100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: When the Bible is discredited... | |
|---|---|
|
Edited by
s1owhand
on
Sat 07/09/11 02:49 PM
|
|
Abra you are simply wrong. Most adherents of the Abrahamic religions really don't believe that the bible is literally true but that it instead valuable as a guide to study. It is only you and a handful of hard-core believers who are trying to insist that it is a literal thing. Do you really want to throw in with that bunch?!  So you're saying that most believers in the Abrahamic religions don't actually believe that the ten commandments came from any God? John 3:16-18 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. So you're suggesting that only a few hard-core Christians believe that what John had to say was true, whilst the vast majority of them believe that John was just full of hot air blabbing his own opinionated rumors? In other words, you're suggesting that the vast majority of Christians actually believe like me? Sheesh!  Damn! I can't believe that I've so grossly misunderstood the religion. So you're saying that basically very few people actually believe it, and the vast majority view it as merely being undependable hearsay fables that only have value as metaphorical ideals? Gee whiz. I'll give it that much.  You could use Greek Mythology for that. This may come as a surprise to you but many of the tales of Greek mythology were also designed to try to instill good moral values in people. ~~~~~ So you're suggesting that it's merely a misguided perception to think that Christians, Muslims, and Jews hold their doctrines up to represent the actual commandments of God? Hmmmm? Interesting. I think you need to pass that by the Christians, Muslims, and Jews to see how they respond to that. Good luck with that.  Most Christians, Jews and Muslims view the ten commandments as divinely inspired I suppose. They are good solid rules to live by. Nothing wrong with that. Doesn't mean the rest of the Bible does not contain inscrutable or self-contradictory statements. And such statements or stories do not invalidate the beauty or worth of the ten commandments either. So what big deal? Yeah - I don't think most followers of these religions believe much differently from you. You just have a problem with the literalists and proselytizers and those who do not genuinely follow the good teachings of the Bible or of Christ or Mohammed. Neither do I. As far as John 3:16-18 is concerned - I interpret that is simply saying that if you want to have the holiest life you should follow the teachings of Jesus. I do not think personally that this requires blind faith but rather a life of honorable and ethical living and I do not subscribe to the belief that simply "believing in Jesus" is enough. But that's me. People can and do interpret these meanings. So I do in fact argue that it's merely a misguided perception to think that Christians, Muslims, and Jews hold their doctrines up to represent the actual commandments of God. In my experience only a very small percentage of people view their religion so narrowly. Most understand that their doctrines are an interpretation of the bible and many feel that any of these religions offer a good foundation for life. This is the basis for religious tolerance which is the cornerstone of our nation. Damn! I can't believe that you've so grossly misunderstood the religion either! I suspect it's cuz yer willful! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You do not and cannot possibly speak for "most" adherents of the Abrahamic religions or what they believe. Most of them are TAUGHT and TOLD by their pastors that the Bible is literally true. Most of them are too timid and afraid to question their authority or even question their pastor. Am I the only one who the above ironohypocrisy above screams out to? -- You do not and cannot.... but I can.  You can what? Speak for the beliefs of most adherents of the Abrahamic religions? I suppose you could try, but I don't expect to convince anyone. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Whooooosh...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
s1owhand
on
Sat 07/09/11 02:59 PM
|
|
Alternative 1. Most people believe the bible is an interesting story which holds valuable lessons on life and religion as long as it is interpreted properly and it does not matter if your personal beliefs or interpretations vary a little bit or which exact religious observance you follow. After all we are all only human. Alternative 2. The bible is historically accurate and the inerrant word of God and if you don't believe it you are going to H E double toothpicks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alternative 1. Most people believe the bible is an interesting story which holds valuable lessons on life and religion as long as it is interpreted properly and it does not matter if your personal beliefs or interpretations vary a little bit or which exact religious observance you follow. After all we are all only human. Alternative 2. The bible is historically accurate and the inerrant word of God and if you don't believe it you are going to H E double toothpicks. Well until we take a poll, we will never know. I could go ask all of the pastors of the seven churches in my town if they teach that the Bible is historically accurate and see what they say. Why don't you take a poll in the Christian forum. I will pose the question in a separate thread, but it would be better in the Christian forum which I don't have a link to. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noah's ark is real, the bible is the truth. Quoted for sociological significance. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noah's ark is real, the bible is the truth. Quoted for sociological significance. I'll count that as one vote. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alternative 3. Those who refuse to believe 1 is possible, hold the same all or nothing mentality as 2 'cept on the other side of the belief fence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Massage...
Good post. Interestingly enough, on another forum, I am discussing whether or not the idea of a soul is necessary for some people. The sociological significance is an interesting parallel. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noah's ark is real, the bible is the truth. Quoted for sociological significance. I'll count that as one vote. I was thinking in the same vein you: I hold that its pointless to talk about what 'most' christian believe unless you have polling data to help flesh out the discussion. There are entire towns in which the vast majority leans one way, or the other. If you grew up in such a town, you might be convinced you knew what 'most christians' beleive. I don't know about 'most', but I do know that there are HUGE numbers of people who think the bible is the literal truth, especially in the midwest and in rural virginia. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is religion that has usurped and destroyed the 'concept' of truth by placing the term "the" in front of it and capitalizing it. The affects/effects of that Orwellian cascade still show up in everyday conversations all over the place. It is a shame.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Abra you are simply wrong. Most adherents of the Abrahamic religions really don't believe that the bible is literally true but that it instead valuable as a guide to study. It is only you and a handful of hard-core believers who are trying to insist that it is a literal thing. Do you really want to throw in with that bunch?! ONLY Some of the larger orgs within the U.S. Christian Broadcasting Network Founder, CEO and Director: The Rev. Pat Robertson Focus on the Family Founder and chairman: Dr. James C. Dobson Coral Ridge Ministries Founder and President: The Rev. D. James Kennedy Alliance Defense Fund President, CEO and General Counsel: Alan Sears American Family Association Founder and Chairman: The Rev. Donald Wildmon American Center for Law and Justice Founder and President: The Rev. Pat Robertson Family Research Council Founder: James C. Dobson Jerry Falwell Ministries Founder and Director: The Rev. Jerry Falwell Concerned Women for America Founders: Tim and Beverly LaHaye Traditional Values Coalition Founder and Chairman: The Rev. Louis P. Sheldon MInnesota Family Council National Organization for Marriage, Americans For Truth organization Christian CPR Christian Coalition. WND’s Josh Craddock of the Institute for Cultural Communicators Ralph Reed’s Faith and Freedom Coalition Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics Religious Liberty Commission World Baptist Fellowship |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Right. Very very right. As in right-wing. Only the ludicrous would take the bible literally!! It is self-contradictory and full of inscrutable verbage!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Slowhand wrote: As far as John 3:16-18 is concerned - I interpret that is simply saying that if you want to have the holiest life you should follow the teachings of Jesus. I do not think personally that this requires blind faith but rather a life of honorable and ethical living and I do not subscribe to the belief that simply "believing in Jesus" is enough. But that's me. I don't see where John 3:16-18 even remotely suggested that "believing in Jesus is enough". However, it clearly states the opposite, "he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." So this is quite LITERALLY demanding that Jesus was the "only begotten" son of God. In other words, a person had damn well better believe in the whole virgin birth thing, etc. Moreover, by demanding that Jesus was the "Son of God" in this context basics demands that a person believe that the entire Old Testament is basically TRUE. Otherwise what sense would it even make to hold up the ideal that Jesus was some prophesied messiah from those previous religious tales? And let's not forget about the part where God speaks to people from a cloud confirming that all these claims are indeed TRUE! Seems to me they really got desperate there. They realized that there would be non-believers so they tried to suck them in by claiming that God himself has verified the validity of these stories. In fact, that sounds so fishy to me that it make me sincerely believe that the entire thing is just the raving nonsense of religious lunatics. After all, we see people on the Internet today who behave this way all the time. They act like as if they KNOW that these stories are true. When in fact they are lying to the HILT. Well, put them back at the time when the New Testament was written and give them a quill and some papyrus and they'd be writing their own Testament to these stories even though they had never seen or hear any actual thing! They talk about it today like as if they were there and actually SAW it with their own eyes. They have that much conviction to back up their claims, when in fact they have NOTHING to claim. Well, gee whiz. If people will act like that on the Internet today about the rumors of some guy who supposedly lived 2000 years ago, what make anyone think that there we're people who were just as obsessed with their rumors back then. Why should anyone believe that the clowns who wrote the New Testament are any different from the clowns who claim to know that this crap is true today? It's the same exhibition of human arrogance and stubbornness. They refuse to CONFESS that they are full of bull. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Slowhand wrote: Only the ludicrous would take the bible literally!! Well Slow, all I can say is welcome aboard. I have no problem with an illiterate Bible. If it's not to be taken literally then there goes the virgin birth, the resurrection, God speaking from clouds, or burning bushes, world-wide floods to drown sinners, painful Childbirth cursed onto women by a supposedly all-benevolent God. Oh yeah, let's not take the story of Adam and Eve falling from grace literally either. And no Satan below us. No heaven above. The whole world could live as one. Wait a minute? Didn't John Lennon write a song about this very thing? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Slowhand wrote: As far as John 3:16-18 is concerned - I interpret that is simply saying that if you want to have the holiest life you should follow the teachings of Jesus. I do not think personally that this requires blind faith but rather a life of honorable and ethical living and I do not subscribe to the belief that simply "believing in Jesus" is enough. But that's me. I don't see where John 3:16-18 even remotely suggested that "believing in Jesus is enough". However, it clearly states the opposite, "he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." So this is quite LITERALLY demanding that Jesus was the "only begotten" son of God. In other words, a person had damn well better believe in the whole virgin birth thing, etc. Moreover, by demanding that Jesus was the "Son of God" in this context basics demands that a person believe that the entire Old Testament is basically TRUE. Otherwise what sense would it even make to hold up the ideal that Jesus was some prophesied messiah from those previous religious tales? And let's not forget about the part where God speaks to people from a cloud confirming that all these claims are indeed TRUE! Seems to me they really got desperate there. They realized that there would be non-believers so they tried to suck them in by claiming that God himself has verified the validity of these stories. In fact, that sounds so fishy to me that it make me sincerely believe that the entire thing is just the raving nonsense of religious lunatics. After all, we see people on the Internet today who behave this way all the time. They act like as if they KNOW that these stories are true. When in fact they are lying to the HILT. Well, put them back at the time when the New Testament was written and give them a quill and some papyrus and they'd be writing their own Testament to these stories even though they had never seen or hear any actual thing! They talk about it today like as if they were there and actually SAW it with their own eyes. They have that much conviction to back up their claims, when in fact they have NOTHING to claim. Well, gee whiz. If people will act like that on the Internet today about the rumors of some guy who supposedly lived 2000 years ago, what make anyone think that there we're people who were just as obsessed with their rumors back then. Why should anyone believe that the clowns who wrote the New Testament are any different from the clowns who claim to know that this crap is true today? It's the same exhibition of human arrogance and stubbornness. They refuse to CONFESS that they are full of bull. Hands Abra the foaming mouth squeegee! See I interpret the only begotten son of God line as saying that Jesus is the only human whose life is so pure that he truly is worthy of being called the son of God. It's just an exhortation to do good. So you should have no problem with THAT... Virgin birth? Well there must be some kind of metaphor for that...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So i guess Gods mom and dad is Zeus and Hera?
I can sit here and claim there is a God named Cacapoopoo and claim "just cause you can't see him doesn't mean he doesn't exist"do y'all see my point. Thats really all the Abrahamic religions have,but i say if you can't prove a God exist then why believe in it in the first place. I keep seeing alot of people saying the bible is more than that and it helps them with life in general.Uh so can using common sense,being a parent and using good judgement.Telling your children they will go to hell if they disobey a fictional character isn't good judgement or God is watching you,yeah if God is a chester he probably is watching your children. Y'all can believe what you want but i honestly don't see any need for the bible for anything other than fictional reading.To see these pathetic evangelist up there claiming they healed someone from cancer and 3 days later the person dies from cancer is really sad.Hell seeing all these churches eveywhere and church parking lots full on Sundays is sad,but it is what it is i just hope people start waking up an seeing these religions for what they are,a hoax just like most of the people who claim to be Christians.Seriously you don't have to claim to be something your not just to fit in with a billion others who have followed that path not really the religion. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i just hope people start waking up an seeing these religions for what they are,a hoax just like most of the people who claim to be Christians.Seriously you don't have to claim to be something your not just to fit in with a billion others who have followed that path not really the religion. That is my hope. But all in good time. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Slowhand wrote: As far as John 3:16-18 is concerned - I interpret that is simply saying that if you want to have the holiest life you should follow the teachings of Jesus. I do not think personally that this requires blind faith but rather a life of honorable and ethical living and I do not subscribe to the belief that simply "believing in Jesus" is enough. But that's me. I don't see where John 3:16-18 even remotely suggested that "believing in Jesus is enough". However, it clearly states the opposite, "he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." So this is quite LITERALLY demanding that Jesus was the "only begotten" son of God. In other words, a person had damn well better believe in the whole virgin birth thing, etc. Moreover, by demanding that Jesus was the "Son of God" in this context basics demands that a person believe that the entire Old Testament is basically TRUE. Otherwise what sense would it even make to hold up the ideal that Jesus was some prophesied messiah from those previous religious tales? And let's not forget about the part where God speaks to people from a cloud confirming that all these claims are indeed TRUE! Seems to me they really got desperate there. They realized that there would be non-believers so they tried to suck them in by claiming that God himself has verified the validity of these stories. In fact, that sounds so fishy to me that it make me sincerely believe that the entire thing is just the raving nonsense of religious lunatics. After all, we see people on the Internet today who behave this way all the time. They act like as if they KNOW that these stories are true. When in fact they are lying to the HILT. Well, put them back at the time when the New Testament was written and give them a quill and some papyrus and they'd be writing their own Testament to these stories even though they had never seen or hear any actual thing! They talk about it today like as if they were there and actually SAW it with their own eyes. They have that much conviction to back up their claims, when in fact they have NOTHING to claim. Well, gee whiz. If people will act like that on the Internet today about the rumors of some guy who supposedly lived 2000 years ago, what make anyone think that there we're people who were just as obsessed with their rumors back then. Why should anyone believe that the clowns who wrote the New Testament are any different from the clowns who claim to know that this crap is true today? It's the same exhibition of human arrogance and stubbornness. They refuse to CONFESS that they are full of bull. Hands Abra the foaming mouth squeegee! See I interpret the only begotten son of God line as saying that Jesus is the only human whose life is so pure that he truly is worthy of being called the son of God. It's just an exhortation to do good. So you should have no problem with THAT... Virgin birth? Well there must be some kind of metaphor for that... Thanks for the squeegee. I needed that. I was dribbling all over my keyboard. Well, gee whiz. If people are going to accept that it's all just metaphors then it's really no different from the story of Buddha. What would make Jesus and more perfect than Buddha? Buddha did everything "perfect" too insofar as anyone can tell. He was born and raised in as a prince in a palace protected from all evil as a child. He married and had children. There's certainly nothing wrong with that. That's perfectly within the directives of a God who has asked all humans to procreate. There's no "sin" in marriage or having children surely. Then after his children were all grown up he embarked on the purest, most spiritual journey that any mortal man could possibly undertake. And according to that story he found spiritual enlightenment. How could that be said to be a life that was any less "perfect" than the life that Jesus supposedly lived. Jesus sat around calling the Scribes and Pharisees hypocrites. I don't think Buddha ever did anything like that. Jesus got upset and became physically violent about the behavior of other people in a temple. I don't think Buddha ever did anything like that. If we actually compare the lives of these two men I think my vote for actual purity and perfect would have to go to Buddha. At least Buddha took on the responsibility and experience of being a father and husband. For all we know he was the best father and husband that ever lived. Who knows? Jesus didn't take on any of those responsibilities. So in a sense Buddha could be said to have lived more of life than Jesus was even willing to expose himself to. Where does anyone get off claiming that Jesus lead the most "perfect" life of any mortal man? Do they have any knowledge of how every other mortal man ever lived to compare that with? I think not. So yes, as a totally fictitious metaphor and parable we can pretend that Jesus was "perfectly pure". But, like I say, the very same thing can be done with the Buddha, or many other religious figures as well. ~~~~ However, even then I would argue that it makes no sense to hold him up as the "son" of the God of the Torah. Clearly Jesus didn't even agree with the immoral teaching of the Torah. Even the New Testament gospels make that crystal clear. See, no foaming at the mouth here. Just trying to clear Jesus of false charges against him (i.e. that he represented the God of the Torah and all the immoral things associated with that picture of God.)  See, I represent pure love Slow. I'm just trying to cleanse the filth that has been spattered onto Jesus by the New Testament and the Christian church. |
|
|
|
|
