Cowboy responded:

Again, comparing living in the Garden to living here on Earth and not to animals. The animals have nothing to do with this, weather their child birth is painful or not is irrelevant.

And again, you're the one who apparently has the wrong creation story. I'm talking about the biblical story of creation where God created the Earth and saw that it was GOOD.

A diseased dog-eat-dog world would not be "Good".

So you're grasping at straws that simply aren't in the biblical story. Your excuses don't have anything to do with the biblical fables of God.


The TRUTH is that the entire New Testament is all nothing more than hearsay rumors. Rumors that no living person today can claim to know are anymore more than superstitious exaggerations.


Cowboy responded:

Any and all information from the past can be seen that way years on down the road. All the history we have in our books may very well just be propaganda to pain this person(s) out to be the way they wanted to tell the story of that specific thing in history. I'll use your way of thinking here, how would you know if history is true or not, you weren't there?

Cowboy, we've already tried to explain this to you a billion times.

It's called independent evidence. For many historical events there is an overwhelming abundance of independent evidence and eyewitness accounts.

Moreover, any so-called "history" that is being taught that cannot be supported by overwhelming independent evidence should not be taught as "history".

Much of what is taught as "history" probably is nothing more than speculation based on fragmented information and guesses.



The sun coming up tomorrow is only faith based if it's important to you that it comes up. Some people realize that there may come a day when it won't come up for whatever reason. Or perhaps if it does come up it might be extra larger and super hot and we'll be wishing it didn't come up on that particular day.

Besides no one is threatening to cast you into a state of everlasting punishment if you don't have faith that the sun will come up tomorrow. So who cares whether you have faith that the sun will come up? It either will, or it won't. Period.

Your "faith" in the matter is totally irrelevant.



Well you talk about the Christian faith having no merit for it is purely faith based. Well you're rejection of this is purely on an opinion but the statements above shows you don't and aren't looking for any factual evidence of anything. Your mind is made up and to you, you know for sure it's wrong. So what is greater? Faith based? Or opinionated based?


Faith and opinion are precisely the same thing Cowboy.

So in truth you could say that it's an opinion-based religion.

That would work just as well.

But hey if you prefer to believe that you were the reason your creator had to have his son crucified to pay for you hateful rebellious attitude toward God, then be my guest.

I never felt that way about my creator so I see no reason to believe such obvious lies. Why should I believe such outrageous lies that are being made about me personally when I already know full well that they clearly aren't true?

That would be like you charging me with murder. I know I haven't committed murder so why should I buy into your clearly false accusations?






Clearly I explained it incorrectly. Heaven and Earth was at one point and time one with one another. The paradise of the Garden of Eden. Adam/Eve did some disobedient things, so God hid the heavens from the Earth. This division between the two created an entirely new creation of what we now call the Earth.



Now you're taking things out of context. When God seen it was good, it was the paradise on Earth. Disease free Garden of Eden. The diseases were introduced to the Earth after the seperation of Heaven and Earth and punishment for our disobedience. We didn't deserve to live in a paradise cause of our disobdience and is why God has given us all a second chance to prove we do deserve the paradise.



Indipendant evidence is still nevertheless hearsay. Anything and everything is hearsay less one witnessed it first hand or is willing to give it credit to being true.




First off, the two different things you're speaking of here have absolutely nothing to do with one another. It is faith based that the sun will come up tomorrow for it is unknown, unseen, before it happens. And most usually it is important to people that the sun comes up the next day. If it wasn't, they wouldn't make plans for the next day and thereafter. No one is threatening anyone any ways. Would you rather be enlightened of the response to certain actions? Or left in the dark? So is the government "threatening" everybody when they tell you that if you speed you'll get a ticket? Or are they just telling you so that you know not to do that? Where is the line between enlightenment and threats?

no, anything and everything is not in the least faith-based. that i expect the sun will come up tommorow is not based on faith at all. in reality it just might not come up. most astrophysicists consider that the sun will morph into a red giant phase in another five billion years or so and not only will the sun not rise on the eastern horison there will be no eastern horizon as the earth will have been obliterated. but i consider it plausible to assume that if the earth has been rotating on it's axis as it has for billions of years now at least one more sunrise is highly likely. that doesn't take faith. takes just a little basic knowledge of astrophysics.

the only concepts that are based on faith are those such as christianity and other religions who's practitioners such as you say yourselves is faith based. i'm told often by christians that i can never understand the concepts of the bible unless i put faith in god or something along those lines. i need no faith whatsoever to grasp a basic understanding of astrophyics or evolutionary biology or the very simple physics of riding a bicycle. i suppose in my younger days i did put some faith and trust in my father INITIALLY when he said, 'you can do this, john' and after a scraped knee or two with much trial and error i finally came to a point where i was able to ride my bike with confidence that i would not scrape my knee each time. so i no longer rely on faith but now rely on my own bicycle riding skills and experience just as i now have confidence that the sun will rise tomorrow.

but i've no confidence that god exists because i cannot gain the experience with god that i've gained over more than a half century watching the sun come up and riding a bicycle. to believe there is a god, i'd have to do what you and other christians do and have faith. in reality, god is unbelievable without faith, no? i think this is so because at the same time i had faith in my father when he told me that i would be able to master riding a bicycle i had faith and trust in him when he told me all about god and took me to church each sunday where others echoed his sentiments. but with trial and error and years of study in the various sciences i've not been able to gain the confidence in god as nobody can give me any tools for learning such as my dad gave me a new bike or such visual displays as a sunrise. nobody seems to be able to convince this 'all powerful' god to do something as simple as show up.

the man is to love his wife as jesus loves the church

the church didnt lead Jesus however, nor did it feel responsible FOR him, rather responsible TO him

this is the most loving relationship I can think of and not one I have an issue with modeling my 'marriage' after

the man, like jesus, has/had ALOT of responsibility FOR caring for and protecting the family which made/makes perfect sense that he was considered the head

Tkitoff,


Last night I was watching a special on television about the myth of the minotaur at Crete.

THE MINOTAUROS (or Minotaur) was a bull-headed monster born to Queen Pasiphae of Krete after she had coupled with a bull.

The creature resided in the twisting maze of the labyrinth, where he was offfered a regular sacrifice of youths and maids to satisfy his cannibalistic hunger. He was eventually destroyed by the hero Theseus.

Evidence of a labyrinth type castle and the remains of hundreds of murdered children would seem to back up the myth of the Minotaur.

But does that make the story a true story? Did Queen Pasiphae mate with a bull and have a monster child?

So how is the Bible historically substantiated? Please give a few examples.

Tkitoff:



"We?" Oh were you there?

No, it wasn't "we." It was them. And I believe the calendar has been changed a few times even since then.



The story of Abraham, Moses, Joshua, the Exodus, the Battle of Jericho, I believe, are all adaptations of other events (plagiarisms)but they are fiction in my opinion.

The new Testament, all fiction. The story of Jesus is a plagiarized myth taken from many other mythical stories of a savior who was crucified. (listed in an earlier post in this thread.)

The story of the crucifiction was a "passion play" acted on many stages back then until they decided to use it in the new testament, in my opinion.

There would be no need to be "saved" from a God who isn't making threats Cowboy.

Also there's no comparison between a government making laws and a religion that claims that people need to be "saved" from a mean nasty God who would condemn them if they merely don't believe in their religion.

That would be like the government condemning people to life imprisonment just for refusing to believe in the traffic laws, even if they don't even drive!

Christianity is a religion that threatens everyone who refuses to buy into it.

It has nothing to do with any God or his "laws". All it has to do with is religious bigotry.

It makes absolutely no sense for a God to make it a "LAW" that a person must believe in him or else be PUNISHED.

That's about as ignorant as ignorance can get Cowboy.

This clearly has to be a man-made made religion that tries to pressure people into worshiping it by threatening them that God will be mean to them if they refuse to worship the religion.

That kind of ignorance can only have come from mortal men Cowboy.

Why you keep supporting the idea that we should believe that our creator could be that ignorant is beyond me.

As a Christian woman it wouldn't be up to you to "model" your marriage at all. It would be up to your husband to "model" the marriage however he sees fit.

About the only way that you could have any say in the matter at all is to choose a man who would model the marriage in accordance with how you feel it should be modeled (or simply refuse to marry that man).

However, that doesn't go along with what was taught in the Old Testament anyway. In the Old Testament the women seldom had any say in who they would marry.

Clearly the Christians have left that asinine notion in the dust quick enough.

Like I say, if we saw a culture today acting like the ancient Hebrews of the Bible we'd probably refer to them as the Taliban and refute their extreme male-chauvinistic ways.

What modern day people who call themselves "Christians" actually do has very little to do with the Bible. I doubt that any "Christians" alive today actually follow the teachings of the Bible. They just use Jesus as an excuse to ignore what they don't want to hear (like male-chauvinism) and then hypocritically use Jesus again to support bigotry against same-gender relationships, etc.

It's just a Salad-Bar religion anymore. Use Jesus to condone all the good things that you'd like to be true, and then turn around and used Jesus to condemn everything that you'd like to be prejudiced against using God as an excuse.

You wouldn't be in a position to "model" a marriage if you were living back in the biblical days. You'd just have to accept whatever husband you were given to and OBEY him whilst keeping you mouth shut.

The FREEDOMS you have today come from the country you live in. Not from Christianity.

as a christian woman, its my responsibility to model my life after what I know/feel is Gods design


and its the christians husbands job not to 'model it how he wants' but to also model his role as husband ACCORDING to Gods design

I dont know what in the bible said women didnt have any choice in their partner or where the bible supports 'male chauvanism'


,,, I guess its , as usual, how one personally receives what is written and what they learn from it,,,,

but I do revere the relationship between christ and the church, much the same way I believe and want my 'marriage' to be one of reverence,,,

That's an interesting thought right there.

Can we explore that a bit deeper?

~~~~

To begin with I would like to ask, Is there anything that you would personally disagree with from the way that you "know/feel" would be God's will or desire of how you should behave?

If so, then on what points to you disagree with God?

If not, then how is "God's will" any different from your own personal will of what you'd like for life to be like?

this is like asking when I stopped beating my husband

it offers only two options which are not truly representative of my feeling


I dont disagree with God, I trust his knowledge and authority and I dont feel as if he guides me into anything that is 'wrong' or 'unhealthy' for me

however

that has nothing to do with how I would 'like' my life to be, because like my own children, there are things they LIKE in the short term that I happen to know will be to their detriment in the long run

so there are things that are in my will to do because of their TEMPORARY or IMMEDIATE result, but that I resist the will to do because of my trust in Gods knowledge or their Long term and permanent results

I think an atheist could give the same general philosophy without any need to refer to any God.

Kind of like over indulging in foods that taste good but a person knows is not going to be good for their health in the long haul.

A person doesn't need to have a God concept to recognize those kinds of things.

The bottom lines is that if you agree with everything that you attribute to a "God", then all you are truly doing is taking your own personal highest moral values and assigning them to a God.

Like I say, atheists can do the same thing. They just recognize that their highest good actually comes from common sense and their own knowledge of the potential consequences of various actions and behaviors.

In fact, I personally feel that a person would be in a poor way indeed if they felt that they needed some external entity to guide them to what is best for them.

The truth of the matter is that many people who claim to feel that way make just at many poor judgments as everyone else. Like marrying the wrong person, etc., etc., etc.

So it's really hard to see where they had gained anything in thinking that some higher "God" was guiding them.

In fact, they might have been better off had they taken responsibility for their own choices instead of being deluded into thinking that some other entity is 'guiding' them around.

Like I say, I see a lot of Christians who have had failed marriages and all sorts of things, yet they still claim that God is "guiding" them.

Guiding them where?

Either that, or they aren't following his guidance very well.

And actually Abra, their only "guidance" from god is old men fables written in a book. Not a very trustworthy source, the atheist is better off.

Still takes faith, for you do not know 100% without a doubt the sun will rise tomorrow. You have absolutely no way of knowing it that for sure. You can feel that for sure it will, but you could never know exactly for sure without a doubt it will. Thus where the faith plays it's place.

If you deny Jesus on this Earth during your life, why should Jesus not do the same to that whom denied him here? Why should Jesus accept this person into the kingdom when this person wouldn't accept Jesus into their heart? Why can one do it and it's ok, but isn't so ok if the other does it?

And it's not believe in me or be punished lol. There is no "punishment" for anything like that. Eternal life is a GIFT. It's not automatically given but it can be taken away as a punishment, no eternal life is a gift earned through our faith, obedience, and most of all love.

we are all human (regardless of faith) and we all have a compass of right and wrong although it is not infallible

agreeing with what is written does not correlate to assigning ones beliefs to the book,, it only means ones values are in agreement with a book

I can find things in these threads that I agree with, but that doesnt mean I am therefore attributing my opinion to what someone else wrote, it only means I am in agreement with what is written, that it makes sense to me

just like science makes sense to you

I dont have any issue with 'atheists' ,, as I said these labels are usually self assigned and dont truly cover a persons heart or relationship with God

only God knows that for sure

I have never stated that I have any need or ability that is any different than an atheist or anyone else on this earth,, I just use a resource that not everyone does as a form of 'guidance'

just like a health nut might refer regularly to certain 'texts' explaining what healthy eating is until it becomes a habit to them,,and then they might continue to refresh their knowledge by returning to those texts

so , we agree,

A person doesn't need to have a God concept to recognize those kinds of things.

which is exactly why I dont understand the all too common assumption that bigotry or any other concepts or values are somehow explicitly tied to someones 'religion',,,,as opposed to it being things people already RECOGNIZE and choose to attribute to or blame on religion

yes, i agree, i don't know the sun will rise. i never said i know it will or believe it will. i said i expet that it will rise. i expect it because i've experienced it for sixty two years, studied some basic astrophysics and in so doing i think it's highly plausible that the sun will rise at least one more day. if i were to say that i know the sun will rise or i believe the sun will rise then yes, i would have to rely on faith. but i don't know it will rise nor do i believe it will rise. hell, as an agnostic i don't know or believe anything other than my own experience. i've no faith that anything exists outside of my experiences. i find many things plausible but i cannot know anything absolutely.

in this we have much in common, mh. i learned in my youth learned about how jesus would expect me to live my life and i haven't lost sight of that as i've aged. all that's really changed in my life model is that i no longer believe that he was the son of god, that his mother was a virgin or that god even exists. other than that i think jesus would be proud of how i've lived my life.

Faith isn't secluded to God. Faith is just thoughts and hopes of something happening. Regardless if it involves God or not. So you have no thought of anything outside your word? For you said you have no faith that anything exists outside of your experiences. Not ment as an insult, just my take on it, but that seems a little selfish, a little self centred. That shows no care for the world as a whole. Besides all that, again faith is merely your hopes, desires, wishes, thoughts. It isn't secluded to being with God. If you have no faith of tomorrow coming, I'm assuming you only live for today? If you only live for today, how are you going to make tomorrow better then it was today?

i don't deny jesus was on this earth. so why would jesus not accept me into 'the kingdom' if in fact such a thing exists? btw, my heart is a four chambered, electromuscular pump that supplies hydraulic pressure to my circulatory system. jesus simply cannot fit in there. my brain is where thought occurs.

Accepting something someone into your heart is figuratively speaking. And what I said had nothing to do with denying Jesus was on Earth or not. I specifically said denying Jesus ON Earth. Denying him as lord and saviour. So can we answer the question at hand and not drift into left field? Question still remains if you deny Jesus while you live on Earth, deny him as your lord and saviour, why should Jesus then accept this certain someone into the kingdom of God? Why should Jesus not deny this person as they denied Jesus while they were here?