people all agreed that slapping your friends is correct then the complete opposite would happen.

When I was at school there was a guy called Gavin and I was friends with him. He lived in a foster home and was picked-on a lot at school and as I was too we became friends. The problem with Gavin though was he stole things... Nothing big, just a few pounds here or there or an inexpensive toy I may have had lying around etc.

From my perspective Gavin was morally wrong to steal. From Gavin's perspective all of the other kids in his foster home stole from him and he stole from them too so it was normal and by the time people tried to tell him that it was wrong, it didn't matter because it was normal behaviour to him.

A lot of kids grow up and are wife-beaters as adults. Of those wife-beaters guess where they learned that morally it's right to beat-up on your true-love?

 

[RedBema]

So, basically what you are saying is that there is no such thing as right and wrong, that is, an absolute right and an absolute wrong, and thus, no such thing as truth really...

This really doesn't make sense to me at all...

Because according to your logic, I could come to you and tell you that a tree is a dog. And you could not, by your own logic, argue with me because it may have been taught to me that way from "generations."

But lets go back to say, the beginning of generations....who determines that a tree is a tree, and not a dog? Was there one generation on the east side that saw a tree, and therefore named it a tree, and one generation on the west side of town that saw a tree, and called it a dog. One day, two children from these two opposite towns meet, and argue over whether or not it is a tree or a dog, but in your logic, neither would be wrong, but both would be right...

But how can something be both A and non-A at the same time? How can a bird be both a bird and a cat at the same time, and in the same sense. It's impossible, logically impossible.

Needless to say, according to your thinking, then you really can't argue against anyone's religion as being wrong, nor can you ever say that anything is wrong. If a man came in and, God forbid, raped your wife, you would have no right to stop him, because it may be "right" in his own eyes.

Black, your logic is essentially this:

"Their is no such thing as truth."

But allow me to break that down into my words, because essentially what you are saying is this:

"The absolute truth is, is that their is no such thing as absolute truth."

So even in your thinking, their is fault. Even that statement has truth in it, so their has to be truth, their has to be logic, their has to be a standard, a moral agency by which we live. But the question is, where does this moral agency come from, and why do we have it? It cannot be from generations, because where would they get it from? Where would the first "cave man" if you will, or "Adam and Eve" have attained their moral thoughts from? If we really are just evoluted people, why are we so intricate? Why is our world so perfectly formed so that if we were just stationed a little bit to far from the sun, or too close to the sun, then we would cease to exist.

Can Hitler really be justified in what he did? According to your thoughts, he was right in everything that he did, and will never have to suffer for one second for all of the suffering that he put others through, and they all died for nothing, but someone elses "logic" because he thought that it was right.

Just doesn't really sound fair or sensible to me.

 

[TeachersPet]

Write In Vote: Deist

 

[Generel]

There are more Islam people here than Jews.......

And there are no Catholics.

 

[BlackObsidian]

So, basically what you are saying is that there is no such thing as right and wrong, that is, an absolute right and an absolute wrong, and thus, no such thing as truth really...

Morals and Truth are two separate things, stop trying to confuse everyone

You're also not listening to what I'm saying... I'm saying that depending on the perspective of the person viewing a situation, it will DRASTICALLY change their view on the morality of it!

according to your logic, I could come to you and tell you that a tree is a dog. And you could not, by your own logic, argue with me because it may have been taught to me that way from "generations."

Who invented the telephone, Alexander Graham Bell or Elisha Gray?
They both did but Bell happened to patent it first and subsequently won a court case to announce the design as his own. Elisha Gray then faded from memory and from then on out Alexander Graham Bell was the inventor of the telephone. That doesn't for one second mean that Elisha Gray didn't ALSO invent the telephone, only that according to laws at the time, his claim to that fact was not filled.

Both invented independently. Both had the same idea. One beat the other to getting the word spread (patent) and the other faded into almost non-existence.

It's the same with what individual people "perceive" as right and wrong. It can't really get much clearer than that I'm afraid.

But lets go back to say, the beginning of generations....who determines that a tree is a tree, and not a dog? Was there one generation on the east side that saw a tree, and therefore named it a tree, and one generation on the west side of town that saw a tree, and called it a dog. One day, two children from these two opposite towns meet, and argue over whether or not it is a tree or a dog, but in your logic, neither would be wrong, but both would be right...

Nope! In that scenario, both generations are correct FROM THEIR OWN PERSPECTIVE. From the perspective of the other person they're wrong. The actual definition of "this is generally accepted as correct" only comes about when one view has become more percieved than another.

From your perspective, God is THE man.
From Priyesh's perspective, Allah is the man.

The ONLY time either you or Priyesh will ever be 100% right about your statement will be when the other person no longer holds a view or perspective on the situation.

But the question is, where does this moral agency come from, and why do we have it? It cannot be from generations, because where would they get it from? Where would the first "cave man" if you will, or "Adam and Eve" have attained their moral thoughts from? If we really are just evoluted people, why are we so intricate? Why is our world so perfectly formed so that if we were just stationed a little bit to far from the sun, or too close to the sun, then we would cease to exist.

Adam (or the first cave man) alone would not have been able to know right from wrong without another perspective on the contested situation because there would be no frame of reference to be based on...

Imagine you are washed-up on a beach somewhere unknown and it's searing heat and there is no-one else in sight. You take your top and jeans off to dry and lay in the hot sand - Are you morally right or wrong to do that? The answer is neither because there is no-one around and you don't know where you are.
If a man then walks up to you extremely angry and tells you that you're in Tunisia (Muslim country!) and that out of respect to their culture you should be clothed, is it then right or wrong? The scene changes because another person arrives to give you a new perspective on things.

Back to the Adam and Eve question... Adam alone would not have been able to know right from wrong without another perspective on the contested situation because there would be no frame of reference to be based on... Until Eve arrived to like or take offense to his antics, thus grouping them into right/wrong in either person's eyes.

As for the earth /evolution thing I explained that in a previous post :p

Can Hitler really be justified in what he did? According to your thoughts, he was right in everything that he did, and will never have to suffer for one second for all of the suffering that he put others through, and they all died for nothing, but someone elses "logic" because he thought that it was right.

Hitler did what he THOUGHT was right at the time and had people back him. From the perspective of a Nazi he was correct in everything he did. From the perspective of myself and almost every other person on the planet, what he did was eveil, sadistic and unforgivable. WRONG doesn't even cut it.

Here's a moral question for you...

Let's say a train is out of control and hurtling toward a crowd of 5 people. You have the opportunity to pull a switch-track and save those five but at the peril of one other person standing on the switch-track side. What do you do?
Logically most people would say, "Throw the switch! Best to have 1 dead than 5"

Now let's say the same situation as above. Only this time you have to make a decision and the person on the switch-track is a family member, daughter, son etc.

What do you do now? Morally it's the same situation as the first but I'd place a large wager you'd let the 5 die for your own purposes (saving a family member from death) and in the same situation other people would make the same choice if their family was at risk.

Can you then honestly say to bereaving family members, "sorry everyone but morally I was correct to kill all your family members and devastate five families"? From YOUR perspective the choice was correct but from the perspective of one of the grieving familes you were plain wrong!

What about if there was a baby on the switch-track? Do you morally make the decision to kill 5 people of varying ages or 1 child? 5 lives outweight 1 still...

So you see morally right and wrong are nothing more than the perspective of the person viewing the situation at that given time.

 

[alucard]

I really like this thread . Although I really don't have much to say, Black says it all for me :P.

 

[painkillerz]

Well guys, this is surely a heated discussion.

Just to let you all know, I am a devout Christian and will always be.

I believe everything the Bible says .. I have this amazing peace in my life by being a Christian because I thoroughly believe that God sent his son Jesus to die for our sins .. There is soo much peace guys .. If any of you would like to talk more about this please pm me. I can show what you need to do to become a Christian and experience a truly fulfilling life.

And please try not to take offense to this .. This is not my intentions .. I'm just trying to share my beliefs.

 

[TeachersPet]

Why is it everytime a conversation about religion erupts, people talk about hitler?

 

[TeachersPet]

BTW I'm seriously wearing this shirt right now

 

[Ccomp5950]

Why is it everytime a conversation about religion erupts, people talk about hitler?

Godwin's law dude, Godwin's law.

"As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."

 

[Roguish]

Some of us are intelligent adults who no longer follow a "belief" system that has been forced down our throats from birth because people before us have not had the intelligence to question the validity of the religion.

I love this comment, it surpasses religion and fully describes our day and age. A paradigm shift in thought processes which I welcome.

 

[Ccomp5950]

It is the presupposition of the skeptic that no one can openly question a religion and arrive at a stance other then that of the skeptics.

It is the presupposition of the theist that no one can openly question a religion and arrive at a stance other then that of the theist.

It is the pride of each in their ideological stance that kept them from openly questioning it in the first place.

 

[eqjedi]

For some reason, i'm not able to vote, being a full member, weird.

I am Middle-Eastern, but I wouldn't really call myself Muslim. I read the Bible, old and new testaments, and I read the Quran, and quite a few other books, and I found too many similarities between them to think them worth fighting over, but also, I noticed, for one thing, each book had too many inconsistencies, especially the Old Testament, which I won't get into right now, but it can basically be likened to some tall tales like Paul Bunyan and the like. Its hard to let go completely, and I still have great respect for other religions, albeit varying, but I feel like i've gone above that.

Being initially brought up as a Catholic, I went to church more than occasionally, and even went to bible school. I took communion and everything. More I learned about Christianity, however.. I saw how close-minded it was, and how really bad things had been done in its name so frequently, as well as all the different denominations that fought each other despite supposedly representing the same good-nature of the person its about, well those things turned me off it completely. I decided to convert to Islam which was on my other side of the family, and I did everything except the hajj I was required to do. Like I said, I did read the entire quran like I did the old and new testaments, and I found nothing that really contradicted them, which anyone who took the time would find. I felt there was fundamentally something wrong with the consistency of the old testament, but remember that Jesus did pretty much say himself "Burn the old book". I wasn't any denomination though, like the sunni or shia offbranches, and having learned about them, well it really has nothing to do with islam. The educated person knows that the war and quarrel happened about a century after Muhammad and is not in the Quran, so I didn't know whether or not I could call myself one.. It was around that point I discarded the very concept of religious labels as primitive, conformist and secluded. So I kept what I knew to be the truth of the texts I read and discarded anything else. I pretty much followed that by researching every single religion I could. I remember Satanism, Wicca, Buddhism, Taoism, Hinduism, and with Hinduism I learned all about the Veda and how suprisingly similar it was to the bible and Quran, and I discovered from that, that the gods of their religion were all the manifestation of one of the many aspects of "God". I was confirmed of this when I started through a few occult books, and discovered one of the biggest things, the schematic of all the aspects of God and how invoking one of the parts of god was the same as invoking one of the hindu gods. This metaphysical schematic used by occultism is similar to mainly what the Egyptians, Caballah, and some other various cultures used. Parts of a whole is the whole point, No One got it down, but this is the concise definition. Overall, finding a group that shared my growing mystical knowledge and beliefs was logical in the next step of learning, so I became a Thelemite. Thelema is an organization dedicated to the occult arts propagated through the Great Beast, Aleister Crowley. However this didn't last close to a year because while I got some nice information on the sciences of it, I read all of Liber, his 'inspirational' texts, and the ultimate perversion "Do what thou wilt shall be the Whole of the law" which is completely unbalanced and does contradict the laws of nature, despite what they believe. It is left to interpretation but doesn't work on certain levels, including all human or intelligent interaction. Wicca probably has it down well enough, but the problem is the scope is limited to the earth, and my comprehension is of the universe and heavens and I want something that works on that scale with the arcane scientific laws and knowledge of the occult without the lax morals. I found it while I was researching... UFO contactees and came across some of the knowledge of religion and science that was shared. I know it may make me seem insane, but when I read their religious theory, it seemed to take everything I had learned into account, the occult laws, the notion of what god really is, the understanding of how god, magic, and science interact. I came to understand god as a force of many parts of the same whole by something called "The Law of Creation" not to be confused with Genesis' Creationism. The "Creation" is the force that creates and refers to that part of God, the one that created, but its important to understand its not like a big guy in a beard pointed his finger and there we were. No, its more like a consciousness comprised of the universe on a different scale that set everything into motion.. its hard to really explain but it reflects scientifically and within the occult laws how such a being can exist without contradicting intellectualism.

 

[RedBema]

Morals and Truth are two separate things, stop trying to confuse everyone.

Firstly, I am not trying to confuse anyone But only attempting to understand your logic in this entire thread.

You're also not listening to what I'm saying... I'm saying that depending on the perspective of the person viewing a situation, it will DRASTICALLY change their view on the morality of it!

It seems to me, that in one statement, that you say that morality and truth are two separate things, of which I would agree, but in the next statement, you seem to say that they do interlink at some junction, of which I also agree.

So though they may be two different things, it's almost as if they need each other to have a definite. I don't believe a truth unless I have a moral justification about it. But what we need to lay out is what is truth...

Maybe you have said so in one way or another, but what is the standard of truth. From what I can gather about your statements, each individual is the standard of truth, but this makes for varying truths, which cannot be true, because again,

A cannot be both A and non-A at the same time and in the same sense.

You continue to state that because the majority believe so, then that becomes the standard of truth, but that isn't logical nor is it right. I have a black car sitting in the driveway right now. I can look out the window and see it. Even while typing these words, I am making sure that it is there. That is the sole truth. I can go and touch it, see it, feel it, drive it, etc. It is the logical truth. However, lets say that out of 10 people, including myself, 7 of them are blind. Thus, 7 of them cannot see my black car sitting out there. The truth is, that it is there, regardless if they can see it or not. But since they are the majority, then according to your logic, the new standard is that there in fact is not a black car sitting out there, even though I can go get inside of it.

I am just having the hardest time figuring out what your standard of truth is Black.

Before we can talk about moral agency, I think that this needs to be nailed down. Please don't think that I am attempting to confuse anyone, I just think that this is imperative to the conversation. There has to be an absolute truth, regardless of what the majority may believe.

For the longest time, the church deemed the world as flat because Aristotle said so. But guess what, they were dead wrong! So even though the majority believed it as truth, it wasn't. There is a truth, and even though man may not be aware of it as a majority, doesn't make it obsolete.

Maybe I am just really confused about the conversation or maybe I am taking it a different direction, but I really am interested in understanding what your standard of truth is.

 

[BlackObsidian]

It seems to me, that in one statement, that you say that morality and truth are two separate things, of which I would agree, but in the next statement, you seem to say that they do interlink at some junction, of which I also agree.

Moral Correctness is the correctness of a specific thought/idea/situation based on how that situation is viewed by the majority of people (as previously discussed) - If everyone in the world thought it was morally correct to drop-kick babies, it WOULD be correct because no-one would think otherwise.

"Truth" is simply whether something is believed to be factual.

If I said to at this very moment, "God is watching down over every one of us!" you would find this statement to be true would you not?

What then if tomorrow it was proven that in fact God did not exist? The truth in which you believed would then no longer BE the truth; instead the truth about God's existence would be that he doesn't exist and thus the "truth" which you believed to be true actually turned out to be false.

So though they may be two different things, it's almost as if they need each other to have a definite. I don't believe a truth unless I have a moral justification about it. But what we need to lay out is what is truth...

Which we have...

Why do they need each other? If something is "true" (believed to be correct), why does any moral justification need to be added into the equation?
If I state that 2+2=4 then I have made a truthful statement, have I not? And this statement needs no moral justification because it is a statement of fact.

Maybe you have said so in one way or another, but what is the standard of truth. From what I can gather about your statements, each individual is the standard of truth, but this makes for varying truths, which cannot be true...

Again, I've never said anything along those lines at all. Truth is truth and morals are morals. The two are separate entities and while they CAN be connected, it does not follow that they MUST be connected.

You continue to state that because the majority believe so, then that becomes the standard of truth...

To THOSE people yes!

... but that isn't logical nor is it right.

lol

Can you really not put yourself into the shoes of two people with differing opinions?

"It was a goal!"
"No it wasn't, it never crossed the line!"
"Yes it did!"
"No it didn't!"

From one person's perspective the truth is that there was a goal scored.
From the other person's perspective there was no goal scored.

Who is correct?

They both BELIEVE they're correct and will continue to do so right up until there is evidence to prove otherwise. Once the evidence is there, one is clearly in the wrong.

There has to be an absolute truth, regardless of what the majority may believe.

For the longest time, the church deemed the world as flat because Aristotle said so. But guess what, they were dead wrong! So even though the majority believed it as truth, it wasn't.

But at the time the church believed the world to be flat, their opinion was based on the evidence available to them at the time, thus when they stated the world as flat, it WAS the truth but it is NO LONGER the truth.

 

[Ccomp5950]

2+2=4 even if other people believe 2+2=5

Opinions have no affect on a true statement, Truth remains truth and constant reguardless of what you think.

The world was round even when people believed it was flat.

I believe you are mixing up localized opinion with truth, this is a mistake.

 

[RedBema]

Can you really not put yourself into the shoes of two people with differing opinions?

"It was a goal!"
"No it wasn't, it never crossed the line!"
"Yes it did!"
"No it didn't!"

From one person's perspective the truth is that there was a goal scored.
From the other person's perspective there was no goal scored.

Who is correct?

They both BELIEVE they're correct and will continue to do so right up until there is evidence to prove otherwise. Once the evidence is there, one is clearly in the wrong.

But, regardless of each of their opinion, the goal was either scored, or not. That is what instant replay is for in the NFL. :judge

But in all seriousness, regardless of what either person sees, or says, the goal was either scored or not scored. Person A may have been too far away to correctly see the goal, or person B may have been at an awkward angle. If someone happened to be recording the entire ordeal, then they could show the videotape, and thus show both parties whether or not it was a goal or not.

That, my friend, is truth. It really doesn't matter what someone says, truth is truth, and the goal was either scored or not. It can't be both, and it can't be neither. It has to be one or the other. And that decision is not deemed by a person's view, but by the rules of the game, that is, whether it did hit the line or not.

If the rules of the game say that it cannot hit the line, and it did, regardless if everyone in the entire stadium says that it was a goal even though it hit the line would not matter, because the rules (truth) of the game says so.

But at the time the church believed the world to be flat, their opinion was based on the evidence available to them at the time, thus when they stated the world as flat, it WAS the truth but it is NO LONGER the truth.

LOL!

So, the world was flat and then all of a sudden it just poofed into a ball?

Let's pretend that the world is square, it's just that we don't have enough evidence to prove that yet. The truth of the matter is that even though we may think that the world is round, the underlying truthful truth is that it is really square. Even though we may not believe or "have the evidence" to prove it yet. We may NEVER in this entire lifetime have enough evidence to prove something, but whether or not man can prove it by evidence, does not determine whether or not it is true, it's just that we havn't figured it out and may never do so.

There could be 10 million other planets with life forms living in 20 million other galaxies, (of which I do not believe), but we just don't have the technology to discover them yet. The truth would be that they are there, existing, at the very time. Because we havn't explored them yet doesn't mean that they are not there. Man may not believe it, because man has not discovered it, but that absolutely would not take away the truth that they are existent.

Truth exists, and is always there, even if man has not discovered it yet. All the while that man thought of the world as flat, guess what, it was round, even if we truly thought that it was flat. We may have thought of it as truth at the time, but as much as man thought of it being true, it wasn't. That is the truth. Heck, even stating that the church was wrong to think of it as flat is a truthful statement! They truly believed that, but they were wrong, which we now know.

We may not to have been able to prove it at the time, but guess what, we finally were able to. Truth exists whether man believes so or not. We weren't living on a flat earth, but a round one. That is the truth. But if we were to discover today that the earth really is square, then guess what, it never would have been a truth that it was round, but only a misconception. The truth would have been that we were wrong. There is a truth, but again, just because we havn't discovered it doesn't make the truth non-existant or cease it to be the truth. There is no way for man to have all the answers on this.

Black, I understand your thinking and have came across thinkers like you before. I have never understood it quite as fully as I do now, but quite honestly, it still just doesn't make since and I am most certain that it is because of my faith in God.

Basically what it comes to is that I believe in God, and you don't, and that is okay to you. My truth is okay to me, and your truth is okay for you, and it doesn't matter whether one of us is wrong, because both of us can be right. But guess what, God either does exist, or He doesn't. He cannot both exist and not exist. So one of us is truly wrong. My hope is that He does exist, and I whole heartedly believe that and will until I die. One day we will figure that out for sure, and when we do it will be too late to have religion discussion abroad the redguides forums.

I have come to the conclusion that both of our definitions of truth differ. Mine is that there is truth, yours is that truth is relative, and differs from perspective to perspective. This to me is saying that their is no "Set Truth" or "Absolute Truth." But again, If you say that the absolute truth is that there is no such thing as absolute truth, then that even in itself is a truthful statement! Which blows all of the logic out of the water. But what I find the most interesting is that you still find a place to argue about religion in the first place. If the standard of truth is by man's own perceptive, then I am completely right in everything that I am saying, and you have no place to as much as say a word against it. (Which I am not saying that you are, because I think that you are simply sharing your thoughts as am I.) But for future reference, if what you truly believe in what you say you do, then my friend, every word you say could be a curse word in my "language" (perspective from generation), I could ban you because I felt like you were cursing me out, and a man could, God forbid, kill your family, and you could not do a single thing about it. You could not sue him, you could not take him to court, because it was right in his own eyes. But then you may find it right in your own eyes to take him to court, but even in that, the reason that you would be taking him to court would be wrong.

What you believe is what I call Postmodernism. Postmodernism states that my truth is my truth, and your truth is your truth, and both can co-exist at the same time and in the same sense. But there is absolutely no logic to that type of thinking at all because you would have no right to EVER question anything in this world. You would at the end of the road, really cease to exist as a person because nothing would be logical because A can be both A and non-A at the same time and in the same sense. A dog can be both a dog and a cat at the same time and in the same sense.

Friend, we are attempting to answer to biggest question of all time...

"What is Truth?"

Maybe one day, the Leader of the One World Government will stand up and state that we will now begin to call the dog species a cat, and the cat species dogs. As the world progresses, that is the truth. I can understand that, because a dog and a cat are simply man given names to animals. But a name would not take away from what the dog actually is. Though we may change the "truth" of his name, the "truth" of what the dog is, will not change. He is still a dog.

You cannot mix man given names, with an omnipotent eternal God. God is truth. Regardless of what man may ever believe or think, God is truth, and His Word is truth. Nothing can ever change that. The entire world could believe that God does not exist, but that would never change the fact that He does. The entire world could believe that the world if flat, but that would never change the fact that it is round.

 

[BlackObsidian]

2+2=4 even if other people believe 2+2=5

Opinions have no affect on a true statement, Truth remains truth and constant reguardless of what you think.

The world was round even when people believed it was flat.

I believe you are mixing up localized opinion with truth, this is a mistake.

If you read the context of that phrase correctly, it was used not in an explanation of the definition of "truth" but as proof that moral justification does not HAVE to be associated with "truth"

LOL!

So, the world was flat and then all of a sudden it just poofed into a ball?

I just re-read that and it was very poorly worded by me. it was meant to "But at the time the church believed the world to be flat, their opinion was based on the evidence available to them at the time, thus when they stated the world as flat, it WAS the truth to them at that particular time, however it is NO LONGER seen as the truth because evidence has proven otherwise."

Right here and now if I sincerely said to you "God exists and he watches down over all of us." you would say I'm telling the truth, correct?

That means that at this exact point in time it is the truth to you and me because we would have weighed all evidence and come to the conclusion that there is more probability FOR God than against. Therefore God exists.

Now imagine that in 20 years time there is a proven way to discount an all-seeing God.

If I then speak to you again and say, "God has been proven to not exist." I am STILL telling the truth, however "the truth" as seen by the both of us throughout those 20 years has changed because new evidence has become available.

Not for one second do I believe anyone will ever prove such a thing but you catch my drift.

It's almost akin to the old question of, "If a tree falls in the woods and no-one is around, does it make a sound?"
Of course we can assume that it does but without someone there to confirm it we cannot be sure. If we then put a person there to listen, it is no long the same scenario of "no one around" to the experiment is null and void.

I'm actually still really interested in our invasion of this thread though; real opinions have always fascinated me

 

[alucard]

Black, truth stays constant and what people believe doesn't affect it.

 

[BlackObsidian]

The opposite of True is False.
The opposite of Truth is Lies.

If truth is a constant rather than variable (always correct), 90% of everything we know about our planet/lives must potentially be classed as a lie (unless of course there is irrefutable PROOF shown for the arguement.)

The phrase "we believe that..." is the belief of a certain situation/statement, possibly based on evidence available at the time (but not neccessarily!)

This means that Every statement ever made along the lines of "we believe that..." would potentially be a lie because there is no 100% proof of the statement, only belief or partial evidence - If truth is a constant we can only ever know it when we are 100% certain of it.

"As scientists, we believe that human brains, though they may not work in the same way as man-made computers, are as surely governed by the laws of physics." - Potentially lies.

"We believe that Google Desktop Search is the best way to unlock the information hidden on your hard drive." - Potentially lies.

"We believe the Bible is the written word of God, inspired by the Holy Spirit and without error in the original manuscripts." - Potentially lies.

If we had spent our entire time since the day humans began to walk the Earth follow the Absolute Truth arguement, we would never have evolved to the standard we are at right now in the time we have. Medicine would not exist at the level it does, technology would not, our understanding of the universe (as miniscule as it is!) would not.
The reason it would not is because people would perform research and analysis and then come up with a "We believe with XX% likelihood and based on the evidence available that... BLAH!" with a slowly increasing % of liklihood over time. BUT people would not use this belief or evidence because it's not 100% irrefutable, thus it's potentially a lie/false.

Let me ask you this...

If I said to you, "I have created a machine which will once and for all PROVE the existence of God to show you the correctness of your lifestyle choices and belief system and to show the un-believers how wrong they are... The machine has a 99% success rate!"
Would you or would you not want to run the machine?
And if the machine said "Yes, God does exist and the proof is X Y and Z" would you not take this proof and parade around everywhere with it to show everyone that you've been correct all along?

Oh but what we're forgetting is that there is a 1% chance that the machine is incorrect, and based on Absolute Truth you can't take it as fact because it's potentially a lie/false.

If "Truth" is indeed a variable rather than constant, we allow ourselves to learn, build on that learning and "achieve" with the knowledge we are gathering.
We perform research based on many other people's research and eventually we can sit down as say, "Excellent! I'm not 90% sure that penicillin can be used to treat bacterial infections which means we can now push medicine further..." I've achieved something and now I'm happy to continue trying to achieve; If we're achieving we're happy to continue researching and so the cycle continues.
If we spent 50 years trying to prove one thing to 100% certainty we'd get very bored and never complete it because we're not getting anywhere with it.

If the penicillin situation above was factual, how much longer would it potentially have taken to get the discovery to 100% before putting it into practice? 10 years? 20 years? 30 years?

And where was medicine 30 years ago?

And I've rambled again lol

 

[someoneorsomething]

I am no bible expert but isnt the god of hte jews christians and muslams the same?? Just differant names/saviors? So we are all praying to the same god just differant ways to do it?

P.S. correct me if im wrong.

 

[RedBema]

Someoneorsomething,

You are very wrong.

The "God" of a Christian is far different from the "god" of Judaism, which is far different from "Allah" of the Muslims.

Different Scriptures, different beliefs.

Christians believe Jesus IS the Messiah,
Jews believe only in the Old Testament, and don't believe that the Messiah has come,
Muslims believe that Jesus was just another prophet, but that Muhammed is the final prophet, and Allah, their god, is a far different god than the Christian God. In fact, they use a completely different scripture. Nothing about it is the same.

A quick overview...

 

[RedBema]

Black, truth stays constant and what people believe doesn't affect it.

YES!

Even though it may be the truth to us that the world is flat, we were wrong, and the ultimate or underlying truth is that it was round. So while man lived on what they thought was a flat earth, it was round all along.

Black, how do you know what you know? How does anyone know what they know?

How does one personally believe in anything? How does a man like you or myself, who has never flew into outerspace know that the world is even round? By pictures, videos, scientists. Heck, they could all be lying to us... We could be living on a destitute rock for all we know. But regardless of what we think we know, new evidence can always come out to disprove whatever it is that we may belief.

But I don't believe by evidence. I don't believe in the Christian God by evidence, nor will I ever, although, the evidence is strikingly their whenever you get into it, it only helps for the time being.

Regardless of what we think, or what we think we know, their is a truth. Man may be completely wrong about alot of things, but that doesn't mean that their is a truth out their, existing, just because we don't know about it. I know what you think. Just because their is no way for man to prove that truth, such as the tree making a noise in the woods, doesn't mean that their isn't a truth. The truth is either that it makes a noise, or that it doesn't make a noise, it has to be one of those two truths. Even though we may not ever be able to know it, doesn't mean that it isn't there or that it doesn't exist.

The absolute truth is, is that their is absolute truth. Their has to be. Life without truth would be null and void, and every word that I am saying would be meaningless.

 

[BlackObsidian]

Black, how do you know what you know? How does anyone know what they know?

A combination of fact, fiction, rumour, belief and guesswork. Of course everything there is used in different proportion by each person, for example a scientist is less likely to go with belief and rumour and more evidence whereas someone of faith may go with what the feel and believe to be true, irrelevant of evidence.

How does one personally believe in anything? How does a man like you or myself, who has never flew into outerspace know that the world is even round? By pictures, videos, scientists. Heck, they could all be lying to us... We could be living on a destitute rock for all we know. But regardless of what we think we know, new evidence can always come out to disprove whatever it is that we may belief.

All true

But I don't believe by evidence. I don't believe in the Christian God by evidence, nor will I ever, although, the evidence is strikingly their whenever you get into it, it only helps for the time being.

Erm... Any chance you can point me in the direction of this evidence? (excluding the Bible!)

The absolute truth is, is that their is absolute truth. Their has to be. Life without truth would be null and void, and every word that I am saying would be meaningless.

*quickly erases unfunny joke about Bemas words being meaningless*

Being 100% honest here I'm seriously thinking about the Absolute Truth Constant arguement. It holds a lot of weight for me, as does the Variable arguement.

 

[datazgal]

Whoa.. I actually learned something from this site!! Good deal. TYTY!

 

[someoneorsomething]

I know this is weird but something i always think about. God said thou shall not have any gods before me. But yet jesus is god...but a seperate entity. So you are going against god by beleive that jesus is a god. according to the old testement.


I know the whole god, jesus, and the holy spirt are one but 3. But it still raises a question? I think he was sent to save us from our sins. But as far as being god, I dont want to piss god off. Sure he was his son, and sure he died for me(well everyone) and i give him that due respect. But it seems that god has been taken out of most sermons. He has been replaced with jesus.

All the time i hear in church "praise jesus" and "in jesus name". Its rare that they metion god even 1/2 the time as they do jesus. I pray to God, not jesus or the saints. I go straight to the sorce. Maybe i will burn for it, but i hope not

 

[Archy]

Bema,

/agree

The fact of the matter is that there is a "Absolute Truth". and that absolute truth is that God does exist and the bible is the word of the one true living God. Religion is a HUGE subject. and the fact of the matter is that there is MANY cults out there that believe their religion or beliefs are the "truth".

However, the "truth" is what the bible says! The whole bible is truth and there has never been a single piece of evidence brought forward to show otherwise(that I am aware of). If you are in a religion that doesnt teach from the bible, then you need to step back and take a look over what you believe to be the "truth". There is nothing in the bible that is that outlandish as to not be believeable. If anything Revelations would be the closest to not be believable, but Revelations is a very complex book.

Many churches dont teach on it because they dont understand it. Most people have a desire to understand what is going to hapen in our future, but at the same time dont want to believe what is written because we as a society are scared of the future and what it holds for us. I am not personally scared of the future in a whole at all. There times I am scared of the future in my flesh, but not spiritually.

The "Absolute Truth" is that the word of God is infact the word of God and it cant be disputed.

As for "eqjedi", have you tried Mormonism? I believe it is a cult, but you seem to be on the fence and looking for a way off. Mormonism is one of the religions you didnt mention. I know it is a false religion, but maybe it will fill the void until you can come back to the only "true" religion, Christianity. Come to know Jesus Christ and there will be no more fence hopping.

 

[Archy]

But it seems that god has been taken out of most sermons. He has been replaced with jesus.

It is also said in the bible that the ONLY way to the Father is through the Son... Noone comes to the Father but through Me.

Anotherwords, you must believe that Jesus came to this earth to die for all our past, present, and future sins. You believe this on faith, not on truth or fact. The truth and fact is that there was a man named Jesus that was born in Bethlehem and died for our sins, there is tons of evidence to proove this besides the bible. As I stated above, I believe the word of God (the bible) is the truth, but I do not believe it because there is 100% concrete proof, but I believe by faith.

Black, I think I know the joke you erased...

It is "there, not their", lol

 

[RedBema]

*quickly erases unfunny joke about Bemas words being meaningless*

Lol...

As for "eqjedi", have you tried Mormonism? I believe it is a cult, but you seem to be on the fence and looking for a way off. Mormonism is one of the religions you didnt mention. I know it is a false religion, but maybe it will fill the void until you can come back to the only "true" religion, Christianity. Come to know Jesus Christ and there will be no more fence hopping.

Archy, I was with you until you said this!

How can you point someone to a "want-to-be" mimic Christian faith? Mormonism parades themselves around stating that they have a "fuller understanding of Jesus" because they added a complete different testament to the Holy Scriptures. I would NEVER EVER point anyone to that, especially if I am a Christian. Mormonsim can't ever fill a void that was made only to be filled by Christ.

And SoS,

Jesus is God. God the Father, God the Son, and God the Spirit. Genesis 1:26 says, "Let Us create man in Our own image."

Also, please read Colossians 1:15-20, Hebrews 1:1-3, and John 1:1-2. This will give you a bigger picture of Jesus. He is not a created being, nor was He just a mere human that God created because He "messed up" and had to come up with a back up plan. Jesus has always been and will always be.

Also, make note of some Old Testament Prophecies such as Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22. What is interesting about these two particular chapters is that they both speak very vividly about some kind of "Messiah" figure.

Isaiah 53 speaks about His appearance and death, which were closely resemble the New Testaments picture of Jesus. Psalm 22, is a very discriptive prophecy of a crucifixion, however, the ironic thing is that the crucifixion death had not even been created at the time of this writing. It ironically speaks the exact same words that Jesus said when He died!

And while I am on it, check out the book of Daniel, the story of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego. They were thrown into a fiery furnace. When King Nebuchadnezzar looked in to make sure that they were dead, the text says that he saw four men, and the fourth was like the "Son of Man." The Hebrew word there implies a "supernatural" figure.

Anyways, those are just some helps to hopefully help you understand a bit more fully.

 

[BlackObsidian]

But I don't believe by evidence. I don't believe in the Christian God by evidence, nor will I ever, although, the evidence is strikingly their whenever you get into it, it only helps for the time being.

Not sure if ya saw the request but just in case, any chance you can point me in the right direction pls?

 

[Archy]

Archy, I was with you until you said this!

How can you point someone to a "want-to-be" mimic Christian faith? Mormonism parades themselves around stating that they have a "fuller understanding of Jesus" because they added a complete different testament to the Holy Scriptures. I would NEVER EVER point anyone to that, especially if I am a Christian. Mormonsim can't ever fill a void that was made only to be filled by Christ.

Bema,

I was being sarcastic. I was so lost in his post!! It seemed that he had studied religion after religion and was still on the fence. I believe he is looking for a fault in the bible or in religion itself. Mormonism is NOT the answer by ANY means at all. I was probably out of line in posting that, for that I am sorry. Its just that MANY other religions that are just a "cultish" as Mormonism, I figured what the heck. If you did see that after that I pointed out that "until he came back to Christianity". Jesus is the only way to be cleansed and any other means will make you to fall short of the glory of God and his Kingdom where he at the present time preparing a place for all of us if we just have the faith to believe in Him.

I just finished watching "The Passion of the Christ". If any of you have not seen this film, I reccoment it. It will never replace the reading of the scriptures, however it will give you a good interpretation of what the Son of God did for us and all he went through to save us from our sins.

Black,

I dont know what you are wanting as proof other than the bible. There is many things you can look to. Like that voice inside your head that tells you from right and wrong. All humans have this instinct, just some choose to ignore it. We were all born with the understanding of right and wrong. People dont want to believe in Christ because we as humans want to believe that we can handle things on our own and that we "are the top of the food chain", were independant. The "truth" is that we are all sinners, liars, thieves, adulturers, etc. My point is that we feel we need to pay for what we receive and in this case we dont, Gods grace is FREE.

There is no sin greater than another with the exception of knowing that there is the word of God and ignoring it or blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. Just a point to think of... Ever wonder why when people hit their hand with a hammer or something goes really wrong in a quick amount of time, one of the main things that is shouted is "Jesus Christ"?? Its not Ahhhhhhhhhhhh Buddha!!

We as humans are of the flesh and cant help but sin and want to know that we can make it to the better place on our own. The fact of the matter is we need to look at what was done for us and not what we can do.

Hope this helps... if not... Look up on the internet "Dead Sea Scrolls" and read the story on them and see what you think.

 

[BlackObsidian]

I dont know what you are wanting as proof other than the bible. There is many things you can look to. Like that voice inside your head that tells you from right and wrong.

Bema mentioned that there was a lot of evidence for his arguement so I was enquiring as to what the evidence is.

All humans have this instinct, just some choose to ignore it. We were all born with the understanding of right and wrong.

Which is why there are occasionally children born who commit the most heinous acts? Because they know right and wrong from birth...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Bulger

People dont want to believe in Christ because we as humans want to believe that we can handle things on our own and that we "are the top of the food chain", were independant.

Has it ever occured to you that people don't want to believe in Jesus Christ because they can see no proof of the concept? Why is it that Animals and Plants don't "pray"? Why is it that only human beings have the nerve to speak up to a higher power to ask for his blessings, help and guidance through their life? What makes humans so much better than the rest of the planet in that they should be favoured by God if indeed God exists?

You see your comment about humans being "top of the food chain" does in fact encompass you also

There is no sin greater than another with the exception of knowing that there is the word of God and ignoring it or blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.

And if the person does not "know" that there is a word of God, presumably he's ok because no sin has been made.

Hope this helps... if not... Look up on the internet "Dead Sea Scrolls" and read the story on them and see what you think.

The Dead Sea Scrolls I am aware of and their significance to religion because they are the onyl diocuments proven to exist from the first 100 years of Jesus's life, however it does seem odd to me that the church seem to have gone through a filtering process to add specific scrolls to their list of holy works but not others (at least that's the impression I got)

The other thing is that they're written in Hebrew, Biblical Hebrew , Dead Sea Scroll Hebrew Aramaic and Koine Greek. How can up-to 872 texts spanning 5 languages be a part of the same book unless the book really is a mish-mash of random stories and texts? Answer: They can't...

The fragments span at least 801 texts that represent many diverse viewpoints, ranging from beliefs resembling those of the Essenes to those of other sects. About 30% are fragments from the Hebrew Bible, from all the books except the Book of Esther and the Book of Nehemiah (Abegg et al 2002). About 25% are traditional Israelite religious texts that are not in the canonical Hebrew Bible, such as the Book of Enoch, the Book of Jubilees, and the Testament of Levi. Another 30% contain Biblical commentaries or other texts such as the Community Rule (1QS/4QSa-j, also known as "Discipline Scroll" or "Manual of Discipline"), the The Rule of the Congregation, The Rule of the Blessing and the War of the Sons of Light Against the Sons of Darkness (1QM, also known as the "War Scroll") related to the beliefs, regulations, and membership requirements of a Jewish sect, which some researchers continue to believe lived in the Qumran area. The rest of the fragments (about 15%) remain unidentified.

 

[Archy]

Which is why there are occasionally children born who commit the most heinous acts? Because they know right and wrong from birth.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Bulger

There are exceptions to every rule. No matter what subject you discuss or rule that there is, there is an exception. I don't know the exact specifics are for the situation on that link. However, the fact of the matter is that we live in a sinful world and that is just more the reason to look upwards to God for salvation.
Some people have mental problems, some dont, Christians get cancer, as well as a agnostics. I just 2 weeks ago had $6,000 stolen from my desk at work. Did I deserve it? NO! I have been at my job for 12 years and trusted the people I work with. I didnt run around telling people I had the $$ there, but someone picked the lock on my desk, broke into my safekeep that was in that locked box and took my money. I think I am a good person, I make mistakes, I sin, but did I deserve to have that stolen? I dont think so. Point is: Bad things happen to both good and bad people.

Has it ever occured to you that people don't want to believe in Jesus Christ because they can see no proof of the concept?

I dont believe it is necessarily that fact that you can't see the proof. There is evidence there. God doesnt call us to believe him based on proof, he calls on us to believe in him on faith.

Gal 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified

Why is it that Animals and Plants don't "pray"? Why is it that only human beings have the nerve to speak up to a higher power to ask for his blessings, help and guidance through their life? What makes humans so much better than the rest of the planet in that they should be favoured by God if indeed God exists?

You see your comment about humans being "top of the food chain" does in fact encompass you also

The answer to that is right here...

Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

And if the person does not "know" that there is a word of God, presumably he's ok because no sin has been made.

No... this is not true! The bible clearly states...

Rom 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God

However, most scholars of the bible in the Christain faith tend to agree that God is a loving and forgiving God. Therefore, If there is the posibility of a human not knowing or hearing the word of God, then they will be accountable for what they do know and not for what they dont know or have been taught. For instance... If a baby or a young child dies, they wont be held accountable for not knowing Christ and be sent to Hell on the judgement day.

The Dead Sea Scrolls I am aware of and their significance to religion because they are the onyl diocuments proven to exist from the first 100 years of Jesus's life, however it does seem odd to me that the church seem to have gone through a filtering process to add specific scrolls to their list of holy works but not others (at least that's the impression I got)

The other thing is that they're written in Hebrew, Biblical Hebrew , Dead Sea Scroll Hebrew Aramaic and Koine Greek. How can up-to 872 texts spanning 5 languages be a part of the same book unless the book really is a mish-mash of random stories and texts? Answer: They can't...

Well, there is 66 books of the bible. The bible was written by man, but inspired by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is part of the Trinity and is perfect. Therefore, the bible is perfect and without blemish. There are many other books and scrolls that were written at the time the bible was written, but they are not included in the bible because God didnt want them there.

In the very last prayer in the bible found in Revelation 22:18-19 it is stated...

Rev 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book.
Rev 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book.

 

[BlackObsidian]

Ok, if I were to quote to you scriptures from a "holy book" for any faith I may hold, everything in that book would apply to you because I believe that the book is perfect in every way... Of is it only your own book of choice and belief with which the entire human race must go about their lives?

(Insert arguement about there being "only one true book" here?)



Oh and just to clarify, if I was to even begin entertaining thoughts about a higher being it would be based on logic, not on the "apparent" truth of an ancient book. I'm not saying that the Bible isn't in fact an accurate "God's Instruction Book" document with which God intended us to run our lives but the likelihood is slim - if it was meant to be, surely he'd have made sure that people knew for sure?

 

[Archy]

Oh and just to clarify, if I was to even begin entertaining thoughts about a higher being it would be based on logic, not on the "apparent" truth of an ancient book. I'm not saying that the Bible isn't in fact an accurate "God's Instruction Book" document with which God intended us to run our lives but the likelihood is slim - if it was meant to be, surely he'd have made sure that people knew for sure?

Ok, Lets say I am God. I invent the human race. I love you because I invented you and I create you in my image (like the bible says).

Now lets pretend that I "program" you to love me and respect me. Is that then true love and respect? A: NO

God gave us free will to do as we like because he loves us. He alows to choose our own course of action, not to run us like a program. The bible is merely a set of instructions and guidelines to go by. It would be like buying a water heater, you can follow the insteructions or not. Either way, the water heater could or could not work properly. We can get work here on earth and get rich and flourish here, but God says he is preparing a place for us and we shouldnt worry about temperal things as this life is short compared to eternity.

 

[BlackObsidian]

Ok, Lets say I am God. I invent the human race. I love you because I invented you and I create you in my image (like the bible says).

Now lets pretend that I "program" you to love me and respect me. Is that then true love and respect? A: NO

God gave us free will to do as we like because he loves us. He alows to choose our own course of action, not to run us like a program. The bible is merely a set of instructions and guidelines to go by. It would be like buying a water heater, you can follow the insteructions or not. Either way, the water heater could or could not work properly. We can get work here on earth and get rich and flourish here, but God says he is preparing a place for us and we shouldnt worry about temperal things as this life is short compared to eternity.

Wouldn't it be more like You are God, you create the human race, you love us because you invented us and created us in your image (narcissist?)

You give us free will and allow us to do as we please. You speak a set of instructions or guidelines but only to a select few people and everyone else has to take their word that it's all true. They then tell other people for hundreds of years and eventually write a document to keep track of it all. This document gets translated over centuries and various stories are added/removed/changed until the instructions are possibly (just maybe!) not the same as intended.

The problem now is that IF the instructions aren't correct, we can't even check that the water heater works because there is no way to prove it one way or another...

*runs away to research Gnostic Gospels*

Oh and another thing...

What happened to Jesus between the ages of 14 and 30(ish)? I thought Jews were married and had kids around that age?

Ooh more stuff...

Pope Damasus I assembled the first list of books of the Bible at the Council of Rome in 382 A.D. He commissioned Saint Jerome to produce a reliable and consistent text by translating the original Greek and Hebrew texts into Latin. This translation became known as the Latin Vulgate Bible and was declared by the Church to be the only authentic and official Bible.

During Damasus' early years, Constantine I rose to rule first the Western Roman Empire, presiding over the Edict of Milan (313) and winning religious freedom for Christians in all parts of the Roman Empire. A crisis precipitated by the rejection of religious freedom by Licinius, Emperor of the Eastern Roman Empire, in favor of paganism resulted in a civil war (324) that placed Constantine firmly in control of a reunited Empire, and led to the establishment of Christian religious supremacy in Nova Roma as well as Rome, bringing new challenges to the authority of the Roman Church. Damasus would have been in his twenties at the time.

Constantine is also remembered for the Council of Nicaea in 325; these actions are considered major factors in the spreading of the Christian religion. His reputation as the "first Christian Emperor" has been promulgated by historians from Lactantius and Eusebius of Caesarea to the present day, although there has been debate over the veracity of his faith. This debate stems from his continued support for pagan deities.

So basically a Pagan leader commissioned the creation of Christianity for the good of Rome and to unite his warring nation... And then decided it wasn't good enough to follow himself... lol

 

[Archy]

Wouldn't it be more like You are God, you create the human race, you love us because you invented us and created us in your image (narcissist?)

Well, If in fact God does exist (I believe he does) and he did create all things as the bible says (Genesis Ch. 1,2)... Doesnt He deserve our praise and glory? Instead, we put people like Tom Cruise & Katie Holmes, Brad & Angelina on the covers of or magazines and we praise them because they are rich and glamerous... OH!, and divorced, and having babies out of wedlock.

You give us free will and allow us to do as we please. You speak a set of instructions or guidelines but only to a select few people and everyone else has to take their word that it's all true.

Have you ever seen the original writings of Aristotle? Or stood in the sistine chapel? Have you ever been to Egypt to see the pyramids? Ever been to see the great wall of china? Do you know how electricity works?
We all know these things exist and we believe by "faith" that they are there as we are told. As for electricity, we all use it everyday and and trust it will be there when we go to use it(as long as you paid your bill), but we still dont know the nitty gritty of how it works and what it is made of.

They then tell other people for hundreds of years and eventually write a document to keep track of it all. This document gets translated over centuries and various stories are added/removed/changed until the instructions are possibly (just maybe!) not the same as intended. The problem now is that IF the instructions aren't correct, we can't even check that the water heater works because there is no way to prove it one way or another...

We can go see them if we want to, just as you can go to Juresulem and see the original writings of the Old Testament and compare them to the King James version of the bible, they are an identical match in meaning.

What happened to Jesus between the ages of 14 and 30(ish)? I thought Jews were married and had kids around that age?

The bible doesnt tell us. It is not significant information. If it was, God would have given information to a prophet and had them write something on it. The whole point of the bible and Jesus coming to this earth is to redeem of us of our sins against the laws that God has for us. It was not meant to be a biography of Jesus' life. It was written to let us knoe the meaning of his life.

So basically a Pagan leader commissioned the creation of Christianity for the good of Rome and to unite his warring nation... And then decided it wasn't good enough to follow himself... lol

Last time I checked, He was human. You have never been wrong? You have never told a lie? Obviously, he was wrong to believe and then fall away. Did you ever think that it was a tactic to...

unite his warring nation

for his own prosperity? We dont know what he was thinking at the time of these decisions. Maybe he felt Rome was falling apart and he needed to instill something to get the people to focus on something greater than their current problems.

The fact is that Christianity is based on faith. There is LOTS of proof of the existance of God. Can it be proven 100%? No. Can you proove 100% that God doesnt exist? No.
When a court case is tried, they look at the evidence and make a decision. The evidence is pretty clear that there is a "Creator". Have you ever seen an explosion create something like life? No. An explosion creates distruction, not life.

Just a small point of evidence that popped into my mind, It was written...

Hbr 11:12 Therefore sprang there even of one, and him as good as dead, [so many] as the stars of the sky in multitude, and as the sand which is by the sea shore innumerable.

Hebrews must have been written before the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in a.d. 70 because: (1) If it had been written after this date, the author surely would have mentioned the temple’s destruction and the end of the Jewish sacrificial system; and (2) the author consistently uses the Greek present tense when speaking of the temple and the priestly activities connected with it (see 5:1–3; 7:23,27; 8:3–5; 9:6–9,13,25; 10:1,3–4,8,11; 13:10–11).

As far as I know they didnt have telescopes back then. Astronomers believed for hundreds and hundreds of years that with a little technology that they would be able to count the stars in the heavens, but as that technology progressed they have come to find that the stars of the heavens seem to go forever, anotherwards...

as the sand which is by the sea shore innumerable

Another bit of evidence, Cosmic Glue, Read this...


They have no idea how the earth is held together and how all the laws of the earth work. Jesus stated it best in the Bible, the book of Job...

(I put a couple things in BOLD, it is not that way in the original text)

Job 38 (New International Version)

The LORD Speaks

1 Then the LORD answered Job out of the storm. He said:
2 "Who is this that darkens my counsel
with words without knowledge?

3 Brace yourself like a man;
I will question you,
and you shall answer me.

4 "Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation?
Tell me, if you understand.

5 Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!
Who stretched a measuring line across it?

6 On what were its footings set,
or who laid its cornerstone-

7 while the morning stars sang together
and all the angels [a] shouted for joy?

8 "Who shut up the sea behind doors
when it burst forth from the womb,

9 when I made the clouds its garment
and wrapped it in thick darkness,

10 when I fixed limits for it
and set its doors and bars in place,

11 when I said, 'This far you may come and no farther;
here is where your proud waves halt'?

12 "Have you ever given orders to the morning,
or shown the dawn its place,

13 that it might take the earth by the edges
and shake the wicked out of it?

14 The earth takes shape like clay under a seal;
its features stand out like those of a garment.

15 The wicked are denied their light,
and their upraised arm is broken.

16 "Have you journeyed to the springs of the sea
or walked in the recesses of the deep?

17 Have the gates of death been shown to you?
Have you seen the gates of the shadow of death ?

18 Have you comprehended the vast expanses of the earth?
Tell me, if you know all this.

19 "What is the way to the abode of light?
And where does darkness reside?

20 Can you take them to their places?
Do you know the paths to their dwellings?

21 Surely you know, for you were already born!
You have lived so many years!

22 "Have you entered the storehouses of the snow
or seen the storehouses of the hail,

23 which I reserve for times of trouble,
for days of war and battle?

24 What is the way to the place where the lightning is dispersed,
or the place where the east winds are scattered over the earth?

25 Who cuts a channel for the torrents of rain,
and a path for the thunderstorm,

26 to water a land where no man lives,
a desert with no one in it,

27 to satisfy a desolate wasteland
and make it sprout with grass?

28 Does the rain have a father?
Who fathers the drops of dew?

29 From whose womb comes the ice?
Who gives birth to the frost from the heavens

30 when the waters become hard as stone,
when the surface of the deep is frozen?

31 "Can you bind the beautiful [c] Pleiades?
Can you loose the cords of Orion?

32 Can you bring forth the constellations in their seasons [d]
or lead out the Bear [e] with its cubs?

33 Do you know the laws of the heavens?
Can you set up God's [f] dominion over the earth?

34 "Can you raise your voice to the clouds
and cover yourself with a flood of water?

35 Do you send the lightning bolts on their way?
Do they report to you, 'Here we are'?

36 Who endowed the heart [g] with wisdom
or gave understanding to the mind [h] ?

37 Who has the wisdom to count the clouds?
Who can tip over the water jars of the heavens

38 when the dust becomes hard
and the clods of earth stick together?

39 "Do you hunt the prey for the lioness
and satisfy the hunger of the lions

40 when they crouch in their dens
or lie in wait in a thicket?

41 Who provides food for the raven
when its young cry out to God
and wander about for lack of food?