Ask TrueReason...Religious questions
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-08-2012, 11:41 AM
Ask TrueReason...Religious questions
(23-08-2012 11:33 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(23-08-2012 11:26 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Can you elaborate on how agnostic atheism was the cause of your turmoil, that is unless you already needed to have a savior. In which case, I would question just how much of a disbeliever you actually were.

My atheism wasn't the cause... it's just that I was a crappy person and I happened to be an atheist. It wasn't until my regeneration that I stopped being crappy.

So, I would say that my atheism had no bearing my human condition; however, Christianity did because it changed me.

I honestly said that as a stupid little quip. My bad.

Have you also considered that your beliefs had nothing to do with you becoming a better person? You probably just grew up. You met a beautiful wife, you had kids, good job, good friends and social community. To say that you were a crappy person because you did not have Christianity would mean that the majority of this board are crappy people right?

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Erxomai's post
23-08-2012, 11:42 AM
RE: Ask TrueReason...Religious questions
(23-08-2012 09:53 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  The idea that God planned everything in the world is sickening, disgusting, and borderline sadistic.

Agreed.

(23-08-2012 10:15 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  It depends on morality.

We as humans (including me) find some of the things YHWH did to be abhorrent, but this is based on our morality. God's morality is a morality all His own; something we don't understand.

Yes, I know all the arguments against this line of thinking... I've heard them all and responded to them all... so yeah, not really looking to start this up again. It just boils down to me trusting that God is perfect as is His plan. Things happen for a reason that I don't yet understand nor will I ever probably understand as my understanding isn't infinite.

Yes, this is a faith based belief. I know.
Don't get me wrong, KC, I have respect for you but that's fucked up. I mean that with the respect I have. It's borderline depressing to hear someone say they are willing to trust someone that's proven (I'm aiming at the bible, but someone can take a jab at current day situations if they'd like) that they aren't mature, capable, or really that caring of a creator to help them survive this world.

What I'm getting at is this, if you have to close your eyes and hope it works out, it's not really working out, is it? If you have to guess at what someone who can save you - or kill you is going to do, then is that a safe relationship? Ionno, it looks to me Christianity is doing more harm to you, you may not notice it however...

A little offtopic, I love your rainbow username. It's totally fabulous.

(23-08-2012 10:45 AM)TrueReason Wrote:  
(22-08-2012 08:39 PM)Red Tornado Wrote:  If there is "proof" (like there is "proof" for the Christian God) for other religions, personal experiences to 'validate' the other religions (like Islam, and others) how confident can you say they are not true? And yours is?

Personal experiences are merely complimentary evidence. If personal experience was the sole piece of evidence I gave for Christianity, I would be presenting a very weak. We can ask what if they had just as much historical proof as Christianity, but that would be just a waste of time as that is simply not the case. If we need to start a new thread going into these evidences more in depth, we can, but this thread is meant to give just the short answer to these questions.

If you're going to be a pastor, you might want to check out the competition for the other religions as well, but since Islam is a younger religion the historical proof can be proven or disproven more easily. (Whereas Christianity it's mostly - "That shits probably long gone by now")

Thanks for replying though.

Bury me with my guns on, so when I reach the other side - I can show him what it feels like to die.
Bury me with my guns on, so when I'm cast out of the sky, I can shoot the devil right between the eyes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Question's post
23-08-2012, 11:47 AM
RE: Ask TrueReason...Religious questions
(23-08-2012 11:41 AM)Erxomai Wrote:  Have you also considered that your beliefs had nothing to do with you becoming a better person? You probably just grew up. You met a beautiful wife, you had kids, good job, good friends and social community. To say that you were a crappy person because you did not have Christianity would mean that the majority of this board are crappy people right?

Hello all you crappy people! Thanks KC .. i feel so crappy now....

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. -- Voltaire
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ddrew's post
23-08-2012, 11:55 AM
RE: Ask TrueReason...Religious questions
(23-08-2012 11:47 AM)ddrew Wrote:  
(23-08-2012 11:41 AM)Erxomai Wrote:  Have you also considered that your beliefs had nothing to do with you becoming a better person? You probably just grew up. You met a beautiful wife, you had kids, good job, good friends and social community. To say that you were a crappy person because you did not have Christianity would mean that the majority of this board are crappy people right?

Hello all you crappy people! Thanks KC .. i feel so crappy now....

I feel crappy,
oh, so crappy!
I feel crappy and happy and bright!

(with apologies to Bernstein and Sondheim)

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
23-08-2012, 11:59 AM
RE: Ask TrueReason...Religious questions
-_-

I was crappy because I didn't have Christianity.

You cannot be applied to me.

So no, y'all aren't crappy.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2012, 12:01 PM
RE: Ask TrueReason...Religious questions
(23-08-2012 11:41 AM)Erxomai Wrote:  
(23-08-2012 11:33 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  My atheism wasn't the cause... it's just that I was a crappy person and I happened to be an atheist. It wasn't until my regeneration that I stopped being crappy.

So, I would say that my atheism had no bearing my human condition; however, Christianity did because it changed me.

I honestly said that as a stupid little quip. My bad.

Have you also considered that your beliefs had nothing to do with you becoming a better person? You probably just grew up. You met a beautiful wife, you had kids, good job, good friends and social community. To say that you were a crappy person because you did not have Christianity would mean that the majority of this board are crappy people right?

All of that happened after my conversion.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2012, 12:01 PM (This post was last modified: 23-08-2012 09:43 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Ask TrueReason...Religious questions
(23-08-2012 10:45 AM)TrueReason Wrote:  the short answer to these questions.

is as follows :

1. All of Christianity is today built on the (false) premise of a "fall", thus a (supposed), need for "salvation", from that fall. And actually the original insight into the Human Condition is much more in line with the scientific worldview, than any supposed need for a "salvation" paradigm. The original meaning of the Garden Myth was an attempt at "encompassing opposites", (as is discussed by Martin Buber, the Jewish Philosopher and Talmudic scholar, in Part 2, of his famous book, "Good and Evil").

2. The (only) "proof" offered for that paradigm, is the "physical" resurrection of their (supposed) "founder", (Yehsua ben Josef).

Why 1 and 2 are not credible, in any way :

1. The "fall" in Genesis is an interpretation of a myth, which we/scholars know was appropriated from Sumerian Choas myths, and "interpreted" by Talmudic scholars as a statement of the Human Condition, and much later re-interpreted by the followers/members of the "Way", (a word the followers of Yeshua in Jerusalem used to refer to themselves), (Acts 9:2), who were for hundreds of years members of a sub-sect of Judaism, (see the sermons of St. John Chrysostom, exhorting HIS congregation to stop going to the synagogues). Yeshua was one of about 20, (that we know of) apocalyptic preachers, who stated "Verily I say unto you, THIS generation shall not pass away, until all these things shall be accomplished". (Matthew 23:24).
That did not occur, and Yeshua was executed for causing a disturbance in Jerusalem, of some sort, likely associated with the economic activities in the Jewish temple, according to a standing order, present in Roman law, for anyone disturbing the "Pax Romana". Not only did that, (the restoration of the ancient Kingdom), not occur in Yeshua's lifetime, when the temple was destroyed in 72 CE, but it did not happen in the next two generations, and convincingly did not happen when in the Bar Kochba Revolt, (130s CE), when the Jerusalem was destroyed completely. Thus the cult/sect was faced with a crisis. Now what ? Answer : invent a reason to continue the sect of the "Way". Reason invented : "salvation". Source : Saul of Tarsus. Proof : :salvation is absent in the first gospel. Thus the entire cult is :

a. based on a known misinterpretation of an ancient myth system, (Chaos and Order),
b. cooked up by later followers, and never spoken about by Yeshua,
c. argued over by the followers to the point they told Saul to leave Jerusalem, after he attempted a bribe, to the leaders of the Jerusalem community,
and kept causing legal troubles for the members of the cult, either purposely, (as he may have been a Roman "plant"/"mole", or just a well intentioned
converted "follower", who, during the course of writing his "letters", kept changing his mind about his views of the "Jesus events"..the changes, and
developments which are present in the letters, for anyone to see, today.
d. Augustine of Hippo, (one of many self-admitted know "liars"... church "fathers", who admitted they used deception), finished cooking up the "original sin" paradigm, and grafted it into the cult.

2. Yeshua did not have a "physical" resurrection, and none of the gospels actually say that he did. Whatever sort of "zombie" body they may have thought he had, was in no way what modern 2012 people mean when they say "physical body". The zombie body did not eat, sleep, or comport in any way to what we mean when we say "physical" in the English Language. It went through walls. All the other zombies in Matthew, the rent curtain of the temple, the split rocks, the earthquake, (Matthew 27:51) were never documented by anyone, anywhere. There is not a shred of evidence that a non-follower of the "Way" ever "saw" Yeshua, after his death, and in fact on the Road to Emmaus, it is documented that even his followers did not recognize the zombie body. It simply was not a "physical" body, in the English language, and they did not intend to say that it was, (whatever it was). While there is a very small probability that by quantum movement, a large object could appear on the other side of a wall, in quantum theory, it has never actually been observed.

Summary :
The entire cult is based on a misinterpretation of a myth. The supposed founder never preached the paradigm. The followers made it up, and developed it, as a marketing scheme to compete with the Greek mystery cults, which were historically it's main competition.

The Christian model is actually THE worst possible explanation for the human condition, available. The reason is it posits an outside/external source of "evil", as the operant factor, for the explanation of "bad things", or inconvenient things. In fact every unfortunate occurance, and/or every non-productive event has a scientifically explainable cause, which we now know about. For exmple, when the genetic mechanism goes awry in an individual child, and the child gets cancer, that does not mean the parents did something wrong, or the child is evil. It means that the genetic mechanism still works well, in general, but the probability that a change will occur, which can be useful for mutations in the group, can be non-useful in an individual. occasionally. The "evil"/salvation, (eons-long pissed off god thing), is not only childish, but so corrupt that to assert it is a good explation for anything, is simply delusional.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
23-08-2012, 12:01 PM
RE: Ask TrueReason...Religious questions
(23-08-2012 10:09 AM)Hafnof Wrote:  Who specifically do you believe wrote the various books of the Bible, and when? Especially, who wrote genesis and the first few books of the old testament? Who wrote the gospels and when? Who wrote Paul's letters, and who wrote Revelations and when?

I haven't done enough in-depth studies into Old testament authorship at this point, but if memory serves me right, Moses is considered the author of Pentateuch, though i'm sure he had some help in that regard.
The Gospels, while they do cite their authors within the texts themselves, are traditionally held to be written by matthew, mark, luke, and john. Support for their authorship is found in the early attestation of that authorship by the early church fathers, and the early dates of the Gospels within the first century AD.
Paul wrote Paul's letters. Stylistic and grammatical differences between his writings, and indeed throughout many of the NT writings, can be attributed to the use of different amanuenses or scribes.
Revelation was most likely written sometime between 90-100 AD. Traditional sources claim the apostle John is the author of Revelation, but there are others who believe another man of the name John wrote Revelation. Authorship of Revelation and some of the other books in the NT have different arguments on each side, but the traditional attributions are usually pretty sound.

That's my answer. If you don't like it, we can start another thread some time discussing arguments for this in more detail.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2012, 12:01 PM
Ask TrueReason...Religious questions
(23-08-2012 11:59 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  -_-

I was crappy because I didn't have Christianity.

You cannot be applied to me.

So no, y'all aren't crappy.

There would be no reason for us to convert, right?

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2012, 12:03 PM
RE: Ask TrueReason...Religious questions
(23-08-2012 10:54 AM)DLJ Wrote:  
(23-08-2012 10:45 AM)TrueReason Wrote:  We can ask what if they had just as much historical proof as Christianity, but that would be just a waste of time as that is simply not the case.

S'funny that.

I hear that one all the time from my Muslim friends.

Consider

Ah! I see what you are saying. There is not "just as much" proof... there is more proof for Islam.

Allah be praised.

Can you direct me to some of their proofs? I am admittedly no expert in Islamic studies, but I would like to see some of their arguments.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: