NationStates Jolt Archive

You all do realize Jesus was mentioned in Josephus who lived at the same time as Jesus right?

Josephus lived about 30 years after Jesus' death. Also, there are 2 whole lines in his writings about Jesus, and it was established a long time ago that those writings were forged after Josephus' death since they don't make any sense in context and the writing looks different.

What is prayer supposed to be proof of?

Proof of the fact that people are morons. Prayer is ultimately a selfish act, making the person doing the praying feel better about themselves, and alleviate any guilt they have over not actually doing anything. Ever notice how self-righteous people get when you challenge them about it?

moron: oh, will you look at those poor starving/killed/diseased/drowned ethiopians/badgers/hedgehogs/atheists - isn't that *terrible* What they really need in this time of peril is for us to pray.

me: umm, wouldn't it be a tad more practical to you know, donate money/medicine/legal aid/food/TANGIBLE THINGS THAT CAN ACTUALLY HELP ?

moron: oh no, what we need now is the strength of our faith. we need to pray to jesus for help

me: as opposed to actually helping you mean ?

moron: " ... "

etc.

Why do you, no for that matter, why do so many people think that Religion and Science are mutually exclusive? Tell me please.
Good, then I'll expect you not to argue against evolution.

5. They're wrong, they just said that to be more PC. The bible clearly says that one is not saved by works, but by faith.

And, James 2:17 clearly states that "Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead..."

So - it works both ways. Scripture says you need faith AND works.

But so does religion. Science I believe should be anything that doesn't contradict religion. Atoms don't contradict religion as far as I know, electricity, etc. Evolution however I am firmly against as well as the "Big Bang theory". Just what I think.
Then you pick and choose which science you like and which you don't. Specifically, those that give you stuff are good and those that you percieve as contradicting your religion are bad. That's a pretty easy test.

You have a flawed understanding of atheism. Atheism is NOT a positive position, in that atheists do not make any assertions. Atheists simply say they do not believe there is a god, but do not say there is no god. There is something called a "positive atheist", because they make the positive claim that there is no god. However, positive atheists are a minority, I would venture to say that 90% of atheists do not make any claims.

The atheists position is simply this, the atheist does not have any religious beliefs. That's it. An absence of belief is not the same as a belief of absence.

As an atheist... I concur... I just don't believe all the stories.. so I am left lacking faith that any of the god-tales are true.

If I actively believed that there were NO gods - I would be a Hard Atheist... or, what I call, an Anti-Theist.

There is prove, Jeruselum, Jericho ruins, Jews, things that explain the human body, the genes, the Earth. The Bible has all the answers, all that you have to do is look for it. "Knock and the door will be opened".

The events depicted in Interview With the Vampire actually happened. New Orleans exists, prostitutes are real, people and animals have blood in their body, it all adds up!

BTW, if the bible has all the answers, why not give them instead of encoding them so that 100,000 brands of religion can sprout up from the same book?

Evolution and the Big Bang has less proof than God. God is like magnestism, you cna't actually see it but you can see the effects of it. And what observations also are there that the Earth is billions of years old? None. Anyways we'll know when we die who was right so rest it already. I've had nearly enough of the public school system claiming to be "non-secular" belief wise but yet teaching evolution and Atheism.
OK, prove god exists. What are the "effects" of god? In order to show the effects of god, you first have to prove his existence and be able to define him.

I have never heard of a school that teaches atheism. As far as evolution goes, it is a science that describes how living organisms can change over time, that's it. It has nothing to do with the beginning of life. Those who claim it does don't konw what they're talking about, because the beginning of life is covered in different theories.

1. The entire bible is pretty militant.

2. Of course the Quran does not contain the book of John, but it does not teach to not persecute the followers of Abraham, otherwise the arabs wouldn't be trying to extreminate the jews, they'd be brothers.

3. Love thy neighbor was something Jesus said, not a commandment.
Anyone who believes in the station of christ as a mouthpiece of God would consider these words a commandment.



5. They're wrong, they just said that to be more PC. The bible clearly says that one is not saved by works, but by faith.

The bible also talks about the need for works in order to be saved.

How do you know? Anyways we brought this upon ourselves you fool. (Sorry bout insult) By not following we said God we don't want you. Besides God is more worried about our spirits than the body. The body may die but the spirit is eternal and where would you rather spend eternity? Hell or Heaven? With an additude like that I'd say Hell. You're choice. We'll know when we die who is right.

We brought 9/11 upon ourselves by not being godly? That's funny, Osama said it was because we're muddling around in Middle Eastern affairs.

Josephus lived about 30 years after Jesus' death. Also, there are 2 whole lines in his writings about Jesus, and it was established a long time ago that those writings were forged after Josephus' death since they don't make any sense in context and the writing looks different.

This is most interesting do you mind supply the source for this?

And, James 2:17 clearly states that "Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead..."

So - it works both ways. Scripture says you need faith AND works.

Thankyou for bringing that up, because that is a biblical contradiction. It says that good works will not save you, only faith will. Later is says that faith will not save you, only godo works will. Each statement is mutually exclusive, so which is it? There's too many scriptures to list, so check out this link to them.

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/faithalone.html

What is more, Science has still not provided explanations for the three most important transitions in the Creation Process: Nothing to Matter, Matter to Life and Life to Conscienceness, all of which are explained by the presence of God.

If you think that the big bang means that something came from nothing (which most creationists tend to think), then you don't understand big bang theory.

BTW, something coming from nothing is scientifically feasable. Consider virtual particles. Virtual particles are particles that randomly pop in and out of existence.

Thankyou for bringing that up, because that is a biblical contradiction. It says that good works will not save you, only faith will. Later is says that faith will not save you, only godo works will. Each statement is mutually exclusive, so which is it? There's too many scriptures to list, so check out this link to them.

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/faithalone.html

Except that scripture gives choices.

Faith without good works is dead. You can only be saved by faith.

The solution then, is to have faith AND do good works.

So - it isn't really a contradiction- it's a choice.

true christians dont slow down science at all it is just the boneheads like bush that slow it down

the truly enlightened ones are open to new ideas
You're using a "no true scotsman" fallacy.

"In order to be a christian, you must tear out the eyes of reason." - Martin Luther

You just used a steriotype. By the Biblical (or at least what I believe to be the Biblical definition) definition a Christian is anyone who beleives Jesus was the Son of God, the only way to heaven, and he died and rose again for our sins. So quite honestly Catholics are not Christians, by the "worlds" standards maybe but not by the Bible's.
You call him on a "no true scotsman" fallacy and then finish up your post with the very same fallacy. lol

To everybody who believes in evolution:
How do you explain love? Do you really think it's a chemical reaction in the brain that leads to...blahblahblah?

Yep, and it has survival value. If one loves their offspring, then they will protect them from harm so that they can grow up and have offspring of their own.

This is most interesting do you mind supply the source for this?
No problemo.
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/josephus-etal.html

No problemo.
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/josephus-etal.html

thanks

2. Of course the Quran does not contain the book of John, but it does not teach to not persecute the followers of Abraham, otherwise the arabs wouldn't be trying to extreminate the jews, they'd be brothers.


Muslims are followers of Abraham. Matter of fact, Islam, in many ways, is a return to the ways of Abraham - who was neither Christian nor Jew. As for not teaching not to persecute, see the quote in my sig.

As for Arabs trying to exterminate Jews, Arabs number about 200 million worldwide, 15% of which are Christian ... there are 1.3-1.5 billion Muslims.

The top five Muslim population nations are as follows:
Indonesia - 171 million Muslims
Pakistan - 119 million Muslims
Bangladesh - 100 million Muslims
India - 100 million Muslims
Turkey - 56 million Muslims

None of those are Arab countries.

You do the math. Muslim != Arab

Just as Ishmael and Israel were brothers, so too are Jews and Muslims.

Muslims are followers of Abraham. Matter of fact, Islam, in many ways, is a return to the ways of Abraham - who was neither Christian nor Jew. As for not teaching not to persecute, see the quote in my sig.

As for Arabs trying to exterminate Jews, Arabs number about 200 million worldwide, 15% of which are Christian ... there are 1.3-1.5 billion Muslims.

The top five Muslim population nations are as follows:
Indonesia - 171 million Muslims
Pakistan - 119 million Muslims
Bangladesh - 100 million Muslims
India - 100 million Muslims
Turkey - 56 million Muslims

None of those are Arab countries.

You do the math. Muslim != Arab

Islam comes out of Arabia, and almost all arabs are muslims.

Also, sheer numbers don't mean anything. Take it as a percentage.

BTW, Pakistan and Turkey are in the middle east and are home to millions of arabs. In fact, Turkey is considered the "gateway" to the middle east from Europe.

Just as Ishmael and Israel were brothers, so too are Jews and Muslims.

Arabs are the descendants of the bastard child of a slave and jews are the descendants of Abraham's wife. Thus, jews rebuked arabs as being unworthy pieces of . . . you get the idea. There's a damn good reason why arabs hate jews.

While you're at it, there's a damn good reason antisemitism exists. Take one race of people announcing that there is only one god, and everyone else's gods are pitifully weak in comparisson. Then they go to the "promised land", but first have to kill everyone already living there, even women, children and fetuses (they were torn out of their mother's bellies). Then they announce to the world that everyone else is lower then them and has no chance to get into paradise, since paradise is only reserved for god's chosen people.

Then read the Quran, it says exactly the same thing and they do exactly the same things, only they claim that they are the master race.

Sorry, but I don't see any chance for world peace so long as such religions exist.

Then read the Quran, it says exactly the same thing and they do exactly the same things, only they claim that they are the master race.


Qur'an doesn't say anything about master races and chosen peoples nor does it say anything about taking over a country by killing everyone living there first.

Qur'an doesn't say anything about master races and chosen peoples nor does it say anything about taking over a country by killing everyone living there first.

What Quran are you reading? The second half of the book's all about how Mohammed went around conquering everyone, killing, raping, etc. and how he was going to turn the entire world into an islamic nation. There's too many passages to list, so here's a link.

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/cruelty/long.html

Arabs are the descendants of the bastard child of a slave and jews are the descendants of Abraham's wife.

Ishmael was just as much the legitimate son of Abram as Isaac was, if not more so since he was the first born.

Can't I just say some guy from Nazareth?

What Quran are you reading? The second half of the book's all about how Mohammed went around conquering everyone, killing, raping, etc. and how he was going to turn the entire world into an islamic nation. There's too many passages to list, so here's a link.

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/cruelty/long.html

Ummmm .... your link there provides 0.1% of a Surah when quoting it.

John 3:16 says "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."

I could easily drop some words and make it say, "Whosoever believeth not in God shall perish everlasting."

But that doesn't make it right, now does it?

Your link has Surah al Baqarah 6 translated as "Don't bother to warn the disbelievers. Allah has blinded them. Theirs will be an awful doom."

Yet, when you click their very link, you see this:

"As for the Disbelievers, Whether thou warn them or thou warn them not it is all one for them; they believe not."

VERY different sentence.

So, we must therefore look to the accepted translation of Qur'an by Abdullah Yusuf Ali ...

"As to those who reject Faith, it is the same to them whether thou warn them or do not warn them; they will not believe."

http://quran.al-islam.com/GenGifImages/Normal/290X330-0/2/6/1.png

Even more different. This is just saying, "No matter what you tell them, they're not going to believe you anyway."

How is that cruel? It's the truth.

Just on the very first sentence in your link, I have debunked the entire link. Want me to go through all of it?

What Quran are you reading? The second half of the book's all about how Mohammed went around conquering everyone, killing, raping, etc. and how he was going to turn the entire world into an islamic nation. There's too many passages to list, so here's a link.

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/cruelty/long.html

Hey, he's a Muslim, YOU ARE NOT!

I know Muslims, Christians, AND jews. I've lived around ALL three ALL my life.

I can tell you this, NONE of their holy books are mostly about conquering and killing.

There should be more options...such as: meant well but was sadly mistaken

I donno buddy, you might want to beef up on your history. From what I've read the rise of Christianity did more good then harm. You know, charity, pacifism, love for one and other. It didn't completely fix humanity's falts but it did take us (the western world) out of a debatable dark age of primitive cruelty.

Maybe that was just dry cynicism but I still say: Educate yourself!

I donno buddy, you might want to beef up on your history. From what I've read the rise of Christianity did more good then harm. You know, charity, pacifism, love for one and other. It didn't completely fix humanity's falts but it did take us (the western world) out of a debatable dark age of primitive cruelty.

Maybe that was just dry cynicism but I still say: Educate yourself!

Unforunatly it had one MAJOR defect: Religious Wars. Before most people didn't have religious wars since all religions were compatable(as the Roman Empire showed). Unfortunatly, with the rise of the "We won't worship nobody, bub" attitude of the christians(who then began a sort of "ethnic cleansing" against other religions), the Crusade was born.

All religions have their good sides and bad. No religions gave more good or more bad, they are all just about equal.

Ishmael was just as much the legitimate son of Abram as Isaac was, if not more so since he was the first born.

He was the son of a slave that Abraham was not married to. That may be first born, but it is under illegitimate circumstances.

Ummmm .... your link there provides 0.1% of a Surah when quoting it.

John 3:16 says "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."

I could easily drop some words and make it say, "Whosoever believeth not in God shall perish everlasting."

But that doesn't make it right, now does it?

Your link has Surah al Baqarah 6 translated as "Don't bother to warn the disbelievers. Allah has blinded them. Theirs will be an awful doom."

Yet, when you click their very link, you see this:

"As for the Disbelievers, Whether thou warn them or thou warn them not it is all one for them; they believe not."

VERY different sentence.

So, we must therefore look to the accepted translation of Qur'an by Abdullah Yusuf Ali ...

"As to those who reject Faith, it is the same to them whether thou warn them or do not warn them; they will not believe."

http://quran.al-islam.com/GenGifImages/Normal/290X330-0/2/6/1.png

Even more different. This is just saying, "No matter what you tell them, they're not going to believe you anyway."

How is that cruel? It's the truth.

Just on the very first sentence in your link, I have debunked the entire link. Want me to go through all of it?
That's not a good comparisson. The first sentence isn't from the book, it is a summation of the passage. If you think that's "debunking" an entire link, then you're being trite.

I donno buddy, you might want to beef up on your history. From what I've read the rise of Christianity did more good then harm. You know, charity, pacifism, love for one and other. It didn't completely fix humanity's falts but it did take us (the western world) out of a debatable dark age of primitive cruelty.

Maybe that was just dry cynicism but I still say: Educate yourself!

These things get practiced outside of the scope of christianity then inside of it. Please note that ALL theocracies are full of intolerance and ALL secular based governments (with the possible exception of "communist" governments) mandate tolerance and end up with much more peaceful societies.

That's not a good comparisson. The first sentence isn't from the book, it is a summation of the passage. If you think that's "debunking" an entire link, then you're being trite.

But they sum up an incorrect translation! As a matter of fact, that same passage speaks specifically of you!

You are so blinded by your hatred of Muslims, that no matter what I say, you will not believe it. Amazing how much truth is in Qur'an that can be seen every day.

These things get practiced outside of the scope of christianity then inside of it. Please note that ALL theocracies are full of intolerance and ALL secular based governments mandate tolerance and end up with much more peaceful societies.
Err, not quite. Try the communists in the USSR forbidding everything. Try G.W. Bush trying to keep Wicca from being recognized as a religion.

He was the son of a slave that Abraham was not married to. That may be first born, but it is under illegitimate circumstances.

Abraham's wife, Sarah, gave Abraham permission to have a child with Hagar. (Genesis 16:2)

How much more legitimate can you get then that? Surrogate children are 100% legitimate ... regardless of what your narrow mind may believe.

Further than that, God blessed Hagar and told her "I will multiply thy seed exceedingly, that it shall not be numbered for multitude." (Genesis 16:10) Which is the same thing God told Abraham later about Isaac!

Ishmael was legitimate in the eyes of Abraham, legitimate in the eyes of Sarah, and legitimate in the eyes of God.

Deal with it.

Abraham's wife, Sarah, gave Abraham permission to have a child with Hagar. (Genesis 16:2)

How much more legitimate can you get then that? Surrogate children are 100% legitimate ... regardless of what your narrow mind may believe.
And according to the eastern custom of the time, Ishmael would be more the son of Sarai than Hagar

I donno buddy, you might want to beef up on your history. From what I've read the rise of Christianity did more good then harm. You know, charity, pacifism, love for one and other. It didn't completely fix humanity's falts but it did take us (the western world) out of a debatable dark age of primitive cruelty.

Maybe that was just dry cynicism but I still say: Educate yourself!
do you have any idea what they did to so called heretics?

teh pagans weren't out ripping people's body parts off with pincers, strtching them on racks and whatnot because they didn't believe in the same god(s).

Err, not quite. Try the communists in the USSR forbidding everything. Try G.W. Bush trying to keep Wicca from being recognized as a religion.
you shoudl have also tried to convince his father that atheists can indeed be citizens...

The Catholic Church did more good then harm. They united Europe, took it out of the Dark Ages, started the Age of Exploration, toleration of natives that converted, guns, bombs. The Crusades were started by the Muslims. The first crusade started when the Byzantine Empire needed help from the Turks who were Muslims. The Catholics won. The second started when the Turks tried again. The Catholics lost. Then the Catholics lost. Lost. Yea like that. The catholics also helped the rise of the burgs.

From a girl I know who follows wicca it seems that she claims to be a witch because she uses wicca. The government doesn't care who you worship or follow. Wicca seems more like a hobbie or a way of life like veganism. Anyway if they do try to stop you go to Canada they would have to allow it to make everything equal.(Kind of sounds communist for a replubic).

I don't know much about wicca so I'm sorry if I offend you.

Secularist are evil. In NY you can bring in any religious symbol but the cross. Biased people.

Islam comes out of Arabia, and almost all arabs are muslims.

Also, sheer numbers don't mean anything. Take it as a percentage.

BTW, Pakistan and Turkey are in the middle east and are home to millions of arabs. In fact, Turkey is considered the "gateway" to the middle east from Europe.



Arabs are the descendants of the bastard child of a slave and jews are the descendants of Abraham's wife. Thus, jews rebuked arabs as being unworthy pieces of . . . you get the idea. There's a damn good reason why arabs hate jews.

While you're at it, there's a damn good reason antisemitism exists. Take one race of people announcing that there is only one god, and everyone else's gods are pitifully weak in comparisson. Then they go to the "promised land", but first have to kill everyone already living there, even women, children and fetuses (they were torn out of their mother's bellies). Then they announce to the world that everyone else is lower then them and has no chance to get into paradise, since paradise is only reserved for god's chosen people.

Then read the Quran, it says exactly the same thing and they do exactly the same things, only they claim that they are the master race.

Sorry, but I don't see any chance for world peace so long as such religions exist.

Announcing that Islam 'hates' Judaism and Christianity, because of the possible parenting of some potentially mythological characters is just silly.

Examination of history shows that early Islam tolerated both Jews and Christians quite well in their societies, because they considered them 'brothers' in religion. Surely you know that Islam considers the Christian and Hebrew sacred books to be holy texts?

If there IS a contention between Islam and other Mosaic religions - it is MORE likely to have been caused by the way Christians responded to Mohammed's church.

You do not give enough choice in this poll O religious one.
Other possibilities-- a popular teacher, a rabblerouser, a rejected teacher, a man surrounded by myth....get the picture?

What i belive is that he was a very intelegent man who was very spiritual, he wasnt the son of god, but might have belived it becasue he was so smart. he did not do the great things Jesus did with magical power but he must have found out ways to do it others didnt know, or he faked every single one jus to make people belive he was the sun of god. No dout this man was one of the founders of christianity. And i belive that he faked he was dead while on the cross, then said he resurected. Then he fled the country to save himself.

Err, not quite. Try the communists in the USSR forbidding everything. Try G.W. Bush trying to keep Wicca from being recognized as a religion.
You obviously missed my edit which included "communist" governments as an exception.

As far as Bush goes, he is one man, not an entire establishment. The United States Constitution is based on secular philosophy, philosophy that is directly contrary to biblical teachings. The entire first ammendment alone flies in the face of almost everything the bible teaches. Then there's the 17th article which does not allow for a religious test for politicians, judges or anyone working for the government. These are things that cannot be allowed in a society based upon biblical law.

Secularist are evil. In NY you can bring in any religious symbol but the cross. Biased people.
I resent that remark. It is a baseless ad hominem.

2. Of course the Quran does not contain the book of John, but it does not teach to not persecute the followers of Abraham, otherwise the arabs wouldn't be trying to extreminate the jews, they'd be brothers.




The bible didn't say "Kill all who follow Mohammed" but the crusaders sure did, the Quaran says that "The followers of the book shall not be touched" for they serve allah is another fashion, or somthing like that.

From a girl I know who follows wicca it seems that she claims to be a witch because she uses wicca. The government doesn't care who you worship or follow. Wicca seems more like a hobbie or a way of life like veganism. Anyway if they do try to stop you go to Canada they would have to allow it to make everything equal.(Kind of sounds communist for a replubic).

I don't know much about wicca so I'm sorry if I offend you.

Secularist are evil. In NY you can bring in any religious symbol but the cross. Biased people.
Wicca is quite certainly a religion, at least by any definition I have heard.
Go to Canada? Why should somebody do that when the Constitution promises them religious freedom? I have no idea what your bit in parenthesis means.

Secularists evil? All of them? That's a bit of a drastic statement, don't you think?

What i belive is that he was a very intelegent man who was very spiritual, he wasnt the son of god, but might have belived it becasue he was so smart. he did not do the great things Jesus did with magical power but he must have found out ways to do it others didnt know, or he faked every single one jus to make people belive he was the sun of god. No dout this man was one of the founders of christianity. And i belive that he faked he was dead while on the cross, then said he resurected. Then he fled the country to save himself.

In Islam (as Keruvalia must've said already) Jesus was a prophet from Allah. In Christianity, he's the son of God. In Judaism, He's some dude who's the fake messiah, but just happened to get a helluva lotta followers.

Baisically, I believe he was a VERY spiritual man who invoked quite alot of thinking, and although he may or may not have intended it(he was a Jew all his life), he created a religion. He also affected two other religions from the same region.

I'd say, Jesus was someone who was different than the rest and he was killed for it.

He wasn't married, he didn't have children. Instead he lived with a guy and two gals together. So in many countries today, including America, he would be looked down upon and parents would probably take their children in if he passed on the street together with his friends.

However, the other outcasts like the old, the sick, the poor wouldn't mind to be seen together with him.

Jesus christ is the savior of my soul, without him I would still be a slave of sin, Blessed Assurance means that I'm saved and though the lord knows I'll mess up but he'll never stop loving me and trying to bring me back into the fold. And as Ralph Stanley said it "Nooooo, theyll bee none ooon the other side" Death and suffrin' that is, good song.......

Jesus christ is the savior of my soul, without him I would still be a slave of sin, Blessed Assurance means that I'm saved and though the lord knows I'll mess up but he'll never stop loving me and trying to bring me back into the fold. And as Ralph Stanley said it "Nooooo, theyll bee none ooon the other side" Death and suffrin' that is, good song.......

You are a good Christian. Allah smiles upon you. :)

He's a thousand year old middle eastern cult leader that suffered from extreme autism and retardation. Oh, and he went to magic school!

Perhaps I can shed some light on why there are no options other than Son of God, lunatic, or liar.
You see, Jesus said in the Bible that he is the Son of God, the Messiah, and the one and only truth. So that means one of 3 things: he was telling the truth, he was a liar, or he was crazy.
But then again, how can we trust the testimony of the disciples, many of whom authored the New Testament? There are 3 similiar options for them: they either gave an accurate description of Jesus's life and teachings, made it all up, or suffered from delusion/brainwashing.
lets first look at brainwashing. That would have been hard for Jesus to do considering that they all came from different backgrounds. Some of them were fishermen, some were taxcollectors, Luke was a doctor and historian. Also,throughout their accounts they give several verses from the Old Testament which they say Jesus cited. In fact they often provide other verses from the Old Testament to support their own telling of Jesus's teachings. This shows that they saw the Bible as just as much an authority as Jesus. So it was hardly a "father knows best," arbitrary relationship between Jesus and his disciples; they didn't immediately swallow everything that Jesus said as absolute fact, they were skeptical. They checked Jesus's teachings against the law that they had known their entire lives (and, like Jesus, they knew it very well).
Could the disciples have been delusional? Well considering once again their vast knowledge of the scriptures, along with their many references to history and politics, they seem to be of sound mind. That and they all give the same message, how could Jesus have found 12 crazy people who all thought the same?
Then again, they could just be lying. The gospel could just be a complete fabrication by the disciples so that they could be rich and powerful or respected, or maybe just for a lark. But if thats the case, why would the disciples paint themselves as foolish, childlike, and cowardly? Those are not qualities to be admired. Instead they chose to give all of the admirable qualities and credit to another man, Jesus-- who was 'dead'. And once the disciples became apostles and started spreading Jesus's teachings they did not live like kings-- no, far from it. They would have lived richer lives had they continued with their former professions. For years they each went around the the known world, being persecuted, insulted, beaten, and imprisioned for their beliefs. They were always warned to stop preaching the gospel, but instead only preached it louder. In the end the disciples and apostles all got what they had comming to them-- they were executed. Some were stoned, some were burned, some were crucified, some were sawed in half. Why would they be willing to go through such things if they knew that the whole thing was a lie? The truth is they believed.
That would mean that their accounts of Jesus's life and teachings are accurate, thus Jesus really did say things like "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can get to the father except through me." No holy man or prophet would say those things, so he must have been crazy or lying. Or he could have been telling the truth.

I'm annoyed that there isn't a "none of the above" option. There is historical record of his existance, though the miricles he proformed and claims of being the son of God have somewhat less doccumentation. The Bible is no 100% historicly accurate, and if you think it is, then you probably believe he was the massiah anyways, so whatever.

Could the disciples have been delusional? Well considering once again their vast knowledge of the scriptures, along with their many references to history and politics, they seem to be of sound mind. That and they all give the same message, how could Jesus have found 12 crazy people who all thought the same?


I used to be in marketing, Just by walking in the park I can find 12 sane people let alone crazy people and make them believe the most unimaginable BS I can think of...

Well, he had a lot of boyfriends. And one of them got jealous.

All religions should be banned as a public practice. It should be made compulsary that such beliefs be kept within the home. If GOD is all around what need does anyone have of 'places of worship'. The main religions all decree that no one should worship idols but they are all quite happy to errect a statue or image of their own brand of miguided belief. It should be decreed that all should have a choice of what they wish to believe but should be left alone to make their own mind up once they have attained a more mature age.

Most wars are a result of some religious zelot creating a cause that is both unjust and oppressive. The masses, brainwashed since birth, follow blindly without putting their own thought processes to work to see all sides of any argument. The most forcefull of these zelots are those you see in the world news be they jewish, christian, muslim or hindu, they all appear to come from the same melting pot. CHAOS!

Once we have rid the world of these parasites of society, in the form of mulas and priests, the world will be a happier place with more time and revenue to tackle the real needs of society and not creating 'craven images' for the religious leaders own reason for being.

JESUS was, in my opinion, an insane liar who was believed by the gullable in power at that time. When a people are oppressed they look to any thing or anyone who can give them an 'out' to the problem. Drugs in present society are also along similar lines and these are also banned. Do so with religion. Ban it all together. It causes nothing but heartache and creates more problems than it solves.

I used to be in marketing, Just by walking in the park I can find 12 sane people let alone crazy people and make them believe the most unimaginable BS I can think of...

yes, some people can be very persuasive and others very gulible. But could you convince 12 people that they needed to die for that BS? Not likely, but then again Jim Jones did it in 1978, convincing 900 people to poison themselves in the biggest mass suicide in modern times. But that is important to note: that was a mass suicide. Have you ever been caught up in a moment or fallen to peer pressure? most of us have, and thats what happened there. People were among their good friends and their "leader" and all together at one moment drank Koolaid with cyanide or something in it. The peer pressure was no doubt enormous, the few who backed down did so by pretending to drink the poison and pretending to lie dead for hours. 276 of the dead were children, who had little or no idea what they were doing. Those people might not have done the same if given time to think about it outside of that environment.
The disciples are a very different case. After their leader was dead, they all drew straws to see who would go where. They went out in all directions to preach the gospel to the entire known world. They each went their own way, some of them never seeing eachother again. For years they preached Jesus's teachings, all the while being persecuted and threatened. They all died, but they all died years after their leader, years apart from each other, alone, and by the most gruesome forms of death that the ancient world could muster.
No other time in history has that happened, and i dont think that anyone could recreate it now.

The disciples are a very different case.

Not necessarily. All the disciples had probably mentioned to their friends, families etc that they were disciples, that they admired Jesus, loved Jesus, would die for Jesus etc. They had, in other words, made a public commitment. Psychological research has shown that people that have made such a commitment will generally not stop believing when the foundation of their believe gets disproven or when their messiah dies - they will instead be strengthened or at least act as if that was the case.

Example: Modern day cultmembers that declare the end of the world wiil take place on a certain date, go and sit on a mountain on that date after giving away all their possesions and then discovering the world continues will generally not say "Oi - my cultguru is a LIAR !" - no they will say: "Because I believed the prohesies G-d has spared the Earth".

Example 2: if you buy a secondhand car incredibly cheap, boast to all your friends about it, and then, one week later, discover that the reason it was so cheap is because it is an utter piece of cr*p even though it looks pretty - most people won't tell their friends. They will continue to pretend it is a good car.

Perhaps I can shed some light on why there are no options other than Son of God, lunatic, or liar.

Or the book is a fiction based on a real character.

The only reason you have any idea what Jesus is supposed to have said... is because a few dusty scrolls said so.

Imagine for just a second, if they weren't 'entirely' true...

Before I start on my points I'd like to say that if your going to be debating against the Bible at least have read what your debating against. That will also go for me with Evolution and so on so if you have any sites you think are good then post em or telegram me.

1) If you've read the Bible it describes two comings of Jesus, one time to die, second time to rule the world.
2) The Gospel is the New testament which was written by Jesus's disciples such as Peter, Matthew, John, etc.
3) Jesus couldn't have faked his death. Roman custom was to stab the ppl in the side to make sure they were dead. If water came out they were dead, if not they would be soon. The water came from the settling of the fluids in the body.
4) The Bible has been proven. It predicted the fall of Isreal, the reformation of Isreal, the division of Rome, the Holocaust in some effects, and there have been predictions of the fall of empires even. Also, ruins found where they were supposed to be, names of countries and leaders in right places and times even.
5) Atheism has more bad points than good points (if any good points). It encourages death, rape, disobediance, and theft if not more than what I've just said.
6) There are different translations of the Bible yes but I think that the King James Translation is the best one.
7) Religion doesnt encurage wars. Ppl do. The Palistinian/Isreali fighting is in some aspects at fault of the landlords of Palistine in WW2 b/c when England gave the land to the Jews, the landlords never told the occupants or compensated the occupants forcing many of them to lose land and jobs.
8) You get to Heaven according to the Bible not by works but by beleiving that you are a sinner, that Jesus died for your sins, rose again, and that he is the only way to heaven. Works don't secure salvation.
9) Ishmeal was legitimate but he was not of Sarah and if I remember correctly, they form another nation, not Isreal.
10) True Christians didn't torture b/c of separate beliefs.
11) The disciples were sane ppl. Some were fishermen, one of them was a taxcollector, they were from many backgrounds.
12) Jesus told his desciples he would be betrayed and be killed. Judas who betrays him gives the money back and then hangs himself. Hard to arrange for someone to give money back who had an instinct for collecting it and then have him kill himself.
13) There aren't dusty scrolls. The New Testament actually involves mostly letters to the separate Churches.
14) Other religion s can get along with one another. They may disagree but they get along.
15) Science doesn't contradict religion. Evolution and Big Bang contradict other religions and in some aspects contradict parts of science.
16) There are many different verses in the Old and New testaments which talk about the prophesies of the First and Second Coming of Christ.
17) The Bible doesn't say the world will end on such an such date. Neither does the Jewish or Koran as far as I know.
18) Evidence can be interpreted different ways.
19) Prayer and physical help is good for crisises. I myself donated money but prayer is also needed for the ppl b/c many things can only be changed by God.
20) Schools teach atheism by teaching evolution, big bang.
21) The Bible and miracles of ppl surviving disasters are evidence to God. How about how we have double of almost every organ? Or divisions among organs that allow parts to survive even if one part is destroyed.
22) We are sinfully and disobedient to God so technically he owes us nothing. He gave us choice, a wonderfull place to live,and company. But we disobeyed. So tell me. Does God owe us anything? Don't we owe God?
23) Much of science is theories which can be disproven. Such as gravity, electricity, etc. Evolution and big bang however have completely circumstancal evidence which can be interpreted in many ways.
24) Plants were made one 24 hour period before the sun so yes the order makes sense.
25) Not taking the Bible litterally brings about problems with that faith.

Sorry about such a long speech but there was so much to cover.

A few things wrong with ur post, Teckor.

1. You CAN go to heaven if you are a good person(Thats what the Catholic Church says, anyhoo. And thats the oldest, largest, and most powerful church on the Planet.) via, Baptism by desire. That means even if you are a Hindu "Pagan"(which is what they are refered to as some christians), if you are saintly and good and kind, and have a pure soul and are a good person, then you will go to heaven. PROTESTANTS, however, say Even if you are the nicest person on the planet, you go to hell. And if your the worst person on the planet and before you die you "cleanse" yourself of your sins, you go up. That's just screwed up.

2. "Atheism has more bad points than good points (if any good points). It encourages death, rape, disobediance, and theft if not more than what I've just said."

WTF!?!?!? Atheism isn't a religion, num-nut. It's saying "I don't believe in a godly power, just the strength of the human mind and body." It's not saying "I'm going to kill you all, mofos!"

"3. We are sinfully and disobedient to God so technically he owes us nothing. He gave us choice, a wonderfull place to live,and company. But we disobeyed. So tell me. Does God owe us anything? Don't we owe God?"

WE disobeyed God? Tell me, when did WE have a choice? I don't remember God coming up to me and saying "How-didl-y howdy there! Would you like to live in a pefect place as long as you believe only in me?

"4.The Bible and miracles of ppl surviving disasters are evidence to God. How about how we have double of almost every organ? Or divisions among organs that allow parts to survive even if one part is destroyed. "

And WHAT does my liver, spleen, and/ or kidneys have to do with the mercy of god, pray tell?

"5. Schools teach atheism by teaching evolution, big bang."

Because those are more believable than "Some guy worked really hard on this planet and made it in 7 days. Then the guy drops us on it, kills us for a few thousands years, floods us and wipes out 99.9999997% of humanity, and then sends everyone born before christ to hell. After christ comes, he only sends people who don't follow his 'merciful rule' to hell(which is a helluva lot more people than christians).

2) The Gospel is the New testament which was written by Jesus's disciples such as Peter, Matthew, John, etc.
50+ years after his suppsoed death.

3) Jesus couldn't have faked his death. Roman custom was to stab the ppl in the side to make sure they were dead. If water came out they were dead, if not they would be soon. The water came from the settling of the fluids in the body.
this is assuming that jesus existed and was crucified. considering the strong resemblance between the jesus myth and the myths of various sun gods, it is likely that he did not exist.

4) The Bible has been proven. It predicted the fall of Isreal, the reformation of Isreal, the division of Rome, the Holocaust in some effects, and there have been predictions of the fall of empires even. Also, ruins found where they were supposed to be, names of countries and leaders in right places and times even.
... point out the passages, please. and getting the location of cities isn't hard, homer did it in the illiad, that doesn't mean that the gods of the ancient greeks were helping either side of the battle.

5) Atheism has more bad points than good points (if any good points). It encourages death, rape, disobediance, and theft if not more than what I've just said.
christianity promotes discrimination, hatred, torture, execution and torture of heretics... mysoginy,

atheists generally don't give a shit if you leave them alone. if you went up to a person and asked them what religion they were and they said "none, i'm an atheist" and you said "oh, well i'm a chrsitian." chances are they would say "alright..." and go about their business. unless you were to say "i'm a christian and you're going to burn in hell!" in which case it may irk them a little.

6) There are different translations of the Bible yes but I think that the King James Translation is the best one.
actually, the king james version has been demonstrated to be the most biased version for political purposes. the nsrv is supposed to be best, it has been translated more directly than the kjv.

8) You get to Heaven according to the Bible not by works but by beleiving that you are a sinner, that Jesus died for your sins, rose again, and that he is the only way to heaven. Works don't secure salvation.
that depends on which part of the bible you read.

10) True Christians didn't torture b/c of separate beliefs.
well, tell that to the large numbers who have done just that. maybe you're not the true christian.

12) Jesus told his desciples he would be betrayed and be killed. Judas who betrays him gives the money back and then hangs himself. Hard to arrange for someone to give money back who had an instinct for collecting it and then have him kill himself.
and the proof for this outside of the bible is...?

15) Science doesn't contradict religion. Evolution and Big Bang contradict other religions and in some aspects contradict parts of science.
evolution and the big bang do not contradict science.

please explain to me how the big bang contradicts science and i'll tear your argument to threads. let's start with a preemptive shreading... the laws of thermodynamics do not apply outside the universe... with no universe, there are no physical laws, before the big bang (not that there was time before the big bang) there was no universe.

16) There are many different verses in the Old and New testaments which talk about the prophesies of the First and Second Coming of Christ.
yet the messiah was supposed to have accomplished everythign in one lifetime...

19) Prayer and physical help is good for crisises. I myself donated money but prayer is also needed for the ppl b/c many things can only be changed by God.
prayer has been shown in studies to have no affect on the health of patients in hospitals... if you could show a study where praying for a result continuously gives the desired result, then please, by all means, link it up.

20) Schools teach atheism by teaching evolution, big bang.
one can believe that the universe was formed in a big bang and still believe in a deity... similarly with evolution. the two concepts are only exclusive to those who have very weak faith.

21) The Bible and miracles of ppl surviving disasters are evidence to God. How about how we have double of almost every organ? Or divisions among organs that allow parts to survive even if one part is destroyed.
so are the sutras evidence of brahmin?

22) We are sinfully and disobedient to God so technically he owes us nothing. He gave us choice, a wonderfull place to live,and company. But we disobeyed. So tell me. Does God owe us anything? Don't we owe God?
as far as i know, we are all one and all that is is brahmin...

or we all owe prometheus for giving us the gift of fire.

23) Much of science is theories which can be disproven. Such as gravity, electricity, etc. Evolution and big bang however have completely circumstancal evidence which can be interpreted in many ways.
... not really... good try though.

24) Plants were made one 24 hour period before the sun so yes the order makes sense.
no it doesn't.

before any life of any kind could begin on earth, the sun would have to be preforming fusion and would have had to blow off most of the dust in its accretion disk. the earth and the sun formed at roughly the same time, the earth would have been still forming as the sun made the transition from protostar to star as it would still be accreting matter from the planetary disk. the sun was made if anything, before the earth, and long before the earth was habitable. i.e. had stopped being molten.

25) Not taking the Bible litterally brings about problems with that faith.
only those who have incredibly weak faith need to take the bible literally. those who believe in the important parts, love, kindness, charity et c do not need to focus on the hate and bigotry.

A few things wrong with ur post, Teckor.

1. You CAN go to heaven if you are a good person(Thats what the Catholic Church says, anyhoo. And thats the oldest, largest, and most powerful church on the Planet.) via, Baptism by desire. That means even if you are a Hindu "Pagan"(which is what they are refered to as some christians), if you are saintly and good and kind, and have a pure soul and are a good person, then you will go to heaven. PROTESTANTS, however, say Even if you are the nicest person on the planet, you go to hell. And if your the worst person on the planet and before you die you "cleanse" yourself of your sins, you go up. That's just screwed up.

2. "Atheism has more bad points than good points (if any good points). It encourages death, rape, disobediance, and theft if not more than what I've just said."

WTF!?!?!? Atheism isn't a religion, num-nut. It's saying "I don't believe in a godly power, just the strength of the human mind and body." It's not saying "I'm going to kill you all, mofos!"

"3. We are sinfully and disobedient to God so technically he owes us nothing. He gave us choice, a wonderfull place to live,and company. But we disobeyed. So tell me. Does God owe us anything? Don't we owe God?"

WE disobeyed God? Tell me, when did WE have a choice? I don't remember God coming up to me and saying "How-didl-y howdy there! Would you like to live in a pefect place as long as you believe only in me?

"4.The Bible and miracles of ppl surviving disasters are evidence to God. How about how we have double of almost every organ? Or divisions among organs that allow parts to survive even if one part is destroyed. "

And WHAT does my liver, spleen, and/ or kidneys have to do with the mercy of god, pray tell?

"5. Schools teach atheism by teaching evolution, big bang."

Because those are more believable than "Some guy worked really hard on this planet and made it in 7 days. Then the guy drops us on it, kills us for a few thousands years, floods us and wipes out 99.9999997% of humanity, and then sends everyone born before christ to hell. After christ comes, he only sends people who don't follow his 'merciful rule' to hell(which is a helluva lot more people than christians).

Ok... one you can't get to heaven if you don't believe Jesus was the Son of God. The Bible says that Jesus is the only way to heaven no one comes to the Father but by him. And dude evolution is just as stupid as you are explaining it. We come out of a "pool" and turn into monkeys then the monkeys evolve to humans.... thats just a bit on the imaginative side. And your one of those people going to hell dude unless you open your eyes. Athiesm is a religion because it is based on faith... and not "fact" and coming out of pools is screwed up too.

"well, tell that to the large numbers who have done just that. maybe you're not the true christian."

ok... none o the christians have ever tortured people... unlike athiests .....like at the Colombine incidince when the "good Athiests" came to school with guns and shot every christian there.

"only those who have incredibly weak faith need to take the bible literally. those who believe in the important parts, love, kindness, charity et c do not need to focus on the hate and bigotry. "

Only weak minded people rely on idiotic statements and refer to different versions or half the Bible.

50+ years after his suppsoed death.


this is assuming that jesus existed and was crucified. considering the strong resemblance between the jesus myth and the myths of various sun gods, it is likely that he did not exist.


... point out the passages, please. and getting the location of cities isn't hard, homer did it in the illiad, that doesn't mean that the gods of the ancient greeks were helping either side of the battle.


christianity promotes discrimination, hatred, torture, execution and torture of heretics... mysoginy,

atheists generally don't give a shit if you leave them alone. if you went up to a person and asked them what religion they were and they said "none, i'm an atheist" and you said "oh, well i'm a chrsitian." chances are they would say "alright..." and go about their business. unless you were to say "i'm a christian and you're going to burn in hell!" in which case it may irk them a little.


actually, the king james version has been demonstrated to be the most biased version for political purposes. the nsrv is supposed to be best, it has been translated more directly than the kjv.


that depends on which part of the bible you read.


well, tell that to the large numbers who have done just that. maybe you're not the true christian.


and the proof for this outside of the bible is...?


evolution and the big bang do not contradict science.

please explain to me how the big bang contradicts science and i'll tear your argument to threads. let's start with a preemptive shreading... the laws of thermodynamics do not apply outside the universe... with no universe, there are no physical laws, before the big bang (not that there was time before the big bang) there was no universe.


yet the messiah was supposed to have accomplished everythign in one lifetime...


prayer has been shown in studies to have no affect on the health of patients in hospitals... if you could show a study where praying for a result continuously gives the desired result, then please, by all means, link it up.


one can believe that the universe was formed in a big bang and still believe in a deity... similarly with evolution. the two concepts are only exclusive to those who have very weak faith.


so are the sutras evidence of brahmin?


as far as i know, we are all one and all that is is brahmin...

or we all owe prometheus for giving us the gift of fire.


... not really... good try though.


no it doesn't.

before any life of any kind could begin on earth, the sun would have to be preforming fusion and would have had to blow off most of the dust in its accretion disk. the earth and the sun formed at roughly the same time, the earth would have been still forming as the sun made the transition from protostar to star as it would still be accreting matter from the planetary disk. the sun was made if anything, before the earth, and long before the earth was habitable. i.e. had stopped being molten.


only those who have incredibly weak faith need to take the bible literally. those who believe in the important parts, love, kindness, charity et c do not need to focus on the hate and bigotry.

The bible doesn't focus on hatred. If you have read or are reading the Bible you would know that.
0 = 999 is impossible. Never will happen. Also, Big Bang states that all matter was compressed. Black hole. Impossible for anyhting to ever get away from it. So much for your preemtive shredding.
Also, without a God you cannot prove existance.
The KJV was translated by multiple ppl and was cross referenced with multiple other translations.
The bible also says that there is one way to heaven no matter what, through the death of something else to take the punishment of our sin. Since Jesus was the Lamb of God and was meant to die for our sins then that is the only way.
The messiah wasn't supposed to accomplish everything in one lifetime. First time around was to offer salvation not to just the Jews but to the Gentiles also. Second time around is the end of the world. Read the Bible for goodness sakes if your going to try to disprove it.
Studies don't mean squat since many are biased. Also, how do you know that studies have shown that prayer has no effect on ppl? You sure the study wasn't politically biased as you claimed the KJV Bible was?
Brahmin? What are you talking about? If you created a robot that disobeyed you, wouldn't the robot owe you? Especially if you gave it choice.

"before any life of any kind could begin on earth, the sun would have to be preforming fusion and would have had to blow off most of the dust in its accretion disk. the earth and the sun formed at roughly the same time, the earth would have been still forming as the sun made the transition from protostar to star as it would still be accreting matter from the planetary disk. the sun was made if anything, before the earth, and long before the earth was habitable. i.e. had stopped being molten."

Not if the Earth was already made. Also how do you know the Earth and the Sun were made at roughly the same time? Were you there? No. Also, gravity would be a problem since everything would be pulled in to the object with the most gravity. Therefore, we don't exist if what you say is true.
You divide the Bible then you are altering the word of God which is forbidden in the Bible.
Also, evidence in the way of bones and skulls that have malnutrition or arthritis can look a lot different from our own.

Ok... one you can't get to heaven if you don't believe Jesus was the Son of God. The Bible says that Jesus is the only way to heaven no one comes to the Father but by him. And dude evolution is just as stupid as you are explaining it. We come out of a "pool" and turn into monkeys then the monkeys evolve to humans.... thats just a bit on the imaginative side. And your one of those people going to hell dude unless you open your eyes. Athiesm is a religion because it is based on faith... and not "fact" and coming out of pools is screwed up too.

The Theory Of Evolution for Dummies:

It is a dark and chaotic world, 4 billion years before present day. The primordial soup, made up of the chemicals to create life, bubbles due to the heat from the volcanic vents. In the sky, lighting comes from the dark, poisonous clouds made up of Carbon Dioxide and many other bad chemicals. After a while, the chemicals in the pool(aided by the pure energy of lightning) begin to create bacteria. For the next 3,000,000,000,000 or so years, they begin to become more complex and emit oxygen into our atmoshpere. Once the onceans become suitable for multi-cellular life, small, boneless fish evolve.

From there evolve the molusks, and then the trilobites. For hundreds of millions of years, strange and wonderful creatures rule the deep. The land is a scorching desert, where nothing lives. Yet. After a few million more years, a massive extinction occurs under the ocean. Due to the fact that it has been changed irreperably, creatures begin to slowly advance on to land(which takes a few million years). Plants have already started, so the little tiny bugs which emerge find food already there for them.

From there the creatures evolve into bigger and larger creatures. Large cousins of modern-day bugs emerge, and all kinds of wonderous creatures evolve. Unfortunately, alot of them are wiped out in even MORE extinctions. Then comes the time of dinosaurs. Our great great great ancestors, the first mammals, emerge at this time. They are about the size of mice. Once the dinosaurs are wiped out, the mice-things(who managed to survive because of their size) begin to grow larger to take the dinosaurs place. They first have to contend with the Giant Birds(who rule for a few million years), but eventually they take over. This world is mammal.

Around 4 million years ago, our first ancestors emerged. They were really just apes with different body structures, but they were smarter. And then the next group of humans came and wiped the first ones out around 3 million years ago. And then those guys were wiped out 2 million years ago, and then we reach [i]Homo erectus. They build huts and tools, and begin to learn stuff. Then the Neanderthals come, and invent language, religion, villages, and other stuff. Then we, Homo sapiens sapiens, emerge. We invent civilization, writing, and all that we have now. That is the road to us."

(I may have gotten the dates wrong, but thats baisically what happened.)

The Theory Of Evolution for Dummies:

It is a dark and chaotic world, 4 billion years before present day. The primordial soup, made up of the chemicals to create life, bubbles due to the heat from the volcanic vents. In the sky, lighting comes from the dark, poisonous clouds made up of Carbon Dioxide and many other bad chemicals. After a while, the chemicals in the pool(aided by the pure energy of lightning) begin to create bacteria. For the next 3,000,000,000,000 or so years, they begin to become more complex and emit oxygen into our atmoshpere. Once the onceans become suitable for multi-cellular life, small, boneless fish evolve.

From there evolve the molusks, and then the trilobites. For hundreds of millions of years, strange and wonderful creatures rule the deep. The land is a scorching desert, where nothing lives. Yet. After a few million more years, a massive extinction occurs under the ocean. Due to the fact that it has been changed irreperably, creatures begin to slowly advance on to land(which takes a few million years). Plants have already started, so the little tiny bugs which emerge find food already there for them.

From there the creatures evolve into bigger and larger creatures. Large cousins of modern-day bugs emerge, and all kinds of wonderous creatures evolve. Unfortunately, alot of them are wiped out in even MORE extinctions. Then comes the time of dinosaurs. Our great great great ancestors, the first mammals, emerge at this time. They are about the size of mice. Once the dinosaurs are wiped out, the mice-things(who managed to survive because of their size) begin to grow larger to take the dinosaurs place. They first have to contend with the Giant Birds(who rule for a few million years), but eventually they take over. This world is mammal.

Around 4 million years ago, our first ancestors emerged. They were really just apes with different body structures, but they were smarter. And then the next group of humans came and wiped the first ones out around 3 million years ago. And then those guys were wiped out 2 million years ago, and then we reach [i]Homo erectus. They build huts and tools, and begin to learn stuff. Then the Neanderthals come, and invent language, religion, villages, and other stuff. Then we, Homo sapiens sapiens, emerge. We invent civilization, writing, and all that we have now. That is the road to us."

(I may have gotten the dates wrong, but thats baisically what happened.)

How do you know that's how it happened? There is no evidence that I can't say that is corrupt or has some flawed method of dating. Also, how come we don't have half pigs half-horses, or quater pigs-34 horses? There is no evidence. Another thing, if we are all mistakes then 9/11 wasn't anything to complain about, or ppl jump[ing off bridges b/c eventually we'll be fire proof or compression proof. Allow me to say "When Hell freezes over."

Oh ya, beleive what you want we'll know in the end.

0 = 999 is impossible. Never will happen.

Eeehm - what does this mean ?

Also, Big Bang states that all matter was compressed. Black hole. Impossible for anyhting to ever get away from it. So much for your preemtive shredding.
No it doesn't. Understanding what it *does* claim requires a rather extensive knowledge of university level mathematics though. The explanations science gives are not the same as those brutal simplifications some sites state and then proceed to attack.

Also, without a God you cannot prove existance.
Existance of .. what ?

Studies don't mean squat since many are biased.
Which is why scientific studies are published in magazines and get commented on by other scientists. Science *likes* being corrected (not all scientists do though - they're only human after all..)

Brahmin? What are you talking about? If you created a robot that disobeyed you, wouldn't the robot owe you? Especially if you gave it choice.
Owe ? What do you mean ?
Does the child conceived by the rape of his mother owe the biological father anything ?
Does a son have to follow his father, even if that father is a monster? Or less extreme: if they have different opinions, should the son copy those of his father ?

Also how do you know the Earth and the Sun were made at roughly the same time? Were you there? No. Also, gravity would be a problem since everything would be pulled in to the object with the most gravity. Therefore, we don't exist if what you say is true.

You say people should read the Bible before they comment on it. I agree.
Now I say you should read at least a basic textbook on stellar evolution (or physics and biology for that matter) before making these claims. And then realise you read a *basic* book.

The bible doesn't focus on hatred. If you have read or are reading the Bible you would know that.
i have read the bible. and there is much discrimination in it. that may not be the focus (well, the old testament was rather full of genocide sanctioned by god...) and many christians seem to focus more on hateful passages (thou shalt not suffer a witch to live, for instance)

0 = 999 is impossible.
what does that have to do with anything?

Also, Big Bang states that all matter was compressed. Black hole. Impossible for anyhting to ever get away from it. So much for your preemtive shredding.
... first of all, black holes do evaporate, it's called hawking radiation, particles can and do get away from them. i suggest you look up hawking radiation.

secondly, that is not how the big bang starts. the big bang starts with a singularity, this does not mean that it starts with a black hole, though a black hole is also a singularity... they are not one and the same.

i suggest that you read up on the theory and actually understand it before you try to say it's wrong. it makes you look foolish.

Also, without a God you cannot prove existance.
only if you're descartes. his ontological argument was quite weak, perhaps you could come up with something on your own?

The KJV was translated by multiple ppl and was cross referenced with multiple other translations.
and was written with a bias towards king james and what he wanted to say. it was also translated from translations. the nsrv attempts to get things from the original source.

The bible also says that there is one way to heaven no matter what, through the death of something else to take the punishment of our sin. Since Jesus was the Lamb of God and was meant to die for our sins then that is the only way.
the passsage where jesus says that it is only through him that one enters heaven can also be interpreted as through following his actions. it was his later followers who corrupted the religion to make it exclusive of all others.

Studies don't mean squat since many are biased. Also, how do you know that studies have shown that prayer has no effect on ppl? You sure the study wasn't politically biased as you claimed the KJV Bible was?
no, it was a blind study. they gave some groups of people pictures and information about some patients and had them pray for the people who were in the hopsital to get better. there was no indication that the prayer had any effect on the patient's recovery. the results were about the same for the prayer group vs the non-prayer group in terms of recovery vs death.

Brahmin? What are you talking about? If you created a robot that disobeyed you, wouldn't the robot owe you? Especially if you gave it choice.
in hindhuism, brahmin is all that there is. it is multifaceted being both divine (brahma, vishnu, shuva being the principle dieties) and well, the rest of the world. all is one and all is brahmin unless i'm misunderstanding the religion (i'm not hindhu, i've only studied it a little)

Not if the Earth was already made. Also how do you know the Earth and the Sun were made at roughly the same time? Were you there? No.
we can observe the formation of other solar systems and see how they form. it makes sense that our solar system would form in the same manner. what i described is planet formation based on current observations.

Also, gravity would be a problem since everything would be pulled in to the object with the most gravity. Therefore, we don't exist if what you say is true.
well, we are constantly falling into the sun. however, we have velocity in the tangential as well as the radial direction, this is why we go around the sun instead of spiralling into it.
by your thinking, the moon would spiral into the earth. however, it does not as it is outside the synchronicity (takes more than one earth day to orbit) and it is in a prograde orbit (orbits in the same direction as the earth rotates) now, in the instance of mars, there is one moon inside the synchronicity ratio and one outside, the one that is inside will smash into mars and the one outside will be lost due to the energy that it will gain in its attempts to tidally slow mars' orbit. uranus' moon triton will end up smashing into uranus, as it orbits in a retrograde sense. though it will more likely be torn into pieces forming a ring system...

Also, evidence in the way of bones and skulls that have malnutrition or arthritis can look a lot different from our own.
what does that have to do with anything?

ok... none o the christians have ever tortured people... unlike athiests .....like at the Colombine incidince when the "good Athiests" came to school with guns and shot every christian there.
1. shooting someone with a gun is a lot more humane than ripping off their breasts with hot pincers and stretching them on racks.
2. it is actually a myth that the columbine kids shot that one girl for saying that she believed in jesus. check out snopes.com for that one
3. the columbine shootings had less to do with the kids being atheists and more to do with the kids having been alienated bt their peers for their whole lives...

Ok... one you can't get to heaven if you don't believe Jesus was the Son of God. The Bible says that Jesus is the only way to heaven no one comes to the Father but by him. And dude evolution is just as stupid as you are explaining it. We come out of a "pool" and turn into monkeys then the monkeys evolve to humans.... thats just a bit on the imaginative side. And your one of those people going to hell dude unless you open your eyes. Athiesm is a religion because it is based on faith... and not "fact" and coming out of pools is screwed up too.
Are you sure you understand the concept of the gene pool? It sounds like you don't, but I'm not sure.

And evolution does not necessarily entail coming from nothing at the beginning of time.

How do you know that's how it happened? There is no evidence that I can't say that is corrupt or has some flawed method of dating. Also, how come we don't have half pigs half-horses, or quater pigs-34 horses? There is no evidence. Another thing, if we are all mistakes then 9/11 wasn't anything to complain about, or ppl jump[ing off bridges b/c eventually we'll be fire proof or compression proof. Allow me to say "When Hell freezes over."

Oh ya, beleive what you want we'll know in the end.

WTF?

You make NO sense. You go from half-pigs to 9/11 to hell.

And evoluion does work that way, dolt! Don't criticize something YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND. Thats called ignorance. At least I KNOW the theory of Creationism. I don't think you understand Evolution, you 9 year old elementary student.

"well, tell that to the large numbers who have done just that. maybe you're not the true christian."

ok... none o the christians have ever tortured people... unlike athiests .....like at the Colombine incidince when the "good Athiests" came to school with guns and shot every christian there.
No Christians have tortured people? That's an outright lie.
Look at the Crusades and the inquisition. Who did that, eh?

"Good Atheists"? Nobody ever said the Columbine murderers were good. Just because they believe in the same thing the Atheists do, doesn't mean the Atheists like them.

At least I KNOW the theory of Creationism. I don't think you understand Evolution, you 9 year old elementary student.
nitpick: creationism isn't a theory.

All of you are crazy. I talk to Jesus every day. He's my Mexican gardner.

What the Bible says about homosexuality, contrary to the view of certain members of the christian right (http://www.whosoever.org/bible/)

nitpick: creationism isn't a theory.

?

Whattaya mean? If its an idea that hasn't been proven, then isn't it a theory? Or is it a belief...

All of you are crazy. I talk to Jesus every day. He's my Mexican gardner.

Heh, you are right!

I live in Panama, and in Latin America Jesus(pronounced Hey-zeus!) is a popular name,

Whattaya mean? If its an idea that hasn't been proven, then isn't it a theory? Or is it a belief...
first of all, a theory has to make predictions, creationism does not do that.
secondly, a theory must be able to be disproven... one cannot prove or disprove the existence of a deity, one can also not test creationism in an attempt to disprove it.

it is thus not a theory.

evolution does make predictions (transitional fossils for instance, before they were found they were predicted to have been found, or hell, fossils of animals that do not exist anymore are things that you would expect to find if life evolved) it can also be tested and disproven (of something really weird shows up along the way, it can disprove the current theory, at which point it must be adapted or abandoned)

I live in Panama, and in Latin America Jesus(pronounced Hey-zeus!) is a popular name,
hell, i live in canada and i met a guy named jesus on the bus.

hell, i live in canada and i met a guy named jesus on the bus.
I met a guy named Jesus in the streets in New York, but I don't think it counts, since he was busy proclaiming himself as the Second Coming.

You're all losing focus, were talking about Jesus-- not evolution or creationism or translations of the bible or aetheism. Lets stay on topic, thats what makes this educational and enlightening for everybody.
I invite you all to look at my post on page 37 and ponder on it and ask questions or point out logical fallacies or what not. And in regards to what someone else said about it:
yes, the disciples did tell everybody that they were disciples of Jesus. But no one back then, including the disciples, knew what that meant. The disciples could have very easily just maintained christianity as a philosophy of sorts and continued to live their normal lives. In fact, thats what they did soon after Jesus was crucified. No one would have thought differently of them, they never before said that they were gonna go all around the world preaching their philosophy to the death. it was a long while after jesus died that they all discovered such a purpose, in what was known as the Pentacost.

Perhaps I can shed some light on why there are no options other than Son of God, lunatic, or liar.
You see, Jesus said in the Bible that he is the Son of God, the Messiah, and the one and only truth. So that means one of 3 things: he was telling the truth, he was a liar, or he was crazy.


Well, starting at the top. The bible was not actually written by Jesus, so he did not say anything in it. What there is in the bible is the representation of a figure by other individuals. So the options you give of: he was telling the truth, he was a liar, or he was crazy, are not all encompassing. There is also the possibility that he never actually existed, and is the creation of a group of social control myth makers. I know, the devout christians will not like thaty, but it is a logical possibility. There is also the possibility, more probable, in my opinion, that he existed, but the events and actions surrounding his life have been exaggerated.

But then again, how can we trust the testimony of the disciples, many of whom authored the New Testament? There are 3 similiar options for them: they either gave an accurate description of Jesus's life and teachings, made it all up, or suffered from delusion/brainwashing.

Again, the options are not exhaustive. How about they made some of it up. Based on events that happened, maybe in one person's life, maybe in the lives of several people, concatenated into a single life for the message to be given.
The testaments were not written at the time of the events, but much later. I do not know how old you are, but I guess that if I challenged you to write a detailed record of the activities of your best childhood friend now, you could do so, but without certainty with regard to the truthfulness of your account.
You have not been brainwashed, nor are you deluded, you simply are a person equipped with the normal imperfect human memory.




Then again, they could just be lying. The gospel could just be a complete fabrication by the disciples so that they could be rich and powerful or respected, or maybe just for a lark. But if thats the case, why would the disciples paint themselves as foolish, childlike, and cowardly? Those are not qualities to be admired. Instead they chose to give all of the admirable qualities and credit to another man, Jesus-- who was 'dead'. And once the disciples became apostles and started spreading Jesus's teachings they did not live like kings-- no, far from it. They would have lived richer lives had they continued with their former professions. For years they each went around the the known world, being persecuted, insulted, beaten, and imprisioned for their beliefs. They were always warned to stop preaching the gospel, but instead only preached it louder. In the end the disciples and apostles all got what they had comming to them-- they were executed. Some were stoned, some were burned, some were crucified, some were sawed in half. Why would they be willing to go through such things if they knew that the whole thing was a lie? The truth is they believed.

Their belief is not the doubt, their veracity is the doubt. If they held the individual Jesus in high esteem, they would be very likely to exaggerate the stories they tell of him. Like a proud grandson telling of his grandfather's exploits in the Second World War. Their representation of themselves as being lesser souls, only increases the likelyhood that the gospels are exaggerated.
I am not saying that they deliberately exaggerated or sought to mislead the ir readership. They may well have genuinely believed what they were writing, just they could have been wrong.


That would mean that their accounts of Jesus's life and teachings are accurate, thus Jesus really did say things like "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can get to the father except through me." No holy man or prophet would say those things, so he must have been crazy or lying. Or he could have been telling the truth.

Unfortunately it does not. It just means the disciples believed that these things were said. Not that they actually were said.

In effect all we have is hearsay evidence, which, as you probably are aware, is not reliable nor dependable. Sorry.

To add on what alien born said, according to the new testament all but one of the disciples of jesus were executed for there faith If they had just denied there faith there lives could have been spared but they didn't if they were lying then why did they not deny there faith to survive. and why also didnt jesus do the same so we can effectively say they believed what they died for

1. shooting someone with a gun is a lot more humane than ripping off their breasts with hot pincers and stretching them on racks.
2. it is actually a myth that the columbine kids shot that one girl for saying that she believed in jesus. check out snopes.com for that one
3. the columbine shootings had less to do with the kids being atheists and more to do with the kids having been alienated bt their peers for their whole lives...


When did christians ever rip peoples breasts off and no the kids from the columbine incident did shoot mainly at christians.

WTF?

You make NO sense. You go from half-pigs to 9/11 to hell.

And evoluion does work that way, dolt! Don't criticize something YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND. Thats called ignorance. At least I KNOW the theory of Creationism. I don't think you understand Evolution, you 9 year old elementary student.

If I'm the 9 year old elementary student then your the liar that told me that to kill someone was okay, that we don't have to follow rules, that we're all mistakes which are worth absolutely nothing. I do understand Evolution for your information.

You could also be called ignorant b/c you don't see that there should be millions of species that are half breeds or etc. But there aren't. Still in the long run, I have something which opposed to contrary beleive is proovable, is as non-biased as possible b/c the KJV was actually translated by ppl who didn't beleive that and also money tends to make ppl want to do jobs right anyhow. Checking with othe translations alos simply means that they have more resources to make sure their right.

Big Bang states that all the matter was compressed into an extremely small space. Therefore the gravity would have be exedingly great. Also, even if matter escaped, it would all spin in one direction or not at all. Yet however, many planets spin in different directions.

Also, without a supernatural being you cannot prove that matter exists at all. 0=999 is what the Big Bang theory says. I'll look up the theory of stellar evolution maybe but there are problems with it.

Also, if God can do anything then he could make the Earth in 6 days(less if he wanted to). The bones claimed to be Neanderthals have the same properties of that someone with malnutrition might have and traces of what might have been arthritis have also been found.

Note: we won't get anywhere with arguments about physical evidence. That is why I am proposing that you look at it this way. If atheism is right we all 1) die and that's the end 2) reincarnation 3) other. If Christianity is right, Christians go to heaven and everyone else goes to Hell. Out of those 2 groups, who wins either way? the Christians. Add in the Muslims (and from what I understand about it), everyone has same chance of going to Heaven since not even Mohammed I've heard has even said that he cannot secure aybody a place in Heaven or paridise. Add in Jews, then their belief comes in. And so on. But Atheists have the least chance of winning in either situation.

Are you sure you understand the concept of the gene pool? It sounds like you don't, but I'm not sure.

And evolution does not necessarily entail coming from nothing at the beginning of time.


Dude i'm not talking about gene pools I'm talking about pools of mud. Well ok maybe there was something there but I know that the only way scientists have ever been able to make protiens was to have them in an environment with no air and lets say there was no air then we become alive and breathing ...but wait oh ya there' s no air.... so we die. That makes a lot of sense.

No Christians have tortured people? That's an outright lie.
Look at the Crusades and the inquisition. Who did that, eh?

"Good Atheists"? Nobody ever said the Columbine murderers were good. Just because they believe in the same thing the Atheists do, doesn't mean the Atheists like them.

But what they did is essentially what atheism encourages. The fact that death doesn't matter since we are all mistakes with no future (or at least a bleek one) and that there's no reason to follow rules.

The Crusades had some parts that were uncalled for yes. The inquisition I have never heard but tell me, did you hear what the Russians did to some Christians after WW2. The Russian Athesits tortured and (cruely) murdered many Christians at their leisure.

Allow me to correct myself then. Perfect Christians and True Christians wouldn't/shouldn't torture. Catholics probably did but I beleive that Christians which follow the Bible wouldn't have done any of that.

Mistaken by whom? his disciples? the Bible is an accurate account of what Jesus said. (if you need me to go into it i will)The most redicilous statement repeated over and over again. NOTHING in the New Testament is accurate. NO AUTHOR in it ever knew or met Cheeses. It's like me writing about someone who lived 40 years ago without having media or anything to give any reports.
BTW if god ever decided to send his son on earth to unmake the original sin and time does not matter for god, why is it of any relevance who this son would be and when he lived? If you believe in god as portrayed in the Bible, then Jesus is irrelevant.

No Christians have tortured people? That's an outright lie.
Look at the Crusades and the inquisition. Who did that, eh?

"Good Atheists"? Nobody ever said the Columbine murderers were good. Just because they believe in the same thing the Atheists do, doesn't mean the Atheists like them.


Ok maybe I can refresh your memory of the crusades....
1.Some of them might have been christians while others were Catholics... or just hired mercinaries.

Awful choices! And your post is just as offensive as "Son of God (please don't tell me you're this stupid).
Ignorance aside, I'd probably go so far as to say that a man named Jesus existed. Great story. I also like the ones about the Buddha, Mohammed, Zoroastria, Krishna and many others.

i have read the bible. and there is much discrimination in it. that may not be the focus (well, the old testament was rather full of genocide sanctioned by god...) and many christians seem to focus more on hateful passages (thou shalt not suffer a witch to live, for instance)


what does that have to do with anything?


... first of all, black holes do evaporate, it's called hawking radiation, particles can and do get away from them. i suggest you look up hawking radiation.

secondly, that is not how the big bang starts. the big bang starts with a singularity, this does not mean that it starts with a black hole, though a black hole is also a singularity... they are not one and the same.

i suggest that you read up on the theory and actually understand it before you try to say it's wrong. it makes you look foolish.


only if you're descartes. his ontological argument was quite weak, perhaps you could come up with something on your own?


and was written with a bias towards king james and what he wanted to say. it was also translated from translations. the nsrv attempts to get things from the original source.


the passsage where jesus says that it is only through him that one enters heaven can also be interpreted as through following his actions. it was his later followers who corrupted the religion to make it exclusive of all others.


Firstly, most Christians don't focus on the hatred. Secondly, the main theme of the Old Testament is about the first coming of Christ which brings in salvation. New Testament talks about him but also about his Second coming which is to rule the world. How is saying that there is one way to heaven exclusive? Where does it say in the Bible that such an such ppl shall not enter Heaven (except for parts about non-believers since they have sin as we all do but have refused to accept the way to heaven as the Bible says). The original source of the Bible has probably already been rewritten at least once so tell me, would it be better to trust an older translation which was written by very knowledgable ppl or to trust a younger one that is probably more affected by political bias or the way ppl speak nowadays and simplification.

Ok maybe I can refresh your memory of the crusades....
1.Some of them might have been christians while others were Catholics... or just hired mercinaries.

JESUS! YOU PEOPLE ARE STUPID!

Catholics ARE Christians! Look at it this way:

..........................Christianity
..............................|
..............................|
....................______|________
....................|........|.............|
....................|.........|.............|
...........Catholics.......|..............|
...........................Protestants....|
........................................Orthodox/other

Catholicisim, Protestantism, and Orthodoxism are all different sub-divisons of Christianity. Some of them have even MORE sub-divisions, others not.

2. DURING THE CRUSADES THERE WERE NO PROTESTANTS, JUST CATHOLICS

The Crusades were in the 1000's. Protestantism was invented in the 1500's. Five-hundred years later

So all the people who fought the crusades were christians.

The most redicilous statement repeated over and over again. NOTHING in the New Testament is accurate. NO AUTHOR in it ever knew or met Cheeses. It's like me writing about someone who lived 40 years ago without having media or anything to give any reports.
BTW if god ever decided to send his son on earth to unmake the original sin and time does not matter for god, why is it of any relevance who this son would be and when he lived? If you believe in god as portrayed in the Bible, then Jesus is irrelevant.

The disciples wrote the New Testament probably shortly after his death. Also Jesus is relevant b/c he is the Son of god according to the Bible. His life matches up with the prophesies concerning his first coming. The New Testament is acurate also because a good deal of it is letters written to different churches.

To the christians here, how can you claim to understand what the son of god is when you dont even understand yourselves? I spit on your weakness and idiocies. Can you blame me for spitting on those who bow down to ideals they cant fully comprehend? To people who bow down at all? If there is a god, why worship and lower yourself before him? Youre nothing more than slaves, wastes of life.

Awful choices! And your post is just as offensive as "Son of God (please don't tell me you're this stupid).
Ignorance aside, I'd probably go so far as to say that a man named Jesus existed. Great story. I also like the ones about the Buddha, Mohammed, Zoroastria, Krishna and many others.

But his story matches up with old testament prophesies.

JESUS! YOU PEOPLE ARE STUPID!

Catholics ARE Christians! Look at it this way:

..........................Christianity
..............................|
..............................|
....................______|________
....................|........|.............|
....................|.........|.............|
...........Catholics.......|..............|
...........................Protestants....|
........................................Orthodox/other

Catholicisim, Protestantism, and Orthodoxism are all different sub-divisons of Christianity. Some of them have even MORE sub-divisions, others not.

2. DURING THE CRUSADES THERE WERE NO PROTESTANTS, JUST CATHOLICS

The Crusades were in the 1000's. Protestantism was invented in the 1500's. Five-hundred years later

So all the people who fought the crusades were christians.

Catholics are not by the Biblical definition Christians. And don't take the Lord's name in vain for goodness sakes. Christianity also was "invented" at the time of Christ's life. Catholism came later.

To the christians here, how can you claim to understand what the son of god is when you dont even understand yourselves? I spit on your weakness and idiocies. Can you blame me for spitting on those who bow down to ideals they cant fully comprehend? To people who bow down at all? If there is a god, why worship and lower yourself before him? Youre nothing more than slaves, wastes of life.

But we have a purpose and a choice. better to believe in a reason for life and following good rules than to believe that life is fruitless. Also, until we die we will never be able to fully comprehend God.

When did christians ever rip peoples breasts off and no the kids from the columbine incident did shoot mainly at christians.

The ripping of breasts is likely to be an example of Inquisition techniques.

The Columbine incident, was mainly boys shooting at the children who had bullied them for years.... if those people were christian.. they were pretty sorry examples of christianity.

The ripping of breasts is likely to be an example of Inquisition techniques.

The Columbine incident, was mainly boys shooting at the children who had bullied them for years.... if those people were christian.. they were pretty sorry examples of christianity.

But I've heard that they in some ways or at least some of them targeted Christians in particular. Also, might I say what was the Inquisition? Probably some Catholic event. Not to insult the Catholics but I've heard many unpleasant things about them.

Catholics are not by the Biblical definition Christians. And don't take the Lord's name in vain for goodness sakes. Christianity also was "invented" at the time of Christ's life. Catholism came later.

Yes, but Catholicism WAS christianity UNTIL the protestants split with the church!

EVERY coutry in Europe belonged to the Catholic Church OR Paganism. There was no other.

Yes, but Catholicism WAS christianity UNTIL the protestants split with the church!

EVERY coutry in Europe belonged to the Catholic Church OR Paganism. There was no other.

No there probably was. Catholism is not Christianity b/c Christianity is the belief that there was a Jesus who was the Son of God, that he died and rose again for our sins, and that he was the only way to heaven.

But I've heard that they in some ways or at least some of them targeted Christians in particular. Also, might I say what was the Inquisition? Probably some Catholic event. Not to insult the Catholics but I've heard many unpleasant things about them.

1. Stop insulting my, my families, and most of the christian worlds sect of Christianity. I've got the picture you dis-like us. Now stop rubbing it in my face. Even though im not a devout member, it's pissing me off.

2. The inquisistion was before the rise of Protestantism as well.

If you're going to defend Jesus, at least not do it the racist/religionist way.

No there probably was. Catholism is not Christianity b/c Christianity is the belief that there was a Jesus who was the Son of God, that he died and rose again for our sins, and that he was the only way to heaven.

...

It just doesnt get in your head, does it?

YES, there WERE other sects of Christianity. They were called Armenian Orthodox(in Armenia, the Middle East), Russian Orthodox(in Russia), and Greek Orthodox(in Greece). Now, EVERYONE else(The German city-states, the Italians, the Spaniards, the Portugese, the English, the Scottish, the Irish, the French, the Belgians, the Swiss, the Sicilians, etc.) belonged to the Catholic Church. ALOT of them split away(like the English, the Germans, the Swiss, the Belgians to name a few) and joined Protestantism, but the majority of the worlds Christians stayed Catholic. Thus the reason why Catholicism is the biggest religious sect in the world(it is a sect of Christianity).

Contrary to your belief, Catholics believe that the way to heaven is through Jesus as well.

Please add the option "Was a Prophet". I believe he was a prophet as Moses and Mohammed were, but you didn't think to put that as an option. I only vote when there is something worth voting on.

I do not believe Jesus was any more the son of God than every other human who is born. We are all metaphorically God's children.

Make a serious poll and I'll vote.

I've been doing some reading lately on this topic. I was raised by fundamentalist Christian parents, rejected all of that, etc., etc.

But I was frustrated by the problem in the original post. Jesus was either a god or he was a lunatic or he didn't exist. Well, it seems clear to me he wasn't any of those things (nope, quoting scripture for me won't change my mind, save yourself the effort).

Two books I'd suggest: The Birth of Christianity, by Joel Carmichael and The Trial of Jesus by Haim Cohn.

The thing I've learned that I had never really considered was that Jesus was a political figure who opposed the Roman occupation. He preached the coming "Kingdom of God" which was to be God's intervention in helping expel the Romans from the holy land. The phrase "take up your cross" referred to joining this political movement, knowing that the Romans might well kill you for your efforts.

Jesus made a bid for power by entering the city, taking over the temple, etc. The Romans executed him, and after his death his legend took on a life of its own (which is a kind of resurrection, I suppose). But I think Jesus would be shocked to see what his agitation became after his death.

lol, time to pull out old European History notes huh? Raise your hand if you know who Martin Luther was... and no, he's not the guy who is the reason why I'm not at work today.

I find it amazing that so many Protestants and others think that Catholics are not Christians. To me, a non-Christian, it just doesn't make sense...

Yes, but Catholicism WAS christianity UNTIL the protestants split with the church!

EVERY coutry in Europe belonged to the Catholic Church OR Paganism. There was no other.

Sorry it was not. Being a Christian in the middle ages, was just that being a Christian. Roman Catholicism only came into existence with the era of the two popes, Rome vs Aquitain and the Cathechism of the Pope in Rome. So until that event christian was simply christian. Not catholic, not protestant. I do not know the history of the Orthodox Christian churches, so maybe they existed. Someone else will have to answer that one.

1. Stop insulting my, my families, and most of the christian worlds sect of Christianity. I've got the picture you dis-like us. Now stop rubbing it in my face. Even though im not a devout member, it's pissing me off.
2. The inquisistion was before the rise of Protestantism as well.
If you're going to defend Jesus, at least not do it the racist/religionist way.
Protestants just burned as many witches as did Catholics. What's the point about the Holy Inquisition? One must assume both groups must have been entirely braindead, anyways. There exists no hint that it might have changed since then, and reading this forum only shows how stupid the "true" worshippers of Cheeses and his alleged father really still are. They cannot even see the real world, and they want to teach others what the heavens are made of ????

Sorry it was not. Being a Christian in the middle ages, was just that being a Christian. Roman Catholicism only came into existence with the era of the two popes, Rome vs Aquitain and the Cathechism of the Pope in Rome. So until that event christian was simply christian. Not catholic, not protestant. I do not know the history of the Orthodox Christian churches, so maybe they existed. Someone else will have to answer that one.
What? :rolleyes:

lol, time to pull out old European History notes huh? Raise your hand if you know who Martin Luther was... and no, he's not the guy who is the reason why I'm not at work today.

I find it amazing that so many Protestants and others think that Catholics are not Christians. To me, a non-Christian, it just doesn't make sense...

I know!

I know alot about Martin Luther, what he did, and how he changed the face of Christianity forever. However, some of his modern followers believe strange things. Up in the Catholic North-east(where I am from), for example, they know that they are Christians and so are Protestants. In the heavily-Protestant south they act like we are barbarous Pagans that stab and kill everyone and eat our children.

...

It just doesnt get in your head, does it?

YES, there WERE other sects of Christianity. They were called Armenian Orthodox(in Armenia, the Middle East), Russian Orthodox(in Russia), and Greek Orthodox(in Greece). Now, EVERYONE else(The German city-states, the Italians, the Spaniards, the Portugese, the English, the Scottish, the Irish, the French, the Belgians, the Swiss, the Sicilians, etc.) belonged to the Catholic Church. ALOT of them split away(like the English, the Germans, the Swiss, the Belgians to name a few) and joined Protestantism, but the majority of the worlds Christians stayed Catholic. Thus the reason why Catholicism is the biggest religious sect in the world(it is a sect of Christianity).

Contrary to your belief, Catholics believe that the way to heaven is through Jesus as well.

The point is that before the reformation, there was no sect called Catholic. Catholic is a term that is used in opposition to Protestant, and prior to Luther et al. the term used for those who believed that the path to Heaven lay through Jesus was Christian.

Note. I am not saying that Catholics are not Christians, I am saying that the concept Catholic did not exist prior to the reformation.

I know!

I know alot about Martin Luther, what he did, and how he changed the face of Christianity forever. However, some of his modern followers believe strange things. Up in the Catholic North-east(where I am from), for example, they know that they are Christians and so are Protestants. In the heavily-Protestant south they act like we are barbarous Pagans that stab and kill everyone and eat our children.Martin Luther was a self-centered anti-semite with no understanding for ancient times at all. The Emperor should have had him executed at once. Really.

Sorry it was not. Being a Christian in the middle ages, was just that being a Christian. Roman Catholicism only came into existence with the era of the two popes, Rome vs Aquitain and the Cathechism of the Pope in Rome. So until that event christian was simply christian. Not catholic, not protestant. I do not know the history of the Orthodox Christian churches, so maybe they existed. Someone else will have to answer that one.

Thats what I said. Catholicism WAS Christianity. They just started to call it Catholicism after the split. Christianity was lead by the Pope in Rome, and the traditions and stuff were the same as modern-day Catholicism.

The point is that before the reformation, there was no sect called Catholic. Catholic is a term that is used in opposition to Protestant, and prior to Luther et al. the term used for those who believed that the path to Heaven lay through Jesus was Christian.

Note. I am not saying that Catholics are not Christians, I am saying that the concept Catholic did not exist prior to the reformation.

Yes, but they were still there. They just changed the name.

The point is that before the reformation, there was no sect called Catholic. Catholic is a term that is used in opposition to Protestant, and prior to Luther et al. the term used for those who believed that the path to Heaven lay through Jesus was Christian.
Note. I am not saying that Catholics are not Christians, I am saying that the concept Catholic did not exist prior to the reformation.Wrong. Get a history book. Or use google.

Thats what I said. Catholicism WAS Christianity. They just started to call it Catholicism after the split. Christianity was lead by the Pope in Rome, and the traditions and stuff were the same as modern-day Catholicism.

The problem then is the way you phrased it. To say that Catholicism was Christianity carries an implication that any other Christian sect is wrongheaded and has got its Christianity wrong somehow. I am sure this is not what you meant. The Catholic traditions are certainly older, but this does not necessarily mean better.

I was born and raised in Protestant England,and now live in Catholic Brazil. They are both predominantly Christian.

Thats what I said. Catholicism WAS Christianity. They just started to call it Catholicism after the split. Christianity was lead by the Pope in Rome, and the traditions and stuff were the same as modern-day Catholicism.
Catholicism never WAS Christianity. Do you believe all propaganda? There have always been Orthodox, Armenian and Coptic Churches.

Catholicism never WAS Christianity. Do you believe all propaganda? There have always been Orthodox, Armenian and Coptic Churches.

Ok, I'm sorry. I knew I forgot the Coptics...

I shoulda said

"Catholicism WAS Christianity in all of Europe except for Greece and Russia. All the soldiers fighting in the Crusades came from nations such as England, France, Spain, and other Catholic nations."

Better?

Ok, I'm sorry. I knew I forgot the Coptics...
I shoulda said
"Catholicism WAS Christianity in all of Europe except for Greece and Russia. All the soldiers fighting in the Crusades came from nations such as England, France, Spain, and other Catholic nations."
Better? :) A sentence like "Catholicism WAS Christianity in all of Europe except for Greece and Russia." is completely pointless. Why don't you just say "The Roman Catholic Church was the most influential Christian organization all over Europe ever since 800 (or even earlier) all through the Middle Ages" ?

:) A sentence like "Catholicism WAS Christianity in all of Europe except for Greece and Russia." is completely pointless. Why don't you just say "The Roman Catholic Church was the most influential Christian organization all over Europe ever since 800 (or even earlier) all through the Middle Ages" ?

Hmmmm...

Good idea!

AHEM!

"The Roman Catholic Church was the most influential Christian organization all over Europe ever since 800 (or even earlier) all through the Middle Ages"

:D

See? :D

Once again were talking about Jesus, not the Big Bang, the Catholic Church, or Columbine. Everybody focus.
In response to objections to my post on page 37 (which i still hold to be solid)
here are some things to think about:
If you were to ask me to tell the story of one of my best friends from my childhood, how much would i be able to remember. Honestly, probably not much. I would be able to think of some stuff, but id forget plenty of details. Whats different with the disciples and Jesus? Well they were hardly childhood friends, almost all of them were in their 30's or so. And despite what many of you keep saying, the gospels were written only a few years after Jesus's death. How many years? I dont know, but less than 10.
Also, the disciples shared more than just a friendship with Jesus; the disciples followed Jesus everywhere for 3 whole years. Every meal that they had in that time, they had with him. Every night during that time, they spent with him. Everyday during that time they would ask him questions and listen to his message. This would have a deep impact on their lives and would be burned into their memory.
But of course the disciples were people, and people can't remember everything. People can't remember all the details of something that happened years ago-- maybe more details than usual in this case, but certainly not all of them.
There are 4 gosples in the bible, written by 4 different disciples. In the gosples we see very similar descriptions of the life of Jesus, but they all include a slighltly different combination of details. Heres an example: the criminals who were crucified with Jesus. In the book of Matthew it simply says that there were two criminals crucified with Jesus, and that they "shouted insults at him." In the book of Mark it simply says that there were two criminals crucified with Jesus and that they "ridiculed him." In the book of Luke there is a great deal of detail: the two criminals were brothers, they were crucified on either side of Jesus, one said to Jesus "if youre the son of God, prove it by saving yourself and us while youre at it." the other rebuked him saying "Dont you fear God even now? We deserve to die for our evil deeds, but this man has done nothing wrong." then he turns to Jesus and reportedly says "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom." Jesus then reportedly says "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise." And finally in the book of John it says that "there were two others crucified with him, one on either side, with Jesus between them."
The point: the disciples vary greatly in their details of the event, but none of them contradict the others. They vary in their detail because they all remember this event to different extents. They didnt all remember everything, but what they couldnt remember they just left out. so to make the assumptiom that what they did write down they remembered very well wouldn't be a mistake.

Jesus certainly did exist. I believe the Bible was inspired by God, but written by mortals with some corruption. However, in the books of Isiah and Jeremiah in the OT there are many prophecies predicting the rise of Jesus. The fact that all these prophecies were fulfilled is in itself enough to prove the legitmacy of Jesus.

Also, if you accept the story of the Gospel, than as the poll goes, Jesus must either have been who He said He was, a liar, or a lunatic, for reasons explained earlier in the post.

But, if you are unwilling to accept the story as its told, then ALL of His disciples must have been liars AND lunatics. Why would they have risked their lives for a cause they knew was untrue? If Jesus didn't ressurect like the Gospels say He did, then the religion would have died with Jesus. It wasn't until the Resurection of Christ that the religion was validated in the first place. The idea that so many people would be so willing to face such persecution and execution for a fallacy is absurd. And that for me is enough proof. As for anything else that is unprovable, faith alone should be suffeceint for belief.

But I think we are all missing the point in arguing about this. Whether or not Jesus is the Son of God should not affect whether or not we should follow His teachings. He taught peace, compassion, humility, acceptance, and love. Anyone who is a true believer in Christ should not condescend to an athiest or Muslim. It is not our job to judge our fellow humans, becuase it is God who is the judge. Man was created to Love, not to fight.

Thankyou :)

BTW if god ever decided to send his son on earth to unmake the original sin and time does not matter for god, why is it of any relevance who this son would be and when he lived? If you believe in god as portrayed in the Bible, then Jesus is irrelevant.

Because "god as portrayed in the Bible" was unique in His role as a personal, loving God who cared for His people. Therefore, His actions are designed to be felt and accepted by human beings living in a simpler, time-based existence. He did not send Jesus to accomplish a task for Himself, but to bring salvation and understanding to humans -- thus Jesus's discrete existence, far from being "irrelevent," is of the upmost importance.

could be that he had reached the "state of godhood" the perfection of the being *without being the "son of god" as he is generally known as, a gnostic concept...we're all divine, that forms my belief system anyway...course i'm an atheist so it's all good.

To the christians here, how can you claim to understand what the son of god is when you dont even understand yourselves? I spit on your weakness and idiocies. Can you blame me for spitting on those who bow down to ideals they cant fully comprehend? To people who bow down at all? If there is a god, why worship and lower yourself before him? Youre nothing more than slaves, wastes of life.

Seriously, i think my life would be more sad if i never believed anything that i cannot fully comprehend... i can't comprehend the number of grains of sand on a beach or many other things to do with nature, i can't comprehend why my brain gets deja vu, i cant comprehend why i fall for certain guys and not for others... im not claiming to be perfect, im human and i understand that i am weak... And because i understand that i worship God who can understand things that i could never understand who sees me in the worst parts of my life at my weakest moments, at my most helpless and pathetic, at my most anry and hating and still loves me enough to send down his son to die for me... He created these things that i cannot understand... and i worship him

But his story matches up with old testament prophesies.

Actually - it misses on several points, and, in some cases, the Baha'i faith seems to have a better match for Messiah.

But, all that is irrelevent... because he 'matches' up in an unverifiable fashion (no OTHER evidence, outside the bible) with stories that were written BEFORE he existed.

Well, if I wanted to invent a story of Messiah... I'd make sure my fiction matched the previous recorded version.... so, who is to say that DIDN'T happen with Jesus?

But I've heard that they in some ways or at least some of them targeted Christians in particular. Also, might I say what was the Inquisition? Probably some Catholic event. Not to insult the Catholics but I've heard many unpleasant things about them.

Catholics follow the teachings of Paul.

Paul was 'elected' as the base of the 'church' by Jesus, also called 'Christ'.

Therefore, Catholics ARE Christians... whether other sects like it or not.

Secondly... Columbine... if the bullies who made lives hell for the so-called "Trenchcoat Mafia" were good christians: 1) Why were they bullying other children... that MUST be against the teachings of Christ; 2) How does that matter anyway? They attacked the bullies... if those bullies were christian... surely it was more about the bullying , than about the religion.

Once again were talking about Jesus, not the Big Bang, the Catholic Church, or Columbine. Everybody focus.
In response to objections to my post on page 37 (which i still hold to be solid)
here are some things to think about:
If you were to ask me to tell the story of one of my best friends from my childhood, how much would i be able to remember. Honestly, probably not much. I would be able to think of some stuff, but id forget plenty of details. Whats different with the disciples and Jesus? Well they were hardly childhood friends, almost all of them were in their 30's or so. And despite what many of you keep saying, the gospels were written only a few years after Jesus's death. How many years? I dont know, but less than 10.
Also, the disciples shared more than just a friendship with Jesus; the disciples followed Jesus everywhere for 3 whole years. Every meal that they had in that time, they had with him. Every night during that time, they spent with him. Everyday during that time they would ask him questions and listen to his message. This would have a deep impact on their lives and would be burned into their memory.
But of course the disciples were people, and people can't remember everything. People can't remember all the details of something that happened years ago-- maybe more details than usual in this case, but certainly not all of them.
There are 4 gosples in the bible, written by 4 different disciples. In the gosples we see very similar descriptions of the life of Jesus, but they all include a slighltly different combination of details. Heres an example: the criminals who were crucified with Jesus. In the book of Matthew it simply says that there were two criminals crucified with Jesus, and that they "shouted insults at him." In the book of Mark it simply says that there were two criminals crucified with Jesus and that they "ridiculed him." In the book of Luke there is a great deal of detail: the two criminals were brothers, they were crucified on either side of Jesus, one said to Jesus "if youre the son of God, prove it by saving yourself and us while youre at it." the other rebuked him saying "Dont you fear God even now? We deserve to die for our evil deeds, but this man has done nothing wrong." then he turns to Jesus and reportedly says "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom." Jesus then reportedly says "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise." And finally in the book of John it says that "there were two others crucified with him, one on either side, with Jesus between them."
The point: the disciples vary greatly in their details of the event, but none of them contradict the others. They vary in their detail because they all remember this event to different extents. They didnt all remember everything, but what they couldnt remember they just left out. so to make the assumptiom that what they did write down they remembered very well wouldn't be a mistake.

Once again were talking about Jesus, not the Big Bang, the Catholic Church, or Columbine. Everybody focus.
In response to objections to my post on page 37 (which i still hold to be solid)
here are some things to think about:
If you were to ask me to tell the story of one of my best friends from my childhood, how much would i be able to remember. Honestly, probably not much. I would be able to think of some stuff, but id forget plenty of details. Whats different with the disciples and Jesus? Well they were hardly childhood friends, almost all of them were in their 30's or so. And despite what many of you keep saying, the gospels were written only a few years after Jesus's death. How many years? I dont know, but less than 10.
Also, the disciples shared more than just a friendship with Jesus; the disciples followed Jesus everywhere for 3 whole years. Every meal that they had in that time, they had with him. Every night during that time, they spent with him. Everyday during that time they would ask him questions and listen to his message. This would have a deep impact on their lives and would be burned into their memory.
But of course the disciples were people, and people can't remember everything. People can't remember all the details of something that happened years ago-- maybe more details than usual in this case, but certainly not all of them.
There are 4 gosples in the bible, written by 4 different disciples. In the gosples we see very similar descriptions of the life of Jesus, but they all include a slighltly different combination of details. Heres an example: the criminals who were crucified with Jesus. In the book of Matthew it simply says that there were two criminals crucified with Jesus, and that they "shouted insults at him." In the book of Mark it simply says that there were two criminals crucified with Jesus and that they "ridiculed him." In the book of Luke there is a great deal of detail: the two criminals were brothers, they were crucified on either side of Jesus, one said to Jesus "if youre the son of God, prove it by saving yourself and us while youre at it." the other rebuked him saying "Dont you fear God even now? We deserve to die for our evil deeds, but this man has done nothing wrong." then he turns to Jesus and reportedly says "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom." Jesus then reportedly says "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise." And finally in the book of John it says that "there were two others crucified with him, one on either side, with Jesus between them."
The point: the disciples vary greatly in their details of the event, but none of them contradict the others. They vary in their detail because they all remember this event to different extents. They didnt all remember everything, but what they couldnt remember they just left out. so to make the assumptiom that what they did write down they remembered very well wouldn't be a mistake.

The 4 gospels weren't written by 4 disciples.

And, you have no idea how long after the 'death' of Jesus the 'Gospels' were written, so don't claim figure.

Okay -let's assume, apart from the (possibly accidental) untruths above - that the Disciples learned the truth of the Gospels from Jesus' own lips.

I don't buy it, sorry. How did Jesus know what happened when he was a foetus? Sure, he was a smart guy, and all... but, to know about world politics, in an age before mass media... whilst still in the uterus?

The 'Gospels' are stories, that may or may not have elements of truth in them. What you SHOULD be looking at is the Teachings of Jesus - because that is the 'spirit' of the book.

Apart from that, the only thing that can be verified is that a man called Jesus probably lived... and almost certainly died.... but not necessarily where, when and how, the text shows.

The 4 gospels weren't written by 4 disciples.

And, you have no idea how long after the 'death' of Jesus the 'Gospels' were written, so don't claim figure.

Okay -let's assume, apart from the (possibly accidental) untruths above - that the Disciples learned the truth of the Gospels from Jesus' own lips.

I don't buy it, sorry. How did Jesus know what happened when he was a foetus? Sure, he was a smart guy, and all... but, to know about world politics, in an age before mass media... whilst still in the uterus?

The 'Gospels' are stories, that may or may not have elements of truth in them. What you SHOULD be looking at is the Teachings of Jesus - because that is the 'spirit' of the book.

Apart from that, the only thing that can be verified is that a man called Jesus probably lived... and almost certainly died.... but not necessarily where, when and how, the text shows.



What its not all literal truth :eek:

The 4 gospels weren't written by 4 disciples.

And, you have no idea how long after the 'death' of Jesus the 'Gospels' were written, so don't claim figure.

Okay -let's assume, apart from the (possibly accidental) untruths above - that the Disciples learned the truth of the Gospels from Jesus' own lips.

I don't buy it, sorry. How did Jesus know what happened when he was a foetus? Sure, he was a smart guy, and all... but, to know about world politics, in an age before mass media... whilst still in the uterus?.

dont buy what? what argument do you think that I am making? Im not trying to convince you that Jesus was the Son of God or not. Im just trying to prove that he was either crazy, lying, or the Son of God. why will you not conceed this? just as you say, assuming that the disciples (who did write the gospels) wrote down only what they remembered for sure Jesus saying than "how could Jesus have known about things before he was born?" exactly, he couldnt have! How/why could he claim such things? He couldnt claim such things if he was a sane person. Therefore, he was either super natural in some way, insane, or lying out of his butt. I conceed those 3 things, will you?

Catholics follow the teachings of Paul.

Paul was 'elected' as the base of the 'church' by Jesus, also called 'Christ'.

Therefore, Catholics ARE Christians... whether other sects like it or not.

Secondly... Columbine... if the bullies who made lives hell for the so-called "Trenchcoat Mafia" were good christians: 1) Why were they bullying other children... that MUST be against the teachings of Christ; 2) How does that matter anyway? They attacked the bullies... if those bullies were christian... surely it was more about the bullying , than about the religion.
Who was elected what? I have no idea how goddamn Paul came into the story at all. He had no connection to Jesus whatsoever and he just started doing his own thing, against Jesus' brother and disciples.

Once again were talking about Jesus, not the Big Bang, the Catholic Church, or Columbine. Everybody focus.
In response to objections to my post on page 37 (which i still hold to be solid)
here are some things to think about:
If you were to ask me to tell the story of one of my best friends from my childhood, how much would i be able to remember. Honestly, probably not much. I would be able to think of some stuff, but id forget plenty of details. Whats different with the disciples and Jesus? Well they were hardly childhood friends, almost all of them were in their 30's or so. And despite what many of you keep saying, the gospels were written only a few years after Jesus's death. How many years? I dont know, but less than 10.
Also, the disciples shared more than just a friendship with Jesus; the disciples followed Jesus everywhere for 3 whole years. Every meal that they had in that time, they had with him. Every night during that time, they spent with him. Everyday during that time they would ask him questions and listen to his message. This would have a deep impact on their lives and would be burned into their memory.
But of course the disciples were people, and people can't remember everything. People can't remember all the details of something that happened years ago-- maybe more details than usual in this case, but certainly not all of them.
There are 4 gosples in the bible, written by 4 different disciples. In the gosples we see very similar descriptions of the life of Jesus, but they all include a slighltly different combination of details. Heres an example: the criminals who were crucified with Jesus. In the book of Matthew it simply says that there were two criminals crucified with Jesus, and that they "shouted insults at him." In the book of Mark it simply says that there were two criminals crucified with Jesus and that they "ridiculed him." In the book of Luke there is a great deal of detail: the two criminals were brothers, they were crucified on either side of Jesus, one said to Jesus "if youre the son of God, prove it by saving yourself and us while youre at it." the other rebuked him saying "Dont you fear God even now? We deserve to die for our evil deeds, but this man has done nothing wrong." then he turns to Jesus and reportedly says "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom." Jesus then reportedly says "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise." And finally in the book of John it says that "there were two others crucified with him, one on either side, with Jesus between them."
The point: the disciples vary greatly in their details of the event, but none of them contradict the others. They vary in their detail because they all remember this event to different extents. They didnt all remember everything, but what they couldnt remember they just left out. so to make the assumptiom that what they did write down they remembered very well wouldn't be a mistake.
You know NOTHING about Christianity and its origins at all, so just shut up!

You know NOTHING about Christianity and its origins at all, so just shut up!
Maybe if you use a bigger font it will make you seem more intelligent

Maybe if you use a bigger font it will make you seem more intelligent

Hell, I'M convinced. :)

dont buy what? what argument do you think that I am making? Im not trying to convince you that Jesus was the Son of God or not. Im just trying to prove that he was either crazy, lying, or the Son of God. why will you not conceed this? just as you say, assuming that the disciples (who did write the gospels) wrote down only what they remembered for sure Jesus saying than "how could Jesus have known about things before he was born?" exactly, he couldnt have! How/why could he claim such things? He couldnt claim such things if he was a sane person. Therefore, he was either super natural in some way, insane, or lying out of his butt. I conceed those 3 things, will you?

Lying: Only if he was NOT capable of doing the things recorded, was not present in the places recorded, claimed that he WAS... AND the Bible is accurate.

Crazy: Again - only if the bible is accurate, AND he claimed to do things that he didn't really do.

Son of God: Only if the bible is utterly accurate, AND the assumption is made that he was the Son of God.

Personally, I am instinctively drawn to a fourth option: the book just isn't that accurate.

In that case, Liar, Crazy, or Son of God become irrelevent.

@Uqisi
"ok... none o the christians have ever tortured people."


Did you have an abusive home that you had to sleep in history classes?

Go to google and search for "inquisition", "witches of Salem", "Hexenhammer", "witch hunt" (no that was not invented by McCarthy).

You might also read some history books about the conquest of America by the catholics and the killing of indegenous people and their torture on the search for gold.

@Teckor

"Catholism is not Christianity"

Well, another sleeper of history classes.

Sometime after the (Christian) Church was founded, it split into two -

Roman-Catholic (Vatican, Rome) and the Orthodox (Constantinople, after Emperor Constantine, who mad Christianity a state religion).
The Roman-Catholoc was also called the Western Church and the Orthodox the Eastern Church (now there are also others in the East, like Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Armenian, etc.) And in the West you have the Amish, the Catholics, the Protestants, and some more.


Even within the Catholics you had many sects, and all fighting against each other, because everyone had the opinion, that only his interpretation of the bible was the right one. (Nice Movie: The name of the rose)

The catholic church also invented the holy inquisition.

BTW, this all happened in Europe, when America was inhabitated just by indegenous people and had probably just been visited by the Chinese under Admiral-Eunuch Zhang.

The Bible did not arrive by fax from Heaven

Personally, I am instinctively drawn to a fourth option: the book just isn't that accurate.

Brian: I'm not the Messiah! Will you please listen? I am not the Messiah, do you understand? Honestly!
Girl: Only the true Messiah denies His divinity.
Brian: What? Well, what sort of chance does that give me? All right! I am the Messiah!
Followers: He is! He is the Messiah!
Brian: Now, fuck off!
[silence]
Arthur: How shall we fuck off, O Lord?

I'm not answering the poll because it does not reflect my beliefs.

The bible was not wrote by Jesus. It was wrote by his possible followers, maybe decades after he had "died".

Jesus had some good ideas, and they have been implemented into society, and they work. Just because a few things he "said" were false does not mean we have to rubbish him entirely. I think his story was falsified a bit, all you have to do is look at the confliction in the four gospels.

The most simple explination is normally the correct one. There is not much to prove Jesus was the son of God, therfore we can assume he was a man who was fighting against the Roman occupation. Perhaps he thought the coming of the messiah would have spurred the Jews on the fight against them?

Good ideas, yes, but not the son of God. You can see how human his feelings are by reading what he says. We certainly can assume that he is not the son of God considering how different to "God's nature he is. God must be either weak (he doesn't stop things like the tsunami), stupid (He didn't know about the tsunami), evil (he caused the tsunami), or indifferent (He didn't know about the tsunami). Thats if he has any human feelings at all. What would he need for feelings? Why did he create the world? Of course, he might not exist as well!

Brian: I'm not the Messiah! Will you please listen? I am not the Messiah, do you understand? Honestly!
Girl: Only the true Messiah denies His divinity.
Brian: What? Well, what sort of chance does that give me? All right! I am the Messiah!
Followers: He is! He is the Messiah!
Brian: Now, fuck off!
[silence]
Arthur: How shall we fuck off, O Lord?

Ah, the Gospel of Brian, as told in the Epistles of St. Monty, of the Pythons.

"He's NOT the Messiah... He's a VERY naughty boy".

@Uqisi
"ok... none o the christians have ever tortured people."

But what about the merry little jaunt across the holy land from around 1000 - 1300 AD? The power hungry and greedy knights of the crusades sound kike the many fundamentalist nutters who are about today. They (the crusader knights) killed thousands...and they were just their own men...

dude...wtf?

Jesus is the "son" of god and my personal savior. Need I say more?
Um...Yes, you actually do. You can't make us explain every nuance of science, and then just explain your beliefes with "Well ya just gotta believe"

@Uqisi
"ok... none o the christians have ever tortured people."

But what about the merry little jaunt across the holy land from around 1000 - 1300 AD? The power hungry and greedy knights of the crusades sound kike the many fundamentalist nutters who are about today. They (the crusader knights) killed thousands...and they were just their own men...
They had their most holy land stolen from them, and they were some of the most devout humans on the face of the planet. They are obviously not gonna just accept that the Muslims or whoever(i think it was the muslims) stole their land.

Um...Yes, you actually do. You can't make us explain every nuance of science, and then just explain your beliefes with "Well ya just gotta believe"
That is part of having faith ... they DO explain just about everything with faith rather then detail

Mistaken by whom? his disciples? the Bible is an accurate account of what Jesus said. (if you need me to go into it i will)
OMG, a book said it! I didn't know that, it must be true then! Uh, try getting some hard evidence people.

Catholicism never WAS Christianity. Do you believe all propaganda? There have always been Orthodox, Armenian and Coptic Churches.

You're right. The popes are all lying fags that are trying to cover up that catholicism was never christianity. How come I never thought of that!?(sarcasm if you're too retarded to understand)

Because "god as portrayed in the Bible" was unique in His role as a personal, loving God who cared for His people. Therefore, His actions are designed to be felt and accepted by human beings living in a simpler, time-based existence. He did not send Jesus to accomplish a task for Himself, but to bring salvation and understanding to humans -- thus Jesus's discrete existence, far from being "irrelevent," is of the upmost importance.
yes..."discrete".....hmmm....I fail to see the logic of that. If he was doing this, the people he was doing it for would not understand it had happened. Plus, Jesus obviously wasn't very "discrete" if he was doing enough annoying stuff to get himself arrested nd nailed to a frickin cross! Why wouldn't he just not actually have a son, but just go into the head of a person already alive, so that people would know that it is important if the knew Bob for all these years and sacrifices himself for his "God". Half of this makes no sense, and the other half is just funny.

I don't understand how people can belive a religion based on people dead for thousands of years and an old book. I'm gonna start Ozism. It has Dorothy as the goddes and the Tin Man as her right hand man. The enforcers of her laws would be munchkins, and their henchmen the flying monkeys. Anyone wanna start it with me. Oh, as for proof, I saw a movie with a bunch of this stuff in it, and I had a vision. Be warned, I have schizophrenia, but I'm positive it w-was real!*twitch*
:upyours:


Can you blame me for spitting on those who bow down to ideals they cant fully comprehend? To people who bow down at all? If there is a god, why worship and lower yourself before him? Youre nothing more than slaves, wastes of life.

I hate the idea of God. It makes no sense. But riddle me this batman. Can you answer every question about life? You understand an insanely small percentage of the scientific knowledge in the universe, and you probably know just as little about science as do the crazy believers of god know about him

Ive made some mistakes in some of my previous posts and it would only be right of me to set the record straight: the 4 gospels were written by apostles, not disciples, between 25 and 35 years after the death of Jesus. I admit that these facts make the argument that ive made up to this point (starting on page 37) somewhat void. I apologize for the false presumptions. I guess i was wrong. Maybe Jesus didnt exist at all. But now im wondering about something else...
Ive seen stuff like this in some posts:

The 'Gospels' are stories, that may or may not have elements of truth in them. What you SHOULD be looking at is the Teachings of Jesus - because that is the 'spirit' of the book.

other people have called Jesus a prophet or a teacher who was misunderstood, etc

at first I didnt think anything of it, but now im intrigued: what does this mean? Do we all admit that the New Testament contains, at least to some degree, the teachings of Jesus of Navereth? wether your answer is yes or no, i suppose the questions that we should investigate now are:
1) If it isnt Jesus's teachings, than whose teachings are they?
2) If it wasnt Jesus's teachings, than why would someone attribute them to him?
3) If Jesus did have teachings at all, why would the people who spread them alter them?

This post made no claims or assumptions (no, i did not assume that Jesus existed or that he was a teacher of any kind or that the bible is accurate). This post did nothing but pose questions. That means that the only valid responses to this post are those that attempt to find answers to 1 or more of the 3 questions above. I'm opened minded, I hope you would all be open minded as well.

Mistaken by whom? his disciples? the Bible is an accurate account of what Jesus said. (if you need me to go into it i will) The Muslims believe that he was a prophet and that the "son of God" saying was misquoted. I believe he was the Son of God (I know this has probably been said before, sorry).

yes..."discrete".....hmmm....I fail to see the logic of that. If he was doing this, the people he was doing it for would not understand it had happened. Plus, Jesus obviously wasn't very "discrete" if he was doing enough annoying stuff to get himself arrested nd nailed to a frickin cross! Why wouldn't he just not actually have a son, but just go into the head of a person already alive, so that people would know that it is important if the knew Bob for all these years and sacrifices himself for his "God". Half of this makes no sense, and the other half is just funny.

Discrete != discreet.

A dictionary sometimes comes in handy, unless you're just trying to mock people and don't care about what they're really saying. If you'd like to criticise my post, please see it in its proper context as a reply to another post in which the meaning of "discrete" was made quite clear.

I believe the dude existed, there's too much rap about him for it to be completely untrue. I just don't think he was exactly as the Big Boring Book Of Outrageous Myths will tell you. Storytellers tend to polish up heroes like that. Hey, maybe Jesus was a big womanizer? Hell, maybe he was gay?

About being the Son of the christian God? I doubt it. Who really knows? I'm not saying a no or a yes before I see something proving it true or proving it wrong.

...would be cool, though. Jesus would totally torch the Vatican when he'd come back.

Ah, the Gospel of Brian, as told in the Epistles of St. Monty, of the Pythons.

"He's NOT the Messiah... He's a VERY naughty boy".
You two have inspired me to go find the DVD and watch that movie again.

You know NOTHING about Christianity and its origins at all, so just shut up!

I don't care if it rains or freezes,
Long as I got my plastic Jesus
Sittin' on the dashboard of my car

Comes in colors pink and pleasant
Glows in the dark 'cause He's iridescent
Take Him with you when you travel far

Git yerself a Sweet Madonna
Dressed in rhinestones sittin' on a
Pedestal of abalone shell

Goin' ninety, I ain't scary
Long as I got my Virgin Mary
Assurin' me that I won't go to Hell

You know NOTHING about Christianity and its origins at all, so just shut up!
Please refrain from flaming.

I don't care if it rains or freezes,
Long as I got my plastic Jesus
Sittin' on the dashboard of my car

Comes in colors pink and pleasant
Glows in the dark 'cause He's iridescent
Take Him with you when you travel far

Git yerself a Sweet Madonna
Dressed in rhinestones sittin' on a
Pedestal of abalone shell

Goin' ninety, I ain't scary
Long as I got my Virgin Mary
Assurin' me that I won't go to Hell

This does demonstrate a real problem in Christianity right now. It pisses me off, cause these kinds of false Christians give the rest a bad name.

Oh speaking to the whole did Jesus exist at all issue, a professor came to our campus from La Verne to perform an archaelogical presentation on the life of Jesus. I didn't go, but a couple of my roommates did. I'll ask them about it and get back to y'all.

Oh speaking to the whole did Jesus exist at all issue, a professor came to our campus from La Verne to perform an archaelogical presentation on the life of Jesus. I didn't go, but a couple of my roommates did. I'll ask them about it and get back to y'all.

Yeah thanx... i'd like to hear it :)

other people have called Jesus a prophet or a teacher who was misunderstood, etc

at first I didnt think anything of it, but now im intrigued: what does this mean? Do we all admit that the New Testament contains, at least to some degree, the teachings of Jesus of Navereth? wether your answer is yes or no, i suppose the questions that we should investigate now are:

1) If it isnt Jesus's teachings, than whose teachings are they?

Whichever individual or group wrote/compiled/edited/whatever the gospels may have added their own specific spin to existing teachings, or may have invented everything whole cloth, whether or not some sort of Jesus actually existed. In other words, if the teachings aren't Jesus', then they likely belong to some later philosopher-type putting words into the mouth of a man whose existence or lack thereof ceases to be important (because he's being fictionalized anyways).


2) If it wasnt Jesus's teachings, than why would someone attribute them to him?

It adds legitimacy to an argument to put them in the mouth of somebody in a position of authority. If Jesus was real, then they were taking advantage of an existing figure's popularity to push their own agenda. If he wasn't, they were inventing an authority figure (the son of God, no less) to give voice to their own opinions.

3) If Jesus did have teachings at all, why would the people who spread them alter them?

Because they may have disagreed with things he said, or may simply have had more interest pushing their own agendas then popularizing his. There's also the equally, if not more, likely option of unintentional corruption of the original message: misquotes, mistranslations, inaccurate word-of-mouth descriptions, or whatever. Keep in mind that a lot of work was being done on the Bible quite some time after the life of this theoretical Jesus. Think of things that, say, Rasputin may have said, less than a century ago, and how many ways they could be inaccurate when quoted today. Then consider that the amount of time is probably larger, reporting less reliable, and linguistic differences at least as problematic.


This post made no claims or assumptions (no, i did not assume that Jesus existed or that he was a teacher of any kind or that the bible is accurate). This post did nothing but pose questions. That means that the only valid responses to this post are those that attempt to find answers to 1 or more of the 3 questions above. I'm opened minded, I hope you would all be open minded as well.

I'm trying, and it is very appreciated that you are as well ^_^

lol 666^

Word. Didn't even notice that. Didn't even think it was particularily anti-Christian :cool:

If Jesus did exist then he could have been the first Socialist agitator.

I must say that I find it objectionable that the last choice makes the accusation of stupidity.

Christian: anyone who believes Jesus to be the son of God, the only way to heaven, the Lamb for our sins, him resurecting himself. Original Christians were the followers of Christ and they certainly didn't have to confess sins to a priest or go through other things to get to heaven as is with the Roman Catholic belief. Also, God creates miracles for anyone if it will benefit the general purpose to get others to be in heaven ith him. Baby found alive after tsunami lying of a matress. Boy lives by clinging to tree for 3 days. Those are miracles and there are probably many more.


boy clings to tree =/= miracle

boy lifted from water by invisible force = miracle. where are the news reports.

a miracle needs to contravene the laws of science before it can be counted

You two have inspired me to go find the DVD and watch that movie again.

Yes! Best of the lot!

I might go watch it again, too.

Discrete != discreet.

A dictionary sometimes comes in handy, unless you're just trying to mock people and don't care about what they're really saying. If you'd like to criticise my post, please see it in its proper context as a reply to another post in which the meaning of "discrete" was made quite clear.

First of all, thank you Captain Obvious. I never thought of that, retard.

I understand what "discrete" meant and I knew that Jesus wasn't "discrete".
Notive the quotation marks around "discrete", meaning I was making fun of the way you spell it over and over again. I know it may be hard for you, but try using your brain before you respond to a post. :mad:

Catholics follow the teachings of Paul.

Paul was 'elected' as the base of the 'church' by Jesus, also called 'Christ'.

Therefore, Catholics ARE Christians... whether other sects like it or not.

Secondly... Columbine... if the bullies who made lives hell for the so-called "Trenchcoat Mafia" were good christians: 1) Why were they bullying other children... that MUST be against the teachings of Christ; 2) How does that matter anyway? They attacked the bullies... if those bullies were christian... surely it was more about the bullying , than about the religion.

Firstly, as I said before, Catholics aren't Christians b/c they believe that you have to go through multiple things in order to get to heaven. The Bible says that there is one way, through Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Secondly, I seriously doubt that the "Christians" were the bullies. Another thing for you to note is that the full name of Catholics is Roman Catholics. Note the Roman.

Firstly, as I said before, Catholics aren't Christians b/c they believe that you have to go through multiple things in order to get to heaven. The Bible says that there is one way, through Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Secondly, I seriously doubt that the "Christians" were the bullies. Another thing for you to note is that the full name of Catholics is Roman Catholics. Note the Roman.

Catholics do believe that Jesus is the only way.

@Uqisi
"ok... none o the christians have ever tortured people."

But what about the merry little jaunt across the holy land from around 1000 - 1300 AD? The power hungry and greedy knights of the crusades sound kike the many fundamentalist nutters who are about today. They (the crusader knights) killed thousands...and they were just their own men...

Firstly, any of the knights in the crusades who actually were Christians shouldn't have done some of the things that they did. That doesn't mean that Christians are bad, simply means ppl make mistakes.

Also, haven't you heard of what the Russian Atheists did to the Christians after WW2. They would murder, starve, beat, humiliate them in ways worse than the Nazis of Hitler.

The 4 gospels weren't written by 4 disciples.

And, you have no idea how long after the 'death' of Jesus the 'Gospels' were written, so don't claim figure.

Okay -let's assume, apart from the (possibly accidental) untruths above - that the Disciples learned the truth of the Gospels from Jesus' own lips.

I don't buy it, sorry. How did Jesus know what happened when he was a foetus? Sure, he was a smart guy, and all... but, to know about world politics, in an age before mass media... whilst still in the uterus?

The 'Gospels' are stories, that may or may not have elements of truth in them. What you SHOULD be looking at is the Teachings of Jesus - because that is the 'spirit' of the book.

Apart from that, the only thing that can be verified is that a man called Jesus probably lived... and almost certainly died.... but not necessarily where, when and how, the text shows.

Tell me though, do you know when the texts were written? Probably not. Secondly, the 4 gosples were written by the disciples, otherwise who were they written by? (Note: that was a rhetorical question) They had to have been written by the disciple otherwise they wouldn't hold up much or at all.

@Teckor

"Catholism is not Christianity"

Well, another sleeper of history classes.

Sometime after the (Christian) Church was founded, it split into two -

Roman-Catholic (Vatican, Rome) and the Orthodox (Constantinople, after Emperor Constantine, who mad Christianity a state religion).
The Roman-Catholoc was also called the Western Church and the Orthodox the Eastern Church (now there are also others in the East, like Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Armenian, etc.) And in the West you have the Amish, the Catholics, the Protestants, and some more.


Even within the Catholics you had many sects, and all fighting against each other, because everyone had the opinion, that only his interpretation of the bible was the right one. (Nice Movie: The name of the rose)

The catholic church also invented the holy inquisition.

BTW, this all happened in Europe, when America was inhabitated just by indegenous people and had probably just been visited by the Chinese under Admiral-Eunuch Zhang.

But the Roman Catholics aren't Christians. They are close but not quite. If they believed that Jesus was the way and the only part of the way to heaven then yes I can see them as Christians but they don't believe that. Also, it may have split from Christianity but it isn't part of it.

Firstly, as I said before, Catholics aren't Christians b/c they believe that you have to go through multiple things in order to get to heaven. The Bible says that there is one way, through Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Secondly, I seriously doubt that the "Christians" were the bullies. Another thing for you to note is that the full name of Catholics is Roman Catholics. Note the Roman.

First: you 'seriously doubt' that the bullies were christians... that doesn't matter. I don't much care about what you 'doubt'.

Present some evidence to support it, and we'll talk.

Second, the Bible also says faith without works is useless. So, just believing on Jesus doesn't get you in.

Third: Relevence of the NAME of Catholics? You think the church is full of Romans or something?

Firstly, as I said before, Catholics aren't Christians b/c they believe that you have to go through multiple things in order to get to heaven. The Bible says that there is one way, through Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Secondly, I seriously doubt that the "Christians" were the bullies. Another thing for you to note is that the full name of Catholics is Roman Catholics. Note the Roman.

....

Must....refrain....from....killling...mislead...nine year old...

CATHOLICS ARE CHRISTIANS!

Get this into your head! Christianity is divided into different groups! There are Orthodox Christians, Protestants, and Catholics(as well as other groups, like Coptics.). Saying that Catholics arent christians is like saying Sunni's aren't muslims or Orthodox Jews arent jews!

What about Russian, Greek, and Armenian Orthodox? Are they not christians because they have Russian, Greek, and Armenian in their names? Are followers of the Church of England not Christians because they have the word England in their name?

How would I know that Catholics are christians? Hmmmm...BECAUSE I AM ONE!. If Catholics aren't christians, then I am afraid that Christianity isn't the largest religion. Roman Catholicism(or Islam) is.

First: you 'seriously doubt' that the bullies were christians... that doesn't matter. I don't much care about what you 'doubt'.

Present some evidence to support it, and we'll talk.

Second, the Bible also says faith without works is useless. So, just believing on Jesus doesn't get you in.

Third: Relevence of the NAME of Catholics? You think the church is full of Romans or something?

The Romans had many gods so why would a Christian Church be called Roman. Secondly, the Bible may say that faith without works is useless but that doesn't mean that you won't go to heaven. Faith and works simply gives you more gifts to give to God. Salvation through Grace,not works. Thirdly, even if a few of the Christians were bullies, that doesn't mean that the Bible supports them. Simply means that being sinful won that time with them.

But the Roman Catholics aren't Christians. They are close but not quite. If they believed that Jesus was the way and the only part of the way to heaven then yes I can see them as Christians but they don't believe that. Also, it may have split from Christianity but it isn't part of it.

Yes, they do believe that Jesus is the only way to heaven. You have not read the cathecism have you?

1. Stop insulting my, my families, and most of the christian worlds sect of Christianity. I've got the picture you dis-like us. Now stop rubbing it in my face. Even though im not a devout member, it's pissing me off.

2. The inquisistion was before the rise of Protestantism as well.

If you're going to defend Jesus, at least not do it the racist/religionist way.

Sorry. But the fact is that Catholics aren't Christians according to the Bible.

Catholics do believe that Jesus is the only way.

Actually, they dont. They believe that you still have to go through all these ceremonies and so on and that you will go to purgatory if you don't complete all of them and that then they have to pay the Churhc until you get to Heaven.

Sorry. But the fact is that Catholics aren't Christians according to the Bible.

Where in the bible does it say "Catholics are not Christians because they follow what Paul said." Paul was one of the disciples too, y'know? Are you saying that one of your precious disciples, *gasp*, lied?

....

Must....refrain....from....killling...mislead...nine year old...

CATHOLICS ARE CHRISTIANS!

Get this into your head! Christianity is divided into different groups! There are Orthodox Christians, Protestants, and Catholics(as well as other groups, like Coptics.). Saying that Catholics arent christians is like saying Sunni's aren't muslims or Orthodox Jews arent jews!

What about Russian, Greek, and Armenian Orthodox? Are they not christians because they have Russian, Greek, and Armenian in their names? Are followers of the Church of England not Christians because they have the word England in their name?

How would I know that Catholics are christians? Hmmmm...BECAUSE I AM ONE!. If Catholics aren't christians, then I am afraid that Christianity isn't the largest religion. Roman Catholicism(or Islam) is.

Catholics aren't according to the Bible b/c they believe that you have to go through ceremonies and confess your sins to a priest, not to God. Also, that you have to pay to get to heaven if you don't have all the ceremonies.

Where in the bible does it say "Catholics are not Christians because they follow what Paul said." Paul was one of the disciples too, y'know? Are you saying that one of your precious disciples, *gasp*, lied?

No, someone misinterpreted what they read. On accident or on purpose. Also, I haven't read that Paul said that you have to confess your sins to a priest to have them forgiven by God.

Um...Yes, you actually do. You can't make us explain every nuance of science, and then just explain your beliefes with "Well ya just gotta believe"

But you have to "just gotta believe" that whatever scientists say must be true. Even when there's evidence against it.

Actually, they dont. They believe that you still have to go through all these ceremonies and so on and that you will go to purgatory if you don't complete all of them and that then they have to pay the Churhc until you get to Heaven.

No, they do not believe what you said. They do believe that Jesus is the only way to heaven. They do believe in purgatory but they believe that you will go there regardless of whether you completed all of the sacraments or not. Obviously they do not believe everyone has to complete all of the sacraments because one of the sacraments is marriage and they dont have a problem with unmarried believers (priests are unmarried). The sacraments are not necessary for salvation according to catholics. No one has to pay the church anything for you to get to heaven. What you are talking about is a practice that was popular in alot of churches over 500 years ago and was abolished by the pope.

So christians are only those, who follow the Bible to the letter?
There is a more apropriate term for that:
Fundamentalism.
Look it up.

Tell me though, do you know when the texts were written? Probably not. Secondly, the 4 gosples were written by the disciples, otherwise who were they written by? (Note: that was a rhetorical question) They had to have been written by the disciple otherwise they wouldn't hold up much or at all.

I'm not going to discuss this with you, if you have NO IDEA what you are talking about.

Please - before you argue... do a little research.

You are just going to embarrass yourself.

Protestants just burned as many witches as did Catholics. What's the point about the Holy Inquisition? One must assume both groups must have been entirely braindead, anyways. There exists no hint that it might have changed since then, and reading this forum only shows how stupid the "true" worshippers of Cheeses and his alleged father really still are. They cannot even see the real world, and they want to teach others what the heavens are made of ????


What? :rolleyes:

This thread only shows how the blind look to the blind for help. Such as athesits looking to other atheists for the begining when they can't even see where their belief is leading them if you were to take it as it actually means.

I am a Christian also and i belive that Jesus the Nazarite was not only a real person. ( there is plenty of evidence of that but that he was the Son of God. in fact the founder of Harvard university took all the evidence he could find and threw out all the evidence that was purely speculation and concluded that Jesus's resurrection is as much history as the battle of troy.

No, they do not believe what you said. They do believe that Jesus is the only way to heaven. They do believe in purgatory but they believe that you will go there regardless of whether you completed all of the sacraments or not. Obviously they do not believe everyone has to complete all of the sacraments because one of the sacraments is marriage and they dont have a problem with unmarried believers (priests are unmarried). The sacraments are not necessary for salvation according to catholics. No one has to pay the church anything for you to get to heaven. What you are talking about is a practice that was popular in alot of churches over 500 years ago and was abolished by the pope.

Then whats with them still with all the sacraments? And even if you go to Prugatory anyways then how are you supposed to get to heaven?

I am a Christian also and i belive that Jesus the Nazarite was not only a real person. ( there is plenty of evidence of that but that he was the Son of God. in fact the founder of Harvard university took all the evidence he could find and threw out all the evidence that was purely speculation and concluded that Jesus's resurrection is as much history as the battle of troy.
Evidence ... or do you like telling stories?

Then whats with them still with all the sacraments? And even if you go to Prugatory anyways then how are you supposed to get to heaven?
get prayed for

I'm not going to discuss this with you, if you have NO IDEA what you are talking about.

Please - before you argue... do a little research.

You are just going to embarrass yourself.

Actually, I have a fair idea of what I'm talking about. Nobody knows entirely what their talking about.

get prayed for

But why? If Jesus is the way to heaven then why do you need to get prayed for? Sorry, I'm simply saying I don't recall hearing that you have to pray for someone in purgatory to get to heaven being in the Bible.

Evidence ... or do you like telling stories?

Only, evolutionists like telling stories, especially ones with contaversal evidence.

Catholics aren't according to the Bible b/c they believe that you have to go through ceremonies and confess your sins to a priest, not to God. Also, that you have to pay to get to heaven if you don't have all the ceremonies.

Who on earth told you that?

Then whats with them still with all the sacraments? And even if you go to Prugatory anyways then how are you supposed to get to heaven?

whats with protestant churches and baby dedications? whats with protestant churches and baptism? whats with protestant churches and communion?

Its the same thing. Those are all things that are good to do but not necessary for salvation.

According to catholics you get out purgatory after you have been there long enough to cleanse you of all of the sins you have committed. It has nothing to do with anyone paying any money. What you are thinking of is paying indulgences, that is a practice that is recognized as an abuse of authority and was denounced as such by the pope.

I do not believe in purgatory myself, neither am I catholic, but I hate it when people talk bad about my religion when they dont have the faintest clue of what they are talking about, so I hate to see you do the same to Catholics.

Actually, I have a fair idea of what I'm talking about. Nobody knows entirely what their talking about.

Many seem to be more informed than you, though.

You are arguing from a vantage point of ignorance... and it is hurting your case far more than any arguments will.

I am a Christian also and i belive that Jesus the Nazarite was not only a real person. ( there is plenty of evidence of that but that he was the Son of God. in fact the founder of Harvard university took all the evidence he could find and threw out all the evidence that was purely speculation and concluded that Jesus's resurrection is as much history as the battle of troy.

Sorry, friend.

That is just not true.

How about providing a link, so we can find out who is filling your head with that kind of thing?

The Romans had many gods so why would a Christian Church be called Roman.
...


Cheers for this, it made me laugh a lot. ;)

In a similar vein, method is a cornerstone of science, so why would a christian church want to be called Methodist?

whats with protestant churches and baby dedications? whats with protestant churches and baptism? whats with protestant churches and communion?

Its the same thing. Those are all things that are good to do but not necessary for salvation.

According to catholics you get out purgatory after you have been there long enough to cleanse you of all of the sins you have committed. It has nothing to do with anyone paying any money. What you are thinking of is paying indulgences, that is a practice that is recognized as an abuse of authority and was denounced as such by the pope.

I do not believe in purgatory myself, neither am I catholic, but I hate it when people talk bad about my religion when they dont have the faintest clue of what they are talking about, so I hate to see you do the same to Catholics.

Then allow me to appologize. Everyone learns something. But still, I quite honestly don't think Catholics are Christians with this new information.

Cheers for this, it made me laugh a lot. ;)

In a similar vein, method is a cornerstone of science, so why would a christian church want to be called Methodist?

Not a clue. If you ask me,different names for Christians is absolutely silly.

Sorry, friend.

That is just not true.

How about providing a link, so we can find out who is filling your head with that kind of thing?

There are plenty of links out there. Even ones which lead (to what I'd call) silly theories such as evolution, Big bang, etc (if there is any more).

Sorry, friend.

That is just not true.

How about providing a link, so we can find out who is filling your head with that kind of thing?

Sorry guys but I've been to a bunch of churches and seen interpretations of the bible from different sources that would consider themselves knowledgable. I hate to break it to you but nothing that I've experienced is right. I come to the personal conclusion that God is like a Greek god, and if you think you can prove me wrong I'm all ears. If you haven't been able to tell I'm agnostic.

If you want to have a meaningful discussion, be sure you define your terms.

The word "fact"

People frequently use the word "fact" when discussing religion, the Bible, etc.. If by "fact" you mean a truth that is accepted by a lot of people, then yes, the Bible is "fact." So are a lot of other ideas, such as the theory of Creationism, that cows are sacred, that we will all be reincarnated. Oh, and that Elvis lives.

However, if by "fact" you mean a theory or event that is supported by evidential matter that can be objectively measured using methods that can be duplicated, when it comes to the Bible, you're out of luck. We can't go back in time. We don't have any uncorrupted sources of data. People didn't even speak English at the time the events of the Bible occured nor when the Bible itself was written. The argument that, "God shaped today's English Bible through his will acting on humanity" can't really be tested, duplicated, or objectively observed, now can it? So unless you're using the first definition of fact, don't say the Bible is fact. You're using the word incorrectly.

Why do people care if the Bible is "fact" anyway? One aspect of "religion" that is pretty core to all of them is an important concept: faith. Do we all agree on that? OK, now, what's the definition of "faith"? Can we accept that a short definition of "faith" is "belief without proof", or, said another way, "belief without fact"?

And for all you who believe every word of the Bible is fact, you might want to consider a history lesson. The Bible didn't fall fully formed from the heavens. It was created by humans. And humans are prone to error, at the very least (they're also prone to manipulating others, using disinformation to gain personal power, taking advantage of others' ignorance or unwillingness to learn for themselves, etc., but I'm sure you've already considered that...)

So, feel free to live by "the book." But do me a favor, if you're going to interpret parts of it literally, rather than as a metaphor of how we should live our lives, be consistent. Sacrifice goats in your back yard. Don't let your wife in the house if she's menstruating. This picking and choosing of which parts are meant to be interpreted "literally" and which are only metaphors has got to go. Why should we accept your views on which parts are literal and which are metaphors?

Personally, I think Jesus, assuming he existed, would be dismayed at how people have corrupted his teachings to create an excuse to persecute others (the Roman Catholic Church being a fine example). This is regardless of whether he was the Son of God, a prophet, a philosopher, or just a smart guy with a lot of really good ideas.

Oh, and by the way, while we're defining terms, I think the current definitions go like this:

Christianity - a group of people that believe Jesus (Christ) was the Son of God (kinda follows from the name). It is this belief that is the core (but not only) difference between Christianity and the other two major religions descended from the Jewish tradition, Judeaism and Islam.

Roman Catholic - A subgroup of those that believe Jesus was the Son of God. The core (but not only) difference between them and other believers of Jesus' divinity is that they believe the Church's temporal power descends in a hierarchy from the Bishop of Rome (also known colloquially as The Pope, or That Guy with the Bubble Car). Hence, "Roman" Catholics.

Now, 2000 years ago, they probably used a different phrase than Roman Catholic, or might have even had a different meaning of their word "Christianity", but in conventional current English that's what they mean. Kinda like how now we say donkey instead of ass.

<grin>

Mike

Jesus was the hippie son of the Jewish god. Read the old testiment, God was really a warmonger. He seems to have calmed down since the birth of His son, but its amazing the things in the old testiment that they don't teach you in Sunday School

What I would like to say about the arguments about different kinds of Christianity is that most of the major churches seem to have completely forgotten what it actually says in the bible. They stick to their rules which they made, and the bible and what it says seems to have been lost somewhere along the way. This is the main problem as I can tell with the different churches, they all need to scrap all of their little rules and rituals and go and look at how the bible says to live and do things that way. Its an issue I've talked to lots of Catholics, Protestants and Baptists about and they all seem to agree with me.

One interesting thing I've noticed while writing this is that the spell checker in Microsoft Word capitalizes the first letters of "Catholics" and "Baptists" but not the "P" in Protestants!?!?!

the bible was written decades after his death by complete "MORTALS" people make mistakes the bible isnt perfect the current bible was edited by a "pagan" leader anyway

There is more than one version of Bible and God told the people what to right so they couldn't make a mistake.

First of all, thank you Captain Obvious. I never thought of that, retard.

I understand what "discrete" meant and I knew that Jesus wasn't "discrete".
Notive the quotation marks around "discrete", meaning I was making fun of the way you spell it over and over again. I know it may be hard for you, but try using your brain before you respond to a post. :mad:

Since you still aren't willing to use a dictionary, I'll post a little snippet here for reference:
The American Heritage Dictionary, Fourth Edition
"dis-crete, adj. Defined for a finite or countable set of values; not continuous."

Wow, looks like I was right all along! I love it when that happens...

I would end this post with a sarcastic comment containing "sorry" or "better luck next time," but I hate it when people do that, so I'll just leave you with the following piece of advice: don't try.

Mistaken by whom? his disciples? the Bible is an accurate account of what Jesus said. (if you need me to go into it i will)


no way in hell is the bible accurate almost anything. (i voted liar)

Many seem to be more informed than you, though.

You are arguing from a vantage point of ignorance... and it is hurting your case far more than any arguments will.

Well I cirtanly don't see you winning any arguments dude so stop being so ignorant.... it's hurting YOU and your reputation.

....

Must....refrain....from....killling...mislead...nine year old...

CATHOLICS ARE CHRISTIANS!

Get this into your head! Christianity is divided into different groups! There are Orthodox Christians, Protestants, and Catholics(as well as other groups, like Coptics.). Saying that Catholics arent christians is like saying Sunni's aren't muslims or Orthodox Jews arent jews!

What about Russian, Greek, and Armenian Orthodox? Are they not christians because they have Russian, Greek, and Armenian in their names? Are followers of the Church of England not Christians because they have the word England in their name?

How would I know that Catholics are christians? Hmmmm...BECAUSE I AM ONE!. If Catholics aren't christians, then I am afraid that Christianity isn't the largest religion. Roman Catholicism(or Islam) is.



One Catholics aren't Christians.... you may hear that from school but the truth hurts.... teachers lie .... science text books lie .... you lie..... let me tell you how they're divided

....

Must....refrain....from....killling...mislead...nine year old...

CATHOLICS ARE CHRISTIANS!

Get this into your head! Christianity is divided into different groups! There are Orthodox Christians, Protestants, and Catholics(as well as other groups, like Coptics.). Saying that Catholics arent christians is like saying Sunni's aren't muslims or Orthodox Jews arent jews!

What about Russian, Greek, and Armenian Orthodox? Are they not christians because they have Russian, Greek, and Armenian in their names? Are followers of the Church of England not Christians because they have the word England in their name?

How would I know that Catholics are christians? Hmmmm...BECAUSE I AM ONE!. If Catholics aren't christians, then I am afraid that Christianity isn't the largest religion. Roman Catholicism(or Islam) is.



One Catholics aren't Christians.... you may hear that from school but the truth hurts.... teachers lie .... science text books lie .... you lie..... let me tell you how they're divided

Religion
Catholics

Christians
protestants
Brotherin

Athiesm
evolution
It takes an eight year old to know that....
( there are others i just didn't put them )

no way in hell is the bible accurate almost anything. (i voted liar)


Then you just voted your way to be an idiot.

firstly can you stop making so many posts which only have like one line more in each. secondly, catholics are Christians, but they, like most other groups have made up their own rituals and rules instead of putting the Bible, what the Christian faith is based on, first!

I wont get into the whole concept of christianity (its really in vain, these idoits will never get it through there heads, so save your energy) but uh, wasent this about jesus?

Personally I think people have to stop thinking he's god, and they have to stop misinterprating his teachings. Jesus was a man, a reformer if you will (and he did predict that people would pervert his sayings), he probaly dident die for 3 days, have you ever heard of a coma? its been proven that in the civil war, due to head injuries from bullets or other wounds, you could enter a coma (takeing a breath oh every 25 minutes) therfore makeing people think your dead. We found fingernail markings in george washington's coffen. It is very likely that jesus just woke up and got out of the cave.
As for healing people, you dont seem to realise how stupid people were in that region, He was probaly just using EFFECTIVE MEDECINE. which is very liekly considering the fact that in the dark ages, gunpowder was considered "sorcery". In the region he came from, if people dident understand it, it was either "divine" or "witchcraft".

His teachings however have been taken to literally and perverted WAY too much. he predicted this and also said "those who pervert my words shall face true judgement at the gates of heaven" (or something like that).

and on a sidenote, ive seen many christians pushing their "faith" on others, often condeming them and whatnot (look at the crusades, look at the inqisition) when jesus, your "king" (he never wanted to be called that, in fact he never really wanted the whole concept of a church) would not condem these people. When he said save your brothers sisters from going to hell, he dident say "evryone thats not a christian is going to hell, so convert convert!", what he meant was that you should keep you and your friends on the straight and narrow path.

and when I say "you" I mean you general epople reading this...

Its quite obvious that the only Gods (yes, that's "Gods", with an s) that are true reside on Mount Olympus, with strong names like Zeus and Poseidon and Ares who do their godly things and come to bonk the brains out of some poor beautiful village virgin once in awhile.

:)

No, Seriously, Jesus is my homeboy. Me and him are tight. When I go up to Heaven to talk to God, he sees me, and I'm like "yo", and he's like "sup dawg", and i tell him "not much bro, check you later on the flip side". He usually just says "worrrd up" after that, and we meet up later in thugz mansion with Tupac and Scarface and talk about the Ho's and G's and everything else that's good in life.

:D teeheehee...

Oh, Jesus? That repulsive lie that some whac-o made up so he could be worshipped? Yeah, he doesn't exsist, nor did he ever.

made up? doubtful
Son of God? doubtful
loony? read the beatitudes, anyone who thinks that good will triumph over evil IS loony.

And whats with all this peace stuff, and loving your neighbor?
sounds like a hippie to me

and he's always talking about sharing. He's a filthy communist.

Most religions claim he exists, even non christian ones.

BTW CATHOLICS ARE CHRISTIANS DAMNIT!

a christian simply believes in the divinity of christ.

"One Catholics aren't Christians.... you may hear that from school but the truth hurts.... teachers lie .... science text books lie .... you lie..... let me tell you how they're divided...

schools, like catholic schools? Like ones that I've attended for 9 years?

christianity includes
-roman catholics
-The orthodoxes (Byzantines, russian, greek)
-Prodestant sects
-dominincans, benedictines, franciscans...

jesus in my opinion was a good thinker, but was too idealistic

You all forget the Jewish/Christian cross churches collectively known as the Independent Eastern Churches and located mainly in north-eastern Africa. They're people too you know. Tsk tsk.... :cool:

One Catholics aren't Christians.... you may hear that from school but the truth hurts.... teachers lie .... science text books lie .... you lie..... let me tell you how they're divided

I wish Defensor Fidei were here...

Anyway, CATHOLICS ARE CHRISTIANS! I'm a Catholic and a Christian. You can be both!!!!! Who do you think St. Peter was? He was the first Pope, and our Lord gave him the keys to heaven. And we are the only church that follows Christs command of eating his body and drinking his blood.

Alright here is Commandos Catholic apoloetics in short-

1. Purgatory

Although not mentioned by name in the Bible, it does appear. Paul says the souls in heaven have been tried by fire, Revelations says nothing unclean shall enter heaven, the ancient Jews believed in purgatory as you can see in Maccebees 2, and it also speaks of a prison where the soul stays until the last penny(sin) has been payed.

2. The Pope

Read Matthew. As you can see Christ appoints "Peter the Rock" as head of his church and Peter is given the power to forgive sins and given the keys of heaven. Peter was the first Pope and his succesors share his powers.

3. Saints and Mary

WE DONT WORSHIP MARY AND THE SAINTS. We ask them to pray for us. Its no different than asking your friends and family to pray for you. And they are obviously on Gods good side since they are so holy.

4. Salvation

The 7 sacraments are not necessary for salvation, but are a good way to express your faith. We believe good works are required/important since THE WHOLE BOOK OF JAMES SAYS SO! I thought protestants believed the bible was infallibe. If so then you'd believe good works are required, as well as faith.

5. History

The Catholic Church was founded by Jesus Christ on Saint Peter the Rock in 33 A.D. When Saint Peter died his successors took his place and continued the line. Eventually the eastern orthodox church broke off, yet the holy Catholic church continued. Eventually the Protestant reformation took place, yet the church still stood its ground, and continues to this day to shine light where there is darkness.



I can cover more or go into more detail if you like.

Commando2, you forgot these important Catholic ideals....

1) Altar-Boys

Catholic priests take much pleasure in the feeling up and touching of these young males, and will often be found in the confession booth exchanging sexual favours with these boys for chocolate bars and the like.

2) Corruption

Mafia lords who kill, embezzle, steal, and grow illegally while donating highly to the Church get massive state funerals, while Mafia lords who kill, embezzle, steal, and grow illegally while donating relatively little to the Church get boxes on the side of the highway as a send-off. figures....

3) Massive International Rallies that serve to piss the hell out of those not sucking the Pope's di....I mean, kissing the Pope's feet

Catholics love getting together and saying to the world that they are indeed Catholics. In their defence, they are not alone in this, but that massive World Youth rally they had in I believe 2003 was extremely self-righteous and holier-than-thou in its approach.

4) Massive Pope/Bishop Beastiality Orgies

Not proven, but you KNOW it happens. How else do you think they spend their time? Talking to God? Counting their money? Yeah right.... :p

If you believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who came to earth and died for our sins because he loves us and you have made a commitment to followin him then you are Christian... by that i would say that true Catholics are Christian... im not Catholic by the way...

Commando2, you forgot these important Catholic ideals....

1) Altar-Boys

Catholic priests take much pleasure in the feeling up and touching of these young males, and will often be found in the confession booth exchanging sexual favours with these boys for chocolate bars and the like.

2) Corruption

Mafia lords who kill, embezzle, steal, and grow illegally while donating highly to the Church get massive state funerals, while Mafia lords who kill, embezzle, steal, and grow illegally while donating relatively little to the Church get boxes on the side of the highway as a send-off. figures....

3) Massive International Rallies that serve to piss the hell out of those not sucking the Pope's di....I mean, kissing the Pope's feet

Catholics love getting together and saying to the world that they are indeed Catholics. In their defence, they are not alone in this, but that massive World Youth rally they had in I believe 2003 was extremely self-righteous and holier-than-thou in its approach.

4) Massive Pope/Bishop Beastiality Orgies

Not proven, but you KNOW it happens. How else do you think they spend their time? Talking to God? Counting their money? Yeah right.... :p

1. Even though it is statistically proven more Protestant ministers have molested boys than Catholic priests.
(Note: I am not attacking Protestants I am just counterattacking this ignoramus)

2. Every human organization has corruption. Even in our Lords original group of diciples there was corruption (Judas's betrayal, Peter denying Christ 3 times, ect.)

3. The rallies are for inspiration.

4. Wow your a moron. Thats not true. The Pope and Bishops are debating Catholic custom, providing sacraments, diplomacy, serving Christ, ect.

What is your problem?

Im not a christian but I know people believe that stuff and I would never make some of the comments Ive read here.

You people disgust me.

What is your problem? You people disgust me.

Are you talking to me or to the heretic attacking my faith on groundless charges?

2. Every human organization has corruption. Even in our Lords original group of diciples there was corruption.......Judas's betrayal......

Judas was a hero without equal.

He gave away everything, including his dearest friend, because Jesus asked it of him.

And, now you sully his name with your 'betrayal' story...

Judas was a hero without equal.

He gave away everything, including his dearest friend, because Jesus asked it of him.

And, now you sully his name with your 'betrayal' story...

Judas wasn't a hero. In fact at first all he wanted when he joined with the disciples was money. That evil thing led to a good thing in some aspects. Judas betrayed Jesus yes, he was however meant to. Also, Jesus never asked him to betray him, Judas probably said to himself "If I give Jesus to the Pharisees they will pay me money." After however, Judas felt guilty, tried to undo what he did and when he fails he forces the Pharisees to take it and then he hangs himself.

Jesus existed. I've even read it in a pro-evolution book so if your a big fan of evolution accept the fact that there are those among your historians that believe he existed.

Christians by what I hope is the right definition is anyone that believes that Jesus died for our sins, rose again, is the only way to heaven and was the Son of God.

I believe that Jesus did exist, and brought with him new ideas that he shared with the world. He is not a liar (even though I am not a Christian). If he believed in Christianity, than for him it is the truth. We are all entitled to our own ideas.

If you want to have a meaningful discussion, be sure you define your terms.

The word "fact"

People frequently use the word "fact" when discussing religion, the Bible, etc.. If by "fact" you mean a truth that is accepted by a lot of people, then yes, the Bible is "fact." So are a lot of other ideas, such as the theory of Creationism, that cows are sacred, that we will all be reincarnated. Oh, and that Elvis lives.

However, if by "fact" you mean a theory or event that is supported by evidential matter that can be objectively measured using methods that can be duplicated, when it comes to the Bible, you're out of luck. We can't go back in time. We don't have any uncorrupted sources of data. People didn't even speak English at the time the events of the Bible occured nor when the Bible itself was written. The argument that, "God shaped today's English Bible through his will acting on humanity" can't really be tested, duplicated, or objectively observed, now can it? So unless you're using the first definition of fact, don't say the Bible is fact. You're using the word incorrectly.

Why do people care if the Bible is "fact" anyway? One aspect of "religion" that is pretty core to all of them is an important concept: faith. Do we all agree on that? OK, now, what's the definition of "faith"? Can we accept that a short definition of "faith" is "belief without proof", or, said another way, "belief without fact"?

And for all you who believe every word of the Bible is fact, you might want to consider a history lesson. The Bible didn't fall fully formed from the heavens. It was created by humans. And humans are prone to error, at the very least (they're also prone to manipulating others, using disinformation to gain personal power, taking advantage of others' ignorance or unwillingness to learn for themselves, etc., but I'm sure you've already considered that...)

So, feel free to live by "the book." But do me a favor, if you're going to interpret parts of it literally, rather than as a metaphor of how we should live our lives, be consistent. Sacrifice goats in your back yard. Don't let your wife in the house if she's menstruating. This picking and choosing of which parts are meant to be interpreted "literally" and which are only metaphors has got to go. Why should we accept your views on which parts are literal and which are metaphors?

Personally, I think Jesus, assuming he existed, would be dismayed at how people have corrupted his teachings to create an excuse to persecute others (the Roman Catholic Church being a fine example). This is regardless of whether he was the Son of God, a prophet, a philosopher, or just a smart guy with a lot of really good ideas.

Oh, and by the way, while we're defining terms, I think the current definitions go like this:

Christianity - a group of people that believe Jesus (Christ) was the Son of God (kinda follows from the name). It is this belief that is the core (but not only) difference between Christianity and the other two major religions descended from the Jewish tradition, Judeaism and Islam.

Roman Catholic - A subgroup of those that believe Jesus was the Son of God. The core (but not only) difference between them and other believers of Jesus' divinity is that they believe the Church's temporal power descends in a hierarchy from the Bishop of Rome (also known colloquially as The Pope, or That Guy with the Bubble Car). Hence, "Roman" Catholics.

Now, 2000 years ago, they probably used a different phrase than Roman Catholic, or might have even had a different meaning of their word "Christianity", but in conventional current English that's what they mean. Kinda like how now we say donkey instead of ass.

<grin>

Mike

I have a feeling that you don't think highly of any religion involving God. Firstly, how do you know what is a fact? Also, the Bible only says that sacrafices were needed constantly in the old testament b/c Jesus came and was the ultimate sacrifice. Secondly, is it better to live by the "book" or to live in anarchy and hopelessness. Just some things for thought.

So - your poll gives three choices:

1 - agree with you
2 - pick one of two amazingly negative opinion (either he's a liar or a loon?)
3 - another option - which stipulates that I'm a stupid penis if I pick it

Good poll.

I believe that Jesus did exist, and brought with him new ideas that he shared with the world. He is not a liar (even though I am not a Christian). If he believed in Christianity, than for him it is the truth. We are all entitled to our own ideas.

Great first post. But unfortunately (not to mess with your ideas) if I thought that the truth was that I could fly into outer space then theirs just the problem of gravity and the fact that I don't have wings.

The fact that you are so serious about this argument just inspires me to write more stereotype-laden opinions. Why don't you go suck the Pope's polish schlong if you like him so much, hmmmm?

If you can drag him away from his viagra-pumped orgies with the bishops....

:p

If you can drag him away from his viagra-pumped orgies with the bishops....

Is that why he always looks so tired? :)

But seriously - I think they should give the guy (the pope) a rest - he's so old, and quite obviously very ill, and yet he's dragged around everywhere, and has to perform so many public duties. Working him to death, huh?

The fact that you are so serious about this argument just inspires me to write more stereotype-laden opinions. Why don't you go suck the Pope's polish schlong if you like him so much, hmmmm?

If you can drag him away from his viagra-pumped orgies with the bishops....

:p

Heretic.

I wish Defensor Fidei were here...

Anyway, CATHOLICS ARE CHRISTIANS! I'm a Catholic and a Christian. You can be both!!!!! Who do you think St. Peter was? He was the first Pope, and our Lord gave him the keys to heaven. And we are the only church that follows Christs command of eating his body and drinking his blood.

Firstly, why would St. Peter be given the keys to heaven? What verse is that again? About the last supper. Also, what translation are you using or use to using? I use King James. But ya you have a point about the eating of his body and drinking of his blood but tell me, isn't it more symbolic than anything? Just a thought.

The fact that you are so serious about this argument just inspires me to write more stereotype-laden opinions. Why don't you go suck the Pope's polish schlong if you like him so much, hmmmm?

If you can drag him away from his viagra-pumped orgies with the bishops....

:p

Hey, I'm not Catholic but still could you at least have respect. I might've not seemed to have given it for them but there always a time to change.

The fact that you are so serious about this argument just inspires me to write more stereotype-laden opinions. Why don't you go suck the Pope's polish schlong if you like him so much, hmmmm?

If you can drag him away from his viagra-pumped orgies with the bishops....

:p

What in gods name does everyone have against Poland?!?!?!

Firstly, why would St. Peter be given the keys to heaven? What verse is that again? About the last supper. Also, what translation are you using or use to using? I use King James. But ya you have a point about the eating of his body and drinking of his blood but tell me, isn't it more symbolic than anything? Just a thought.

The book of Matthew, where Christ proclaims that Peter is the rock upon which he will build his church. I use the New American Bible. Yes, some people do consider it to be symbolic but if it was symbolic why would Christ pass the bread and wine around the table?

What in gods name does everyone have against Poland?!?!?!

That's the first time I've seen a reply with something against Poland. You've seen other quotes against Poland?

The book of Matthew, where Christ proclaims that Peter is the rock upon which he will build his church. I use the New American Bible. Yes, some people do consider it to be symbolic but if it was symbolic why would Christ pass the bread and wine around the table?

Where in the Book of Matthew plz cause I'm having a hard time locating it. Passing it around the table probably because he wanted to (I don't have the faintest idea) although the Bible does say that no one or man (can't remember which) knows the mind of God.

Catholics aren't according to the Bible b/c they believe that you have to go through ceremonies and confess your sins to a priest, not to God. Also, that you have to pay to get to heaven if you don't have all the ceremonies.
I must say, that is the most retarded thing I've ever heard.

I've been forced to go to a religious education class for the last 5 years, and the parish just happens to be Roman Catholic. We(they) believe that the priest is Christ(God) empodied on Earth, and that confessing to him, not just to a mortal priest genius. Thanks for your time.



Not really. Idiot

Judas wasn't a hero. In fact at first all he wanted when he joined with the disciples was money. That evil thing led to a good thing in some aspects. Judas betrayed Jesus yes, he was however meant to. Also, Jesus never asked him to betray him, Judas probably said to himself "If I give Jesus to the Pharisees they will pay me money." After however, Judas felt guilty, tried to undo what he did and when he fails he forces the Pharisees to take it and then he hangs himself.

Jesus existed. I've even read it in a pro-evolution book so if your a big fan of evolution accept the fact that there are those among your historians that believe he existed.

Christians by what I hope is the right definition is anyone that believes that Jesus died for our sins, rose again, is the only way to heaven and was the Son of God.

1) Why would jesus be in a book about evolution? If you are going to invent evidence, at least be credible.

What was the name of the book? Is there an online link?

2) Most people agree that a man called Jesus lived in roughly the right place at roughly the right time. Other than that meager offering, there is no non-scripture evidence for any of it.

3) Jesus told the disciples he knew he was going to be betrayed. Both he and Judas knew that ALL of the other disciples would be too WEAK to betray him, so Judas did it. He betrayed his most beloved friend in order that Jesus could finish his work.

Heretic.
You obviously don't understand what a heretic is. A heretic is either a person who disagrees with the religion that a government of a country(or kingdom, whatever) has decided to be the only religion in that region. That, or a person who claims to be [insert religion here] and is actually [insert religion that contradicts many beliefs of first religion here]

well let'se see...

Son of God - well, no, I don't believe in any type of God... well, I guess I'm more agnostic than atheist, but still...

Lunatic - I had to think about this for a second (what would make hijm a lunatic???) if this option implies the opinion that he was a lunatic because of the word he spread, than, um, no. I don't think a person is a lunatic for their beliefs, whether I agree or not.

Liar - I suppose I could choose this, but then again, Jesus was THE MAN! and he was only "lying" about half the stuff he said. the rest was mega-cool :cool:

Didn't Exist - who knows, I for one believe he did, despite the fact that I believe the bible is a bunch of exaggerated stories meant to teach people how to lead good lives.

There should be more choices! I don't think that one needs to believe in Christianity or the bible or God or ANY of that shtuff to love Jesus. I do, and I'm more of a Buddhist than anything...

JESUS ROCKS :-D

the curches have wained in thier time from good intentioned bloody enforcers to a mega conglomorate and monitary black hole, just like wal mart today. all the money these poor idiots give to these high hogs stays in the vatican or when a diaster stikes like the tsunami in south east asia they send money but advertise thier faith like it's a fucking car. i can't believe that people today believe a lie the has been handed down for thousands of years. oh wait yes i can you are all idiots. love me or go to hell. say your sorry or go to hell. do good deeds or go to hell. don't speak your mind or go to hell. don't say anything against us or be labled a heritic, tortured untill you give up and go to hell. don't be a woman or be oppressed. don't be from another faith or go to hell. molest young boys or go to hell. don't say anything about him molesting young boys or go to hell. someone up really high must be one rageing gay inferno to help cover up the molster/protecter problem in america. if i cought that fuck face i'd castrate him on the spot with a spoon. what other relgion can you start the decline of an entire civilization and be thought of as a hero. stand by as millions of poeple are slaughtered and not feel guilty, or feel guilty and pray, say your sorry to an imagionary being and then feel fine. start entire wars that lasts for 100 years for a fucking cup. sheer stupidity your name is vatican.