NationStates Jolt Archive

There's one thing I haven't understood about Christianity.

The only thing a person needs for salvation is belief in God and Jesus, right? So it doesn't matter what a person has done in their life as long as they believe in Jesus? I think that's a little absurd. I mean, I really think your actions are more important than your beliefs. Salvation should depend on how good a person you've been, not on what you've believed. Believing is a passive thing that every person has something different and they cannot change (like Christians can't become Atheists and Atheists can't become Christians, in most cases). However, actions define who you are and what kind of a person you are. So why are we being judged by our beliefs?

What of a person that has never even heard of Christianity? You claim that they are not judged by their beliefs since they never knew of the teachings of God. However, when it's about a person that HAS heard of Christianity, it's their fault and they deserve hell or whatever it is for not believing in it. I ask you, what is the difference between never hearing of Christianity and dismissing it as false? I think none, in fact, I challenge all Christians:

I am turning my back to God and disrespecting him by not believing in Him and Jesus. However, how do you know you are not doing the same thing. You accept the Bible as truth so easily for a matter that is so heavy. How do you know Jesus was the messiah? How are you so certain that the Bible holds the truth about God, that you are willing to risk greatly insulting God by believing in a false book about Him?

And that's my primary concern with the illogic of Christianity and other book-based religions. You can't know for sure that your book is the right one. In fact, all you have to go on is the beliefs of the majority, and if the book *seems* to be holy. Wouldn't God be extremely angry if you chose to believe a book about Him that is completely false? I mean, how do you know that all of this that has been passed down the millenia is wrong? How do you know that Jesus was the Messiah or actually existed? What if Jesus was somebody else, and you're worshipping God's son as somebody completely different, which would be extremely disrespectful to God?

And if you claim that he's not, then he shouldn't be angry at non-believers either. I believe that I don't have enough information to make a decision about God, so I'm not going to risk offending Him by choosing to believe something about him that is so uncertain. I believe in a logical God, and for me it would be more logical if he were to judge people based on their actions, something they can actively change and something that defines their character, rather than their beliefs, something that they cannot change easily. In fact, in my view of a perfect God, he would reward all those who have lived good lives, and NOT eternally punish evil-doers for a finite life. I believe I am complimenting God by believing he's perfect instead of believing things about him that seem flawed (Christianity).

Yet, according to Christianity, I am going to hell, or whatever place you go or don't go to if you don't believe.

Yes, it is rather absurd if you ask me. Then again, I keep finding the alternatives to be little better. It's frustrating, really. At least Christianity has one good aspect: Nietzsche didn't like it.

Yeah, I totally agree. It's something that has bothered me for a long time.

There's one thing I haven't understood about Christianity.

The only thing a person needs for salvation is belief in God and Jesus, right? So it doesn't matter what a person has done in their life as long as they believe in Jesus? I think that's a little absurd. I mean, I really think your actions are more important than your beliefs. Salvation should depend on how good a person you've been, not on what you've believed. Believing is a passive thing that every person has something different and they cannot change (like Christians can't become Atheists and Atheists can't become Christians, in most cases). However, actions define who you are and what kind of a person you are. So why are we being judged by our beliefs?

What of a person that has never even heard of Christianity? You claim that they are not judged by their beliefs since they never knew of the teachings of God. However, when it's about a person that HAS heard of Christianity, it's their fault and they deserve hell or whatever it is for not believing in it. I ask you, what is the difference between never hearing of Christianity and dismissing it as false? I think none, in fact, I challenge all Christians:

I am turning my back to God and disrespecting him by not believing in Him and Jesus. However, how do you know you are not doing the same thing. You accept the Bible as truth so easily for a matter that is so heavy. How do you know Jesus was the messiah? How are you so certain that the Bible holds the truth about God, that you are willing to risk greatly insulting God by believing in a false book about Him?

And that's my primary concern with the illogic of Christianity and other book-based religions. You can't know for sure that your book is the right one. In fact, all you have to go on is the beliefs of the majority, and if the book *seems* to be holy. Wouldn't God be extremely angry if you chose to believe a book about Him that is completely false? I mean, how do you know that all of this that has been passed down the millenia is wrong? How do you know that Jesus was the Messiah or actually existed? What if Jesus was somebody else, and you're worshipping God's son as somebody completely different, which would be extremely disrespectful to God?

And if you claim that he's not, then he shouldn't be angry at non-believers either. I believe that I don't have enough information to make a decision about God, so I'm not going to risk offending Him by choosing to believe something about him that is so uncertain. I believe in a logical God, and for me it would be more logical if he were to judge people based on their actions, something they can actively change and something that defines their character, rather than their beliefs, something that they cannot change easily. In fact, in my view of a perfect God, he would reward all those who have lived good lives, and NOT eternally punish evil-doers for a finite life. I believe I am complimenting God by believing he's perfect instead of believing things about him that seem flawed (Christianity).

Yet, according to Christianity, I am going to hell, or whatever place you go or don't go to if you don't believe.


There are so many different interpretations of the Bible that it's just not funny. Some think everybody goes to heaven, some think all humans are evil, some think only the faithful will go to heaven some think you need faith and works to get into heaven. The point is that human judgment and interpretation is clouded by our emotion. People are going to interpret the Bible or any other religious book in the way that it best suits them. If they feel better knowing that everybody goes to heaven then they'll believe that. If they feel better knowing that only the faithful go to heaven, so be it. It's only a human reaction to do such thing and if those people are content with our human weaknesses (ie, our need to be loved, our fear of death and lonliness) then it's their choice. Who really cares what they believe or whether it's logical or not. Let them have their abstract interpretations so long as they don't try to for them on us.

There are so many different interpretations of the Bible that it's just not funny. Some think everybody goes to heaven, some think all humans are evil, some think only the faithful will go to heaven some think you need faith and works to get into heaven. The point is that human judgment and interpretation is clouded by our emotion. People are going to interpret the Bible or any other religious book in the way that it best suits them. If they feel better knowing that everybody goes to heaven then they'll believe that. If they feel better knowing that only the faithful go to heaven, so be it. It's only a human reaction to do such thing and if those people are content with our human weaknesses (ie, our need to be loved, our fear of death and lonliness) then it's their choice. Who really cares what they believe or whether it's logical or not. Let them have their abstract interpretations so long as they don't try to for them on us.

Then is Christianity truly only for the emotionally/mentally weak, or for those who choose to have a little extra strength emotionally/mentally? Is religion really only a way to help boost our psychological strength?

I apologize if the first question offends anyone, but I feel that I'll never believe in any religion, however, I can forsee myself believing in religion if something bad happens, or the possibility. For example, if my loved one would die, or if one of my parents would die, I could forsee myself choosing to believe in religion simply because I'd much rather believe that we will all meet and continue to live in heaven rather than simply die off.

So is that the underlying cause of religion (where some people have simply exploited it to suit their needs)?

And that's my primary concern with the illogic of Christianity and other book-based religions. You can't know for sure that your book is the right one. In fact, all you have to go on is the beliefs of the majority, and if the book *seems* to be holy. Wouldn't God be extremely angry if you chose to believe a book about Him that is completely false? I mean, how do you know that all of this that has been passed down the millenia is wrong? How do you know that Jesus was the Messiah or actually existed? What if Jesus was somebody else, and you're worshipping God's son as somebody completely different, which would be extremely disrespectful to God?


Jesus isn't God, but Jesus is the incarnate Logos, meaning that He is the perfect Embodiment of one aspect of God. Therefore, worshipping Jesus is one and the same as worshipping God. Hope that clears one thing up.. no time to address the whole thing at the moment..

Then is Christianity truly only for the emotionally/mentally weak, or for those who choose to have a little extra strength emotionally/mentally? Is religion really only a way to help boost our psychological strength?

I apologize if the first question offends anyone, but I feel that I'll never believe in any religion, however, I can forsee myself believing in religion if something bad happens, or the possibility. For example, if my loved one would die, or if one of my parents would die, I could forsee myself choosing to believe in religion simply because I'd much rather believe that we will all meet and continue to live in heaven rather than simply die off.

So is that the underlying cause of religion (where some people have simply exploited it to suit their needs)?

Yes it is. A person with emotional strength seeks truth and there is little to no evidence making Christianity or any concept of God true. A person with intelectual strength but emotional weakness seeks truth outwardly but inwardly, he gives in to his human desires of happiness and hope when proposed with something as tempting as God.

Jesus isn't God, but Jesus is the incarnate Logos, meaning that He is the perfect Embodiment of one aspect of God. Therefore, worshipping Jesus is one and the same as worshipping God. Hope that clears one thing up.. no time to address the whole thing at the moment..

Yeah, that's my point, how can you know Jesus is God. You say worshipping Jesus is the same as worshipping God, but what if the Jesus that existed 2000 years ago wasn't actually the son of God? How can you risk offending God by accepting "Jesus is God" as truth?

Yeah, that's my point, how can you know Jesus is God. You say worshipping Jesus is the same as worshipping God, but what if the Jesus that existed 2000 years ago wasn't actually the son of God? How can you risk offending God by accepting "Jesus is God" as truth?

By putting blind faith in Jesus I suppose. Faith. Silly concept isn't it.

A person with intelectual strength but emotional weakness seeks truth outwardly but inwardly, he gives in to his human desires of happiness and hope when proposed with something as tempting as God.

Yes, because believing that there are eternal consequences to your moral choices is just soo comforting, and allows for so much more earthly pleasure, correct?

Yeah, that's my point, how can you know Jesus is God. You say worshipping Jesus is the same as worshipping God, but what if the Jesus that existed 2000 years ago wasn't actually the son of God? How can you risk offending God by accepting "Jesus is God" as truth?

Short of mystical experience (if convincing mystical experience is really possible), you'll never know with absolute certainty.. whether absolute certainty would be good for humanity is another question..

Yes, because believing that there are eternal consequences to your moral choices is just soo comforting, and allows for so much more earthly pleasure, correct?

If you are a good person and some people around you are bad, then yes. You are comforted with knowing that you will be rewarded eternally while they will be punished eternally.

Yes, because believing that there are eternal consequences to your moral choices is just soo comforting, and allows for so much more earthly pleasure, correct?

That's exactly right. People, to lead a happy life, need rules and constraints. And the idea of somebody watching over you all the time seeing that you're doing the right thing is appealing to most people. The promise of eternal bliss in heaven is pretty tempting too. Have you met very many unhappy Christians?

If you are a good person and some people around you are bad, then yes. You are comforted with knowing that you will be rewarded eternally while they will be punished eternally.

The self-confidence a fat man feels when a fatter man walks into the room doesn't apply to religion, in my experience.. "I may be a sinner, but those guys are *really* screwed" is not common logic..

The self-confidence a fat man feels when a fatter man walks into the room doesn't apply to religion, in my experience.. "I may be a sinner, but those guys are *really* screwed" is not common logic..

But it's been known to happen.

The self-confidence a fat man feels when a fatter man walks into the room doesn't apply to religion, in my experience.. "I may be a sinner, but those guys are *really* screwed" is not common logic..

That's not what I'm suggesting.

I'm suggesting they all feel good about themselves doing the right thing. However, when somebody does something that's really not fair and hurts them, they can feel alright that they will be punished. It's hard to explain, but it's not vengeance, it's justice and equillibrium.

That's exactly right. People, to lead a happy life, need rules and constraints. And the idea of somebody watching over you all the time seing that you're doing the right thing is appealing to most people. The promise of eternal bliss in heaven is pretty tempting. Have you met very many unhappy Christians?

True, but if you ask me, it does more harm than good, destracting us from the problems of this life. OTOH, I really haven't been able to even show that we should bother solving our problems at all.

But it's been known to happen.

I don't doubt that it has.. and I'm sure some religious people consciously block out any debate or study into religious matters for their own happiness's sake, but I'd call those people the minority.. any well-studied Christian should have a good grasp of the issues their faith raises..

That's not what I'm suggesting.

I'm suggesting they all feel good about themselves doing the right thing. However, when somebody does something that's really not fair and hurts them, they can feel alright that they will be punished. It's hard to explain, but it's not vengeance, it's justice and equillibrium.

Those are callous people, then. I'm not an evangelical Christian, and I don't feel a personal obligation to convert others, but I feel a sense of loss to know that a soul has been lost or is corrupted, not joy that they will suffer for what they have done to me while I will not.

True, but if you ask me, it does more harm than good, destracting us from the problems of this life. OTOH, I really haven't been able to even show that we should bother solving our problems at all.

In the end, happiness is really what matters isn't it?

Those are callous people, then. I'm not an evangelical Christian, and I don't feel a personal obligation to convert others, but I feel a sense of loss to know that a soul has been lost or is corrupted, not joy that they will suffer for what they have done to me while I will not.

Whatever you feel, it's better than feeling powerless that he's managing to get through life just fine by breaking the law and doing bad things. This way you feel ok that he will get justice, or feel sorry for him for his punishment that awaits. Regardless, you will feel better.

I don't doubt that it has.. and I'm sure some religious people consciously block out any debate or study into religious matters for their own happiness's sake, but I'd call those people the minority.. any well-studied Christian should have a good grasp of the issues their faith raises..

Well studied Christians are the minority. Most Christians I've met just say that they are Christians. Their parents go to church and are christian so they pretend that they are without knowing what it means. There's one girl at school who, when asked: "Are you Christian?" replies: "No. I'm Catholic."
Biblically educated Christians are few and far between in my experience.

Ok, here's my two cents. I was (emphasis on was) a Lutheran Christian, but know I do not strictly believe in that religion, but I do believe in a God/Higher Power. "Why?" I hear cry. Well, that's because I am not so egotistical to think that I (by this I mean all human beings) am the best life form out there. Come on, have you seen the things humans do? We Can't be the best that there is out there. Also, look at stuff around you, like how water becomes less dense when it freezes. If that didn't happen, the oceans would have frozen solid by now. I mean Atheists, you're trying to tell me that all the odd occurences that occur happen just "by chance"? And you Christian Fundamentalists, choke on this one. Jesus had two daddies. So there.

Whatever you feel, it's better than feeling powerless that he's managing to get through life just fine by breaking the law and doing bad things. This way you feel ok that he will get justice, or feel sorry for him for his punishment that awaits. Regardless, you will feel better.

It's a sense of loss regardless whether justice is done or not. You feel for the victim. The salvation of the perpetrator's soul is in God's hands.. you can feel however you want about it depending on your personality (hopefull that they will repent, or cynical, thinking they never will), but neither outcome affects your own fate.

Well studied Christians are the minority. Most Christians I've met just say that they are Christians. Their parents go to church and are christian so they pretend that they are without knowing what it means. There's one girl at school who, when asked: "Are you Christian?" replies: "No. I'm Catholic."
Biblically educated Christians are few and far between in my experience.

This could depend on the age of those people you've met, or their denomination. Some churches emphasize study, while others don't. The phrase "Holy Rollers" comes to mind.. people who believe in outward expression rather than introspection or study.. I'm not going to vouch for every denomination.

*snip*

I didn't say anything against God's existence. Just I guess against these organized religions. I have no problem with believing in just the concept/theory of God. I, for one, accept the theory of God or some other such force that created the universe.

Ok, here's my two cents. I was (emphasis on was) a Lutheran Christian, but know I do not strictly believe in that religion, but I do believe in a God/Higher Power. "Why?" I hear cry. Well, that's because I am not so egotistical to think that I (by this I mean all human beings) am the best life form out there. Come on, have you seen the things humans do? We Can't be the best that there is out there. Also, look at stuff around you, like how water becomes less dense when it freezes. If that didn't happen, the oceans would have frozen solid by now. I mean Atheists, you're trying to tell me that all the odd occurences that occur happen just "by chance"? And you Christian Fundamentalists, choke on this one. Jesus had two daddies. So there.
Interesting way of thinking. I'm not trying to hijack the debate or anything (and I'll be off after this), but...

Isn't this way of thinking a bit backwards? Supposing the universe didn't come into existance after mankind, and that the theories of evolution are pretty accurate, doesn't it stand to reason that we are perfectly adapted to our environment?
And supposing we do have another 5 billion years worth of Earth left, so we have time to evolve into an even more perfectly adapted species (or who knows, maybe more than one?), would that invalidate your line of thought?

Questions, questions... Anyway, have a nice morning all of you.

Ok, here's my two cents. I was (emphasis on was) a Lutheran Christian, but know I do not strictly believe in that religion, but I do believe in a God/Higher Power. "Why?" I hear cry. Well, that's because I am not so egotistical to think that I (by this I mean all human beings) am the best life form out there. Come on, have you seen the things humans do? We Can't be the best that there is out there. Also, look at stuff around you, like how water becomes less dense when it freezes. If that didn't happen, the oceans would have frozen solid by now. I mean Atheists, you're trying to tell me that all the odd occurences that occur happen just "by chance"? And you Christian Fundamentalists, choke on this one. Jesus had two daddies. So there.

Douglas Adams - 'A puddle wakes up one morning and thinks: "This is a very interesting world I find myself in. It fits me very neatly. In fact it fits me so neatly... I mean really precise isn't it?... It must have been made to have me in it."'

Does God think that. Oh, I Can't possibly be the best thing our there. Of course he doesn't. Because he is the best. But since he doesn't exist, perhaps we are.

The bible.

Written by mere men in a time when people thought that the earth was flat, Earth was the center of the Universe and Spontaneous Generation was a fact.

The bible.

Written by mere men in a time when people thought that the earth was flat, Earth was the center of the Universe and Spontaneous Generation was a fact.

And yet the pyramids of Egypt and the Roman roads and aqueducts were built by people who believed those very discredited concepts. The people who wrote the bible mightn't have known what we know today, but it doesn't follow that they were idiots.

Interesting way of thinking. I'm not trying to hijack the debate or anything (and I'll be off after this), but...

Isn't this way of thinking a bit backwards? Supposing the universe didn't come into existance after mankind, and that the theories of evolution are pretty accurate, doesn't it stand to reason that we are perfectly adapted to our environment?
And supposing we do have another 5 billion years worth of Earth left, so we have time to evolve into an even more perfectly adapted species (or who knows, maybe more than one?), would that invalidate your line of thought?

Questions, questions... Anyway, have a nice morning all of you.

I'm not saying the universe did come into existence after mankind. I'm saying that I don't believe that humans are the best life forms that could have evolved/been created. In fact, humans are more like a virus then an animal, if you think about it. After all, we are the only other organism that destroys it's own habitat (well, at least that I can remember.)

But they were simple men, and what is written there is NOT the word of God.

Growing up Southern Baptist, I can honestly say that I often suspected that people used the "salvation clause" as a free ticket to some pretty awful things to other people, and even other Christians. It's such an easy out.
I've heard threats of "less treasures" in heaven (whatever that's supposed to mean), but so what. Everything would lose it's novelty relatively soon anyways in eternity. So what's the point of living a good life anymore?
Or at least, a kinda, sorta, every now and then good life should be good enough.

It also means that gentle Buddhist monks and spiritually comitted Native Americans suffer neverending damnation while spoiled white affluent assholes go to eternal bliss on a technicality, but whatever gets you by I guess.

Everything would lose it's novelty relatively soon anyways in eternity. So what's the point of living a good life anymore?

Indeed, I mean, would you really want to spend eternity with Christian fundamentalists?

Indeed, I mean, would you really want to spend eternity with Christian fundamentalists?

:D

There's one thing I haven't understood about Christianity.

The only thing a person needs for salvation is belief in God and Jesus, right? So it doesn't matter what a person has done in their life as long as they believe in Jesus? I think that's a little absurd. I mean, I really think your actions are more important than your beliefs. Salvation should depend on how good a person you've been, not on what you've believed. Believing is a passive thing that every person has something different and they cannot change (like Christians can't become Atheists and Atheists can't become Christians, in most cases). However, actions define who you are and what kind of a person you are. So why are we being judged by our beliefs? Actions are a result of belief, belief is not a result of actions. One is the cause the other is the effect. Belief is the cause. When you see the result, you know the cause. The question isn't, "Why are some people bad?" The question is, "Why are some people good?" Good effect means God is involved in the cause.

What of a person that has never even heard of Christianity? You claim that they are not judged by their beliefs since they never knew of the teachings of God. However, when it's about a person that HAS heard of Christianity, it's their fault and they deserve hell or whatever it is for not believing in it. I ask you, what is the difference between never hearing of Christianity and dismissing it as false? I think none, in fact, I challenge all Christians:

I am turning my back to God and disrespecting him by not believing in Him and Jesus. However, how do you know you are not doing the same thing. You accept the Bible as truth so easily for a matter that is so heavy. How do you know Jesus was the messiah? How are you so certain that the Bible holds the truth about God, that you are willing to risk greatly insulting God by believing in a false book about Him?
Most Christians don't know the answer to this. The answer is the Jesus part of God was the Creator part of God. Jesus didn't just exist for 30 years, he was "in the beginning". So, anyone that looks at nature and can see a creator has seen Jesus, no matter what name they give him.

The bible is the official "cannon", but not the only source of truth. As I said above, anyone who looks at creation and sees a creator has seen the work of God and hold some truth about God. I have read many of the religious "cannon" of the major religions. There is a stream of the same truth in all of them. The basics of all the religions are the same. This is true even though the authors had no contact through time or geography. Every one has the basic theme: Love God;Love Everyone.

And that's my primary concern with the illogic of Christianity and other book-based religions. You can't know for sure that your book is the right one. In fact, all you have to go on is the beliefs of the majority, and if the book *seems* to be holy. Wouldn't God be extremely angry if you chose to believe a book about Him that is completely false? I mean, how do you know that all of this that has been passed down the millenia is wrong? How do you know that Jesus was the Messiah or actually existed? What if Jesus was somebody else, and you're worshipping God's son as somebody completely different, which would be extremely disrespectful to God?

And if you claim that he's not, then he shouldn't be angry at non-believers either. I believe that I don't have enough information to make a decision about God, so I'm not going to risk offending Him by choosing to believe something about him that is so uncertain. I believe in a logical God, and for me it would be more logical if he were to judge people based on their actions, something they can actively change and something that defines their character, rather than their beliefs, something that they cannot change easily. In fact, in my view of a perfect God, he would reward all those who have lived good lives, and NOT eternally punish evil-doers for a finite life. I believe I am complimenting God by believing he's perfect instead of believing things about him that seem flawed (Christianity).

Yet, according to Christianity, I am going to hell, or whatever place you go or don't go to if you don't believe.
It is sad that all religions develop a chauvinism toward the microns of their faith, while ignoring the gigabytes. Even Jesus said he had many rooms. Crhistianity is one of those rooms. Christianity should be the most simple of religions not the most complex. Christianity has only two rules. Love God (Everytime you do what is right you are showing the effect of God in your heart) Love Everyone (Everytime you wish good upon others, even those that hate and wish ill on you, you are showing the effect of this love)

Forget everything else that the pharasees are feeding you. Jesus said the conservative religious leaders had killed every prophet and they would kill him also. Even today, they continue to kill him.

The only thing a person needs for salvation is belief in God and Jesus, right?
wrong. That is the "once saved, always saved" theology which is by no means universally accepted. It is not accepted by the largest denomination of Christianity (Catholicism) or a number of the smaller denominations. While all of them accept that without that belief you cannot be saved, not all of them accept that that belief is the only thing you need to be saved.


So it doesn't matter what a person has done in their life as long as they believe in Jesus?


Only if you believe in the "once saved, always saved" doctrine. Otherwise, it matters very much. Not so much what you have done in the past, but what you do after you accept Jesus.

I think that's a little absurd.
as do I, and a great number of people who reject the "once saved, always saved" theology that has done so much harm to the Christian faith.

I mean, I really think your actions are more important than your beliefs. Salvation should depend on how good a person you've been, not on what you've believed.

Here, we disagree. Whether you drown while trying to swim across the pacific ocean does not depend on how well you swim, but on whether you jumped on the life boat or not. A crappy swimmer or even a non-swimmer will reach the other side if they get on the life boat, the best swimmer in the world will still drown if he doesnt. By the same token, it does not matter how good or how bad you are, without Jesus you can never be good enough to make it, even if you were the most humanitarian person ever to walk the face of the Earth, it is just not possible to make it without Jesus, just like even the greatest swimmer cannot swim across the pacific ocean. There are things that are so difficult they cannot be done by a human being regardless of how good they are at what they are trying to do.

Believing is a passive thing that every person has something different and they cannot change (like Christians can't become Atheists and Atheists can't become Christians, in most cases).

That is incorrect. Many atheists have become believers and many believers have become atheists. I see this happening every day.

However, actions define who you are and what kind of a person you are. So why are we being judged by our beliefs?
Actions also have consequences and rewards here on Earth. The person who does good will recieve plenty of rewards here on Earth and the one who does evil will suffer plenty of consequences. You will still recieve many rewards from doing good whether you are a Christian or not, but that just has nothing to do with what happens after you die.


What of a person that has never even heard of Christianity? You claim that they are not judged by their beliefs since they never knew of the teachings of God.
right


However, when it's about a person that HAS heard of Christianity, it's their fault and they deserve hell or whatever it is for not believing in it. I ask you, what is the difference between never hearing of Christianity and dismissing it as false? I think none, in fact, I challenge all Christians:

The difference is that one person didnt have a choice, the other did.



You accept the Bible as truth so easily for a matter that is so heavy.

Not at all. What gave you that impression? That's very presumptuous of you and is totally incorrect. Many of us have come to accept what we believe after extensive study and meditation precisely because we recognize how important it is.


How do you know Jesus was the messiah? How are you so certain that the Bible holds the truth about God, that you are willing to risk greatly insulting God by believing in a false book about Him?
At one point I didnt know. But I searched and I eventually uncovered the truth. Now I know.


And that's my primary concern with the illogic of Christianity and other book-based religions. You can't know for sure that your book is the right one. In fact, all you have to go on is the beliefs of the majority, and if the book *seems* to be holy.
Not at all. There is also logic, reason, and the holy spirit.


Wouldn't God be extremely angry if you chose to believe a book about Him that is completely false?

I dont know. Do you? if so, how?



I mean, how do you know that all of this that has been passed down the millenia is wrong? How do you know that Jesus was the Messiah or actually existed?

The scholarly community both secular and Christian agrees that Jesus existed. There is no serious denial of his existence. The question is what was he? I know the answer because I have studied it.



What if Jesus was somebody else, and you're worshipping God's son as somebody completely different, which would be extremely disrespectful to God?

Thats why you study things and dont believe blindly. You never want to be in a position where you believe something for no good reason. I believe he was God's son because that is the conclusion I have come to after much research.


And if you claim that he's not, then he shouldn't be angry at non-believers either.

God isn't angry at unbelievers.


I believe that I don't have enough information to make a decision about God, so I'm not going to risk offending Him by choosing to believe something about him that is so uncertain.


That's a wise choice. But an even wiser one would be to start working towards finding the truth until you know for sure what you believe.



In fact, in my view of a perfect God, he would reward all those who have lived good lives, and NOT eternally punish evil-doers for a finite life. I believe I am complimenting God by believing he's perfect instead of believing things about him that seem flawed (Christianity).

The problem is that God isn't who you want him to be or who I want him to be. God is who he is whether we like it or not. The goal should never be to figure out how you can make God fit your view of what a perfect God should be like because the result of that is that you will worship a God of your own creation. The goal should be to understand who God is, not to shape our view of him into who we wish he was. Don't worship the God you wish existed, search for the real God and worship him.

There's one thing I haven't understood about Christianity.

The only thing a person needs for salvation is belief in God and Jesus, right? So it doesn't matter what a person has done in their life as long as they believe in Jesus? I think that's a little absurd. I mean, I really think your actions are more important than your beliefs. Salvation should depend on how good a person you've been, not on what you've believed. Believing is a passive thing that every person has something different and they cannot change (like Christians can't become Atheists and Atheists can't become Christians, in most cases). However, actions define who you are and what kind of a person you are. So why are we being judged by our beliefs?

What of a person that has never even heard of Christianity? You claim that they are not judged by their beliefs since they never knew of the teachings of God. However, when it's about a person that HAS heard of Christianity, it's their fault and they deserve hell or whatever it is for not believing in it. I ask you, what is the difference between never hearing of Christianity and dismissing it as false? I think none, in fact, I challenge all Christians:

I am turning my back to God and disrespecting him by not believing in Him and Jesus. However, how do you know you are not doing the same thing. You accept the Bible as truth so easily for a matter that is so heavy. How do you know Jesus was the messiah? How are you so certain that the Bible holds the truth about God, that you are willing to risk greatly insulting God by believing in a false book about Him?

And that's my primary concern with the illogic of Christianity and other book-based religions. You can't know for sure that your book is the right one. In fact, all you have to go on is the beliefs of the majority, and if the book *seems* to be holy. Wouldn't God be extremely angry if you chose to believe a book about Him that is completely false? I mean, how do you know that all of this that has been passed down the millenia is wrong? How do you know that Jesus was the Messiah or actually existed? What if Jesus was somebody else, and you're worshipping God's son as somebody completely different, which would be extremely disrespectful to God?

And if you claim that he's not, then he shouldn't be angry at non-believers either. I believe that I don't have enough information to make a decision about God, so I'm not going to risk offending Him by choosing to believe something about him that is so uncertain. I believe in a logical God, and for me it would be more logical if he were to judge people based on their actions, something they can actively change and something that defines their character, rather than their beliefs, something that they cannot change easily. In fact, in my view of a perfect God, he would reward all those who have lived good lives, and NOT eternally punish evil-doers for a finite life. I believe I am complimenting God by believing he's perfect instead of believing things about him that seem flawed (Christianity).

Yet, according to Christianity, I am going to hell, or whatever place you go or don't go to if you don't believe.

you people really need to take RCIA, if only for the information you can get on the teachings of the Holy See (Vatican).

1. Good works and good thought is required for salvation. Athiests can achieve salvation by being good people.
2. The Church teaches that ignorance of the teachings is not indicative of a persons damnation. If you're on a desert island i nthe Pacific, w/ no human contact, of course your not going to know about the Church etc.
3. As for the authority of the Church...
And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.
I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. MATT 16

"Bible and the word of God"

You must have been seriously injured by someone claming to be a Christian. I'm sorry. But that's no excuse to be disrespectful of the deeply held beliefs of others. Think you would do this for Judaism or Islam or Buddism? Somehow I don't think so. :headbang:

"Bible and the word of God"

You must have been seriously injured by someone claming to be a Christian. I'm sorry. But that's no excuse to be disrespectful of the deeply held beliefs of others. Think you would do this for Judaism or Islam or Buddism? Somehow I don't think so. :headbang:

Thank you! It's nice to see someone come to the defense of the one religion that seems to get bashed continualy in these forums.

Peace be with you!

"Squawks" are problem listings that pilots generally leave for maintenance crews to fix before the next flight. Here are some squawks submitted by US Air Force pilots and the replies from the maintenance crews.

(P)=PROBLEM (squawk) (S)=SOLUTION

(P) Test flight OK, except autoland very rough
(S) Autoland not installed on this aircraft

(P) IFF inoperative
(S) IFF always inoperative in OFF mode (IFF-Identification Friend or Foe)

(P) Friction locks cause throttle levers to stick
(S) That's what they're there for

The real solution to the question is not:Is Jesus the Son of God or not. But rather: Why do religions not see the that they are simply the evolution of previous religions. And that God has intended that all religions accept each other as legitimate paths to the understanding of God's purpose for humankind. There is no real difference between the different religions. The apparent differences are caused by the passage of time, the differences of culture and the different social teaching that each Messenger has brought from God.


"The concept of progressive revelation places the ultimate emphasis on recognition of the revelation of God at its appearance. The failure of the generality of humankind in this respect has, time and again, condemned entire populations to a ritualistic repetition of ordinances and practices long after these latter have fulfilled their purpose and now merely stultify moral advance. Sadly, in the present day, a related consequence of such failure has been to trivialize religion. At precisely the point in its collective development where humanity began to struggle with the challenges of modernity, the spiritual resource on which it had principally depended for moral courage and enlightenment was fast becoming a subject of mockery, first at those levels where decisions were being made about the direction society should take, and eventually in ever-widening circles of the general population. There is little cause for surprise, then, that this most devastating of the many betrayals of trust from which human confidence has suffered should, in the course of time, undermine the foundations of belief itself. So it is that Bahá'u'lláh repeatedly urges His readers to think deeply about the lesson taught by such repeated failures: "Ponder for a moment, and reflect upon that which has been the cause of such denial...."21 "What could have been the reason for such denial and avoidance...?"22 "What could have caused such contention...?"23 "Reflect, what could have been the motive...?"24

(Commissioned by The Universal House of Justice, One Common Faith)

So many people misunderstand the Bible and teach it according to misunderstanding that it actually creates apostasy. It's a sad thing to see it happen too. I believe that the King James version has to be the most accurate, nowadays there is so much slang the the newest Bibles don't convey as good of a message, sometimes it's like reading 1000+ page poorly written comic book, but even KJV has a lot of problems and mistranslations. If you want to get into some real research, buy a Septuagent of the Old Testament and a Lexicon of the New Testament. It's easy to see the problems and misunderstandings in them, while your at it learn to read Greek and Ancient Hebrew, then consider that the Biblical writers at times used metaphors and poems, same as we do, and that not everything can be taken literally, but at the same time, much of it can. So do research on the Biblical writers, find other writings they accomplished and read them. Study their style and language so you get a feel for what the person is trying to say. (these documents are actually available, Dead Sea Scrolls, as an example) Then read the Bible in it's original, unadulterated native language. It's so simple.

It's awfully confusing.

wrong. That is the "once saved, always saved" theology which is by no means universally accepted. It is not accepted by the largest denomination of Christianity (Catholicism) or a number of the smaller denominations. While all of them accept that without that belief you cannot be saved, not all of them accept that that belief is the only thing you need to be saved.

However, it IS true that if you don't have belief, no matter what you do, you can't be saved, right? If you do as good as you can and are a saviour, but do not believe in Jesus, you do not go to heaven. That's where religion is wrong.

as do I, and a great number of people who reject the "once saved, always saved" theology that has done so much harm to the Christian faith.

What about the "no matter how good you are, if you don't believe in me, you burn" theology?

Here, we disagree. Whether you drown while trying to swim across the pacific ocean does not depend on how well you swim, but on whether you jumped on the life boat or not. A crappy swimmer or even a non-swimmer will reach the other side if they get on the life boat, the best swimmer in the world will still drown if he doesnt. By the same token, it does not matter how good or how bad you are, without Jesus you can never be good enough to make it, even if you were the most humanitarian person ever to walk the face of the Earth, it is just not possible to make it without Jesus, just like even the greatest swimmer cannot swim across the pacific ocean. There are things that are so difficult they cannot be done by a human being regardless of how good they are at what they are trying to do.

Nice analogy, but if a person can't see the boat, then is it their fault? They do their best to swim across the ocean, but see no boat, how is this any fault of theirs?

That is incorrect. Many atheists have become believers and many believers have become atheists. I see this happening every day.

What I mean is that most of the times you can't change what you believe. Me, for example, I can't possibly imagine myself ever believing in God and heaven, unless I'm in an emotionally weakened state of mind. How is it any fault of mine if I can't possibly believe in Jesus, God, and all that stuff? I just can't. I see no boat! Maybe my eyes are broken, but I know what I'm seeing, and I see no boat.

Actions also have consequences and rewards here on Earth. The person who does good will recieve plenty of rewards here on Earth and the one who does evil will suffer plenty of consequences. You will still recieve many rewards from doing good whether you are a Christian or not, but that just has nothing to do with what happens after you die.

Just admit it, if you're not a Christian, you're screwed either way, that's pretty much the way things go. It's an excellent recruiting tactic, I must say.

Christian - do good - go to heaven
Christian - do bad - screwed
Atheist - do good - doesn't mean shit, you're screwed
Ahteist - do bad - screwed

The difference is that one person didnt have a choice, the other did.

Why doesn't the person that has never known about the teachings of the church start worshipping a rock? You can't say they'll go to hell because they didn't worship the rock, since they "had the choice". Now you give me a choice to believe something that's absurd by my standards, or I can reserve judgement. According to my logical reasoning, I don't have much choice, because I'm not going to worship this metaphorical rock.

Not at all. What gave you that impression? That's very presumptuous of you and is totally incorrect. Many of us have come to accept what we believe after extensive study and meditation precisely because we recognize how important it is.

Really? What study do you do? Do you read the bible intensively? Ask scholars for their opinion? The decision is still far too great to be based on these petty "evidences". The risk of offending God by having the wrong faith is much too powerful for your evidence to be enough.

At one point I didnt know. But I searched and I eventually uncovered the truth. Now I know.

How can you know it's the truth? Like I said, according to your faith, God is a god of justice, so he will punish those that turn their backs to him, how can you be absolutely sure that you're not turning your back on him by believing the wrong faith? You say you're sure? I say you're not sure enough for a matter that is so important.

Not at all. There is also logic, reason, and the holy spirit.

If anything, logic and reason dictate that everyone should reserve judgement on what is and what is not God. The holy spirit is a made-up concept appearing in a book, certainly not proof enough to start worshipping.

The scholarly community both secular and Christian agrees that Jesus existed. There is no serious denial of his existence. The question is what was he? I know the answer because I have studied it.

Scholarly community? So you're trusting the scholarly community and whatever studies you've done in your decision of which faith to believe, knowing that getting it wrong would mean seriously offending God?

Thats why you study things and dont believe blindly. You never want to be in a position where you believe something for no good reason. I believe he was God's son because that is the conclusion I have come to after much research.

If you think that's good enough...

God isn't angry at unbelievers.

Really? Then how come he banishes all unbelievers, regardless of what life they've lead and what kind of people they've been?

That's a wise choice. But an even wiser one would be to start working towards finding the truth until you know for sure what you believe.

I've decided that I can't know for sure. God is something that I could never possibly hope to understand, so I will not try, for I know I have my limitations, and could not ever possibly hope to know and understand what God is.

The problem is that God isn't who you want him to be or who I want him to be. God is who he is whether we like it or not. The goal should never be to figure out how you can make God fit your view of what a perfect God should be like because the result of that is that you will worship a God of your own creation. The goal should be to understand who God is, not to shape our view of him into who we wish he was. Don't worship the God you wish existed, search for the real God and worship him.

Well, personally, I like to believe that a perfect God created this universe. I don't know why, it just seems right to me that perfection is enough to be able to create universes. Worst-case scenario is if I'm wrong, I'll simply be complimenting God.
And by my logic and reasoning, I do believe a perfect God would judge people by their actions, and not their beliefs.

If you disagree, then that's where we stand. I just don't believe a God would be so conceited as to judge people by whether they believe in him or not, knowing their limitations as mere humans.

"Bible and the word of God"

You must have been seriously injured by someone claming to be a Christian. I'm sorry. But that's no excuse to be disrespectful of the deeply held beliefs of others. Think you would do this for Judaism or Islam or Buddism? Somehow I don't think so. :headbang:

This applies for those things as well! It is just that I am familiar with Christianity only, so I address the issue of Christianity, but my arguments still stand against other such religions.

And I'm not hurt by any Christian, I'm just surprised at Christianity's and other religions' inconsistencies.

Yes, because believing that there are eternal consequences to your moral choices is just soo comforting, and allows for so much more earthly pleasure, correct?
No but believing in thoes consequences can be avoided with the "get out of jail free" card you already posess by believing in thoes consequences is.
(to believe in thoes exact consequences you have to already have faith in the deity ... and christianity preaches salvation by faith ...) so in the end yes it is comforting for thoes that believe in it because it is not them that suffer the consequences

As it says in the book of James, "Faith without works is dead." Which means believing alone is useless, actions must be taken for salvation. Christ's teaching must be followed, or else why would he have taught them?

Nice analogy, but if a person can't see the boat, then is it their fault? They do their best to swim across the ocean, but see no boat, how is this any fault of theirs?

You were told if you just reach out a boat will come, but you didn't. sucks for you. everyone who did reach out got rescued.


What I mean is that most of the times you can't change what you believe. Me, for example, I can't possibly imagine myself ever believing in God and heaven, unless I'm in an emotionally weakened state of mind. How is it any fault of mine if I can't possibly believe in Jesus, God, and all that stuff? I just can't. I see no boat! Maybe my eyes are broken, but I know what I'm seeing, and I see no boat.

Most people can't possibly imagine half the stuff that happens to them actually happening. Could you have percieved where you would be today 10 years ago? Even if you are very young you probably couldn't. The fact that you can't imagine it does not mean it isnt possible.


Just admit it, if you're not a Christian, you're screwed either way, that's pretty much the way things go. It's an excellent recruiting tactic, I must say.

When it comes to the afterlife, yes. If you are not a Christian but had the opportunity to be one, you didn't make it to heaven. But that's not the same as saying that doing good things does not bring good rewards. Doing good things indeed brings good rewards as any person who does good things can attest if you ask them. If nothing else, it brings you the joy of having done something worthwhile for someone else, though most of the time, it brings you much more than that (call it karma, zen, or whatever you want). But none of this has anything to do with the afterlife.

People like to mix apples and oranges a lot and that is why you end up saying things like "why cant you get to heaven by doing good?" because one thing has nothing to do with the other!


Why doesn't the person that has never known about the teachings of the church start worshipping a rock? You can't say they'll go to hell because they didn't worship the rock, since they "had the choice". Now you give me a choice to believe something that's absurd by my standards, or I can reserve judgement. According to my logical reasoning, I don't have much choice, because I'm not going to worship this metaphorical rock.

I dont understand what you are trying to say here.


Really? What study do you do? Do you read the bible intensively? Ask scholars for their opinion? The decision is still far too great to be based on these petty "evidences". The risk of offending God by having the wrong faith is much too powerful for your evidence to be enough.

There is quite a bit of study you can do. The first step is easy since you already believe in God, you can already pray that God will guide you to a greater understanding of who he is. Then you can continue by researching the religions that interest you. Research their history, their and get a good overview. Then you can visit a variety of religious institutions (based on the ones you found interesting when you did your preliminary research). Churches, temples, mosques, etc. Talk to people who have already studied a lot more about a particular religion than you have (priests, pastors, rabbis, etc.). Read the holy texts yourself. Read commentaries on the holy texts. Read apologetics on the faith. Cross refference stuff you have doubts about with secular sources when possible. Use your common sense, logic, and reason at all times. You can eliminate some religions quickly with just the preliminary study and eliminate others as you get deeper into studying them. There is a tremendous amount of room to learn if what you seek is learning.


How can you know it's the truth? Like I said, according to your faith, God is a god of justice, so he will punish those that turn their backs to him, how can you be absolutely sure that you're not turning your back on him by believing the wrong faith? You say you're sure? I say you're not sure enough for a matter that is so important.

You failed to accurately describe my faith to begin with. God doesnt punish anyone for not believing. I am sure of what I believe in because research and experience have proven that I am on the right track. There are religions that are entirely experience based (Buddhism) and there are religions that are entirely knowledge based (Judaism). Christianity is in neither end, it is both. Both the knowledge and experience that I have accumulated over the years prove to me beyond any doubt that God exists, that Jesus is his son and my saviour, and other such fundamentals that I am not going to get into here. There are a lot of details that I do not know for sure, but I am sure of alot of the fundamentals.



If anything, logic and reason dictate that everyone should reserve judgement on what is and what is not God. The holy spirit is a made-up concept appearing in a book, certainly not proof enough to start worshipping.

Logic and reason say you should study something before you make any judgement on it. Logic and reason also tell me that the fact that you have made so many mistakes about what it is Christianity believes in the two posts Ive read here proves that you have not done adequate research and thus are nowhere close to knowledgable enough on this subject to come to any sort of conclusion let alone a well founded one.


Scholarly community? So you're trusting the scholarly community and whatever studies you've done in your decision of which faith to believe, knowing that getting it wrong would mean seriously offending God?

You keep saying getting it wrong would offend God but that is a dogma you have invented, or do you somehow know this? How do you know this?


Really? Then how come he banishes all unbelievers, regardless of what life they've lead and what kind of people they've been?

He doesn't. If God did nothing at all after creation, everyone who has ever lived wouldve been doomed with absolutely no chance of getting into heaven to be in his presense. He did the opposite of what you claim, he made a way out of having to pay the eternal consequences of sin regardless of what life you've lead. The one thing he cant do is make decisions for you, you have to do that yourself, but he made the way out. He isn't banishing people, he is trying to save them.

Again, its like asking the boat captain why he refuses to take you out of the water. He will answer something like "what are you talking about? I saw your ship go down from 5 miles away, I couldve sat there and done nothing but instead I sent my son to come rescue you, knowing he would die in the process, he came and rescued everyone who called out to him. You refused to reach for the life boat! you did it to yourself."


I've decided that I can't know for sure. God is something that I could never possibly hope to understand, so I will not try, for I know I have my limitations, and could not ever possibly hope to know and understand what God is.

One cant ever hope to understand all of the mysteries of what God is like. But that doesnt mean you cannot understand who he is. Its the same as with anyone else. Take....George Bush for example. I can never hope to understand all of his thought processes and everything that goes into his decision making, but that doesnt mean I cant know who he is, what his policy views are, and what platform he stands for.


Well, personally, I like to believe that a perfect God created this universe. I don't know why, it just seems right to me that perfection is enough to be able to create universes. Worst-case scenario is if I'm wrong, I'll simply be complimenting God.
And by my logic and reasoning, I do believe a perfect God would judge people by their actions, and not their beliefs.

That's the problem. You believe what you like to believe instead of searching for what is true whether you like it or not. That's like early scientists who used to say "well, I like to believe that the Earth is the center of the universe and the rest of the universe revolves around it". Sure, its nice to believe because it makes you feel much more important, but if you want to know the truth then you have to go beyond what you would like to believe and start gathering facts about what is true. As nice as it would feel to believe that the world is the center of the universe, it would still be untrue. Whether you like to believe something or not has no bearing on whether it is true.

You were told if you just reach out a boat will come, but you didn't. sucks for you. everyone who did reach out got rescued.




Again, its like asking the boat captain why he refuses to take you out of the water. He will answer something like "what are you talking about? I saw your ship go down from 5 miles away, I couldve sat there and done nothing but instead I sent my son to come rescue you, knowing he would die in the process, he came and rescued everyone who called out to him. You refused to reach for the life boat! you did it to yourself."


:headbang: I'm going to hell! I can't believe in God. I have no reason to believe in God. I could try as hard as I possibly can to believe in God but it would be a lie. Since I'm not allowed to lie I'm going to hell. It's all my fault of course. My fault I can't believe in God. It's my fault I can't change who I am. I am going to hell.

You failed to accurately describe my faith to begin with. God doesnt punish anyone for not believing. I am sure of what I believe in because research and experience have proven that I am on the right track. There are religions that are entirely experience based (Buddhism) and there are religions that are entirely knowledge based (Judaism). Christianity is in neither end, it is both. Both the knowledge and experience that I have accumulated over the years prove to me beyond any doubt that God exists, that Jesus is his son and my saviour, and other such fundamentals that I am not going to get into here. There are a lot of details that I do not know for sure, but I am sure of alot of the fundamentals.
Yes He does. You said so.

That's the problem. You believe what you like to believe instead of searching for what is true whether you like it or not. That's like early scientists who used to say "well, I like to believe that the Earth is the center of the universe and the rest of the universe revolves around it". Sure, its nice to believe because it makes you feel much more important, but if you want to know the truth then you have to go beyond what you would like to believe and start gathering facts about what is true. As nice as it would feel to believe that the world is the center of the universe, it would still be untrue. Whether you like to believe something or not has no bearing on whether it is true.
No, I don't suppose it would. I have a question. Just how much of the true nature of God does the bible represent?

There's one thing I haven't understood about Christianity.

The only thing a person needs for salvation is belief in God and Jesus, right? So it doesn't matter what a person has done in their life as long as they believe in Jesus? I think that's a little absurd. I mean, I really think your actions are more important than your beliefs. Salvation should depend on how good a person you've been, not on what you've believed. Believing is a passive thing that every person has something different and they cannot change (like Christians can't become Atheists and Atheists can't become Christians, in most cases). However, actions define who you are and what kind of a person you are. So why are we being judged by our beliefs?

What of a person that has never even heard of Christianity? You claim that they are not judged by their beliefs since they never knew of the teachings of God. However, when it's about a person that HAS heard of Christianity, it's their fault and they deserve hell or whatever it is for not believing in it. I ask you, what is the difference between never hearing of Christianity and dismissing it as false? I think none, in fact, I challenge all Christians:

I am turning my back to God and disrespecting him by not believing in Him and Jesus. However, how do you know you are not doing the same thing. You accept the Bible as truth so easily for a matter that is so heavy. How do you know Jesus was the messiah? How are you so certain that the Bible holds the truth about God, that you are willing to risk greatly insulting God by believing in a false book about Him?

And that's my primary concern with the illogic of Christianity and other book-based religions. You can't know for sure that your book is the right one. In fact, all you have to go on is the beliefs of the majority, and if the book *seems* to be holy. Wouldn't God be extremely angry if you chose to believe a book about Him that is completely false? I mean, how do you know that all of this that has been passed down the millenia is wrong? How do you know that Jesus was the Messiah or actually existed? What if Jesus was somebody else, and you're worshipping God's son as somebody completely different, which would be extremely disrespectful to God?

And if you claim that he's not, then he shouldn't be angry at non-believers either. I believe that I don't have enough information to make a decision about God, so I'm not going to risk offending Him by choosing to believe something about him that is so uncertain. I believe in a logical God, and for me it would be more logical if he were to judge people based on their actions, something they can actively change and something that defines their character, rather than their beliefs, something that they cannot change easily. In fact, in my view of a perfect God, he would reward all those who have lived good lives, and NOT eternally punish evil-doers for a finite life. I believe I am complimenting God by believing he's perfect instead of believing things about him that seem flawed (Christianity).

Yet, according to Christianity, I am going to hell, or whatever place you go or don't go to if you don't believe.


Faith, good deeds and following and obeying GOD's Ten Commandmets is all that is required. Sounds simple, yet we all fall short!

Faith, good deeds and following and obeying GOD's Ten Commandmets is all that is required. Sounds simple, yet we all fall short!
If we're the point of creation, and we're too flawed to achive the goal we're intended for, then what is the point of creation? The obvious answer would be that God just enjoys watching souls squirm in hell, but I'm guessing there's some sort of loving, caring reason, right?

There's one thing I haven't understood about Christianity.

The only thing a person needs for salvation is belief in God and Jesus, right? So it doesn't matter what a person has done in their life as long as they believe in Jesus? I think that's a little absurd. I mean, I really think your actions are more important than your beliefs. Salvation should depend on how good a person you've been, not on what you've believed. Believing is a passive thing that every person has something different and they cannot change (like Christians can't become Atheists and Atheists can't become Christians, in most cases). However, actions define who you are and what kind of a person you are. So why are we being judged by our beliefs?

What of a person that has never even heard of Christianity? You claim that they are not judged by their beliefs since they never knew of the teachings of God. However, when it's about a person that HAS heard of Christianity, it's their fault and they deserve hell or whatever it is for not believing in it. I ask you, what is the difference between never hearing of Christianity and dismissing it as false? I think none, in fact, I challenge all Christians:

I am turning my back to God and disrespecting him by not believing in Him and Jesus. However, how do you know you are not doing the same thing. You accept the Bible as truth so easily for a matter that is so heavy. How do you know Jesus was the messiah? How are you so certain that the Bible holds the truth about God, that you are willing to risk greatly insulting God by believing in a false book about Him?

And that's my primary concern with the illogic of Christianity and other book-based religions. You can't know for sure that your book is the right one. In fact, all you have to go on is the beliefs of the majority, and if the book *seems* to be holy. Wouldn't God be extremely angry if you chose to believe a book about Him that is completely false? I mean, how do you know that all of this that has been passed down the millenia is wrong? How do you know that Jesus was the Messiah or actually existed? What if Jesus was somebody else, and you're worshipping God's son as somebody completely different, which would be extremely disrespectful to God?

And if you claim that he's not, then he shouldn't be angry at non-believers either. I believe that I don't have enough information to make a decision about God, so I'm not going to risk offending Him by choosing to believe something about him that is so uncertain. I believe in a logical God, and for me it would be more logical if he were to judge people based on their actions, something they can actively change and something that defines their character, rather than their beliefs, something that they cannot change easily. In fact, in my view of a perfect God, he would reward all those who have lived good lives, and NOT eternally punish evil-doers for a finite life. I believe I am complimenting God by believing he's perfect instead of believing things about him that seem flawed (Christianity).

Yet, according to Christianity, I am going to hell, or whatever place you go or don't go to if you don't believe.


I would say that by modern doctrine, you are a 'hell bound sinner' but by looking at the teachings of the man that started it all, you probally aren't too far off base.

Basically the bible states that its by faith alone that you are saved, but by having that faith then you will be acting in a way that will help those around you and be a 'good' person. No one is perfect though, and so not always will you be able to do the right then every time, and so you're forgiven for your slip ups, as long as you forgive others.

It also states biblically that people are judged not as a whole, but each according to their 'deeds', but it also states that Jesus is there to intercede for those that are 'his' and that regardless of their deeds, they had faith in him, and so had faith in god and are saved the judgement.

I believe that everyone has the judgeing of "right and wrong" and that we all have the ability to follow that, and in general that is what is needed to be rewarded in the afterlife. But I'll also be the first to say, faith is not a fact, and never will be. So no one is the expert on what is to come in the next life. We will all die, and when we do we will either find out what is out there, or we will just be no more. Either way, nothing to really do about it until the day comes.

The only thing a person needs for salvation is belief in God and Jesus, right? So it doesn't matter what a person has done in their life as long as they believe in Jesus? I think that's a little absurd. I mean, I really think your actions are more important than your beliefs. Salvation should depend on how good a person you've been, not on what you've believed.

This is an important and valid question about salvation. Whether its based on works or faith. I would submit to you that the one causes the other. IE if you have faith then it causes actions. To take an example, a hall mark. A hall mark proves a piece of Jewelry's authenticity. To examine the hallmark is to examine the identity of the person who made it and when they made it etc. In the same way actions and deeds can be shown as proof of faith. If I claim to have faith (IE I believe that Jesus was the son of God who came to this world and died for our sins so that we can have eternal life) then I should act upon that belief. Christianity is a belief that has implications. Believing it is not just an intelectual position, if you believe that Jesus is the son of god then you have to listen to what it is he says and take it seriously. Basicly faith, or belief in God without actions taken in response to that belief is not proper belief at all. It is true belief if it impacts your life.

If we're the point of creation, and we're too flawed to achive the goal we're intended for, then what is the point of creation? The obvious answer would be that God just enjoys watching souls squirm in hell, but I'm guessing there's some sort of loving, caring reason, right?

Correct! We must at all times keep trying and never give up. That is what GOD expects from us, to remain faithful and give him our best, no matter what!

wrong. That is the "once saved, always saved" theology which is by no means universally accepted. It is not accepted by the largest denomination of Christianity (Catholicism) or a number of the smaller denominations. While all of them accept that without that belief you cannot be saved, not all of them accept that that belief is the only thing you need to be saved.

Not only is it not accepted doctrine of Christianity, it's not even itself a universal maxim within the theological framework which it was coined from (Calvinism's doctrine of the Perseverance [Preservance] of the Saints)...

Tozer put forth that the saying is only even quoted in a first part, with the second left out... There are effectively "two schools" on that saying:

The first; "Once saved, always saved; and it doesn't matter what you do..." A concept and theology known as Hyper-Calvinism.

The Second; "Once saved, always saved; and it does matter what you do..." The saying Tozer asserted as being closer to the original doctrine, and more in line with biblical doctrine.

In the second, if one comes around speaking of Christ, claiming Christ, but is themself not conveying a very good image of Christ in their life; the person should not be surprised if the Session begins to question their salvation, and would eventually place them under censure... or be excommunicated [barred from communion]... The whole knowing them by their fruits deal.

I just found the best thing ever for religion! Read The Tale of the Body Thief By Anne Rice, and look at what David's description of God is. I think it is one of the best theories I have heard of yet.

Correct! We must at all times keep trying and never give up. That is what GOD expects from us, to remain faithful and give him our best, no matter what!
God told me the same thing!

... in respect to making love to my girlfriend

Oh btw god says oral is good

Your actions are based on your beliefs. If you have no problem stealing from your nieghbor you will likely steal from your nieghbor when given a chance. If however you have conscern for the welfare of your nieghbor and his property you will most likely not steal from your nieghbor. People say all sorts of things about what they believe but actions speak loader than words. Should some pointy nose singer get out of a limo and speak that every one should ride in fuel efficient cars are we to believe she believes in what she said?

Actions arrive out of the core and or real beliefs. Words are just words.

If some one does accept Jexus Christ as there lord and savior with all the Love God Love your nieghbor stuff etc. and they acted on it it would be quite a life change. However the mantra is nothing more than words.

Dear Jesus I know I have sinned. I welcome you into my heart etc. = meaningless.

The actions that arrive out of that core believe or that would arrive out of that core believe are where there truth is.

Although I am not much for Christianity. The truth is there is more to believing than pretending.

Good non Jesus believing people to hell, bad jesus believing people to heaven isn't quite accurate.

I think it is more like Good non Jesus believing people to hell former bad people who started beliving in Jesus before they died to heaven.

How could you be a bad person if your core was to love everyone and everyone and your actions arrived out of that core belief?

Ok, here's my two cents. I was (emphasis on was) a Lutheran Christian, but know I do not strictly believe in that religion, but I do believe in a God/Higher Power. "Why?" I hear cry. Well, that's because I am not so egotistical to think that I (by this I mean all human beings) am the best life form out there. Come on, have you seen the things humans do? We Can't be the best that there is out there.
That's just wishful thinking, and egotistical. Why do you think that anyone or anything else in the universe would give a damn about the human concept of "best"?
Also, look at stuff around you, like how water becomes less dense when it freezes. If that didn't happen, the oceans would have frozen solid by now. I mean Atheists, you're trying to tell me that all the odd occurences that occur happen just "by chance"?
Nope - we don't yet know exactly how it started, but it's fallacious to assume that someone must have designed it that way just because we don't fully understand the alternatives.

It's also egotistical to think that anything complex must have been designed by some higher entity. Humans design things, but there's no reason to believe that the human way is the way of the whole universe (or of any other species or entity), or that it could even be possible to design a universe.

As for the water freezing - if we lived in a universe where it didn't get less dense, then it would be a very different universe, and homo sapiens wouldn't be part of it, but so what? Perhaps there are billions of universes, and someone in another one is saying "Look at the way water becomes denser when it freezes. If that didn't happen, it would all have overheated by now ...."

Correct! We must at all times keep trying and never give up. That is what GOD expects from us, to remain faithful and give him our best, no matter what!
He would say that, wouldn't he :)

What a load of pap - we haven't a clue what god expects. We only know what other people, past and present, have claimed that god expects.

Correct! We must at all times keep trying and never give up. That is what GOD expects from us, to remain faithful and give him our best, no matter what!
I keep trying. I never give up.

I'm a free man. I will not submit. I will not bow my head. I will not be told what to do. If authority cannot be challenged, then it is anathema to freedom, and I'll fight it (assuming there's an afterlife) untill the day it is no more.

Stand tall, stong, proud & free. Rid yourselves of this 'god' thing. Religion is just another word for slavery.


Note: I honestly don't give a toss what your religion is, but seeing you all try to justify it makes my skin crawl.

Whats funny is how little most Christians know about their own teachings and their own Jesus.

Whats funny is how little most Christians know about their own teachings and their own Jesus.
Doesn't just apply to Christians either. Most people don't seem to know what their religion is all about.

What I really don't like are people who think it's right to "save" people by burning them at the stake...

Whats funny is how little most Christians know about their own teachings and their own Jesus.
What's even funnier is how impossible it is from our future perspective to know what it was he was trying to say without doing so through the Lens of those Christians.

There's one thing I haven't understood about Christianity. *snips rest* The idea of salvation by faith alone is a Lutheran concept. I can't speak for many other Churches, but I know that the Catholic Church holds that salvation can be possible for non-Christians, and that "faith without works is dead."

Doesn't just apply to Christians either. Most people don't seem to know what their religion is all about.

What I really don't like are people who think it's right to "save" people by burning them at the stake...
Indeed, I think I know more about Christianity and its interpretation than most Christians who consider themselves learned in the Bible, yet are blinded with their own assurance in these ideas which hinders them from searching for the validity behind their ideas. One who is to sure in themself is prone to stagnation.

The sad thing is some people are so mind-washed, they are not willing to open their minds to ideas other than their own.

The idea of salvation by faith alone is a Lutheran concept. I can't speak for many other Churches, but I know that the Catholic Church holds that salvation can be possible for non-Christians, and that "faith without works is dead."
This is true. Equally, it accepts that those Christians who are sinful in their conduct will distance themselves from God, whilst those non-Christians who follow Jesus' principles are likely to be saved. I wonder if this applies to homosexuals too, or are we all damned to Hell? :rolleyes:

The idea is that all of sinned and fall short of the glory of God. So it doesn't matter how "good" you've been in life, you haven't been perfect. Because God is perfect, your sin separates you from Him. Salvation then, is a gift from God, through the death of Christ. All who have faith in Him as their saviour will be saved. Of course, true faith ought to be backed up by works.

The sad thing is some people are so mind-washed, they are not willing to open their minds to ideas other than their own. Are these real people or strawmen? That's not intended as an insult - it's just that everyone seems to label other people "brainwashed" all the time.

Hmm I wonder if most clerics come close to even realising it...they are amongst the biggest sinners out there, well some anyway.

Are these real people or strawmen? That's not intended as an insult - it's just that everyone seems to label other people "brainwashed" all the time.
For the lack of a better term I suppose. I could use the words "taught to think in a certain way" instead. It has a very similar meaning in the end.

No it doesn't. Being "taught to think in a certain way" is the process of giving someone the tools to analyze things from a certain perspective or with a certain method. For example, scientific instruction is teaching someone to think using the scientific method, i.e. observation and induction. Being "taught to think a certain thing" is closer to brainwashing but even then it is not the same thing. For example, I have been taught not to judge people by their skin colour. Have I been brainwashed? Perhaps, but not if I come to accept that for myself. Brainwashing tends to imply a process whereby certain doctrines are taught in such a way that they cannot be rejected. Scientific education and religious instruction are not examples of brainwashing.

Yet some religious organisations do indeed brainwash their faithful, both sects within Christianity as well as those in many other religions. Perhaps use of the term brainwash was excessive, yet being taught to think in a certain manner does play a huge role in how one perceives things to be.

The basic idea of Christianity is that people, even when they've just been born, are sinful (just because they're human, not there fault.) If you never sinned for the rest of your life, or never stopped sinning, you'd still be just as condemned. The idea is that Jesus died to save people and take the punishment for them. So, people can theoreticaly, but never practicaly be saved by not sinning so the only way to be saved is to have faith in the one who saved us all. (Assuming, there, that you are a Christian etc.)

Brainwashing tends to imply a process whereby certain doctrines are taught in such a way that they cannot be rejected.
That's what churches attempt to do, especially with children. They take young developing minds, fill them with spurious claims, stress how those claims relate directly to them personally with emotionally-charged language, and back it all up with ceremonies and sermons which bypass the rational mind and go straight to the emotions.

Minds are shaped as we experience things, and very young minds are extremely susceptible to being moulded. Even people who do eventually dispense with their religion often find it difficult, if not impossible, to break the mindset of guilt, sin and dependence on higher "authority" which has been inculcated into their minds from an early age.

While they should learn about various religions, I can't help thinking that children should not be allowed to take part in religious ceremonies or instruction (as opposed to education) until they are at least about 14, and old enough to think for themselves.

The basic idea of Christianity is that people, even when they've just been born, are sinful
Which is nonsense - they're human, and fallible, but to dump the charge of "sin" on them from the moment they're born is sick.

Then is Christianity truly only for the emotionally/mentally weak, or for those who choose to have a little extra strength emotionally/mentally? Is religion really only a way to help boost our psychological strength?

I apologize if the first question offends anyone, but I feel that I'll never believe in any religion, however, I can forsee myself believing in religion if something bad happens, or the possibility. For example, if my loved one would die, or if one of my parents would die, I could forsee myself choosing to believe in religion simply because I'd much rather believe that we will all meet and continue to live in heaven rather than simply die off.

So is that the underlying cause of religion (where some people have simply exploited it to suit their needs)?
Why would you only Believe is something bad were to happen?

Yeah, that's my point, how can you know Jesus is God. You say worshipping Jesus is the same as worshipping God, but what if the Jesus that existed 2000 years ago wasn't actually the son of God? How can you risk offending God by accepting "Jesus is God" as truth?
How can you risk offending God by Not accepting? Why would you want to risk it?

How can you risk offending God by Not accepting? Why would you want to risk it?
Easily ... god is suposed to be loving
he will understand if he exists

If he doesent ehh he does not deserve my worship

Why would you only Believe is something bad were to happen?
Because bad things have the power to change people in wierd ways

How can you risk offending God by accepting "Jesus is God" as truth?
How can you risk offending God by Not accepting? Why would you want to risk it?
These two questions just about sums the situation up! Nobody really has a clue what god is or what he wants. If he exists, then any belief risks offending him (if he's so weak and egotistical that he can be offended), because backing any one doctrine means rejecting many other equally plausible ones.

These two questions just about sums the situation up! Nobody really has a clue what god is or what he wants. If he exists, then any belief risks offending him (if he's so weak and egotistical that he can be offended), because backing any one doctrine means rejecting many other equally plausible ones.
Exactly... and accepting one of them often requires modification of your true self usualy above and beyond what is required to exist in a society

I just dont see the justification for modifying myself in ways I dont like for something as flimsy as that.

Well thats assuming I can activly CHOOSE to believe in something that so far does not sound plausable

And that's my primary concern with the illogic of Christianity and other book-based religions.

If you don't like Christianity and other book-based religions don't follow them.

Which is nonsense - they're human, and fallible, but to dump the charge of "sin" on them from the moment they're born is sick.

I agree. It's not exactly fair, but it's true. It all started with the Fall, Adam and Eve etc. etc. The point is that everyone is sinful, so the only people who can get into heaven are those that admit that that's true and believe that God sent Jesus to die for sins [insert all Christian beliefs here].

I agree. It's not exactly fair, but it's true. It all started with the Fall, Adam and Eve etc. etc. The point is that everyone is sinful, so the only people who can get into heaven are those that admit that that's true and believe that God sent Jesus to die for sins [insert all Christian beliefs here].
So you say

I dont think an all smart all just and all loving god would make salvation by belief the method to salvation, belief is created when something when presented in the right way to you, and seems to make sense.
As such you cant activly choose to believe in something just be receptive and hope that something that makes sense to YOU comes along.

Its not a concious choice

It seems wrong to me that an all loving god would make belief the method to salvation ... it just feels wrong I cant controll that. how exactly do I come about to believing the rest of the tripe about this deity that feels so wrong?

So you say

I dont think an all smart all just and all loving god would make salvation by belief the method to salvation, belief is created when something when presented in the right way to you, and seems to make sense.
As such you cant activly choose to believe in something just be receptive and hope that something that makes sense to YOU comes along.

Its not a concious choice

It seems wrong to me that an all loving god would make belief the method to salvation ... it just feels wrong I cant controll that. how exactly do I come about to believing the rest of the tripe about this deity that feels so wrong?

You do or you don't. That's all there is to it. Looking at it logicaly, scientificaly or mathematicaly none of this stuff makes sense or is very believable. However, on a purely philosophical level, it does seem a good choice. Alls I knows is I think that compared to pre-Christanity (come on fellow religious people - not just christians - back me up here) I think I'm better off this side of the fence.

You do or you don't. That's all there is to it. Looking at it logicaly, scientificaly or mathematicaly none of this stuff makes sense or is very believable. However, on a purely philosophical level, it does seem a good choice.
That's a contridication - pure philosophy is logical, isn't it? They teach logic on philosophy courses.

Alls I knows is I think that compared to pre-Christanity (come on fellow religious people - not just christians - back me up here) I think I'm better off this side of the fence.
Good lord no! Before Christianity was adopted by the Roman Empire, there was a degree of religious tolerance. Most people were polytheistic, and so accepted that other people could have gods other than their own, and would often adapt others' gods into their own pantheon. After the rise of Christianity, intolerance became the order of the day; intolerance not only of other religions, but of variations within Christianity. The strong and bloody arm of the state was used to suppress heresies and other beliefs; non-Christian texts were suppressed, helping to push European learning into the Dark Ages. Where the Romans had fought wars for the empire; Christians fought them in the name of god. Where the Romans crucified, Christians burned people to death. Where other cultures celebrated people's natural sexual instincts, Christians turned them into something "base" and guilt-ridden. Christians preached a message of love (sometimes) and killed those who didn't accept it!

Christendom began to pull out of its dark ways with the Renaissance, and later the Enlightenment, movements inspired in part by pre-Christian learning and anti-religious sentiment.

You do or you don't. That's all there is to it. Looking at it logicaly, scientificaly or mathematicaly none of this stuff makes sense or is very believable. However, on a purely philosophical level, it does seem a good choice. Alls I knows is I think that compared to pre-Christanity (come on fellow religious people - not just christians - back me up here) I think I'm better off this side of the fence.
Why is there a fence at all? Why separate yourselves from humanity?

I personally feel it's a rather weak philosophy. There is reason enough to atone for the wrongs we commit against our fellow man, and it is sufficient to do so in direct dialogue with those we wrong. Any attempt to fit an imperceivable middle-man in there and assume that by apologising to him we have done all we need to do is only harmful to those we bring ill upon.

People inherently do wrong. There is no escaping that; even forgiveness cannot deny us our nature. But that's not to say we inherently are wrongful, as Christians would have us believe. Anyone who sees their tendency for self-indulgence and strives to overcome it is proving this point.

This tendency towards self-interest is not man-made. In fact, if you take the creation story as historical truth (I treat it as metaphor, personally), you will notice that the "Fall" resulted in man's awareness of both evil and Good. Taking that fruit did not create in man a sinful nature; it gave him awareness and understanding of his sinful nature. In Eden, Adam took from nature whatever he pleased without thought for its impact. I wonder how it would have survived in a few generations had that fruit not been taken?

That's a contridication - pure philosophy is logical, isn't it? They teach logic on philosophy courses.

Good lord no! Before Christianity was adopted by the Roman Empire, there was a degree of religious tolerance. Most people were polytheistic, and so accepted that other people could have gods other than their own, and would often adapt others' gods into their own pantheon. After the rise of Christianity, intolerance became the order of the day; intolerance not only of other religions, but of variations within Christianity. The strong and bloody arm of the state was used to suppress heresies and other beliefs; non-Christian texts were suppressed, helping to push European learning into the Dark Ages. Where the Romans had fought wars for the empire; Christians fought them in the name of god. Where the Romans crucified, Christians burned people to death. Where other cultures celebrated people's natural sexual instincts, Christians turned them into something "base" and guilt-ridden. Christians preached a message of love (sometimes) and killed those who didn't accept it!

Christendom began to pull out of its dark ways with the Renaissance, and later the Enlightenment, movements inspired in part by pre-Christian learning and anti-religious sentiment.

Perhaps I should explain myslef a little better, by logic, I mean deduction through the examination of evidence (of which there is little to none, admittedly) and by philosophical I mean theoretically considering and thinking, not asking How but Why.

Also (regarding the second quote) that was a comment on personal experience, not historical fact. No matter what the Roman Empire did, that doesn't change anything for me personaly. I stand by what I said before (but as a fellow historian, mathematician and scientist I can follow your argument. It applies very well to a general culture, but not to an individual quite as well)

Why is there a fence at all? Why separate yourselves from humanity?

I personally feel it's a rather weak philosophy. There is reason enough to atone for the wrongs we commit against our fellow man, and it is sufficient to do so in direct dialogue with those we wrong. Any attempt to fit an imperceivable middle-man in there and assume that by apologising to him we have done all we need to do is only harmful to those we bring ill upon.

People inherently do wrong. There is no escaping that; even forgiveness cannot deny us our nature. But that's not to say we inherently are wrongful, as Christians would have us believe. Anyone who sees their tendency for self-indulgence and strives to overcome it is proving this point.

This tendency towards self-interest is not man-made. In fact, if you take the creation story as historical truth (I treat it as metaphor, personally), you will notice that the "Fall" resulted in man's awareness of both evil and Good. Taking that fruit did not create in man a sinful nature; it gave him awareness and understanding of his sinful nature. In Eden, Adam took from nature whatever he pleased without thought for its impact. I wonder how it would have survived in a few generations had that fruit not been taken?
Bravo.

Because bad things have the power to change people in wierd ways
Good things should also change people. Shouldnt they?If only the bad things that happen to you make you believe,Then who gets the credit for the good things?I hurt for many of you , i just wonder what i can say or do to help you beleive.Or does something bad have to happen to you first?I Pray not.:(

Good things should also change people. Shouldnt they?If only the bad things that happen to you make you believe,Then who gets the credit for the good things?I hurt for many of you , i just wonder what i can say or do to help you beleive.Or does something bad have to happen to you first?I Pray not.:(
No but you usualy get a more abrupt and stronger change out of bad situations then good

Thats what you get when you try to adapt survival instincts to sociaty

You do or you don't. That's all there is to it. Looking at it logicaly, scientificaly or mathematicaly none of this stuff makes sense or is very believable. However, on a purely philosophical level, it does seem a good choice. Alls I knows is I think that compared to pre-Christanity (come on fellow religious people - not just christians - back me up here) I think I'm better off this side of the fence.
Exactly it is not in my nature to swallow that tripe

Like it or not I dont have the ability thus far to change it

So by my very nature I can not be saved, because by my very nature I can not believe.

I hardly think its right to punish or reward people for something they ultimatly have no real controll over

in the epistle of james, james says what you do counts as well as what you believe. james was christ's brother. as was jude, but that's beside the point. what james is saying is that your belief is proven by your actions.

when I learnt that "christians" would attempt to baptize or force new world natives to "accept christ and his teachings" before they killed them (usually by fire), I was appalled. in much the same way, I was horrified to learn that some "christians" would just go and do whatever evil they wanted (steal, cheat, cause general harm to others) and felt that by confessing their sins they would be absolved.

who teaches people things like this?

one of my favourite jesus miracles is the bread and the fish story. I know that there are those who believe that he popped extra fish and bread out of thin air like some magician at a kiddie party. what christ did was offer what he had, selflessly, to the crowd and they responded in kind. the miracle was to get a mob of selfish and greedy people to share among themselves. quite a task, I might add.

this miracle illustrates a fundemental christian teaching. that is, share what you have with others - anyone - you are not to be selective. you don't need anything for others will help you. (jesus sounds a great deal like a communist, sometimes). why is it that many "christians" cannot have any charity or tolerance for others? who teaches them these things?

Exactly it is not in my nature to swallow that tripe

Like it or not I dont have the ability thus far to change it

So by my very nature I can not be saved, because by my very nature I can not believe.

I hardly think its right to punish or reward people for something they ultimatly have no real controll over
You remind me of a television commercial for Sylvan Learning Centre, that begins with, "The worst thing you can hear from your child's lips is, 'I can't...'."

If you sincerely want to understand, but it's not your nature to swallow that particular tripe in order to be religious, find some other means. God needn't be taken in the literal form to be literally believed in.

You remind me of a television commercial for Sylvan Learning Centre, that begins with, "The worst thing you can hear from your child's lips is, 'I can't...'."

If you sincerely want to understand, but it's not your nature to swallow that particular tripe in order to be religious, find some other means. God needn't be taken in the literal form to be literally believed in.
Yes but I was specificaly dealing with the christian ideal that it be THEIR specific deity must be the one that is being believed in in order for salvation to occurr

instead of picking and choosing from the worst parts of various christian sects and then tarring the whole religion with them as if they represent all christianity you could take another approach

you could read the bible, especially the new testament, especially the gospels, decide for yourself what you believe in, then look for a denomination that believes as you do.

you may well find one.

instead of picking and choosing from the worst parts of various christian sects and then tarring the whole religion with them as if they represent all christianity you could take another approach

you could read the bible, especially the new testament, especially the gospels, decide for yourself what you believe in, then look for a denomination that believes as you do.

you may well find one.
Tried all of the above ... no joy

instead of picking and choosing from the worst parts of various christian sects and then tarring the whole religion with them as if they represent all christianity you could take another approach

you could read the bible, especially the new testament, especially the gospels, decide for yourself what you believe in, then look for a denomination that believes as you do.

you may well find one.
Heh... Easier said than done. You know why? Any given interpretation of the bible requires picking and choosing. Anything you could raise in the bible in support of your views, someone else could raise another point in the bible that says the exact opposite.

In a world where the Bible as a whole is taken as divine edict, it is impossible to reconsiliate these ideas or to explicitly pick one as more valid than the other. The only rational approach to this contradiction problem is to also look at context during scriptural analysis, which requires a perception of the authors as human writers with their own agenda or motive. When such contextual study is ignored by those who claim biblical infallousy, no amount of reading will ever result in revelation.

Heh... Easier said than done. You know why? Any given interpretation of the bible requires picking and choosing. Anything you could raise in the bible in support of your views, someone else could raise another point in the bible that says the exact opposite.

In a world where the Bible as a whole is taken as divine edict, it is impossible to reconsiliate these ideas or to explicitly pick one as more valid than the other. The only rational approach to this contradiction problem is to also look at context during scriptural analysis, which requires a perception of the authors as human writers with their own agenda or motive. When such contextual study is ignored by those who claim biblical infallousy, no amount of reading will ever result in revelation.
it doesnt bother anyone else. from jerry fallwell to the pope, they all pick and choose what is the most important aspect of the word of god. why shouldnt you?

it doesnt bother anyone else. from jerry fallwell to the pope, they all pick and choose what is the most important aspect of the word of god. why shouldnt you?
Okay, fair enough. What do you make of this?

Jesus didn't at all think of the kingdom of heaven as somewhere we go when we die. Matthew 8 verse 20: "The Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head". Instead, Heaven is simply a way of describing what God is; he is the universe, and his kingdom is a oneness with him. Similarly, Hell isn't a form of afterlife-justice. It's a form of current-life justice. Being thrown into the fire comes from the "pagan" ritual of throwing sacrifices into the pit of Gehenna, which was ultimately the worst form of humiliation and pain that a Jew could be put through; to have one's existence given up and used to serve the "enemy". Similarly, the idea of behaviour is the simple premise that if one doesn't act empathetically towards his fellow man, he will suffer an equivilent fate.

Next, Jesus never considered himself the Only son of God. Matthew 21 verse 21: "Jesus replied, 'I tell you the truth, if you have faith and do not doubt, [you can] do what was done to the fig tree...'" Jesus's power was granted to him through his innate understanding of what God was, and was not the unique providence of he himself. He never thought of himself as particularly gifted; merely that he was God's Son, as all were. However, he was unwilling to impress such a statement upon an Israel who had a desperate reliance upon God as a separate entity to themselves.


A perfect example of picking and choosing according to one's tastes. Perhaps you can begin to see the problem?

Okay, fair enough. What do you make of this?

Jesus didn't at all think of the kingdom of heaven as somewhere we go when we die. Matthew 8 verse 20: "The Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head". Instead, Heaven is simply a way of describing what God is; he is the universe, and his kingdom is a oneness with him. Similarly, Hell isn't a form of afterlife-justice. It's a form of current-life justice. Being thrown into the fire comes from the "pagan" ritual of throwing sacrifices into the pit of Gehenna, which was ultimately the worst form of humiliation and pain that a Jew could be put through; to have one's existence given up and used to serve the "enemy". Similarly, the idea of behaviour is the simple premise that if one doesn't act empathetically towards his fellow man, he will suffer an equivilent fate.

Next, Jesus never considered himself the Only son of God. Matthew 21 verse 21: "Jesus replied, 'I tell you the truth, if you have faith and do not doubt, [you can] do what was done to the fig tree...'" Jesus's power was granted to him through his innate understanding of what God was, and was not the unique providence of he himself. He never thought of himself as particularly gifted; merely that he was God's Son, as all were. However, he was unwilling to impress such a statement upon an Israel who had a desperate reliance upon God as a separate entity to themselves.


A perfect example of picking and choosing according to one's tastes. Perhaps you can begin to see the problem?

is that your belief?

But it's been known to happen.
Not only does it happen, it's completely pervasive in American society. The bible says that all have sinned, and there every christian I know has committed tons of "sins". but hey, at least they aren't homos.

is that your belief?
Not particularly, though it would fit. It's just a way in which things can be selectively interpreted.

Not particularly, though it would fit. It's just a way in which things can be selectively interpreted.
then it doesnt cover my point.

anyone can pick out some hard to believe or reconcile bits out of the bible.

of course it requires having some kind of faith already or at least the will to have faith. but, protestanly speaking, every person is capable of interpreting the bible. when you decide where your beliefs lie, REALLY decide, after much study, thought and prayer, then you will probably have a belief that is similar or identical to some christian sect already in existance.

or you could make a thorough study of one particular sect. its easiest with the more long term studied ones full of big thinkers like eastern orthodox, roman catholics, methodists. they have thought through every contradiction in scripture. most of which will never come to your attention. they all have slightly different interpretations but if you study closely, it all hangs together and makes logical sense within the system established.

Is religion really only a way to help boost our psychological strength?

Pretty much. And it does, too.

http://www.technicianonline.com/story.php?id=010607

I am turning my back to God and disrespecting him by not believing in Him and Jesus. However, how do you know you are not doing the same thing. You accept the Bible as truth so easily for a matter that is so heavy. How do you know Jesus was the messiah? How are you so certain that the Bible holds the truth about God, that you are willing to risk greatly insulting God by believing in a false book about Him?

And that's my primary concern with the illogic of Christianity and other book-based religions. You can't know for sure that your book is the right one. In fact, all you have to go on is the beliefs of the majority, and if the book *seems* to be holy. Wouldn't God be extremely angry if you chose to believe a book about Him that is completely false? I mean, how do you know that all of this that has been passed down the millenia is wrong? How do you know that Jesus was the Messiah or actually existed? What if Jesus was somebody else, and you're worshipping God's son as somebody completely different, which would be extremely disrespectful to God?

Maybe it would, but we have a chance of salvation. You, on the other hand, have none by completely rejecting and denying God.

Using logic on a christian is like trying to teach a dog algebra. Don't bother.

then it doesnt cover my point.
Wait, what? Whether or not I believe it changes the validity of the argument? That makes no sense at all. All I gave was an interpretation as to how the bible could be used in an interpretation that is different to Paulite Christian doctrine.

One does not need to subscribe to a particular group ideology in order to make sense of scripture. All Christianity is unified by two concepts; Uniqueness of Deity and Uniqueness of Jesus as God-Son. Biblical Testimony can be similarly interpreted in an impersonal Universal Force; no sect of Christianity adopts such a view.

Joining a particular Christian group is either something you do after the discovery and not as part of the discovery, or as something you do as an instant (though possibly temporary) end to your discovery in ignorance of the possibility of other interpretations.

It could also be interpreted as a bunch of myths adapted from Egyptian sources and modified over the years into a Roman state religion, then modified several more times to incorporate various rebellions against Vatican control.

Wait, what? Whether or not I believe it changes the validity of the argument? That makes no sense at all. All I gave was an interpretation as to how the bible could be used in an interpretation that is different to Paulite Christian doctrine.

One does not need to subscribe to a particular group ideology in order to make sense of scripture. All Christianity is unified by two concepts; Uniqueness of Deity and Uniqueness of Jesus as God-Son. Biblical Testimony can be similarly interpreted in an impersonal Universal Force; no sect of Christianity adopts such a view.

Joining a particular Christian group is either something you do after the discovery and not as part of the discovery, or as something you do as an instant (though possibly temporary) end to your discovery in ignorance of the possibility of other interpretations.
if you say so

the thread was about how the bible as the word of god makes no sense for various reasons.

my point was that instead of focusing on the problematical parts of various sects and using them to discredit the whole thing, one can focus on the stuff one agrees with and will probably find a sect one can happily join.

you brought up a potential problem that you dont believe in. so what? i can do the same. my point is that if YOU focus on your own beliefs YOU, kamaski, can find a sect that you will be happy in.

YOU may find that "All Christianity is unified by two concepts; Uniqueness of Deity and Uniqueness of Jesus as God-Son. Biblical Testimony can be similarly interpreted in an impersonal Universal Force; no sect of Christianity adopts such a view." but plenty of people seem to think that it takes more (or other) things than that. thats why there are so many sects and why it pays to look for one that meets your needs.

Christianity is not at all illigical. We are imperfect beings, and God is perfect. Imperfection cannot stand in the prescence of perfection it simply cannot stand it. Thus God provides us with a way to overcome our imperfection. By sacrificing his son who was perfect he paid the price of our transgressions. No matter how good a person is he can never become perfect to claim otherwise is the pinnacle of arrogance. People have tried to disprove the Christianity for 2000 years and have yet to make any headway. As time progresses archeological evidence proves the validity of the Bible. You may point to other religions but I would have one point to make about that. The three major religions of the worl Islam, Judaism, and Christianity all agree on the same God Yahwey, Jehova, and Allah are the same God the differing point comes in as to the role of Jesus. Now historical evidence supports the Gospels representation of Jesus more than any other, thus meaning that Christ actually did fufill over 100 messianic prophecies of the Jewish faith, and that the Islamic view which was formed hundreds of years later is also unreliable. This leads me to conclude that the Bible is the inspired word of God and that Jesus Christ is the Messiah,

Here's the thing about the bible.

If god is real and his message to us is so important, why doesn't he publish an updated bible himself, in every language, every few years in unambiguous language that spells out exactly what he wants us to do?

And "disproving" christianity is a ridiculous concept. One of the basic precepts of it is that it needs no proof. There for it is impossible to be disproven. You can point out the myriad ways in which it is irrational, illogical, ridiculous, contrary to observed reality, self-contradictory, and cruel. But you can't disprove anything based on unreasoned faith.

And "disproving" christianity is a ridiculous concept. One of the basic precepts of it is that it needs no proof. There for it is impossible to be disproven. You can point out the myriad ways in which it is irrational, illogical, ridiculous, contrary to observed reality, self-contradictory, and cruel. But you can't disprove anything based on unreasoned faith.


I will answer any question as to the rationale of scripture post here or email me at sonnyrulz8000@hotmail.com

Here's the thing about the bible.

If god is real and his message to us is so important, why doesn't he publish an updated bible himself, in every language, every few years in unambiguous language that spells out exactly what he wants us to do?

God does not need to update the bible because it is truth and truth never changes and the reason he doesnt translate it himself is because he wants us to do it so that we might gain greater understanding about him

God does not need to update the bible because it is truth and truth never changes and the reason he doesnt translate it himself is because he wants us to do it so that we might gain greater understanding about him
It doesn't bother him that most of us are probably getting it wrong? It's not exactly the clearest text, especially considering it has been translated from translations for years. And why does he need imperfect humans to write it. Couldn't he do it himself and have it delivered to everyone's door?

Oh wait, I'm using logic again. Never mind.

I will answer any question as to the rationale of scripture post here or email me at sonnyrulz8000@hotmail.com
I've really had this argument far too many times already and it goes nowhere. Thanks for the offer though.

It doesn't bother him that most of us are probably getting it wrong? It's not exactly the clearest text, especially considering it has been translated from translations for years. And why does he need imperfect humans to write it. Couldn't he do it himself and have it delivered to everyone's door?

Oh wait, I'm using logic again. Never mind.
Use logic :eek: heratic

If you don't like Christianity and other book-based religions don't follow them.
Easy for you to say ... becomes kind of hard when people try to legislate using that as reasoning

the thread was about how the bible as the word of god makes no sense for various reasons.
And I approached that problem by highlighting that was it the word of God, it would not be so vastly interpretable. As it stands, one can create any random junk and have it supported by scripture. Heck, people do it all the time. This "Coming to bring the sword" thing is brought up on a near constant basis when it's completely inconsistent with Jesus's passive aggression. This Levitical law thing is brought up all the time by Atheists as God's Rules, which also seems inconsistent with the whole "We forgive those who tresspass against us" deal. And how do you go about being kind to your fellow man when you all the while hold him in contempt for failing to subscribe to Jesus?

Either it's the word of man and we can apply context or it's the word of God and we must apply universal application. Since universal application is impossible due to internal contradictions, it cannot completely be today's word of God, and I would appreciate clarity on what bits are and what bits are not considered Godly. But then we moved on from that, of course.

my point was that instead of focusing on the problematical parts of various sects and using them to discredit the whole thing, one can focus on the stuff one agrees with and will probably find a sect one can happily join.

you brought up a potential problem that you dont believe in. so what? i can do the same. my point is that if YOU focus on your own beliefs YOU, kamaski, can find a sect that you will be happy in.

YOU may find that "All Christianity is unified by two concepts; Uniqueness of Deity and Uniqueness of Jesus as God-Son. Biblical Testimony can be similarly interpreted in an impersonal Universal Force; no sect of Christianity adopts such a view." but plenty of people seem to think that it takes more (or other) things than that. thats why there are so many sects and why it pays to look for one that meets your needs.
Your argument appears to be that if I ignore problems, I can be happy in a Christian organisation. While entirely true, it's nonetheless unhelpful. I am an inherently rational being, and cannot just happily accept things that contradict my reasoning. I'd either need to have my own fault explained or to see the origin of your reasoning and to be content with that train of thought.

The problem is one I have with the very nature of the faith. Ask a Christian, regardless of his sect, whether

a) God is the creator of the universe, is all-powerful and all-loving,
b) Jesus Christ was God uniquely incarnate in man, and
c) God has given us a second life after this one,

and you will get a positive response on all three counts. None of these are necessary to the existence of God, the validity of Jesus's teaching and the prospect of his resurrection, and yet all form a structural backbone to what it is to be Christian.

Is there any Sect of Christianity that denies a creator God, a Jesus that was God's Only Son and a heavenly rebirth?

And "disproving" christianity is a ridiculous concept. One of the basic precepts of it is that it needs no proof. There for it is impossible to be disproven. You can point out the myriad ways in which it is irrational, illogical, ridiculous, contrary to observed reality, self-contradictory, and cruel. But you can't disprove anything based on unreasoned faith.

Key point being unreasoned, in my stance...


There is quite a bit of study you can do. The first step is easy since you already believe in God, you can already pray that God will guide you to a greater understanding of who he is. Then you can continue by researching the religions that interest you. Research their history, their and get a good overview. Then you can visit a variety of religious institutions (based on the ones you found interesting when you did your preliminary research). Churches, temples, mosques, etc. Talk to people who have already studied a lot more about a particular religion than you have (priests, pastors, rabbis, etc.). Read the holy texts yourself. Read commentaries on the holy texts. Read apologetics on the faith. Cross refference stuff you have doubts about with secular sources when possible. Use your common sense, logic, and reason at all times. You can eliminate some religions quickly with just the preliminary study and eliminate others as you get deeper into studying them. There is a tremendous amount of room to learn if what you seek is learning.


Basically, start extremely biased, search everything that might help you, say anthing you find contrary to your opinion false, and call the faith-based information you find that agrees with you fact, because it agrees with your belief (which can't be disproven and is thus correct).

It doesn't bother him that most of us are probably getting it wrong? It's not exactly the clearest text, especially considering it has been translated from translations for years. And why does he need imperfect humans to write it. Couldn't he do it himself and have it delivered to everyone's door?

Oh wait, I'm using logic again. Never mind.

My friend you may be using logic but it has a few flaws if the Bible were tranlated incorrectly then there would be varied scriptures but there are not regardless of the language it holds the same message because those translating it have taken painstaking lengths to assure its accuracy the first translations were so exact that if two words even touched eachother they stopped and started over. Now I have a question for you not to be arrogant or selfrighteous but to make you think to reflect upon yourself, how much of the Bible have you read? and how much have you truly sought answers to your questions? I believe that within everyone there is a burden holding them from God I believe that if you answer these questions you might come closer to discovering yours.

God Bless
Yochimslovia

Key point being unreasoned, in my stance...



Basically, start extremely biased, search everything that might help you, say anthing you find contrary to your opinion false, and call the faith-based information you find that agrees with you fact, because it agrees with your belief (which can't be disproven and is thus correct).

I do not mean to be disrespectful in any way but I believe that you are taking his quote out of context. The author did not mean that you start with a bias towards Christianity, but that you recognize the existence of a God, and speaking as someone who has studied the religions of the world and shared ideas with others who have as well Christianity makes the most sense in all fo my studies I have yet to find a contradiction or flaw, nor have I found anyone who has raised a valid complaint against it. The key is to look not at the chruch but at the scriptures, the church is filled with people who are in nature fallible so you must look at the God who has no flaws. I do not believe that you purposly miscontrued the authors intentions, but I believe that you may have misunderstood his meaning.