Which religion(s) have beliefs that make absolutely no sense, make you mad, or just get under your skin for one reason or another?

Hmmmmm.....let me think.

Hindus never get any respect. It's the forgotten religion.

Tired of most organized religions and there bloodthirsty followers. So many preach peace with one mouth and spit in your face with the other.

Tired of most organized religions and there bloodthirsty followers. So many preach peace with one mouth and spit in your face with the other.

Spend some time in a Christian chuch. Any one, you choose. Meet some people and talk to them. They really aren't bloodthirsty and will never spit in your face. I'm not sure what underlying factors you have that make you feel this way but I can assure you that most Christians, Jews, Hindu, Buddist or whatever are not going to be a threat to you. Some muslims, maybe. The radical muslims are off the hook but they are the exception to the rule.

God Bless you!

Hmmmmm.....let me think.

:killingme

Jehovah's Witnesses .... used to have a neighbor who was a JW. I'd come home from work in uniform (military) and she'd give me grief about how she doesn't believe in the military, which I found hypocritical for 2 reasons: 1) She was a former interpreter for the German army during WWII (she was about 80 when she lived next to us); and, 2) how do you live in a country and enjoy the freedoms offered that you wouldn't otherwise have if there wasn't a military? :shrug:

Another day I'd come home with the little "I gave blood today" sticker, and she launched into a hour-long :blahblah:-fest about how you shouldn't give your blood away because your soul is preserved in your blood, and if you give your blood away, you're giving your soul away as well. I responded, telling her that your body regenerates blood, so it's likely regenerating soul, too. :lol:

Those protostans really bug me. I don't mind Stans, but proto-stans are just a-holes.

Spend some time in a Christian chuch. Any one, you choose. Meet some people and talk to them. They really aren't bloodthirsty and will never spit in your face. I'm not sure what underlying factors you have that make you feel this way but I can assure you that most Christians, Jews, Hindu, Buddist or whatever are not going to be a threat to you. Some muslims, maybe. The radical muslims are off the hook but they are the exception to the rule.

God Bless you!
Thank you for your concern. I don't mean "spit in your face" and "bloodthirsty" literally. I think that when everyone dies they will find out that there is only one higher power and that "oh my god!!!" we are going to the same place. So the "my god is better than yours" speech that so many people preach from so many different religions will be useless in the end. The "spit in your face" comment is more for the "plant the seed then shun you for not conforming".

Obamanism

Spend some time in a Christian chuch. Any one, you choose. Meet some people and talk to them. They really aren't bloodthirsty and will never spit in your face. I'm not sure what underlying factors you have that make you feel this way but I can assure you that most Christians, Jews, Hindu, Buddist or whatever are not going to be a threat to you. Some muslims, maybe. The radical muslims are off the hook but they are the exception to the rule.

God Bless you!

I've been to several christian churches. They're all bloodthirsty one way or another (mind you I've been to 7 fairly regularly (1 for many many many years)). I suppose that's a fair sampling. Either way, 100% of them had a problem with something or another.

Edit: I don't doubt it's probably like this in every religion to some degree.

Jehovah's Witnesses .... used to have a neighbor who was a JW. I'd come home from work in uniform (military) and she'd give me grief about how she doesn't believe in the military, which I found hypocritical for 2 reasons: 1) She was a former interpreter for the German army during WWII (she was about 80 when she lived next to us); and, 2) how do you live in a country and enjoy the freedoms offered that you wouldn't otherwise have if there wasn't a military? :shrug:

Another day I'd come home with the little "I gave blood today" sticker, and she launched into a hour-long :blahblah:-fest about how you shouldn't give your blood away because your soul is preserved in your blood, and if you give your blood away, you're giving your soul away as well. I responded, telling her that your body regenerates blood, so it's likely regenerating soul, too. :lol:


I've had the same kinda experiences with the Witnesses. In general, I don't think they are a mean harmful group but their views are strange.

1. They don't salute the flag (It's just a piece of cloth?????)
2. They don't celebrate any holidays or birthdays
3. They think that all the dead will be brought back to life in 10K years or something like that
4. They don't vote
5. They don't believe in the gov't or military.
6. They would rather die than receive a blood transfusion.

I worked with a witness. He was a good worker but we couldn't talk religion. Once I heard some of the beliefs, I knew it was better to leave that stuff alone. Another guy I worked with would always openly refer to this guy's religion as a cult. I agreed but I kept my mouth shut.

Again, I don't hate this person but the religious beliefs of the JW are a little too much to swallow.

I've had the same kinda experiences with the Witnesses. In general, I don't think they are a mean harmful group but their views are strange.

1. They don't salute the flag (It's just a piece of cloth?????)
2. They don't celebrate any holidays or birthdays
3. They think that all the dead will be brought back to life in 10K years or something like that
4. They don't vote
5. They don't believe in the gov't or military.
6. They would rather die than receive a blood transfusion.

I worked with a witness. He was a good worker but we couldn't talk religion. Once I heard some of the beliefs, I knew it was better to leave that stuff alone. Another guy I worked with would always openly refer to this guy's religion as a cult. I agreed but I kept my mouth shut.

Again, I don't hate this person but the religious beliefs of the JW are a little too much to swallow.

I suspect one of my coworkers is a JW. She celebrates no holidays, didn't vote, and has a few other quirks about her that she chalks up to her "beliefs". But I thought JWs didn't drink alcohol, but my old neighbor and my current coworker dabble in the drinkage. :whistle:

I've been to several christian churches. They're all bloodthirsty one way or another (mind you I've been to 7 fairly regularly (1 for many many many years)). I suppose that's a fair sampling. Either way, 100% of them had a problem with something or another.

Edit: I don't doubt it's probably like this in every religion to some degree.


I really don't care if you believe or not. It's your life. I would agree that most religions have a problem with certain things. I would say it's more about having morals and values which present a problem with some people in today's society.

I really don't think you can say Christians are blood thirsty. In general, they all mean well. As a Catholic, it's disappointing the hear Baptists bash us on a regular basis. It's also upsetting that the media has been able to portray all catholic priests as pedophiles when there are many other segments of society experiencing this delimma. I would guess there are more teachers having sex wtih juveniles than priests but it doesn't sell papers.

I suspect one of my coworkers is a JW. She celebrates no holidays, didn't vote, and has a few other quirks about her that she chalks up to her "beliefs". But I thought JWs didn't drink alcohol, but my old neighbor and my current coworker dabble in the drinkage. :whistle:

The JW I know does drink. It's the Seventh day guy who doesn't drink, eat meat, consume caffiene, etc. He's the guy who goes to church on Saturday. He's cool but then again, it make you wonder.

" Which religion(s) do you have a problem with?"

Atheists-by declaring "there is no God" they make themselves their own god.
So what? you may ask!. Well, by making yourself your own god, when you die your god dies with you. Poor selection for a god-don't you think? Especially if you were hoping for someone that could possibly save you from your own death.
Maybe that's why the bible says "a fool sayeth in his heart, there is no God"
It takes a fool to select a god that dies the same moment he does.

:killingme:killingme:killingme:killingmeObamanism:killingme:killingme:killingme

Atheists-by declaring "there is no God" they make themselves their own god.

that's not actually true.

In fact, that's pretty much the exact opposite of what they're getting at.

I really don't think you can say Christians are blood thirsty. In general, they all mean well.

well if you're of a specific religion, of course you don't see it that way (not saying you are, just in general). I'm sure the Aztec didn't see themselves as overly bloodthirsty and I'm sure their actions (ritual sacrifice/etc.) fit fine in their society. We, however, see it another way.

that's not actually true.

In fact, that's pretty much the exact opposite of what they're getting at.

If that is the case, then who is their god?. If there is one, then they no longer qualify as atheists???

atheist= a(anti) theos(greek for god)

Catholics drive me batty!

Fear Tactics.

Simply Demonic.

If that is the case, then who is their god?. If there is one, then they no longer qualify as atheists???

atheist= a(anti) theos(greek for god)

no one is their god .... that's their whole point.

saying they don't believe in a deity =/= claiming they're god.

Hindus never get any respect. It's the forgotten religion.



It was left off because, obviously, nobody has a problem with it.

But I thought JWs didn't drink alcohol, but my old neighbor and my current coworker dabble in the drinkage. :whistle:



No - they drink. I dated a JW many hundreds of years ago, and she didn't mind getting snot-slinging drunk and doing all kinds of freaky-deaky stuff.


Wouldn't wish me a happy birthday to save my life though.

So she had to go.

If that is the case, then who is their god?. If there is one, then they no longer qualify as atheists???

atheist= a(anti) theos(greek for god)

They don't have one. You're the genious assuming that because they denounce God, they are somehow proclaiming themselves as their own god. Why is it so hard for you to think that maybe they just don't believe in one whatsoever. Durrrr

Anyway, each religion has stupid beliefs if you aren't involved with it. Though scientology and the little aliens inside you kinda takes the cake :lmao:

no one is their god .... that's their whole point.

saying they don't believe in a deity =/= claiming they're god.



If atheists look to no deity for guidance,understanding and wisdom regarding the things of life,then,by default, they look onto themselves for such answers. That means their very own(self proclaimed) guidance,understanding and wisdom is the only truth regarding life. By that very act they are proclaiming their own thoughts are superior to all others.
They are their own god! For there is no greater, now is there?

:ohwell: This poll should have been single option. Now the results are screwy because you can also for for all of the above.

How can you have a probem with Buddhism??

I"m surprised so many people have issues with Wicca too:ohwell:

It was left off because, obviously, nobody has a problem with it.

That's what I mean. Nobody even cares enough about them to have a problem with them. It's like the whole billion of them don't even exist.

:ohwell: This poll should have been single option. Now the results are screwy because you can also for for all of the above.

How can you have a probem with Buddhism??

I"m surprised so many people have issues with Wicca too:ohwell:

What single option would that be? :confused:

Why not? Buddhism (technically a philosophy not a religion) or Wicca, those too have some strange ideologies as much as the others. :shrug:

For the record I didn't vote. Although I choose to be a Catholic I find there is some truth and goodness in all religions but I could pick apart all of them if it came down to it.

That's what I mean. Nobody even cares enough about them to have a problem with them. It's like the whole billion of them don't even exist.

Good point. You'd think those bloodthirsty monotheists would be all up in arms over those pantheists. :lol: And have you seen that wacked out lookin' Kali goddess? :yikes:

For the record I didn't vote. Although I choose to be a Catholic I find there is some truth and goodness in all religions but I could pick apart all of them if it came down to it.

I love all religions.... however I am not religious. I was born and raised Roman Catholic and while I have an appreciation for it I can't say if I will go back even though I have an aunt who is a Catholic Nun.

:lmao: I was thinking about going back to the Catholic church last week, I got a message on facebook from a friend who said she became pregnant after praying to St. Joseph in some church in NYC...... I thought about it for a minute.

I like the romantic value of the Roman Catholic church though.

If atheists look to no deity for guidance,understanding and wisdom regarding the things of life,then,by default, they look onto themselves for such answers. That means their very own(self proclaimed) guidance,understanding and wisdom is the only truth regarding life. By that very act they are proclaiming their own thoughts are superior to all others.
They are their own god! For there is no greater, now is there?

Wow, your logic is so...flawed. You sure you're not a chick? :lmao:

They don't proclaim themselves as a god you twit. They might look upon themselves for instruction, or other people, or maybe some book they read. They just take life as it is, learn from their experiences and other experiences they hear about, and just go on with life (I think they typically have a 'this is it' philosophy with no afterlife beliefs). Maybe they look at science for their answers (NOT scientology) instead of religion. Why is the earth the way it is? Creation vs Big Bang + Evolution. That's SCIENCE. It's not like they're saying "Hey dude I made this world and I control everything in it, ALL WORSHIP ME!" or something like that. They aren't making themselves a god. Not everyone uses religion to look for the answers and uses it for all of their guidance and wisdom. If you do, you're someone I want to stay FAR away from. And if you're not ALWAYS using religion to seek each and every answer, then are you calling yourself a god as well? Or did you get advice from a friend or family member and follow it? Are they your gods too? Didn't think so.

Here are all the definitions from dictionary.com -- none of which being remotely close to what you are thinking. They aren't deifying themselves and they certainly don't think they're supreme beings or in charge of anything but their own actions (and if they do, they're probably starting a cult somewhere :lol:).

God   /god/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [god] Show IPA Pronunciation
noun, verb, god-ded, god-ding, interjection
–noun
1. the one Supreme Being, the creator and ruler of the universe.
2. the Supreme Being considered with reference to a particular attribute: the God of Islam.
3. (lowercase) one of several deities, esp. a male deity, presiding over some portion of worldly affairs.
4. (often lowercase) a supreme being according to some particular conception: the god of mercy.
5. Christian Science. the Supreme Being, understood as Life, Truth, Love, Mind, Soul, Spirit, Principle.
6. (lowercase) an image of a deity; an idol.
7. (lowercase) any deified person or object.
8. (often lowercase) Gods, Theater. a. the upper balcony in a theater.
b. the spectators in this part of the balcony.
–verb (used with object)
9. (lowercase) to regard or treat as a god; deify; idolize.
–interjection
10. (used to express disappointment, disbelief, weariness, frustration, annoyance, or the like): God, do we have to listen to this nonsense?

There are radicals in ALL religions. I've seen radicals stand behind the crucifix telling me I'm going to hell as well as the radicals that flew into the WTC that think we're all going to hell. Truth is NO-one is any better than ANY-one and if ANY one thinks they are then they are the fool.

Wow, your logic is so...flawed. You sure you're not a chick? :lmao:

:smack:

:smack:

:love:

Wow, your logic is so...flawed. You sure you're not a chick? :lmao:

They don't proclaim themselves as a god you twit. They might look upon themselves for instruction, or other people, or maybe some book they read. They just take life as it is, learn from their experiences and other experiences they hear about, and just go on with life (I think they typically have a 'this is it' philosophy with no afterlife beliefs). Maybe they look at science for their answers (NOT scientology) instead of religion. Why is the earth the way it is? Creation vs Big Bang + Evolution. That's SCIENCE. It's not like they're saying "Hey dude I made this world and I control everything in it, ALL WORSHIP ME!" or something like that. They aren't making themselves a god. Not everyone uses religion to look for the answers and uses it for all of their guidance and wisdom. If you do, you're someone I want to stay FAR away from. And if you're not ALWAYS using religion to seek each and every answer, then are you calling yourself a god as well? Or did you get advice from a friend or family member and follow it? Are they your gods too? Didn't think so.

Here are all the definitions from dictionary.com -- none of which being remotely close to what you are thinking. They aren't deifying themselves and they certainly don't think they're supreme beings or in charge of anything but their own actions (and if they do, they're probably starting a cult somewhere :lol:).

God   /god/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [god] Show IPA Pronunciation
noun, verb, god-ded, god-ding, interjection
–noun
1. the one Supreme Being, the creator and ruler of the universe.
2. the Supreme Being considered with reference to a particular attribute: the God of Islam.
3. (lowercase) one of several deities, esp. a male deity, presiding over some portion of worldly affairs.
4. (often lowercase) a supreme being according to some particular conception: the god of mercy.
5. Christian Science. the Supreme Being, understood as Life, Truth, Love, Mind, Soul, Spirit, Principle.
6. (lowercase) an image of a deity; an idol.
7. (lowercase) any deified person or object.
8. (often lowercase) Gods, Theater. a. the upper balcony in a theater.
b. the spectators in this part of the balcony.
–verb (used with object)
9. (lowercase) to regard or treat as a god; deify; idolize.
–interjection
10. (used to express disappointment, disbelief, weariness, frustration, annoyance, or the like): God, do we have to listen to this nonsense?

Thank you. I just picked up on this thread and was about to tear this person a new one.

I consider myself an atheist, though I've been researching different religions for a while in any time I can find to see if I can find faith in any of them.

At this point, I believe that when I die, I'll just decompose and my particles will eventually become part of something else, whether it be a rock, a bug, a tree, or maybe even part of me will become another person. Matter doesn't go away, pieces of things always eventually become part of something else. That's all I can truly say I have faith in right now. I haven't been able to bring myself to believe anything else. I'm happy for those that can though, I'm sure it's a good feeling. I feel comfortable with what I believe my fate to be though. It's natural, and there's no denying that aspect of it.

If it turns out I go to Hell, Hades, or whatever else there is out there, then whoops. My bad. I'm only human.

Edit: as for an answer to the original point of this thread, I don't have a problem with ANY well known religion (with the exception of those crazy ones like the suicide cults). Only people that misunderstand the intentions of it. Why isn't there a choice for none in the poll?

Thank you. I just picked up on this thread and was about to tear this person a new one.

I consider myself an atheist, though I've been researching different religions for a while in any time I can find to see if I can find faith in any of them.

At this point, I believe that when I die, I'll just decompose and my particles will eventually become part of something else, whether it be a rock, a bug, a tree, or maybe even part of me will become another person. Matter doesn't go away, pieces of things always eventually become part of something else. That's all I can truly say I have faith in right now. I haven't been able to bring myself to believe anything else. I'm happy for those that can though, I'm sure it's a good feeling. I feel comfortable with what I believe my fate to be though. It's natural, and there's no denying that aspect of it.

If it turns out I go to Hell, Hades, or whatever else there is out there, then whoops. My bad. I'm only human.

Edit: as for an answer to the original point of this thread, I don't have a problem with ANY well known religion (with the exception of those crazy ones like the suicide cults). Only people that misunderstand the intentions of it. Why isn't there a choice for none in the poll?

no prob, you evil self proclaiming god person! :roflmao:

But on a serious response to what you said, one problem I do have with religion is how some of them say "if you aren't one of us, you're going to hell!" You know what I say to that? Kiss my ass! :moon:

I just don't get it. If God really cared THAT MUCH about your religion and beliefs, wouldn't He show Himself? Or do SOMETHING that left no doubt in your mind? Hold a weekly teleconference, or maybe a talkshow like Jesus has on South Park (speaking of which, if Jesus shows himself in south park all the time, why is Kyle jewish?)? I have 0 proof whatsoever, just faith. So if I put my faith into the wrong thing, believed the wrong story from thousands of years ago, etc...that means I'm doomed to eternal damnation, or limbo, or wherever else? Even if I'm a great person otherwise and better than a majority of the people who follow the 'right' religion (The correct answer is Mormon! :lol:)? Please. I just don't buy that for one second. Preach to me all you want about how I'm going to hell if I don't believe in your religion, but if I'm a better person than you are then I have more of a right regardless of my religious choice. The religion choice part was just a scare tactic to get everyone to believe in your religion (started back in the Dark Ages, now it's just evolved into part of the religion itself) :smile:

The basic point of religion is guidance, hopefully into being the best person you can be. The rest is just gobble-dee-gook. If there is an all-powerful being, I think your actions will be more important than anything else (unless you call God a chick, then you're just insulting and going straight to hell! :lol:).

And before you ask...no, I didn't vote on any of those religions as religions that 'annoy' me. Though that one concept does bug me a bit. I do believe and I have faith, but until I am given cold hard proof that God really truly wants me to believe in one specific perfect exact way, then I don't think it's that big of a deal.

If it turns out I go to Hell, Hades, or whatever else there is out there, then whoops. My bad. I'm only human.



Should I bother to vote?

With that said, to answer the above quote:

God is supposed to an all knowing, an all powerful and understanding God. Why would he have to resort to blackmail to garner your affection and belief?

Believe in Me or be banished to Hell for all time and eternity?? What kind of God would say or believe such a thing. A God wouldn't, but man would. What a way to insure a flow of income. Believe or perish.
God would know we're infallible, and he's the one that gave us free choice (or so the Bible says). I'm sure if he was a kind God, he'd also be a forgiving God, and give us a chance to repent and to sit with Him and forgive us our sins as a man or woman, BEFORE he sends to Hell for all time and eternity, whether we believed in him or not on this side of the veil.

For those that believe God will banish me to Hell for all time and eternity because as a man I don't believe. :neener: I don't believe in YOUR God, my God's cooler than yours.

ALL organized religions are businesses, period. They are about making money, not saving souls. All TAX free. Religion, as far as making money goes, is better than organized crime. Leaders of most churches live better than ANY Mafiaso ever did, never pay any taxes, AND have never broken a law. Pay your 10% protection money or we's gonna break yu's knee caps an banish you to Hell for all time and eternity!!

If atheists look to no deity for guidance,understanding and wisdom regarding the things of life,then,by default, they look onto themselves for such answers. That means their very own(self proclaimed) guidance,understanding and wisdom is the only truth regarding life. By that very act they are proclaiming their own thoughts are superior to all others.
They are their own god! For there is no greater, now is there?

what?

that's a crazy leap of 'logic' lol

lets see if I can match it!

hmmmmm

ah HA!

If the sky is blue and cloudy, then the answer must be vacuum cleaners!

what?

that's a crazy leap of 'logic' lol

lets see if I can match it!

hmmmmm

ah HA!

If the sky is blue and cloudy, then the answer must be vacuum cleaners!

:roflmao: :killingme

:buddies:

what?

that's a crazy leap of 'logic' lol

lets see if I can match it!

hmmmmm

ah HA!

If the sky is blue and cloudy, then the answer must be vacuum cleaners!

:roflmao:
:roflmao:
:roflmao:

:roflmao:
:roflmao:
:roflmao:

that was sig worthy! good call :smile:

that was sig worthy! good call :smile:

I have been a big fan of Xaquin44 for a long time....

oh you all!

:huggy::huggy:

What single option would that be? :confused:

Why not? Buddhism (technically a philosophy not a religion) or Wicca, those too have some strange ideologies as much as the others. :shrug:

For the record I didn't vote. Although I choose to be a Catholic I find there is some truth and goodness in all religions but I could pick apart all of them if it came down to it.


It's multiple choice so you can for all of the above and any of the other religions, which throws off the accuracy of the poll. Not the MPD'ers won't do that anyway.:lol:

Buddhism being a philosophy rather than a religion is exactly why I was :confused: it was included. As for Wicca, I don't identify with that either because most of those people are whackadoo's too. I think I voted all of the above:shrug:

I love all religions.... however I am not religious. I was born and raised Roman Catholic and while I have an appreciation for it I can't say if I will go back even though I have an aunt who is a Catholic Nun.

:lmao: I was thinking about going back to the Catholic church last week, I got a message on facebook from a friend who said she became pregnant after praying to St. Joseph in some church in NYC...... I thought about it for a minute.

I like the romantic value of the Roman Catholic church though.

:eyebrow:Going back? Do you have to go through CCD again? Or pay money? Annulments cost money. If you're going "back" just go get a favor(baby), that's like trying to cheating God:nono: And what does having an aunt who's a nun got to do with it??:confused:

I've all ready told you.. Sometime between my birthday and 1 year from the day you started:elaine:

:eyebrow:Going back? Do you have to go through CCD again? Or pay money? Annulments cost money. If you're going "back" just go get a favor(baby), that's like trying to cheating God:nono:
Its a joke.


And what does having an aunt who's a nun got to do with it??:confused:

Nothing really, I just threw it in there.


I've all ready told you.. Sometime between my birthday and 1 year from the day you started:elaine:

Now thats not nice.... please stop saying that.

oh you all!

:huggy::huggy:

much :kiss:

:ohwell: This poll should have been single option. Now the results are screwy because you can also for for all of the above.

How can you have a probem with Buddhism??

I"m surprised so many people have issues with Wicca too:ohwell:


Is Wicca really considered a religion? I thought it was a bunch of nuts who thought they were witches and worshiped trees or something like that. Then there's scientology. There's even stranger yet.

Is Wicca really considered a religion? I thought it was a bunch of nuts who thought they were witches and worshiped trees or something like that. Then there's scientology. There's even stranger yet.

Strange is subjective. If you ask me I hold to the strangest religion yet. I mean come on, a God who becomes a man just to die and then has his worshippers eat and drink His body and blood in the form of bread and wine like neo-cannibals? That is downright scandalous! And yet I believe it and love it!

That's what I mean. Nobody even cares enough about them to have a problem with them. It's like the whole billion of them don't even exist.



According to them, they don't.







Sorta.

Strange is subjective. If you ask me I hold to the strangest religion yet. I mean come on, a God who becomes a man just to die and then has his worshippers eat and drink His body and blood in the form of bread and wine like neo-cannibals? That is downright scandalous! And yet I believe it and love it!

When did God become a man??

Strange is subjective. If you ask me I hold to the strangest religion yet. I mean come on, a God who becomes a man just to die and then has his worshippers eat and drink His body and blood in the form of bread and wine like neo-cannibals? That is downright scandalous! And yet I believe it and love it!

And yours is nothing new, that fairy tale was being told thousands of years before Christianity or Catholicism..

Is Wicca really considered a religion?

It's roots are deeper than Christianity.

I thought it was a bunch of nuts who thought they were witches and worshiped trees or something like that.

Every religion has nuts, and being a witch doesn't make you Wiccan anymore than owning a Bible makes you Christian.

I don't worship trees, I respect them. Sometimes I hug them. :dance:

Is Wicca really considered a religion? I thought it was a bunch of nuts who thought they were witches and worshiped trees or something like that. Then there's scientology. There's even stranger yet.
Wicca and scientology are both considered cults.

The only religion I have a problem with is that one which causes harm to others. Christian, Muslim, Buddihism, w/e....all have been, and will continue to be abused and misused for the selfish, egotistical purposes of their followers. Very few, are there in the world whose faithful followers actually follow the intended purpose of the faith/religion. Look how many ways the Bible has been distorted/misinterpreted for selfish reasons. What about the Koran?

As long as mankind is in charge of "religion" as we know it, you have to expect errors/discrepancies/fault with it. That shouldn't be the deciding factor in your conviction to worship God... in w/e way you see fit. It shouldn't be your justification NOT to either. I can look at just about every religion and find some incident where so-called followers/fanatics were at the root of the crime/incident... NOT that the religion is to blame, but the people who used it as an excuse.

Kind of like guns and crime, if you wish. It's not the guns/religion who kill and harm people...its the nuts behind the trigger. On the other hand, there are a lot of Muslims, Christians, Catholics, Buddhists, etc. who are extroidinary people who truly do awesome things for self-less reasons. These people truly want to make the world a better place. It is unfortunate, their deeds are overlooked or discriminated against when something horrible happens.

That's why forum discussions on religion are like discussing which sort of shoes are going to look best on me....there's so many...and it being a personal thing, why should you look to popular decision to decide the outcome?

Then again, these discussions are like everything else in the world... humans seem to have a natural instinct to blame a "thing" or "religion", "club", "organization" instead of the people and their nature for the crime/deed. I never could understand that...

I can't even begin to describe what I'd call Scientology. It is a set of beliefs, but it's not spiritual in any sense. It doesn't try to resolve wisdom or right versus wrong - nothing I've read from Dianetics would compel me to become one. Most of the others have something resembling a founder who led a life consistent with the teachings, but L. Ron Hubbard was just never the kind of guy you'd want to imitate. The others usually have milestones and major events - even miracles and contemplation of the origin of the universe. Scientology is hand-waving and space aliens.

But my biggest problem with them is the way they deal with criticism - and how they've managed to get away with it. Their brutality with criticism rivals mobsters and the Spanish Inquisition. At least with some religions, their brutality hinges on the supposition that in the long run, they are saving souls. Scientology does it to save money, reputation and to suppress the truth.

Just about any other religion I can respect even if I don't agree with it, although I'm a bit wary moreso of Islam, simply because my sporadic reading of the Koran and Hadith is that it's not inspiring to me and deals more with harsh treatment of outsiders, infidels and apostates than anything really character building and being a better person.

Wicca and scientology are both considered cults.

not to them hehe

I can't even begin to describe what I'd call Scientology. It is a set of beliefs, but it's not spiritual in any sense. It doesn't try to resolve wisdom or right versus wrong - nothing I've read from Dianetics would compel me to become one. Most of the others have something resembling a founder who led a life consistent with the teachings, but L. Ron Hubbard was just never the kind of guy you'd want to imitate. The others usually have milestones and major events - even miracles and contemplation of the origin of the universe. Scientology is hand-waving and space aliens.

But my biggest problem with them is the way they deal with criticism - and how they've managed to get away with it. Their brutality with criticism rivals mobsters and the Spanish Inquisition. At least with some religions, their brutality hinges on the supposition that in the long run, they are saving souls. Scientology does it to save money, reputation and to suppress the truth.

Just about any other religion I can respect even if I don't agree with it, although I'm a bit wary moreso of Islam, simply because my sporadic reading of the Koran and Hadith is that it's not inspiring to me and deals more with harsh treatment of outsiders, infidels and apostates than anything really character building and being a better person.

It's not just for money! If you upset the aliens inside of them, they won't be taken away to the other planet of paradise. So they need to suppress you and brutalize you in order to keep their inner aliens happy.

Get with it!

Religion is an industry since you can buy it, sell it, push it or advertise it.

It's like Kotex, some people need it, some people tell you that you can't live without it and either way it's gonna cost you .

When did God become a man??

And yours is nothing new, that fairy tale was being told thousands of years before Christianity or Catholicism..

Bob, here is not the place for me to debate you on the realities of truth found in myth and why I believe in Christianity. Maybe one day you and I can sit down for a long (or many) cups of coffee and do just that if you so wish. In the meantime I'll let you continue with your retarded and ignorant hit and runs.

So, you never answered my last question to you in another tread when you were being a mere boner ass with a chip on your shoulder. I'm under the impression that you were once going to be a cleric of some sort. Is that true? If so, what demonination?

In the meantime I'll let you continue with your retarded and ignorant hit and runs.



Why, because I've looked and researched, listened and read, and found my reality to be much different than yours.. Is that what makes me retarded and ignorant?

Religion is an industry since you can buy it, sell it, push it or advertise it.

By that rationale, so is "love". But that's just cynical.

Much of the world's religion didn't set out to become "industry", and in a pure sense, remains that way. You can be a Buddhist without being some kind of promoter for Buddha or profiting from it every bit as much as you can be a die-hard fan of the Redskins without buying sports paraphenalia. Most of the founders of the world's religions didn't think of themselves as starting a new religion. Buddha was on a search for enlightenment; Moses was trying to set his people free and take them to the promised land; Jesus was trying to fulfill what was already existing. Even Martin Luther only wanted to fix what was wrong, and was against the idea of people following *HIM*.

Great religious leaders point to the path - con man declare themselves as the path, and charge you for it. You'll find them everywhere, including religion.

I don't think you can buy 'love'

I mean you could spend money on someone who caould fake love .... but I don't think that qualifies.

Why, because I've looked and researched, listened and read, and found my reality to be much different than yours.. Is that what makes me retarded and ignorant?

If you've done that then why don't you ever give anything of substance? You don't, but instead choose hit and runs which is why I call you retarded and ignorant. You also, from my observation, only seem to have it out for Catholicism and not particularly Protestantism, which implies to me that you have a chip on your shoulder (which may or may not be legitimate) but that doesn't particularly make you objective in your condemnations.

I see you glossed over my question. That's ok, no answer is answer enough.

Why, because I've looked and researched, listened and read, and found my reality to be much different than yours.. Is that what makes me retarded and ignorant?

Oh and let me add, your reality is what you make of it but we only seem to know what your reality isn't as you bash others for theirs. :eyebrow:

When did God become a man??

In the begining.
& in
John 3:16

If you've done that then why don't you ever give anything of substance? You don't, but instead choose hit and runs which is why I call you retarded and ignorant. You also, from my observation, only seem to have it out for Catholicism and not particularly Protestantism, which implies to me that you have a chip on your shoulder (which may or may not be legitimate) but that doesn't particularly make you objective in your condemnations.

I see you glossed over my question. That's ok, no answer is answer enough.

What part of "organized religion" calls out Catholicism specifically?

Oh, and condemnations if sort of harsh. I've never said ANYone would be condemed to Hell for believing or not. I leave that to our compassionate Christians to do.

In the begining.
& in
John 3:16

He gave his only begotten Son...

That means He is His Son??

He's His own Grandpa??

That's quite the interpretation..

I voted other, for all of the above, and then all the rest.

I want to talk to someone who's lived a holy life.:ohwell:

What part of "organized religion" calls out Catholicism specifically?

Oh, and condemnations if sort of harsh. I've never said ANYone would be condemed to Hell for believing or not. I leave that to our compassionate Christians to do.

Glad to see you changed the above to a more generic "christians" you're moving along a bit. :clap: Psst, a condemnation doesn't require hell Bob.

Now, carry on with your retardation and ignorance as usual.

I want to talk to someone who's lived a holy life.:ohwell:

what's that?

I want to talk to someone who's lived a holy life.:ohwell:

Beelzebaby666 has exceeded their stored private messages quota and can not accept further messages until they clear some space.

Glad to see you changed the above to a more generic "christians" you're moving along a bit. :clap: Psst, a condemnation doesn't require hell Bob.

Now, carry on with your retardation and ignorance as usual.

I think he's getting at that while condemnation doesn't require hell (obviously), you won't get any worse then a condemnation from a church.

(seriously, eternity in hell for -not believing- in an entity that won't show himself?)

(why would anyone even want to believe in that?)

what's that?

Exactly.

Beelzebaby666 has exceeded their stored private messages quota and can not accept further messages until they clear some space.

Oopsie! All fixed:blushing: Now you've gone and let the missus know I sent you a private.:lol:

(why would anyone even want to believe in that?)Since people clearly choose what they want to believe, I suspect they want to believe that they have more to look forward to than being worm food. As I understand it, you atheists believe that we will die, get our bodies eaten, and basically account for nothing but "the circle of life" no matter how we act or what we do - thus having your morals be completely self-contrived arrogance.

I think he's getting at that while condemnation doesn't require hell (obviously), you won't get any worse then a condemnation from a church.

(seriously, eternity in hell for -not believing- in an entity that won't show himself?)

(why would anyone even want to believe in that?)

My faith has never defined what hell is aside from the absence of God (although personal images of it have changed over the years), so make of that what you will.

In fact, if you ask me it can be worse. What's more hellish than the thought of continued reincarcnation and having to do good so you don't get reincarnated into your next life as a roach by no choice of your own? I mean, who would want to believe in that? Just a thought.

Love ya Xaquin! :kiss:

and basically account for nothing but "the circle of life" no matter how we act or what we do

You say that like it's a bad thing.

You say that like it's a bad thing.:lol:

So a religion that drinks wine as a symbol of drinking Christs blood, and eats unleavened bread as a symbol of eating Christs skin, isnt bloodthirsty? :shrug:Correct

Exactly.

Exactly but what was the point in asking? :confused:

Nobody claims to be holy, at least no one that I know. Whether one be religious or spiritual they are that for a reason and it's because they have a need. The righteous don't claim to have those needs so maybe the Atheists are the "holy" ones you should be looking for eh? :lmao:

My faith has never defined what hell is aside from the absence of God (although personal images of it have changed over the years), so make of that what you will.

In fact, if you ask me it can be worse. What's more hellish than the thought of continued reincarcnation and having to do good so you don't get reincarnated into your next life as a roach by no choice of your own? I mean, who would want to believe in that? Just a thought.

Love ya Xaquin! :kiss:

at least it's another chance hehe

(mind you, I think that's just as silly as any given religion out there hehe)

Since people clearly choose what they want to believe, I suspect they want to believe that they have more to look forward to than being worm food. As I understand it, you atheists believe that we will die, get our bodies eaten, and basically account for nothing but "the circle of life" no matter how we act or what we do - thus having your morals be completely self-contrived arrogance.

I don't understand why so many people believe atheism to be so arrogant and selfish. I respect other people's religions and beliefs, and live by moral standards taught to me by my parents, the government, my friends and family, even organizations like the ASPCA. It may be self contrived, but how is it arrogant? I'm looking to others that just don't happen to be a God for reasonable moral guidance.

I don't understand why so many people believe atheism to be so arrogant and selfish. I respect other people's religions and beliefs, and live by moral standards taught to me by my parents, the government, my friends and family, even organizations like the ASPCA. It may be self contrived, but how is it arrogant? I'm looking to others that just don't happen to be a God for reasonable moral guidance.

You're a smart cookie! :huggy:

edited: You may want to reconsider using the government as an example of what one should or should not do.

I don't understand why so many people believe atheism to be so arrogant and selfish. I respect other people's religions and beliefs, and live by moral standards taught to me by my parents, the government, my friends and family, even organizations like the ASPCA. It may be self contrived, but how is it arrogant? I'm looking to others that just don't happen to be a God for reasonable moral guidance.And, I see it as arrogant (the choice of self-morals, not the person in general) because it takes into account one person's singular experiences and/or the limited people with whom they deal for establishing an entire moral code.

I meant no offense - arrogance was in regards purely to the choice, not the person.

I don't understand why so many people believe atheism to be so arrogant and selfish. I respect other people's religions and beliefs, and live by moral standards taught to me by my parents, the government, my friends and family, even organizations like the ASPCA. It may be self contrived, but how is it arrogant? I'm looking to others that just don't happen to be a God for reasonable moral guidance.
You mean you're your own god? :lmao:

You're a smart cookie! :huggy:

edited: You may want to reconsider using the government as an example of what one should or should not do.

the government would typically be of what 'not' to do if you're using the politicians, while the laws would be of what you should do. :shrug:

And, I see it as arrogant (the choice of self-morals, not the person in general) because it takes into account one person's singular experiences and/or the limited people with whom they deal for establishing an entire moral code.

I meant no offense - arrogance was in regards purely to the choice, not the person.

This post, combined with your avatar and siggy, make me want to literally roll around on the floor and laugh until I pass out. :clap:

And, I see it as arrogant (the choice of self-morals, not the person in general) because it takes into account one person's singular experiences and/or the limited people with whom they deal for establishing an entire moral code.

I meant no offense - arrogance was in regards purely to the choice, not the person.

I got my morals from Mother Goose, and Mister Rogers.. others choose the Bible..

Fiction is fiction.

"And, I see it as arrogant (the choice of self-morals, not the person in general) because it takes into account one person's singular experiences and/or the limited people with whom they deal for establishing an entire moral code."

Sounds like religion to me .... Evertime you read a passage, you bring your own views into it. Same as any other thing.

The Jews. I'm not sure why but they just bug me for some reason.

I got my morals from Mother Goose, and Mister Rogers.. others choose the Bible..

Fiction is fiction.
Are you callin me mother goose fiction? HOW DARE YOU SIR!

The Jews. I'm not sure why but they just bug me for some reason.

and I hope to continue to bother you :biggrin: :moon:

The Jews. I'm not sure why but they just bug me for some reason.


In your case, it's probably because they circumcise all of their boys and you like your little boys with foreskins.

And, I see it as arrogant (the choice of self-morals, not the person in general) because it takes into account one person's singular experiences and/or the limited people with whom they deal for establishing an entire moral code.

I'm taking into account other people's experiences, and then my own to add to it. I'm constantly learning from other people, but it's absolutely inevitable to process the information with my own past experiences. It's the same as relating a story from a holy text to your personal life.

This post, combined with your avatar and siggy, make me want to literally roll around on the floor and laugh until I pass out. :clap:
By all means, be my guest......

I got my morals from Mother Goose, and Mister Rogers.. others choose the Bible..

Fiction is fiction.Fact is fact, heartache is heartache........ Isn't that a song?

I'm taking into account other people's experiences, and then my own to add to it. I'm constantly learning from other people, but it's absolutely inevitable to process the information with my own past experiences. It's the same as relating a story from a holy text to your personal life.I agree, each person relates what they learn to their own experiences. But, unless you are neglecting the combined wisdom (and failures) of thousands of years of people who've based their moral compass on religious teachings, you're left with one of two options:

1. Base at least thee major portion of your moral code on religious principals because that's who you have mostly come in contact with and "learned" morals from, or

2. Based an entire moral system out of a vacuum other than your experiences and the non-religious people's experiences around you (after negating any influence religious concepts have had on them).


So, you either have a religious-based moral system and don't accept it, or, you have one completely of your own devising - which arrogantly (IMHO) negates the majority of the people of the world that ever existed.

I agree, each person relates what they learn to their own experiences. But, unless you are neglecting the combined wisdom (and failures) of thousands of years of people who've based their moral compass on religious teachings, you're left with one of two options:

1. Base at least thee major portion of your moral code on religious principals because that's who you have mostly come in contact with and "learned" morals from, or

2. Based an entire moral system out of a vacuum other than your experiences and the non-religious people's experiences around you (after negating any influence religious concepts have had on them).


So, you either have a religious-based moral system and don't accept it, or, you have one completely of your own devising - which arrogantly (IMHO) negates the majority of the people of the world that ever existed.

Who gives a flyin' #### where people learn how to be civilized, as long as they learn to be civilized? Who the #### are you to question anyone's beliefs, or lack thereof? I get so sick of you self righteous, sanctimonious asswipes.

By all means, be my guest......
:roflmao:
:roflmao:
:roflmao:
oww that hurt :otter:

Who gives a flyin' #### where people learn how to be civilized, as long as they learn to be civilized? Who the #### are you to question anyone's beliefs, or lack thereof? I get so sick of you self righteous, sanctimonious asswipes.

he's a self oppressing anti oppressor who wants to judge people by their questions, but hates people questioning anything. Get it right!

It's not arrogent to think that morals didn't exist before religion?

It's not arrogent to think that morals didn't exist before religion?

Say it ain't so! :faint:

Who gives a flyin' #### where people learn how to be civilized, as long as they learn to be civilized? Who the #### are you to question anyone's beliefs, or lack thereof? I get so sick of you self righteous, sanctimonious asswipes.I don't care. I don't question the source of people's beliefs. I was answering LuckyStar's question is all.

But, you have a nice day, too!

I agree, each person relates what they learn to their own experiences. But, unless you are neglecting the combined wisdom (and failures) of thousands of years of people who've based their moral compass on religious teachings, you're left with one of two options:

1. Base at least thee major portion of your moral code on religious principals because that's who you have mostly come in contact with and "learned" morals from, or

2. Based an entire moral system out of a vacuum other than your experiences and the non-religious people's experiences around you (after negating any influence religious concepts have had on them).


So, you either have a religious-based moral system and don't accept it, or, you have one completely of your own devising - which arrogantly (IMHO) negates the majority of the people of the world that ever existed.

They may be religious principles to you, but I can't be sure that those principles really came from an almighty being.

That, and I only have a few friends that are actually religious. We atheists were just taught to play nice. Since when is "play nice" a religious thing? Why can't it just be a human thing to get through this life alive?

:roflmao:
:roflmao:
:roflmao:
oww that hurt :otter:



he's a self oppressing anti oppressor who wants to judge people by their questions, but hates people questioning anything. Get it right!Whom did I judge?

And, who was supposed to be hurt? I didn't try and hurt anybody.

Whom did I judge?

And, who was supposed to be hurt? I didn't try and hurt anybody.

I was a little hurt by being referred to as arrogant for my beliefs.

It's not arrogent to think that morals didn't exist before religion?Who suggested they did (now that you finally feel you can speak with me on something, just nothing you've been proven wrong on).

I never suggested morals didn't exist before religion, nor that morals exist without religion. If you read it that way, perhaps you need to evaluate yourself as to why you feel to defend against that thought, even when it's not there.

I was a little hurt by being referred to as arrogant for my beliefs.

Scare tactics, guilt tactics, hurting people...that's how religion works.

Whom did I judge?

And, who was supposed to be hurt? I didn't try and hurt anybody.

i hurt myself by roflmaoing too much. and i was just bringing my original comment of your post + avatar + siggy and bringing it full circle. :shrug:

Scare tactics, guilt tactics, hurting people...that's how religion works.

Nah, I'm pretty sure that's how the crazies like God-woman on Wife Swap/Muslim Suicide Bombers and the like work. It's the people, not the religions.

Edit: That episode what legendary.

Scare tactics, guilt tactics, hurting people...that's how religion works.

not necessarily. it just depends on how you see things and what level of belief you have.

not necessarily. it just depends on how you see things and what level of belief you have.You're absolutely right...just depends on what brainwash level you have reached.

You're absolutely right...just depends on what brainwash level you have reached.

lol... like that poor woman on Wife Swap? She must be so stressed out.

Some of the most immoral people I've come across practice one form of religion or another.

Some of the most immoral people I've come across practice one form of religion or another.

once upon a time, there was a man named Osama Bin Laden...:whistle:

lol... like that poor woman on Wife Swap? She must be so stressed out.


Didn't see it.

They may be religious principles to you, but I can't be sure that those principles really came from an almighty being.

That, and I only have a few friends that are actually religious. We atheists were just taught to play nice. Since when is "play nice" a religious thing? Why can't it just be a human thing to get through this life alive?I never suggested that the principles came from an Almighty Being, just that they were religious principles.

Taught by whom to play nice? What is considered nice (ie, by what standard)?

I don't know why you feel you can't just be a human and get out alive.... Certainly nothing I've said

I was a little hurt by being referred to as arrogant for my beliefs.If you misunderstood what I said (and then when I explained it more completely), I apologize.

I never referred to you as arrogant for your beliefs, and I'm sorry you took it that way.

Some of the most immoral people I've come across practice one form of religion or another.Me too :high5: And, some of the best.

And, some of the worst have been atheist, and some of the best.

Imagine that. Fits right into what I was saying......

I never suggested that the principles came from an Almighty Being, just that they were religious principles.

Taught by whom to play nice? What is considered nice (ie, by what standard)?

I don't know why you feel you can't just be a human and get out alive.... Certainly nothing I've said

so basically you're saying principles didn't come from an almighty being, but from religion. so if not an almighty being, then 'religion' would be developed by people and thereby pointless to worship, since who's to say which people are any better than others when it comes to moral principles.

Good job at disproving your argument :buddies:

If anything, I'd trust my own moral compass above anyone elses. So why would I follow religion if it's just made up by a bunch of potentially corrupt and unknown people that were around thousands of years ago? Maybe they got it wrong. :gasp:

I'm not necessarily arguing that what I just said is correct, but you just argued their point more than your own.

so basically you're saying principles didn't come from an almighty being, but from religion. so if not an almighty being, then 'religion' would be developed by people and thereby pointless to worship, since who's to say which people are any better than others when it comes to moral principles.

Good job at disproving your argument :buddies:

If anything, I'd trust my own moral compass above anyone elses. So why would I follow religion if it's just made up by a bunch of potentially corrupt and unknown people that were around thousands of years ago? Maybe they got it wrong. :gasp:

I'm not necessarily arguing that what I just said is correct, but you just argued their point more than your own.

I'm convinced the only thing it's attempting to do is stir the pot and offend people.

I'm convinced the only thing it's attempting to do is stir the pot and offend people.

religion? or This_Person's nonsensical ranting?

or This_Person's nonsensical ranting?

:yay:

If you misunderstood what I said (and then when I explained it more completely), I apologize.

I never referred to you as arrogant for your beliefs, and I'm sorry you took it that way.

...

As I understand it, you atheists believe that we will die, get our bodies eaten, and basically account for nothing but "the circle of life" no matter how we act or what we do - thus having your morals be completely self-contrived arrogance.

hahaha

so basically you're saying principles didn't come from an almighty being, but from religion. so if not an almighty being, then 'religion' would be developed by people and thereby pointless to worship, since who's to say which people are any better than others when it comes to moral principles.

Good job at disproving your argument :buddies:That's quite a circle you drew around yourself, but not what I said at all.If anything, I'd trust my own moral compass above anyone elses. So why would I follow religion if it's just made up by a bunch of potentially corrupt and unknown people that were around thousands of years ago? Maybe they got it wrong. :gasp:

I'm not necessarily arguing that what I just said is correct, but you just argued their point more than your own.No, not really - YOU just argued your version of my point as theirs, which is very different than me arguing what you said.



What I said, argued, believe, whatever, is that there is one true religion. Which one it is is completely unimportant for this discussion, however.

When asked about morals, I suggested that it's arrogant for an atheist to suggest that they either don't get their morals from religion, or, to not get their morals from religion and therefore get them from their own devising.

What that means is that the vast majority of people in this nation (the ones who I have a logical chance to be referring to) are surrounded by the vast majority of people who claim one religion or another - I believe it's around 90+% that say they belong to and believe in one religion or another (however, anything over 50% makes my argument true). So, since these people get at least some part of their moral compass from their religion, an atheist must either ignore the actions of a majority of people around them, or, accept that at least some part of their moral code are from the experiences they have with people's religious moral codes.

Now, different religions have different moral codes. If you grew up in the mid-east, stoning a teenage girl for being raped (because she was morally bankrupt enough to put herself in a position where she could be raped) would be perfectly normal - and a religious based moral code. Here in the US, that is outrageously wrong to us - based in no small part on our religious based moral code.

So, I neither claimed that any religion gets its code from an Almighty Being (because, at least some don't even claim to) nor that the Being in question exists or doesn't exist. You put quite a bit of words into my mouth, and virtually none of them were right.

:blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah:
:yay:

He gave his only begotten Son...
That means He is His Son??
He's His own Grandpa??
That's quite the interpretation..

God is a spirit.
Jesus was his son, (God manifest in the flesh.)
God was not a human (he was/is spirit) until he became flesh as Jesus.
Understanding the oneness of God can be confusing.

:yay:


Really. I give up trying to understand his back peddling ass.

I think he's getting at that while condemnation doesn't require hell (obviously), you won't get any worse then a condemnation from a church.

(seriously, eternity in hell for -not believing- in an entity that won't show himself?)

(why would anyone even want to believe in that?)

Condemnation is not from a church that comes from the devil.
Conviction is from God.

...
Exactly - the moral choice is is what I was saying the arrogance is by atheists.

You got it now!! Good job!!

God is a spirit.
Jesus was his son, (God manifest in the flesh.)
God was not a human (he was/is spirit) until he became flesh as Jesus.
Understanding the oneness of God can be confusing.

yeah, but he was still god ....

:yay:Really. I give up trying to understand his back peddling ass.That's probably best for both of you, unless you want to ask questions.

I used small words, I don't know what else to do.

yeah, but he was still god ....

Yup:yay:

Exactly - the moral choice is is what I was saying the arrogance is by atheists.

You got it now!! Good job!!


I'm sure she appreciates your condescension.

[QUOTE=This_person;3417198]What I said, argued, believe, whatever, is that there is one true religion. Which one it is is completely unimportant for this discussion, however.[QUOTE]

I respect that you have your own religion, and have not insulted you for it; everyone is entitled to their own beliefs without being ostracized. I'm only asking that I not be referred to as arrogant for mine.

What I said, argued, believe, whatever, is that there is one true religion. Which one it is is completely unimportant for this discussion, however.

I respect that you have your own religion, and have not insulted you for it; everyone is entitled to their own beliefs without being ostracized. I'm only asking that I not be referred to as arrogant for mine.I agree, and I'm glad no one has done that.

Condemnation is not from a church that comes from the devil.
Conviction is from God.

a church that comes from the devil?

Yup:yay:

huh?

a church that comes from the devil?

sunmoonstars is much worse than This_person. I've had it on iggy since day one. Of course, if you're just dangling a hook....have fun.

I agree, and I'm glad no one has done that.

:liar:

I'm sure she appreciates your condescension.It gets frustrating to explain the same thing in different ways over and over gain because someone doesn't understand.


Me: Blue = blue

Someone else: Yeah, but if blue is green, then you're wrong

Me: Yep, I would be wrong, but I'm saying blue is blue

Someone else: You're an ignorant religious whackjob for calling blue green

Me: If I called blue green, I'd be wrong, but I'm saying blue is blue

Someone else: See, you called blue green!!! You're an idiot



This gets old really fast.

Exactly - the moral choice is is what I was saying the arrogance is by atheists.

You got it now!! Good job!!

My moral choice is mine, and you called it arrogant. That was insulting. To me. As a person. I am insulted by you calling something about me arrogant. You called my moral choice arrogant. That insulted me.

How do I have to say it? Am I lesser to you for not having a religion?

It gets frustrating to explain the same thing in different ways over and over gain because someone doesn't understand.

I feel your pain.

sunmoonstars is much worse than This_person. I've had it on iggy since day one. Of course, if you're just dangling a hook....have fun.I take that as a compliment :lol:

My moral choice is mine, and you called it arrogant. That was insulting. To me. As a person. I am insulted by you calling something about me arrogant. You called my moral choice arrogant. That insulted me.

How do I have to say it? Am I lesser to you for not having a religion?

It gets frustrating to explain the same thing in different ways over and over gain because someone doesn't understand.





This gets old really fast.

Looks like it needs to take it's own advice. :lmao:

I take that as a compliment :lol:

Don't. You're just a click away.

Don't. You're just a click away.

I doubt he cares. Neither do I, about being insulted, really. It's just someone online. I'm just bored at work.

Edit: but it has been fun seeing how much of a jerk he can really be.

I doubt he cares. Neither do I, about being insulted, really. It's just someone online. I'm just bored at work.

Of course he cares.

My moral choice is mine, and you called it arrogant. That was insulting. To me. As a person. I am insulted by you calling something about me arrogant. You called my moral choice arrogant. That insulted me.

How do I have to say it? Am I lesser to you for not having a religion?I didn't call YOU arrogant.

If you fall into one of the two categories I stated above (meaning, you either ignore the vast majority of the people around you and their belief structure because it has a religious background to it, or, you refuse to accept that their moral codes helped establish yours, and their moral code comes from a religious background, thus meaning your moral code has a huge component that is religious based and refuse to accept that - if you fall into one of those categories) then I find that choice arrogant.

If that offends you, you falling into one of those categories and my finding that arrogant, I sincerely apologize. I don't change my opinion on it, but I apologize for having offended you with having my own opinion on something.

As far as lesser, of course not, and I never suggested any such thing.

That's quite a circle you drew around yourself, but not what I said at all.No, not really - YOU just argued your version of my point as theirs, which is very different than me arguing what you said.



What I said, argued, believe, whatever, is that there is one true religion. Which one it is is completely unimportant for this discussion, however.

When asked about morals, I suggested that it's arrogant for an atheist to suggest that they either don't get their morals from religion, or, to not get their morals from religion and therefore get them from their own devising.

What that means is that the vast majority of people in this nation (the ones who I have a logical chance to be referring to) are surrounded by the vast majority of people who claim one religion or another - I believe it's around 90+% that say they belong to and believe in one religion or another (however, anything over 50% makes my argument true). So, since these people get at least some part of their moral compass from their religion, an atheist must either ignore the actions of a majority of people around them, or, accept that at least some part of their moral code are from the experiences they have with people's religious moral codes.

Now, different religions have different moral codes. If you grew up in the mid-east, stoning a teenage girl for being raped (because she was morally bankrupt enough to put herself in a position where she could be raped) would be perfectly normal - and a religious based moral code. Here in the US, that is outrageously wrong to us - based in no small part on our religious based moral code.

So, I neither claimed that any religion gets its code from an Almighty Being (because, at least some don't even claim to) nor that the Being in question exists or doesn't exist. You put quite a bit of words into my mouth, and virtually none of them were right.
In a nutshell, you are saying religion was created by man for man as a form of law and explanation for the unexplainable. Without it as guidance, some would be lost as to how to act, react and proceed. I agree.

Don't. You're just a click away.You've put me on iggy before, and I survived...... :lmao: But, I appreciate that you don't have me there yet, and find others worse. That tells me you think there's hope for me.

You've put me on iggy before, and I survived...... :lmao: But, I appreciate that you don't have me there yet, and find others worse. That tells me you think there's hope for me.


Now who's putting words in somebody's mouth? You really do have a high opinion of yourself, don't you?

Of course he cares.You are right, of course I care (nice to see I graduated from "it").

I want to offend no one, and I can have my feelings hurt. I haven't yet, but I can.

Now who's putting words in somebody's mouth? You really do have a high opinion of yourself, don't you?Touche


My opinion of myself is that I'm willing to talk, discuss, and learn from others - and I may have a thing or two to teach, as well. If that's "high", so be it. I've changed my view on things based upon conversations here, and I think that puts me in a small group.

In a nutshell, you are saying religion was created by man for man as a form of law and explanation for the unexplainable. Without it as guidance, some would be lost as to how to act, react and proceed. I agree.
Much closer.

I don't think they'd be "lost", and I think one religion was not created by man (the church associated was, but not the religious concepts).

I think the ones you refer to as "lost" would simply create their own moral standard without the guidance of thousands of years and trillions of people's thoughts and views before them. They'd be, effectively (since they'd be witout religion) atheists. I don't think atheists are "lost" unless they think they are.

Established religions give people shared culture and experience, and a shared moral code such that the bulk can agree on the majority of things that are "right" and "wrong" within their code (there are always outliers).

I don't think atheists are "lost" unless they think they are.Agreed. Most atheist I know don't rely on religion to set their moral compass and they accept the unknown without need for philisophical explanations.
Established religions give people shared culture and experience, and a shared moral code such that the bulk can agree on the majority of things that are "right" and "wrong" within their code (there are always outliers).
I agree with this as well. It explains why there is such contention in places that attempt to govern over multi-factioned societies such as Iraq and even the U.S.
Though I see religion as a necessity for those who feel they need it to define their intent and purpose, I also see it as the bane of society because of so many variations. The world will NEVER agree and therefore we'll never know world peace. Such is the nature of man.

This_person,

I understand why whatever religion you may believe in would consider me arrogant. However, I have refrained from insulting yours, and kept to voicing my own personal beliefs; that there was a time before religion and that morals arose out of survival (play nice, and don't get hurt or eaten). I would appreciate if you refrained from voicing that my beliefs in particular are arrogant.

Agreed. Most atheist I know don't rely on religion to set their moral compass and they accept the unknown without need for philisophical explanations.OR, they use it and believe they've chosen something different without realizing where their moral compass's "north" points to.I agree with this as well. It explains why there is such contention in places that attempt to govern over multi-factioned societies such as Iraq and even the U.S.
Though I see religion as a necessity for those who feel they need it to define their intent and purpose, I also see it as the bane of society because of so many variations. The world will NEVER agree and therefore we'll never know world peace. Such is the nature of man.If God came down and did parlor trick miracles for weeks on end, there would always be those that doubted - we agree on this it seems.

God is a spirit.
Jesus was his son, (God manifest in the flesh.)
God was not a human (he was/is spirit) until he became flesh as Jesus.
Understanding the oneness of God can be confusing.

It's not counfusing to understand that you believe what you were told. You believe your churches interpretation of the Bible. Others believe their churches interpretation as told to them by their church. Chrisitans can't even agree as to what to believe in, and they all read the same book!!

There is no "oneness" of God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit.. but niether is there oneness between Hermione and Harry.


Jesus was his son, (God manifest in the flesh.)

Show me in the scruiptures where it says this.

This_person,

I understand why whatever religion you may believe in would consider me arrogant.I don't believe my religion considers you arrogant, and I know that I don't automatically consider you arrogant (I don't know you well enough).However, I have refrained from insulting yours, and kept to voicing my own personal beliefs; that there was a time before religion and that morals arose out of survival (play nice, and don't get hurt or eaten). I would appreciate if you refrained from voicing that my beliefs in particular are arrogant.I don't find this belief, that you've worded here arrogant.

I clearly delineated that choice which I considered arrogant. Do you fall into one of those two categories? If you do, I will honor your wishes and refrain from telling you that I find that choice arrogant. However, I believe you to be smarter than that, from what I've learned of you today and previously.

I don't believe my religion considers you arrogant, and I know that I don't automatically consider you arrogant (I don't know you well enough).I don't find this belief, that you've worded here arrogant.

I clearly delineated that choice which I considered arrogant. Do you fall into one of those two categories? If you do, I will honor your wishes and refrain from telling you that I find that choice arrogant. However, I believe you to be smarter than that, from what I've learned of you today and previously.

*headdesk* I give up.

*headdesk* I give up.Do you fall into one of the two categories I described?

Do you fall into one of the two categories I described?

Yes. Because my belief is that before religion, there was natural selection and that whole play nice thing, therefore my beliefs could be considered your religion-denouncing category. I do denounce religion, because before that was something else that influenced religion. I skip religion and go back to science.

Edit: personally denounce. If you believe it, awesome. I'm still looking.

Yes. Because my belief is that before religion, there was natural selection and that whole play nice thing, therefore my beliefs could be considered your religion-denouncing category. I do denounce religion, because before that was something else that influenced religion. I skip religion and go back to science.

Edit: personally denounce. If you believe it, awesome. I'm still looking.

stop being so arrogant by believing something I don't! Even if it is true!

(by the way, even though I'm right and you're wrong, you're the arrogant one)

And when Jesus had been baptized, just as he came up from the water, suddenly the heavens were opened to him and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting on him.Anda voice from heaven said, "This is mySon, the Beloved, with whom I am well pleased." (Matthew 3:13-17)

Granted he's God, but it seems to me here that he is two seperate entities.. One in the water (Jesus) getting baptized and one (God) above proclaiming that it was his Son in the water getting baptized.


What you got?

Yes. Because my belief is that before religion, there was natural selection and that whole play nice thing, therefore my beliefs could be considered your religion-denouncing category. I do denounce religion, because before that was something else that influenced religion. I skip religion and go back to science.But, you've taken this to a personal level, and you've claimed I called YOU arrogant.

So, what you described above is not one of the two categories I'm talking about.

Do you, personally, discount anything you may possibly learn from the vast majority of people around you because the vast majority have their moral code come from religion?

Or

Do you, personally, refuse to accept that if you DO learn your moral code in some part from people around you who've learned at least some of THEIR moral code from religion, that therefore some part of YOUR moral code comes from religious concepts? Even if those concepts predated the religion, the codification of those concepts are religious in nature, and they've been promulgated through the centuries of centuries by religious edict, and therefore a religious compenent makes up part of your particular moral fiber?

If you so discount, or, if you so refuse to accept, then.... well, I disagree.

Yes. Because my belief is that before religion, there was natural selection and that whole play nice thing, therefore my beliefs could be considered your religion-denouncing category. I do denounce religion, because before that was something else that influenced religion. I skip religion and go back to science.

Edit: personally denounce. If you believe it, awesome. I'm still looking.

Oooh. I watched Lord of the Flies over the weekend.... it was a mini-play pretty much depicting what you just typed. Have you seen it or read the book?

stop being so arrogant by believing something I don't! Even if it is true!

(by the way, even though I'm right and you're wrong, you're the arrogant one)When you have value to add, it'd be great to read what you have to say! :buddies:

Oooh. I watched Lord of the Flies over the weekend.... it was a mini-play pretty much depicting what you just typed. Have you seen it or read the book?

Read the book like in Elementary school...

Good read.

I don't understand why people get so bent out of shape about religion. They are just based on a fictional books that some guy wrote. I think religion is just a way to control and make money of people who are not smart enough to know any better.

Oooh. I watched Lord of the Flies over the weekend.... it was a mini-play pretty much depicting what you just typed. Have you seen it or read the book?

That book was so sad. So sad and so awesome.

I don't understand why people get so bent out of shape about religion. They are just based on a fictional books that some guy wrote. I think religion is just a way to control and make money of people who are not smart enough to know any better.And, I'll be willing to bet few people you talk to find THAT condescending :lol:

And, I'll be willing to bet few people you talk to find THAT condescending :lol:

I don;t care what they think. I am smart enough to not simply accept whatever someone tells me at face value when science can prove otherwise.

This whole thread makes me :jameo:

Agreed. Most atheist I know don't rely on religion to set their moral compass and they accept the unknown without need for philisophical explanations.

Atheists I know never accept the unknown and limit themselves to hard science (as opposed to soft science as well) for their answers or knowledge. They tell me that any "morals" they may have come from survival of the fittest purposes (I kid you not) and anything subsequent to that is because it makes them feel good which is merely a high from synapses in the brain (or some such crap), which basically means it's not morals at all.

I've found that when questioned further a good many of the self-proclaimed Atheists really are Agnostics.

Atheists I know never accept the unknown and limit themselves to hard science (as opposed to soft science as well) for their answers or knowledge. They tell me that any "morals" they may have come from survival of the fittest purposes (I kid you not) and anything subsequent to that is because it makes them feel good which is merely a high from synapses in the brain (or some such crap), which basically means it's not morals at all.

I've found that when questioned further a good many of the self-proclaimed Atheists really are Agnostics.

You must be a talented interrogator, of just too hardheaded to accept the fact that people can be good, just to be good. They don't need to be blackmailed or extorted, or threatened to do it, they just do it.

Forget God,

Just be good for goodness sake.

Atheists I know never accept the unknown and limit themselves to hard science (as opposed to soft science as well) for their answers or knowledge. They tell me that any "morals" they may have come from survival of the fittest purposes (I kid you not) and anything subsequent to that is because it makes them feel good which is merely a high from synapses in the brain (or some such crap), which basically means it's not morals at all.

I've found that when questioned further a good many of the self-proclaimed Atheists really are Agnostics.
I am agnostic. I am 1 of a family full of atheists. When I quipped "unknown" it was merely a generalization. Yes, the atheists I know are basically as you describe.

You must be a talented interrogator, of just too hardheaded to accept the fact that people can be good, just to be good. They don't need to be blackmailed or extorted, or threatened to do it, they just do it.

Forget God,

Just be good for goodness sake.
Actually, there is a scientific explanation for why people are "good" just for the sake of being good and in a nutshell, it does have to do with "pleasure" chemicals released in the brain.

Actually, there is a scientific explanation for why people are "good" just for the sake of being good and in a nutshell, it does have to do with "pleasure" chemicals released in the brain.

All my pleasure chemicals are in the nightstand on BG's side of the bed...

Actually, there is a scientific explanation for why people are "good" just for the sake of being good and in a nutshell, it does have to do with "pleasure" chemicals released in the brain.

But yes, i do understand the point you are making.. Edorphins and the like.. Krebs.. Synapses..

You must be a talented interrogator, of just too hardheaded to accept the fact that people can be good, just to be good. They don't need to be blackmailed or extorted, or threatened to do it, they just do it.

Forget God,

Just be good for goodness sake.

I am a talented debater, as I dialogued with Atheists for over a decade at one point in time. I could take your good just to be good without God comment, strip it down to it's bare essentials, and rationally run it in the ground, but somd.com is not a good venue for that. You sure you don't wanna go for that long couple cups of coffee? I'm not out to convert you, just merely get you to be reasonable. :buddies:

And hey, I'm just telling you what all true Atheists have told me, I can't help it if you don't it when I'm being informative. :shrug:

I could take your good just to be good without God comment, strip it down to it's bare essentials, and rationally run it in the ground

I'd say 'good to be good' is pretty bare bones ....

I don;t care what they think. I am smart enough to not simply accept whatever someone tells me at face value when science can prove otherwise.When did science prove God doesn't exist?

You must be a talented interrogator, of just too hardheaded to accept the fact that people can be good, just to be good. They don't need to be blackmailed or extorted, or threatened to do it, they just do it.

Forget God,

Just be good for goodness sake.
What's "good"? What standard should we go by?

I am a talented debater, as I dialogued with Atheists for over a decade at one point in time. I could take your good just to be good without God comment, strip it down to it's bare essentials, and rationally run it in the ground, but somd.com is not a good venue for that. You sure you don't wanna go for that long couple cups of coffee? I'm not out to convert you, just merely get you to be reasonable. :buddies:

And hey, I'm just telling you what all true Atheists have told me, I can't help it if you don't it when I'm being informative. :shrug:

You may be a talented debater, and I know I'm a terrible debater, but this is an old discussion on these forums. I have presented arguments, with historical documentation to support my argument, and it has not gained me, or any other athiest, any more respect than what is typically posted towards us here on the forums. It would be a complete and total waste of my time, as well as yours, to attempt to get a bunch of forum noobs to understand.

This is why I rarely post in the warm, wonderful religion forums anymore.

Perhaps if christians didn't have so much disdain for athiests, we'd have less disdain for christians.

I'd say 'good to be good' is pretty bare bones ....

You can't call the purposes of pleasure synapses (endorphines or what have you) morality - unless you want to conveniently change the definition of morality. Anyone who does something good for their own physical pleasure is not doing a moral act.

There is no morality without the belief in a Higher Power or at least living with the conditioning of such a belief. Anyone who does something good because they think or feel it's the right thing to do is doing a moral act and thereby is a believer in one shape, form or another, or influenced (known or unknown) by believers.

There is no morality without the belief in a Higher Power or at least living with the conditioning of such a belief. Anyone who does something good because they think or feel it's the right thing to do is doing a moral act and thereby is a believer in one shape, form or another, or influenced (known or unknown) by believers.


I bet the cults love you.

You can't call the purposes of pleasure synapses (endorphines or what have you) morality - unless you want to conveniently change the definition of morality. Anyone who does something good for their own physical pleasure is not doing a moral act.

There is no morality without the belief in a Higher Power or at least living with the conditioning of such a belief. Anyone who does something good because they think or feel it's the right thing to do is doing a moral act and thereby is a believer in one shape, form or another, or influenced (known or unknown) by believers.

except people who did so before organized religion .... apparently they don't count?

also, what about kids? My kid doesn't know about god or higher powers (being three) but he'll do nice things all the time.

You can't call the purposes of pleasure synapses (endorphines or what have you) morality - unless you want to conveniently change the definition of morality. Anyone who does something good for their own physical pleasure is not doing a moral act.

There is no morality without the belief in a Higher Power or at least living with the conditioning of such a belief. Anyone who does something good because they think or feel it's the right thing to do is doing a moral act and thereby is a believer in one shape, form or another, or influenced (known or unknown) by believers.

The brainwashing is almost complete in this one..

I bet the cults love you.

Probably. Christianity was a "cult" at one time too. :shrug:

except people who did so before organized religion .... apparently they don't count?

also, what about kids? My kid doesn't know about god or higher powers (being three) but he'll do nice things all the time.

Forget about organized religion, I'm not even talking about that. When it comes to this conversation of Atheists and morality think God or no God simply put.

Sure your kid will and why do you suppose that is? Because either you teach him too or because he was born with a soul made by God. I'm surprised you so easily walked into that. :razz:

It's not counfusing to understand that you believe what you were told. You believe your churches interpretation of the Bible. Others believe their churches interpretation as told to them by their church. Chrisitans can't even agree as to what to believe in, and they all read the same book!!
There is no "oneness" of God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit.. but niether is there oneness between Hermione and Harry.
Show me in the scruiptures where it says this.
With Pleasure..
John 10:30..
King James Version, New American Standard Bible, and New Living Translation and 21st Century King James Version
and do me a favor find the word Trinity in the Bible..
thanks..

Probably. Christianity was a "cult" at one time too. :shrug:





It's still a cult.

I don't have a problem with religions at all, I have a problem with religious extremists of all types. Atheists, that means you too.

I also happen to have a problem with drastic misinformation. Allow me to correct a few things:

Atheists do not believe themselves to be and worship themselves as gods - that's LaVey Satanism. The idea behind that is that gods are merely inventions of man, and therefore worship of man is more direct and logical, preferably oneself. They allow personal indulgence so long as it does not hurt others.

Jehovah's Witnesses do drink alcohol, but they do not promote overindulgence, as basically any religion does. The big points for them are that they do not believe in blood transfusions, holidays, religious statues, or voting.

I would also like to point out last of all that lack of evidence does not prove nonexistence - there's really no way to disprove God, but there's no way to prove him either. That aside you really won't change anybody's mind in the long run - that takes a personal revelation. Argument over petty things as such is irrelevant. And have some respect for people - calling one's deep personal belief a "fairy tale" or their sacred book a "work of fiction" is immature, obnoxious and childish.

As for itsbob, it's widely acknowledge by secular scholars EVERYWHERE that there are MANY factual events depicted in the Bible that are corroborated by other period-specific documents. Even those with minimalist views regarding biblical historicity submit that events after a certain date are pretty spot-on. You can't write it off as a work of fiction because you don't necessarily agree with what it says. The major difference as well between Jehovah's Witnesses and other forms of Christianity is that they decided to modernize their translation and cross-reference it with newly-discovered documents rather than continue to use a hundreds-years-old King James translation. Pull your head out of your ass.

Morals also, believe it or not, can be exclusive from one's religion. Atheists have morals too, and there certainly are self-proclaimed Christians that totally lack morals. Perhaps history's most famous example is that of Father Grigori Rasputin, the drunkard, womanizing "holy man" attached to the last Czarina of Russia. Don't judge a religion on the basis of its members.

And for the record I'm deist.

When did science prove God doesn't exist?

When did anyone prove He did??

Let's see.. the world is only 6000 years old.. Check. God got that one right.


man walked with the Dinosaurs.. Another check in the God column.. he got that one right..

Eve was made from Adam's rib.. but WAIT.. they both have the same amount of ribs.. But we'll give God that one too.. because we're good people after all.

The normal life span of a man during the dinosaur years was >600 years..

Bushes talked.. and people listened..

The world flooded, but there is no evidence.. there was an Ark with every animal on the planet on it... but no evidence of a monstorus ship EVER being built, or even the logistics of it EVER working out.

Yep, you got me, God exists, I had it wrong, just waaaay too much evidence to think otherwise.

because he was born with a soul made by God.

And this is the problem with trying to have a discussion with christians. They are incapable of being objective.

Probably. Christianity was a "cult" at one time too. :shrug:

all of them were ....

Forget about organized religion, I'm not even talking about that. When it comes to this conversation of Atheists and morality think God or no God simply put.

let me ask you this then. Why would existence of a god bring morals?

Example: People living in the wilds of Australia love and care for their children and give gifts and aid to friends when they need it and vice versa. They have neither heard nor care about god. For them, there is no god. Yet, they manage as a civilization. Are they immoral?

Sure your kid will and why do you suppose that is? Because either you teach him too or because he was born with a soul made by God. I'm surprised you so easily walked into that. :razz:

I teach him to be nice sure, but I don't worship any gods .... so 'god' has nothing to do with it.

Also, a soul made by god is born sinful (I don't believe this at all, but it's been told to me numerous times by the denizens of this forum) so I'd wager that has nothing to do with the price of tea in china.

As for itsbob, it's widely acknowledge by secular scholars EVERYWHERE that there are MANY factual events depicted in the Bible that are corroborated by other period-specific documents. Even those with minimalist views regarding biblical historicity submit that events after a certain date are pretty spot-on. You can't write it off as a work of fiction because you don't necessarily agree with what it says. The major difference as well between Jehovah's Witnesses and other forms of Christianity is that they decided to modernize their translation and cross-reference it with newly-discovered documents rather than continue to use a hundreds-years-old King James translation. Pull your head out of your ass.



Stephen King has the same writing style.. Actual places and events worked into his manuscripts.. he even includes REAL people.. though I don't think any of his live to the ripe old age of 600, or walk on water.

So the Shining must be true??

to think, in 2000 years humans maybe gathering to pray to the God Cujo!!

And when Jesus had been baptized, just as he came up from the water, suddenly the heavens were opened to him and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting on him.Anda voice from heaven said, "This is mySon, the Beloved, with whom I am well pleased." (Matthew 3:13-17)

Granted he's God, but it seems to me here that he is two seperate entities.. One in the water (Jesus) getting baptized and one (God) above proclaiming that it was his Son in the water getting baptized.
What you got?

Revelation 20:4And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
OH one more..
Deuteronomy 6:4-Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD
Oh wait one more..
Acts 2:38-Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost
Wow...is this another..

Matthew 1:23
Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us

except people who did so before organized religion .... apparently they don't count?

And yeah, let's talk about these people because they count!

Let's go back to cavemen.

Caveman Xaquin finds a woman and thinks she's beautiful, far more than that hag in the cave next door, ug ug this is beauty! From where this concept of beauty?

Caveman Xaquin finds that his beautiful woman gives him little peeps, ug ug peeps good! From where this concept of good?

Caveman Xaquin finds that he has these heart felt feelings for his woman and his peeps, ug ug this is love! From where this concept love?

Caveman Xaquin is sure that the sun is necessary for life, even though the retard in the cave next door says it's the moon, ug ug this is truth! From where this concept of truth?

Silly example I know but you get the point, yes? Truth, goodness, beauty, love - until someone can prove these things like this have evolved then mankind will continue to believe in a Higher Power.

With Pleasure..
John 10:30..
King James Version, New American Standard Bible, and New Living Translation and 21st Century King James Version
and do me a favor find the word Trinity in the Bible..
thanks..

Check your translation history for John 10:30 and you'll find the correct term was "I and the Father"... Tricky translations get you every time.

1) There is one God: Deuteronomy 6:4; 1 Corinthians 8:4; Galatians 3:20; 1 Timothy 2:5.

2) The Trinity consists of three Persons: Genesis 1:1; 1:26; 3:22; 11:7; Isaiah 6:8; 48:16; 61:1; Matthew 3:16-17; Matt 28:19; 2 Corinthians 13:14. In the passages in the Old Testament, a knowledge of Hebrew is helpful. In Genesis 1:1, the plural noun "Elohim" is used. In Genesis 1:26; 3:22; 11:7 and Isaiah 6:8, the plural pronoun for "us" is used. That "Elohim" and "us" refer to more than two is WITHOUT question. In English, you only have two forms, singular and plural. In Hebrew, you have three forms: singular, dual, and plural. Dual is for two ONLY. In Hebrew, the dual form is used for things that come in pairs like eyes, ears, and hands. The word "Elohim" and the pronoun "us" are plural forms - definitely more than two - and must be referring to three or more (Father, Son, Holy Spirit).

In Isaiah 48:16 and 61:1, the Son is speaking while making reference to the Father and the Holy Spirit. Compare Isaiah 61:1 to Luke 4:14-19 to see that it is the Son speaking. Matthew 3:16-17 describes the event of Jesus' baptism. Seen in this is God the Holy Spirit descending on God the Son while God the Father proclaims His pleasure in the Son. Matthew 28:19 and 2 Corinthians 13:14 are examples of 3 distinct persons in the Trinity.

3) The members of the Trinity are distinguished one from another in various passages: In the Old Testament, "LORD" is distinguished from "Lord" (Genesis 19:24; Hosea 1:4). The "LORD" has a "Son" (Psalm 2:7, 12; Proverbs 30:2-4). Spirit is distinguished from the "LORD" (Numbers 27:18) and from "God" (Psalm 51:10-12). God the Son is distinguished from God the Father (Psalm 45:6-7; Hebrews 1:8-9). In the New Testament, John 14:16-17 is where Jesus speaks to the Father about sending a Helper, the Holy Spirit. This shows that Jesus did not consider Himself to be the Father or the Holy Spirit. Consider also all of the other times in the Gospels where Jesus speaks to the Father. Was He speaking to Himself? No. He spoke to another person in the Trinity - the Father.

Stephen King has the same writing style.. Actual places and events worked into his manuscripts.. he even includes REAL people.. though I don't think any of his live to the ripe old age of 600, or walk on water.

So the Shining must be true??

to think, in 2000 years humans maybe gathering to pray to the God Cujo!!

The primary difference, of course, being that Stephen King is one man and that the Bible was written by many people, all of whom somewhat kept to reasonably the same continuity that's also dictated elsewhere. Although we might qualify Stephen King's work as a whole as fiction, if it does indeed contain true events then they themselves are true. The fictional part of it does not unconditionally invalidate the rest of the work - that's absolutely foolish. Don't try to twist my words around.

I stand by what I said before - unless you can ABSOLUTELY PROVE OTHERWISE that anything in the Bible did not happen, you have no case. Period. You can disagree with it all you want and cite implausibility, but the honest truth is that nobody truly knows, so we're all just as right as one another. Get off your high horse.

I might also add that it is entirely plausible that man lived longer years ago, given that genetic impurities that started out as mutations have now spread throughout the entire human race, not to mention that our atmosphere and planetary conditions have certainly changed in the past couple millenia.

[QUOTE=itsbob;3417625]When did anyone prove He did??
The world flooded, but there is no evidence.. there was an Ark with every animal on the planet on it... but no evidence of a monstorus ship EVER being built, or even the logistics of it EVER working out.

QUOTE]

CNN.com - Satellite closes in on Noah's Ark mystery - Mar 13, 2006 (http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/space/03/13/satellite.noahs.ark/index.html)
it's on CNN..does that make it true?? People seem to think everything else on there is...

Revelation 20:4And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
OH one more..
Deuteronomy 6:4-Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD
Oh wait one more..
Acts 2:38-Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost
Wow...is this another..

Matthew 1:23
Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us


Notice the difference between LORD and Lord, when speaking of God and Jesus?

Don't quite understand what other point you were trying to make above.

Check your translation history for John 10:30 and you'll find the correct term was "I and the Father"... Tricky translations get you every time.

1) There is one God: Deuteronomy 6:4; 1 Corinthians 8:4; Galatians 3:20; 1 Timothy 2:5.

2) The Trinity consists of three Persons: Genesis 1:1; 1:26; 3:22; 11:7; Isaiah 6:8; 48:16; 61:1; Matthew 3:16-17; Matt 28:19; 2 Corinthians 13:14. In the passages in the Old Testament, a knowledge of Hebrew is helpful. In Genesis 1:1, the plural noun "Elohim" is used. In Genesis 1:26; 3:22; 11:7 and Isaiah 6:8, the plural pronoun for "us" is used. That "Elohim" and "us" refer to more than two is WITHOUT question. In English, you only have two forms, singular and plural. In Hebrew, you have three forms: singular, dual, and plural. Dual is for two ONLY. In Hebrew, the dual form is used for things that come in pairs like eyes, ears, and hands. The word "Elohim" and the pronoun "us" are plural forms - definitely more than two - and must be referring to three or more (Father, Son, Holy Spirit).

In Isaiah 48:16 and 61:1, the Son is speaking while making reference to the Father and the Holy Spirit. Compare Isaiah 61:1 to Luke 4:14-19 to see that it is the Son speaking. Matthew 3:16-17 describes the event of Jesus' baptism. Seen in this is God the Holy Spirit descending on God the Son while God the Father proclaims His pleasure in the Son. Matthew 28:19 and 2 Corinthians 13:14 are examples of 3 distinct persons in the Trinity.

3) The members of the Trinity are distinguished one from another in various passages: In the Old Testament, "LORD" is distinguished from "Lord" (Genesis 19:24; Hosea 1:4). The "LORD" has a "Son" (Psalm 2:7, 12; Proverbs 30:2-4). Spirit is distinguished from the "LORD" (Numbers 27:18) and from "God" (Psalm 51:10-12). God the Son is distinguished from God the Father (Psalm 45:6-7; Hebrews 1:8-9). In the New Testament, John 14:16-17 is where Jesus speaks to the Father about sending a Helper, the Holy Spirit. This shows that Jesus did not consider Himself to be the Father or the Holy Spirit. Consider also all of the other times in the Gospels where Jesus speaks to the Father. Was He speaking to Himself? No. He spoke to another person in the Trinity - the Father.
I can give you one more..
1 Tim 3:16-And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.


Hummmmm

CNN.com - Satellite closes in on Noah's Ark mystery - Mar 13, 2006 (http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/space/03/13/satellite.noahs.ark/index.html)
it's on CNN..does that make it true?? People seem to think everything else on there is...

and you would believe that raft to be big enough to carry EVERY animal on the planet? Plus the food to feed them.. plus fresh water.. REALLY!??

Read up on your sciences.. and having a ship atop a mountain wouldn't seem to far fetched.. after you consider WHERE the mountains came from.. but even it IS a ship, it in no way shape or form would be big enough to carry what it supposedly carried.

And of COURSE, nobody has been to the ship to prove it's existence.. how handy that NOBODY is allowed to go there to investigate it.

:bs:

all of them were ....



let me ask you this then. Why would existence of a god bring morals?

Example: People living in the wilds of Australia love and care for their children and give gifts and aid to friends when they need it and vice versa. They have neither heard nor care about god. For them, there is no god. Yet, they manage as a civilization. Are they immoral?



I teach him to be nice sure, but I don't worship any gods .... so 'god' has nothing to do with it.

Also, a soul made by god is born sinful (I don't believe this at all, but it's been told to me numerous times by the denizens of this forum) so I'd wager that has nothing to do with the price of tea in china.

Yeah so? I don't care.


You are talking about the Aborigines? They have their mythology and rituals Xaquin. Bomp try again.

So, why do you teach your kid to be nice? Did your momma teach you? Or because society says he has to be? Because there are laws? And our laws today are kind of sort of based on like the 10 commandments :gasp:? So, yeah you may not want to admit it but God kind of may have something to do with it. Sorry but it's true and it's just the way it is right now, face it. :shrug:

Yeah so? I don't care.


You are talking about the Aborigines? They have their mythology and rituals Xaquin. Bomp try again.

So, why do you teach your kid to be nice? Did your momma teach you? Or because society says he has to be? Because there are laws? And our laws today are kind of sort of based on like the 10 commandments :gasp:? So, yeah you may not want to admit it but God kind of may have something to do with it. Sorry but it's true and it's just the way it is right now, face it. :shrug:

...and which came first, rational thought with regards as to morals, or the ten commandments? It's a classic chicken and egg scenario. The commandments were given well after general morality was established.

QED... next please.

and you would believe that raft to be big enough to carry EVERY animal on the planet? Plus the food to feed them.. plus fresh water.. REALLY!??

Read up on your sciences.. and having a ship atop a mountain wouldn't seem to far fetched.. after you consider WHERE the mountains came from.. but even it IS a ship, it in no way shape or form would be big enough to carry what it supposedly carried.

And of COURSE, nobody has been to the ship to prove it's existence.. how handy that NOBODY is allowed to go there to investigate it.

:bs:

Humm....Its Bob.
I know I haven't seen it. (have you?) It is a mystery just like BOs BC....

However, I can tell that you study the bible for what reason I don't know.
Let me give you an example of God..
If you have parents....you are a son. Right??
If you kids.......you are a father. Right??
If you have a wife...........you are a husband. Right??
But you only have ONE name.
IF I write a check out to you I can't make it out to "The Son" or "The Father" or "The Husband"...I have to put it in your name.
God has many titles...But his name is JESUS...
Simple reasoning for the "one God" idea....:yahoo:
Take it or leave it. I'm not going to shove anything down your throat either way, I'm happy in what I believe in. Just be happy with yours.

...and which came first, rational thought with regards as to morals, or the ten commandments? It's a classic chicken and egg scenario. The commandments were given well after general morality was established.

QED... next please.

I don't think it's chicken and egg at all, the 10 commandments came later - to the Hebrews.

Who cares? That's not my argument. Go do your schoolwork or something.

:whistle:

I'm quite interested... what was it then?

You said that our laws are based on the ten commandments and that our laws are based on religion, but obviously the ten commandments came well after there was established law in the land. The Code of Hammurabi, the first written law, came in 2500 BC, and the Ten Commandments came between 1441 and 1533 BC.

The very fact that we have guilt as a basic human emotion is evidence that religion did not create morality.

:whistle:

Hey!!

1. I edited that!

2. I used the vernacular but I used it properly - somethin'.

:roflmao:

Hey!!

1. I edited that!

2. I used the vernacular but I used it properly - somethin'.

:roflmao:

:yay:

I'm quite interested... what was it then?

You said that our laws are based on the ten commandments and that our laws are based on religion, but obviously the ten commandments came well after there was established law in the land. The Code of Hammurabi, the first written law, came in 2500 BC, and the Ten Commandments came between 1441 and 1533 BC.

The very fact that we have guilt as a basic human emotion is evidence that religion did not create morality.

I just threw in the 10 commandments because that's what a lot of our laws are based on today, but forget about that. I'm not arguing that religion gives us morality. I'm arguing simply that a concept of God (any concept, even the caveman's concept) does and that a true Atheist as they have explained themselves to me cannot have morality unless they want to acknowledge some form of higher power or at least the conditioning from those who believe in one (or them or it or what have you).

I'm not discussing this from a Christian p.o.v. but from a Theistic p.o.v. I'm trying to keep it as simple as possible.

And our laws today are kind of sort of based on like the 10 commandments :gasp:?

Which was based on something else which was based on something else etc. etc.

If no one in any given society believed in a higher power, what do you think would happen?

seriously.

Do you think the world would be thrown into chaos, or do you think society would lay down laws and customs similar to those that stand today?

I lay money on the later.

a true Atheist as they have explained themselves to me cannot have morality unless they want to acknowledge some form of higher power or at least the conditioning from those who believe in one

why not?

Let's say a higher power exists .... and tells us 'You have to do these things, but not these things.'

How is that different from your parents saying 'Do these things, but not these things.'?

Is it not possible (and face it, it's probable) that in societies formative years, it was said 'hey, lets not kill each other .... it's really becoming a downer and it's not doing us any favors'

Is it that big of a stretch that society came (or would come) to these terms without the fear of some higher power completely boning them in the afterlife?

Which religion(s) have beliefs that make absolutely no sense, make you mad, or just get under your skin for one reason or another?

Damn Methodists.....:coffee:

Which was based on something else which was based on something else etc. etc.

If no one in any given society believed in a higher power, what do you think would happen?

seriously.

Do you think the world would be thrown into chaos, or do you think society would lay down laws and customs similar to those that stand today?

I lay money on the later.

I had to really think about this and my first thought was to very early cultures; however, in the vestiges of our very early cultures there is evidence of their worship of something (pantheistic, whatever, it doesn't matter it's something beyond themselves and that's the point). Then my mind went to communism but even so the atheistic state could not stamp out faith in a higher power and even allowed state sanctioned churches (apparently a necessary opiate for the masses, ha!) and even by the time of communism the world was already influenced by theism anyway. So, yeah I'm kind of thinking that without it there would be chaos or close to it.

why not?

Let's say a higher power exists .... and tells us 'You have to do these things, but not these things.'

How is that different from your parents saying 'Do these things, but not these things.'?

Since you're asking me I'm going to tell you because that higher power is from where things such as love exists and I have yet to see that concepts such as love, beauty, goodness and the like evolved. You didn't answer my question earlier about where you believe such a thing as love comes from, you glossed over it.

Is it not possible (and face it, it's probable) that in societies formative years, it was said 'hey, lets not kill each other .... it's really becoming a downer and it's not doing us any favors'

Possible but not probable and that only because it's called survival not morality. Animals do that Xaquin. My cats don't pass up the field mouse for their dinner out of kindness or heck even for the endorphin rush they may get for doing so. They stalk it, mercilessly toy with it, and then brutally bite it's head off and eat it. They don't know jack about God, they don't love me, they just come to me because I feed them and scratch them and don't think they won't crap on the floor if I forget to change the litter box.

I have a feeling in your atheistic dream world you'd be fighting for your survival more than you think because the tribe in the town over just may be fitter than yours and nobody would have a conscience (why should they there is NOBODY to answer to). Xaquin, is it really so hard to admit that even if you don't believe in God that any morals you have are influenced or conditioned by those over the mellinia who have or do believe in a higher power? This whole atheism thing is pretty new in the history of mankind don't ya think?

Is it that big of a stretch that society came (or would come) to these terms without the fear of some higher power completely boning them in the afterlife?

Yes, it's a big stretch. As for "fear" and "boning", uh yeah, I have an answer for that too but I'm gonna let it slide. I'm tired and I don't want mAlice to wig out if I mention a soul. :lol:

I don't have a problem with religions at all, I have a problem with religious extremists of all types. Atheists, that means you too.

I also happen to have a problem with drastic misinformation. Allow me to correct a few things:

Atheists do not believe themselves to be and worship themselves as gods - that's LaVey Satanism. The idea behind that is that gods are merely inventions of man, and therefore worship of man is more direct and logical, preferably oneself. They allow personal indulgence so long as it does not hurt others.

Jehovah's Witnesses do drink alcohol, but they do not promote overindulgence, as basically any religion does. The big points for them are that they do not believe in blood transfusions, holidays, religious statues, or voting.

I would also like to point out last of all that lack of evidence does not prove nonexistence - there's really no way to disprove God, but there's no way to prove him either. That aside you really won't change anybody's mind in the long run - that takes a personal revelation. Argument over petty things as such is irrelevant. And have some respect for people - calling one's deep personal belief a "fairy tale" or their sacred book a "work of fiction" is immature, obnoxious and childish.

As for itsbob, it's widely acknowledge by secular scholars EVERYWHERE that there are MANY factual events depicted in the Bible that are corroborated by other period-specific documents. Even those with minimalist views regarding biblical historicity submit that events after a certain date are pretty spot-on. You can't write it off as a work of fiction because you don't necessarily agree with what it says. The major difference as well between Jehovah's Witnesses and other forms of Christianity is that they decided to modernize their translation and cross-reference it with newly-discovered documents rather than continue to use a hundreds-years-old King James translation. Pull your head out of your ass.

Morals also, believe it or not, can be exclusive from one's religion. Atheists have morals too, and there certainly are self-proclaimed Christians that totally lack morals. Perhaps history's most famous example is that of Father Grigori Rasputin, the drunkard, womanizing "holy man" attached to the last Czarina of Russia. Don't judge a religion on the basis of its members.

And for the record I'm deist.

Could you please post more often?

for reals

The primary difference, of course, being that Stephen King is one man and that the Bible was written by many people, all of whom somewhat kept to reasonably the same continuity that's also dictated elsewhere. Although we might qualify Stephen King's work as a whole as fiction, if it does indeed contain true events then they themselves are true. The fictional part of it does not unconditionally invalidate the rest of the work - that's absolutely foolish. Don't try to twist my words around.

I stand by what I said before - unless you can ABSOLUTELY PROVE OTHERWISE that anything in the Bible did not happen, you have no case. Period. You can disagree with it all you want and cite implausibility, but the honest truth is that nobody truly knows, so we're all just as right as one another. Get off your high horse.

I might also add that it is entirely plausible that man lived longer years ago, given that genetic impurities that started out as mutations have now spread throughout the entire human race, not to mention that our atmosphere and planetary conditions have certainly changed in the past couple millenia.


So you agree that people lived into their 600's?? I don't care what you say about environment, living conditions.. NOT a chance. Your skin, let alone the rest of your organs, would not survive that long..

Noah fit two of EVERY animal on the Earth into a single ship? With food and fresh water, and an automated waste disposal system?

The earth is only 6000 years old?

And if both those are true, where are the bones of the BILLIONS of people that died in the flood? Where's the 'flood sedimentary level' at?

Dinosaurs and man walked the earth together?

And many MEN wrote the bible?? How many? Where's the list of names?

Does many = 1, >1.. >10?

You say a fictional

And how many years AFTER most of the "facts" was it written? it definitely wasn't a diary or a journal. ANd what difference does it make if it was ONE person or 100 people that wrote a piece of fiction?

Although we might qualify Stephen King's work as a whole as fiction, if it does indeed contain true events then they themselves are true. The fictional part of it does not unconditionally invalidate the rest of the work - that's absolutely foolish.

So you agree with me, we just have to determine where the line is between fact and fiction within the Bible.

I stand by what I said before - unless you can ABSOLUTELY PROVE OTHERWISE that anything in the Bible did not happen, you have no case. Period.

Can you ABSOLUTELY PROVE that EVERYthing in the Bible happened, without referring back to the bible? If not than by your logic you have no case, and the entire book is a sham, a fraud, and the biggest scam ever put upon humanity.

It appears that we have three candidates with a clear lead over the rest of the field, but no convincing winner. I think we need to start another poll with just those three, and only let people vote for one. Hopefully, in that way, we can come to a consensus on whom we need to persecute.

I still believe, prior to the flood of DaVinci Code conspiracies, that the Bible is bollocks because it's derogatory to women in general and saying that Jesus was a white man(as portrayed by the church) is about as probable as saying that Eve was created from Adam's rib.

It's a nice story with some historical significance. The church is in the business of perpetuating itself, not your spirit. Period.

Why is it that people will so easily defend their faith in something that's just not possible? The Bible has some very good things in it. The Ten Commandments for instance, are a very simple set of rules that I believe everyone should try to live by. The rest, is misleading, convoluted crap. It's a book, with no awe inspiring power as far as I can tell. Wanna be awe-struck?? Bring a living thing in to this world by your own hand, look at the sky, admire the complexity of the human hand. That's powerful.

When did science prove God doesn't exist?

Back in the Roman times people believed that the Moon and the Sun were God. Science has proven this to be wrong.

Just like science will eventually prove that the current religious beliefs of man are wrong. As technology grows religion will change to claim God is responsible for whatever science has yet to explain.

Take scientolagy a lot of its beliefs are based on Aliens and how they planted life on earth. I think this will grow greatly as a religion. It will take a lot longer to disprove the beliefs of scientolagy than any other religion.

Granted scientolagy is just a made up religion that is relativly new. 500 years from now it may be looked at entirely differently.

I just spoke to my very Catholic friend and we dicussed something called Vatican Law, from the Illuminata. She says that Wiccans go to Heaven because there are not X amount of slots in heaven and that as long as you are unaware of Jesus(meaning not Catholic) and that you have lived a good life, you're in.

This was directly from her Father down in the 7th.

I just thought that was worth tossing in there:lol: Basically, you are good for being good, but not nessecarliy Christian. Common sense indicates that if you do wrong, you go to Hell if you don't vindicate yourself before you die. Half the posts in this thread are hypocritical, hence you are a bad Catholics. Perhaps I'll see you when I get there.


Done.

I thought God's name was Jehovah, and his son's name was Jesus... and that in Christianity you're not supposed to worship or pray to Jesus, but to Jehovah; God. That's what I was taught as a child. Am I wrong?

I still believe, prior to the flood of DaVinci Code conspiracies, that the Bible is bollocks because it's derogatory to women in general and saying that Jesus was a white man(as portrayed by the church) is about as probable as saying that Eve was created from Adam's rib.

It's a nice story with some historical significance. The church is in the business of perpetuating itself, not your spirit. Period.

Why is it that people will so easily defend their faith in something that's just not possible? The Bible has some very good things in it. The Ten Commandments for instance, are a very simple set of rules that I believe everyone should try to live by. The rest, is misleading, convoluted crap. It's a book, with no awe inspiring power as far as I can tell. Wanna be awe-struck?? Bring a living thing in to this world by your own hand, look at the sky, admire the complexity of the human hand. That's powerful.

:yeahthat:

:huggy:

But in Latin .... Jehovah schtats with an 'I'

edit: damn, too late!

I thought God's name was Jehovah, and his son's name was Jesus... and that in Christianity you're not supposed to worship or pray to Jesus, but to Jehovah; God. That's what I was taught as a child. Am I wrong?

Jehovah is a modern version of the name of god. Same thing with Yahweh. It's a name, based on the four letters used in the bible. At some point, someone decided it wasn't proper to say his name, even though it had been spelled out in the bible. That's why when you read the bible it says "god" or "lord", instead of his name.

Some religions teach that you should pray "through" Mary or Jesus, others teach that you have a direct line of communication with god.

How to pray

How To Pray To God (http://www.allaboutprayer.org/how-to-pray-to-god-faq.htm)

god’s name

Jehovah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah)

Names of God in Judaism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_God_in_Judaism)

YHWH Tzevaot/Sabaoth
The name YHWH and the title Elohim frequently occur with the word tzevaot or sabaoth ("hosts" or "armies", Hebrew: צבאות) as YHWH Elohe Tzevaot ("YHWH God of Hosts"), Elohe Tzevaot ("God of Hosts"), Adonai YHWH Tzevaot ("Lord YHWH of Hosts") or, most frequently, YHWH Tzevaot ("YHWH of Hosts"). This name is traditionally transliterated in Latin as Sabaoth, a form that will be more familiar to many English readers, as it was used in the King James Version of the Bible.
This compound divine name occurs chiefly in the prophetic literature and does not appear at all in the Pentateuch, Joshua or Judges. The original meaning of tzevaot may be found in 1 Samuel 17:45, where it is interpreted as denoting "the God of the armies of Israel". The word, apart from this special use, always means armies or hosts of men, as, for example, in Exodus 6:26, 7:4, 12:41, while the singular is used to designate the heavenly host.
The Latin spelling Sabaoth combined with the large, golden vine motif over the door on the Herodian Temple (built by the Idumean Herod the Great) led to identification by Romans with the god Sabazius.

The name Sabaoth is also associated with a demi-god in the gnostic Nag Hammadi Text; he is the son of Yaltabaoth.

Waiting Waiting

damn i watch to many movies :killingme

=)

hehe

Done.

Good because your ignorance is extraordinary. I don't recall a Catholic in this thread ever saying you were going to hell. Get the chip off your shoulder and go stand in the corner with itsbob. :buttkick:

Good because your ignorance is extraordinary. I don't recall a Catholic in this thread ever saying you were going to hell. Get the chip off your shoulder and go stand in the corner with itsbob. :buttkick:

They don't have to -say- it

they wrote it down in little pamphlets and one largish book.

They don't have to -say- it

they wrote it down in little pamphlets and one largish book.


The Baptists and Catholics have been trashing each other in tracts for ages. You're not alone. I've seen it, too.

It's really unfortunate to see you getting rude about this, but I'd like to explain my (Atheist) view of these things, since they seem to have gotten lost in the commotion a few times, understandably.

And yeah, let's talk about these people because they count!

Let's go back to cavemen.

Caveman Xaquin finds a woman and thinks she's beautiful, far more than that hag in the cave next door, ug ug this is beauty! From where this concept of beauty?

Caveman Xaquin finds that his beautiful woman gives him little peeps, ug ug peeps good! From where this concept of good?

Caveman Xaquin finds that he has these heart felt feelings for his woman and his peeps, ug ug this is love! From where this concept love?

Caveman Xaquin is sure that the sun is necessary for life, even though the retard in the cave next door says it's the moon, ug ug this is truth! From where this concept of truth?

Silly example I know but you get the point, yes? Truth, goodness, beauty, love - until someone can prove these things like this have evolved then mankind will continue to believe in a Higher Power.

Let's start with love: Oxytocin, plain and simple. Also known as the "Cuddle Hormone"

Beauty: Another part of evolution, from my perspective. Peacocks for example are attracted to the males with fuller plumes that have richer colors because it denotes health, strength, and therefore healthier children and hopefully the continuation of their species. This was actually an experiment followed out in a documentary recently aired on either the Discovery Channel or National Geographic, can't remember which. It was around the time they were doing studies on reverse evolution in chickens.

Good: A descriptor that the human race has established along with language. In the way you use it, it's good when children are born because it helps in the continuation of evolution.

Truth: a verified or indisputable fact, proposition, principle, or the like: mathematical truths.* 1+1=2.

*truth definition | Dictionary.com (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/truth)

Can you ABSOLUTELY PROVE that EVERYthing in the Bible happened, without referring back to the bible? If not than by your logic you have no case, and the entire book is a sham, a fraud, and the biggest scam ever put upon humanity.

God forgive him..

God forgive him..

heh

forgive him for disbelieving the flawed thing used by numerous people to persecute different people through the course of history because they don't adhere to rules doled out from an invisible god that won't talk to you or help you out in any way?

lawl

heh

forgive him for disbelieving the flawed thing used by numerous people to persecute different people through the course of history because they don't adhere to rules doled out from an invisible god that won't talk to you or help you out in any way?

lawl

:roflmao:

So few run-on sentences fail to irritate me. Thank you, Xaq.

R, you're the second biggest phony on this forum... The first hasn't even shown her face in this thread.. Choke on a ball gag while fornicating you hypocrite. Quit hiding behind a religion to exonerate yourself for being a sleeze, a gossip, a liar, a fornicator an adulterer and a worshipper of false God's... According to Vatican Law, you're the one going to Hell because you are still shouting from the rooftops that you are golden and you are right. That's very un-Christian.


I don't even believe in YOUR Hell, and I'm not ignorant of the crap you're spewing. You sound to me like someone who has recently gone back to the church looking for something to hold on to. Knowing that you are happy to give yourself over to something and recieve nothing in return, it's not even surprising that you're here now, defending yourself.

At least one other person who knows you in this forum agrees with me that your posts here sound like Copy&Paste, because in person, you're a simpering idiot.


I'll happily stand in the opposite corner with Bob. He's a very smart man with a good heart.. I can only hope that he feels half as positively about me.

:roflmao:

So few run-on sentences fail to irritate me. Thank you, Xaq.

I was going to keep going, but then I had trouble getting through it lol

I still believe, prior to the flood of DaVinci Code conspiracies, that the Bible is bollocks because it's derogatory to women in general and saying that Jesus was a white man(as portrayed by the church)

How so?

R, you're the second biggest phony on this forum... The first hasn't even shown her face in this thread.. Choke on a ball gag while fornicating you hypocrite. Quit hiding behind a religion to exonerate yourself for being a sleeze, a gossip, a liar, a fornicator an adulterer and a worshipper of false God's... According to Vatican Law, you're the one going to Hell because you are still shouting from the rooftops that you are golden and you are right. That's very un-Christian.


I don't even believe in YOUR Hell, and I'm not ignorant of the crap you're spewing. You sound to me like someone who has recently gone back to the church looking for something to hold on to. Knowing that you are happy to give yourself over to something and recieve nothing in return, it's not even surprising that you're here now, defending yourself.

At least one other person who knows you in this forum agrees with me that your posts here sound like Copy&Paste, because in person, you're a simpering idiot.


I'll happily stand in the opposite corner with Bob. He's a very smart man with a good heart.. I can only hope that he feels half as positively about me.


:lmao: Who are you berating?

How so?

If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off (1 Cor. 11:6)

As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches (1 Cor. 14:34)

Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner (1 Peter 3:7)

etc. etc.

:lmao: Who are you berating?

'Radiant'1

:lmao: Who are you berating?

I believe she was describing Radiant1.

So you agree that people lived into their 600's?? I don't care what you say about environment, living conditions.. NOT a chance. Your skin, let alone the rest of your organs, would not survive that long..

That's because we are borne from a different genetic pool, one more dilute than that which existed years and years ago. I already said that. It's entirely possible that the cells in a person's body of that era were more aptly equipped to regenerate. I'm not saying I absolutely believe it but I wouldn't doubt it.

That seems to be a rather essential component you are missing in this entire debate - moderation. One's beliefs are not binary values - they can be more than two polar opposites.


Noah fit two of EVERY animal on the Earth into a single ship? With food and fresh water, and an automated waste disposal system?


Who is to say that there were fewer species of animals back in that time period and that newer ones were not created by genetic mutation, cross-breeding, and so forth?


The earth is only 6000 years old?


Depending upon which translation you use, from my understanding, this can change. Some more modern translations indicate that the "seven days" spoken of in Genesis is not necessarily meant to be taken literally; it is an ambiguous unit of time. What if humans have only existed for 6000 years? It is widely accepted by scientists that humanity has only been in existence for a comparatively short time as opposed to the rest of the world.



And if both those are true, where are the bones of the BILLIONS of people that died in the flood? Where's the 'flood sedimentary level' at?

Dinosaurs and man walked the earth together?


I'll have to research those - I'll get back to you (no sarcasm).


And many MEN wrote the bible?? How many? Where's the list of names?

Does many = 1, >1.. >10?


More than ten. Although authorship is vague for about forty of the books the other ones scholars are fairly certain of, and some of the others they have definite implications as to who wrote what... Who were the authors of the books of the Bible? (http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-authors.html)


And how many years AFTER most of the "facts" was it written? it definitely wasn't a diary or a journal. ANd what difference does it make if it was ONE person or 100 people that wrote a piece of fiction?


Since you mentioned Stephen King earlier, I take it you're a fan of fiction in general. I'm sure you're familiar with the fact taht continuity becomes harder and harder to maintain the more people are involved with a project... It's become easier thanks to better record keeping, but back in those days it was still fairly difficult, and the fact that multiple authors corroborated each other in addition to archeological finds is proof enough for me that there is at least something true in the Bible.


So you agree with me, we just have to determine where the line is between fact and fiction within the Bible.

If there is one. Like I keep saying there's no real way to prove many things either way so it's a personal decision. I might also add that Stephen King expressly states that his works are fictional, so the "line" is far easier to arrive at, making for a rather poor comparison between the Bible and a modern thriller novel.


Can you ABSOLUTELY PROVE that EVERYthing in the Bible happened, without referring back to the bible? If not than by your logic you have no case, and the entire book is a sham, a fraud, and the biggest scam ever put upon humanity.

No, I cannot. See above for my argument that refutes this - just because not EVERYTHING is one hundred percent verifiably true does not mean that everything contained therein is false, and yet you continue to shamelessly parade around proclaiming superiority as such. Assuming that somehow everybody thought in extreme terms such as you do, and you basically won this argument, I would still have zero respect for you because we live in polite society, the fabric of which is manners.

Anybody that calls somebody's deep personal beliefs a fairy tale and equates it to children's stories has no manners, period. I'm being kind of presumptuous here, but I'd like to see how many friends you'd have if you ran into a crowded church and told each and every person there that they are living a lie because you said so. How do you think that'd go over? I'm sure your atheist buddies would find it laughable, but that doesn't change the fact that it's downright wrong.

**EDIT: I need to re-address one of your points citing your use of 'my' logic. What you are stipulating is not my logic at all. My logic is that you cannot prove something unless you can provide sufficient evidence that beyond a doubt other possibilities are false. If you can tell me precisely where the Earth came from, then God doesn't exist. Unfortunately, we don't really know, so at this point anything's up in the air. You cannot prove that everything in the Bible is false, therefore the Bible itself is not fictional. You also cannot prove that everything in the Bible is true, so it's not infallibly true either. It's anybody's best guess. Once again, I implore you to stop contorting what others say to further your own sad point.

heh

forgive him for disbelieving the flawed thing used by numerous people to persecute different people through the course of history because they don't adhere to rules doled out from an invisible god that won't talk to you or help you out in any way?

lawlHoly crap (pardon the pun) I think this is the 2nd thing we agree on. :lmao:

How so?

Are women so lacking in value that they are reduced to cattle and viewed as immoral, ignorant possessions?

Where's the equality of the sexes in the Bible? I'm not saying that men and women are exactly equal, but two equal parts of a whole. That is something absent from the Bible as far as I can tell.

I just spoke to my very Catholic friend and we dicussed something called Vatican Law, from the Illuminata. She says that Wiccans go to Heaven because there are not X amount of slots in heaven and that as long as you are unaware of Jesus(meaning not Catholic) and that you have lived a good life, you're in.

This was directly from her Father down in the 7th.

I just thought that was worth tossing in there:lol: Basically, you are good for being good, but not nessecarliy Christian. Common sense indicates that if you do wrong, you go to Hell if you don't vindicate yourself before you die. Half the posts in this thread are hypocritical, hence you are a bad Catholics. Perhaps I'll see you when I get there.


Done.

NOT DONE (sorry but not even close).
The bible doesn't say that at all.
John Chapter 3. Jesus says "....you MUST be born of the water and of the spirit to see the kingdom of God...."
Act 2:38 is the plan of salvation...(read it) as a matter of fact read the entire chapter...Check out who was there....(even Mary)
People don't want to believe that a loving God will send folks to HELL even if they are 'good' people. When you are a sinner (a person that falls short) short of what? His plan/his idea for our salvation...
Don't rely on what 'others' tell you, read it for yourself.
When God judges on judgment day he is going to judge us ALL by what is in the bible and if we followed the works of the Bible, NOT by what someone else told us what we need to do.
WE read ANY AND EVERYTHING else, take time out to read that.

That's because we are borne from a different genetic pool,

so god created different types of human?

When God judges on judgment day he is going to judge us ALL by what is in the bible and if we followed the works of the Bible,

which version?

I thought God's name was Jehovah, and his son's name was Jesus... and that in Christianity you're not supposed to worship or pray to Jesus, but to Jehovah; God. That's what I was taught as a child. Am I wrong?

Blue Letter Bible - Study Tools (http://www.blueletterbible.org/study/misc/name_god.cfm) ...the meaning of Jehovah.
1 Timothy 3:16: And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Waiting Waiting

damn i watch to many movies :killingme

LOL...

John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

kids say the darndest things