PeterHammer Posted December 5, 2002 Share Posted December 5, 2002 The thing here is that it's not about someones personal preference in life if they choose not to believe the bible then it doesn't apply to them. Sorry no matter how much any catholic, muslim, buddist, athiest, non-believer chooses to ignore the bible and not believe it, it doesn't make it go away and it doesn't make the truth contained there-in any less applicable to them. It's like putting your hands over your ears and saying "blahblahblah" when someone tells you something you don't like. People are just ignoring something they don't like and hoping it doesn't go away.The truth is that all man-made religions are false, just as false as the false gods of the anchent greek and egyptian days. It's very simple, if someone doesn't believe in Jesus Christ as their savior and that they are a sinner destined for hell, they will goto hell. The terrorists of 9-11 all went to hell. A catholic who thinks confessional once a week saves them... goes to hell. Buddists, Hindu's, athiests, all goto hell the moment they die. Only those who have believed in Christ as savior goto heaven. I'm not being mean, I'm not being cruel, I'm saying what the truth is and that truth is every single human being on the earth today, tomorrow and years from now are imperfect sinners and because of that sin and until a person is saved they are destined to an enteral and tormenting hell. The 10 commandments doesn't save anyone (btw in the old Mosaic law there were actually over 500 laws and regulations to have been kept, not just the 10), not believing doesn't make you exempt, living a good and clean lifestyle doesn't get one to heaven, nor does praying to allah or buddah or any other false god. The truth is in plain site and I can't make anyone believe anything they don't want to, but i wouldn't be as foolish to carelessly toss around a decision about ones enteral destiny. Modem, though you do a good job at being eloquent, your argument has one fatal flaw. You establish that there is a "truth" yet you do not provide any concrete, or even tangible, evidence that proves this truth of yours. What plain site are you refering too? That collection of bedtime stories called the new testament? What proof do you have that these books are true, and not just some crazy tale conjured up by a first century novelist seeking fame and fortune? Someone (a group of someones actually) a long time ago wrote a book that contains a character called Jesus Christ. A bunch of people believe that Christ was an actual person. But does that prove it? A lot of people in the 1400's believed the world was flat too! That did not make it any more true did it? Until you produce a bone or tooth or hair that actually was Jesus Christ, your view is just that. Because christians the world over happen to share your view, does not make it any more true than the Koran, or the Torah, or the Dao, or the Egyptian book of the dead for that matter. Open your eyes man. You may miss the world going by you.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rage Posted December 5, 2002 Share Posted December 5, 2002 The thing here is that it's not about someones personal preference in life if they choose not to believe the bible then it doesn't apply to them. Sorry no matter how much any catholic, muslim, buddist, athiest, non-believer chooses to ignore the bible and not believe it, it doesn't make it go away and it doesn't make the truth contained there-in any less applicable to them. It's like putting your hands over your ears and saying "blahblahblah" when someone tells you something you don't like. People are just ignoring something they don't like and hoping it doesn't go away.The truth is that all man-made religions are false, just as false as the false gods of the anchent greek and egyptian days. It's very simple, if someone doesn't believe in Jesus Christ as their savior and that they are a sinner destined for hell, they will goto hell. The terrorists of 9-11 all went to hell. A catholic who thinks confessional once a week saves them... goes to hell. Buddists, Hindu's, athiests, all goto hell the moment they die. Only those who have believed in Christ as savior goto heaven. I'm not being mean, I'm not being cruel, I'm saying what the truth is and that truth is every single human being on the earth today, tomorrow and years from now are imperfect sinners and because of that sin and until a person is saved they are destined to an enteral and tormenting hell. The 10 commandments doesn't save anyone (btw in the old Mosaic law there were actually over 500 laws and regulations to have been kept, not just the 10), not believing doesn't make you exempt, living a good and clean lifestyle doesn't get one to heaven, nor does praying to allah or buddah or any other false god. The truth is in plain site and I can't make anyone believe anything they don't want to, but i wouldn't be as foolish to carelessly toss around a decision about ones enteral destiny. Modem, though you do a good job at being eloquent, your argument has one fatal flaw. You establish that there is a "truth" yet you do not provide any concrete, or even tangible, evidence that proves this truth of yours. What plain site are you refering too? That collection of bedtime stories called the new testament? What proof do you have that these books are true, and not just some crazy tale conjured up by a first century novelist seeking fame and fortune? Someone (a group of someones actually) a long time ago wrote a book that contains a character called Jesus Christ. A bunch of people believe that Christ was an actual person. But does that prove it? A lot of people in the 1400's believed the world was flat too! That did not make it any more true did it? Until you produce a bone or tooth or hair that actually was Jesus Christ, your view is just that. Because christians the world over happen to share your view, does not make it any more true than the Koran, or the Torah, or the Dao, or the Egyptian book of the dead for that matter. Open your eyes man. You may miss the world going by you.... Very well put. Here's a proposition: The Bible was written by men, and by men who subscribed to various religious dictates created by men as well, not by God. Another great point. I just wish that people would see that all religions are just blind faiths. Also, people need to learn to just accept things as they are, your faith, is your faith, worry about that and don't try to push it on everyone else. There will never be a point in time where everyone will agree on this matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshie Posted December 5, 2002 Share Posted December 5, 2002 I haven't been following this thread at all, but I saw the modem post and it was the most tempting bait I've seen all day (well, next to a post on another board about how eating mushrooms lets them communicate with the spirit of Einstein, but lets not go there). I'm the kinda guy who doesn't *believe* anything. Instead, I take what I can know for absolute certainty, and use that as my foundation. It may end up being a tiny foundation, but it'll never crumble under the weight of what I build upon it. Of course, since it's a tiny foundation, I have to build upwards, meaning the more and more detailed I get in my ideas, the more 'out there' it becomes, eh? What a great metaphor. ^_^ But no matter how crazy the ideas become, I know that if ever I find out something is wrong, I can just refer right back down to my foundation and work it through reasonably. So this basically means I'll consider a lot of things as long as they can live up to my foundation. A lot of popularly accepted ideas, however, don't even make it five stories up. Before I start ranting, I'd like to say I think a lot of atheists are totally full of crap. They're the kids who couldn't handle religion, wanted to live their own lives just 'because', and without understanding any of their actions or motives, dropped it out of almost sheer laziness. It never surprises me to see atheists pick up Wicca. They still need a religion, but their spite for Judao-Christian doctrine makes them look for an alternative. Then they go convincing themselves they can cast spells just because an old book says so (wasn't this their gripe with Christianity?). Then there are the agnostics, who are probably the most reasonable of the bunch, second only to those who hold no opinion on religion whatsoever (yes, agnosis is still an opinion on religion). They consider their inability to know for certain whether there is or isn't, was or wasn't, will be or won't be a G/god(s). They're basically the people who stick with the scientific method, and aren't upset if they can't discover the truth, yet are appreciative when they find out something *isn't* true. It's not so much about being right as it's about not being wrong. Now that my humongous pseudo-disclaimer is out of the way. Modem. Your ideas ask for a lot of trouble, and also go against a fundamental building block of your religion. Christianity is about faith, and *believing* in Jesus and/or God. You, however, give the impression that you don't believe Christianity is right; instead, you believe you *know* Christianity is right. Now, by thinking you know, as a truth, as a certainty, absolute knowledge, that Christianity is right, you slap your God in the face. Your god, after all, expressed time and again that there is only faith, only believing. People have to *believe* in him, because, as the church insists in every defense against every scientist ever, God will never let you actually *know* he exists. It would remove the element of faith, which is seen as the very key to salvation. This is why, after all, Jesus preached that the meek were blessed. The quiet and humble, who practiced their faith without parading around insisting they were right. When you begin believing you *know* the truth, a sort of pride, a kind of indignance forms deep within you. It happens to all of us. When we think we've grasped truth, we hold on tight, and we'll all put up a helluva fight and make absolutely certain we're 100% wrong before letting it go, and then we usually only change it a little so we don't have to let go completely. This feeling is what Jesus wanted people to avoid. That feeling is why humility has been put on a pedestal in all forms of spirituality throughout the world, including Christianity. Yanno? Now, personally, I'm sort of a non-theist. Kinda like Agnostic 2.0. I don't really have a perspective on religion, though I like to study them and understand other people's perspectives. This allows me to point out flaws in other people's reasonings without expressing whether or not I think their beliefs are wrong. I'm no Christian, but I can tell people when they're misinterpreting something. I'm not out to liberalize christianity, unless telling people when they're wrong is considered liberal (republicans might think so ^_^). I'm more interested in...hrm...normalizing it, I guess. Figuring out how it was meant to come across. The writers of the books never intended for them to all be put together by Roman politicans in the 4th century A.D. They were just writing books, records of their experiences and anthologies of their songs, poems, and cultures. So I look for context--when something was written, who it was likely written by, why certain sentiments were held; separate what's there because of culture from what's there for spirituality. Take, for example, Paul of the NT. This guy is the most quoted author in all of Christianity--I think I see his words more often than quotes of Jesus himself. Yet Paul was never one of the thirteen. Yes, as the story goes, he was given charge of the 'church' (a remarkable word, since our idea of a church didn't have a word in that language at that time, so I wonder what it literally translated to--perhaps fellowship? when did anyone decide it was an institution?). But has anyone ever wondered why someone out of the official 'loop' would be given such a task? Someone who was more versed in Jewish laws and customs, which Jesus kept amending left and right? Ah well, I ask the questions they don't cover in sunday school--maybe that's why I stopped attending so long ago. ;P Oy, and that's what led to my binge on Taoism and eventual agnosticism. o.O Then I became a scholar. ^_^ So anyway, yeah, don't run around telling people they're going to hell, no matter how 'honestly' you say you're behaving. God himself (in the OT, where he was ever so verbal) never mentioned a hell--just death, an off switch, the end. Even Jesus said, in his too-often quoted 3:16 line, "will not perish," as if perishing--coming to an end, stopping, dying--were the alternative to gaining the so-called kingdom of heaven. I say so-called because I personally think "kingdom of heaven" is more a metaphor of something you can achieve in life, thus explaining his moutaintop sermen where he said some of those present would see the kingdom of heaven before their death (this has been amazingly skewed into hundreds of theories, such as them being revived on one grand judgement day, etc.). Kind of like, hrm...enlightenment, for lack of a better word. As much as I hate comparing it to Buddhism, it's kind of like saying those who accept Siddhartha (Jesus) was the Buddha (son of God) will have that as their first step toward achieving enlightenment (kingdom of heaven) in this lifetime (before seeing death). Like I said, my foundation builds up and up, further and further out, but I think that's a very reasonable theory, don't you? It sure does seem to fit the puzzle pieces better, and eliminates the need to argue with scientists about spirits and the afterlife. Ah well, I'm off. If you stayed with me through this, thank you!! It's been a long time since I've been able to post about religion on a board. It felt good. :D Did I do ok? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gtksxp Posted December 5, 2002 Share Posted December 5, 2002 Here's another one for discussion, perhaps more controversial: Organized religion has been and continues to be the cause for the greatest amount of human suffering in the History of humankind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deron Dantzler Posted December 5, 2002 Share Posted December 5, 2002 gtksxp: that i agree with. superfula: i'll make this short but i'm going to pose a question for you that i want all of the christians who support abstinance to think about. you say that sex before marriage is a sin correct? well in the same statement you are binding god to human ideas because we are so called 'married' by either a court system or in church, we get marriage liscenses. it's all a legallity. marriage in the sense of 'hey let's get married' on a certain date is only a formality. if god is real he is in no way bound to that. marriage in god's eyes in my opinion would be a state of emotional attachment. and another thing: keep in mind that by the 'bible' as you call it, lust (or wanting to have sex with someone) is a sin. so see that brings up the question, how can the bible be real as it defies that very thing which is natural? there are sexual urges and desires by nature. it's not a sin, only naturality. acting on that should be judged by one's own self, and i think if 2 people are emotionally ready to have sex then they should have sex. i don't think your god would have a problem with that either. he's not bound by your social status of being 'married.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshie Posted December 5, 2002 Share Posted December 5, 2002 Nah, I think the tendency of the human toe to become 'stubbed' on various objects (chair legs, walls, doorways, etc.) is the greatest cause of suffering. But I also don't see suffering as a bad thing. Or a good thing. And no, to all the simple minded folk, thinking it's neither bad nor good doesn't mean I think it's good. *mumbles about how often he's had to say that* And since I completely left this out in my monstrous post, my on-topic sentiments! Sex = fun! Relationships = risky! Love = over-rated, but still potentially fun! And I enjoy thinking this way! Cuz I'm allowed to have lots and lots of fun, sweaty sex. :D Gay + STD testing = long nights of unprotected sex. >:] And as you can see from my earlier post, my priorities have still managed to stay in whack enough to make me intellectual and social. ^_^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kobayashi Posted December 5, 2002 Share Posted December 5, 2002 (edited) I would like to give my opinion about the whole thing; feel free to disagree with me, but let's keep it gentle! ;) Why do animals have sex, you think? Is it because they want to give birth? Hell no! In nature, having young ones means being weaker towards your natural enemies. It makes the individual less flexible and less focussed, thus an easier prey. There is no interest for the individual, although it does strenghtens the sort. Why is it then, that all animals are hungry for sex? Just for the fun of it! It's the orgasm that drives animals towards sex. Nature pulls a dirty trick on them: in their search for an orgasm they reproduce and the future of their species rest assured. Humans - often referred to as intelligent beings :cry: - are the only animals who have found the knowledge to resolve the link between sex and procreation: anticonception. The point is: wether you're having sex for fun or to make children (which doesn't mean you cannot enjoy it :happy: ), make sure to act like the intelligent being you're supposed to be! Want to have fun? Protect yourself! Show respect for yourself and for your partner. Want to have childeren? Be prepared! Raising childeren is a hard task and an engaging decission which should not be taken lightly. In my personal opinion marriage is not a safe conduct for sex... common sense, maturity and respect, though, should be sufficient. Edited December 5, 2002 by kobayashi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qumahlin Posted December 5, 2002 Share Posted December 5, 2002 Here's another one for discussion, perhaps more controversial: Organized religion has been and continues to be the cause for the greatest amount of human suffering in the History of humankind. This is the greatest statement...EVER Religions will always now and forvever be..blind faith. Over time every religion comes up with opjects to help fabricate the "stories" told..the shroud of turin for example. Then when science finds out that the shroud of turin wasn't around anywhere near the time the bible or jesus christ (might of been)...the people who want to believe the shroud is real just put their hands over their ears and say your wrong wrong wrong wrong... Bottom line is you cannot convince someone's religion is wrong. You cannot ever expect all the religions to get along since they all think they are right...there is no point arguing it. There are plenty of theories about the social and mental reasons religions were created. will they ever be proven? no it's impossible for it to be proven. All this arguing over who is right and wrong will never end. It has gone on since the first documentations of CIVILization (funny to use that word when if you look at the past of every human culture we are anything but) So bottom line... are athiests going to hell? we don't know. are catholics going to hell? we don't know. are buddhists going to hell? we don't know. are christians going to hell? we don't know. are muslims going to hell? we don't know are scientologists going to hell? we don't know Is ANYONE going to hell? we don't know is there a hell? we don't know is there a heaven? we don't know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kombolcha Posted December 5, 2002 Share Posted December 5, 2002 there was a class discussion about this some time back. and at first i somewhat happy that girls were easier to get and they were more willing to have sex and stuff... But now I'm the opposite, after thinking of all the diseases there are out there especially AIDS. and having sex shouldn't be a casual thing, it just doesn't seem right to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deron Dantzler Posted December 5, 2002 Share Posted December 5, 2002 Joshie: Your post was very interesting, and I was able to relate to all of it. You're a very intelligent individual. Religiously, I'm the same as you though I haven't thought about some of the points you came across, just many other personal theories on Christianity. That was good what you said about Jesus's "Those who believe in me shall not perish...". I was raised in a Christian household, and I've been what you call 'Agnostic 2.0' for 2 or 3 years now. Religion draws me when I see conversation, and I like to pick the individual religions apart and take them for what they are worth. Nice to see someone with the same style views. One 'religion' you may be interested in reading up on if you haven't is Humanism. Very interesting concept and it closely models what religion I would participate in if I was a participant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glockfan Posted December 5, 2002 Share Posted December 5, 2002 nicely put. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trust Posted December 5, 2002 Share Posted December 5, 2002 Choosing Virginity?? :o :D The gov is worry about numbers... these numbers: U.S. 288,640,954 World 6,260,345,482 Dec 05, 2002 Look this table: http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/worldpop.html They are very optimist about population in 2050... And look here to 'funny' clock http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/clock2.html More: http://www.census.gov/population/www/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orphic Posted December 5, 2002 Share Posted December 5, 2002 What about the bean sausage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gtksxp Posted December 5, 2002 Share Posted December 5, 2002 Here's another one for discussion, perhaps more controversial: Organized religion has been and continues to be the cause for the greatest amount of human suffering in the History of humankind. This is the greatest statement...EVER Religions will always now and forvever be..blind faith. Over time every religion comes up with opjects to help fabricate the "stories" told..the shroud of turin for example. Then when science finds out that the shroud of turin wasn't around anywhere near the time the bible or jesus christ (might of been)...the people who want to believe the shroud is real just put their hands over their ears and say your wrong wrong wrong wrong... Bottom line is you cannot convince someone's religion is wrong. You cannot ever expect all the religions to get along since they all think they are right...there is no point arguing it. There are plenty of theories about the social and mental reasons religions were created. will they ever be proven? no it's impossible for it to be proven. All this arguing over who is right and wrong will never end. It has gone on since the first documentations of CIVILization (funny to use that word when if you look at the past of every human culture we are anything but) So bottom line... are athiests going to hell? we don't know. are catholics going to hell? we don't know. are buddhists going to hell? we don't know. are christians going to hell? we don't know. are muslims going to hell? we don't know are scientologists going to hell? we don't know Is ANYONE going to hell? we don't know is there a hell? we don't know is there a heaven? we don't know Thank you for the compliment. BTW, my statement is based on my most objective observation of current world events and my own limited study of History. It is unfortunate this is the case though, because religions are supposed to be about love and peace. I think it should be quite easy to find that the common denominators in all world religions promote these two values. If all religions were to dismiss historical and traditional beliefs and stipulate respect for life at all levels as a primordial tenet, then humankind would work harder at procuring welfare among all peoples, and we would all live in peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackalo Posted December 5, 2002 Share Posted December 5, 2002 My choice is to wait for marriage. My reason is that I don't want to have to worry about the possibility of having a kid at such an early age, and hopefully be able to follow my dreams for a while. Time for my rambling, however. Anyone else think that everyone in the world should be screened for STD's over the next 5 years, and then the people who have it should be forbidden to have any form of sex? It would end the problem of STD's, now wouldn't it? After watching Channel One the other day, and seeing the special on STD's in Africa, I feel no sorrow for people in that country. It is their own choice to continue to have sex once they get an STD, and continue to produce babies that have no chance at life because of it. Is it my fault that they did this? No. Should I donate money to keep them alive for a while longer just so they can continue to pass diseases onto other people? No. If everyone in the world was screened, like I stated earlier, and the people who were infected with some form of STD were either not allowed to have sex, or quarantined somewhere, no one else would have to worry about getting an STD from sex. It would end all this hype, and people could make their own choiced based on whether or not they wanted to have sex before marriage or not without having to deal with STD's. And for those of you who disagree with me, stating that someday there might be a cure for AID's and what-not, I have but one thing to say... We don't have a cure right now, and everyday adults and babies are dying. Edited: Forgot to mention that it might not eliminate all cases of STD's, but it would sure as hell lower the odds considerably Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshie Posted December 5, 2002 Share Posted December 5, 2002 (edited) Joshie: Your post was very interesting, and I was able to relate to all of it. You're a very intelligent individual.Religiously, I'm the same as you though I haven't thought about some of the points you came across, just many other personal theories on Christianity. That was good what you said about Jesus's "Those who believe in me shall not perish...". I was raised in a Christian household, and I've been what you call 'Agnostic 2.0' for 2 or 3 years now. Religion draws me when I see conversation, and I like to pick the individual religions apart and take them for what they are worth. Nice to see someone with the same style views. One 'religion' you may be interested in reading up on if you haven't is Humanism. Very interesting concept and it closely models what religion I would participate in if I was a participant. Hee, thanks for liking my post. :D Yes, I have heard of Humanism, and it was even ranked #1 in a find-your-religion question kinda thing for me. Secular Humanism, at least. I looked into it a little, and it was fine and all. I liked its position of indifference on so many things (right and wrong don't really resonate for me, so I can't devote myself to a 'side' on issues like other people do). But I didn't really dig its dependence on free will. I think free will is just a limited perception of cause and effect. By not seeing all the causes and variables working together in events, we think there's an element of randomness, particularly in human thought and action. Because of this belief in 'spontaneity', people think they have absolute control over their decisions. That just doesn't fit with cause and effect for a guy like me who finds cause and effect present in all things. Yeah, I guess I can only really believe in cause and effect, without knowing for certain--but it sure does fit the puzzle pieces extremely well, and there's no evidence against it, except for other 'belief' structures. Plus every analysis of every event I've experienced so far in my life has led to obvious cause and effect dominance. So yeah. :D But more importantly: play naked! Unless you're getting some of this snow action over here on the east coast. >:] In that case, either put on lotsa clothes and go make snow angels, or stay inside and drink cider/tea/cocoa with friends. :D Edited December 5, 2002 by Joshie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Posted December 5, 2002 Share Posted December 5, 2002 The thing here is that it's not about someones personal preference in life if they choose not to believe the bible then it doesn't apply to them. ?Sorry no matter how much any catholic, muslim, buddist, athiest, non-believer chooses to ignore the bible and not believe it, it doesn't make it go away and it doesn't make the truth contained there-in any less applicable to them. ?It's like putting your hands over your ears and saying "blahblahblah" when someone tells you something you don't like. ?People are just ignoring something they don't like and hoping it doesn't go away.The truth is that all man-made religions are false, just as false as the false gods of the anchent greek and egyptian days. ?It's very simple, if someone doesn't believe in Jesus Christ as their savior and that they are a sinner destined for hell, they will goto hell. ?The terrorists of 9-11 all went to hell. ?A catholic who thinks confessional once a week saves them... goes to hell. ?Buddists, Hindu's, athiests, all goto hell the moment they die. ?Only those who have believed in Christ as savior goto heaven. I'm not being mean, I'm not being cruel, I'm saying what the truth is and that truth is every single human being on the earth today, tomorrow and years from now are imperfect sinners and because of that sin and until a person is saved they are destined to an enteral and tormenting hell. ?The 10 commandments doesn't save anyone (btw in the old Mosaic law there were actually over 500 laws and regulations to have been kept, not just the 10), not believing doesn't make you exempt, living a good and clean lifestyle doesn't get one to heaven, nor does praying to allah or buddah or any other false god. The truth is in plain site and I can't make anyone believe anything they don't want to, but i wouldn't be as foolish to carelessly toss around a decision about ones enteral destiny. Modem, though you do a good job at being eloquent, your argument has one fatal flaw. You establish that there is a "truth" yet you do not provide any concrete, or even tangible, evidence that proves this truth of yours. What plain site are you refering too? That collection of bedtime stories called the new testament? What proof do you have that these books are true, and not just some crazy tale conjured up by a first century novelist seeking fame and fortune? Someone (a group of someones actually) a long time ago wrote a book that contains a character called Jesus Christ. A bunch of people believe that Christ was an actual person. But does that prove it? A lot of people in the 1400's believed the world was flat too! That did not make it any more true did it? Until you produce a bone or tooth or hair that actually was Jesus Christ, your view is just that. Because christians the world over happen to share your view, does not make it any more true than the Koran, or the Torah, or the Dao, or the Egyptian book of the dead for that matter. Open your eyes man. You may miss the world going by you.... Gosh, a lot of replies. All good too. I'll get to them, sorry for the double posts ahead of time. As far as all religions being false, well that's bull. That's just a copout so you can make up whatever feels right to you. And for the validity of the bible, well yeah no one has found Christ yet. But the fact that scrolls have been found that are over 1000 years old (oldest text anyone has ever found), match the bible word for word. So what we have today in the bible is the same that they had years ago. How is that possible? There were no spelling mistakes. The only things that could be considered "mistakes" was the translation from Greek/Hebrew to English. There are just some words in Greek that we don't have for English etc. How about that any archeologist worth their salt uses the bible more than any other book to locate places. Time and time again the bible has been proven valid as a history book. Places and people only mentioned in the bible have been found. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kobayashi Posted December 5, 2002 Share Posted December 5, 2002 i don't think your god would have a problem with that either. he's not bound by your social status of being 'married.' quod erat demonstrandum... an interesting point of vue! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Posted December 5, 2002 Share Posted December 5, 2002 Now that my humongous pseudo-disclaimer is out of the way. Modem. Your ideas ask for a lot of trouble, and also go against a fundamental building block of your religion. Christianity is about faith, and *believing* in Jesus and/or God. You, however, give the impression that you don't believe Christianity is right; instead, you believe you *know* Christianity is right. Now, by thinking you know, as a truth, as a certainty, absolute knowledge, that Christianity is right, you slap your God in the face. Your god, after all, expressed time and again that there is only faith, only believing. People have to *believe* in him, because, as the church insists in every defense against every scientist ever, God will never let you actually *know* he exists. It would remove the element of faith, which is seen as the very key to salvation. Faith leads to assurance. Assurance leads to knowing. I can say that I know the truth. There is nothing wrong with that at all. Believing in something and knowing something are the same things. I believe 1+2=3, I know 1+2=3. You can't separate knowing and believing. They are one and the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Posted December 5, 2002 Share Posted December 5, 2002 gtksxp: that i agree with.superfula: i'll make this short but i'm going to pose a question for you that i want all of the christians who support abstinance to think about. you say that sex before marriage is a sin correct? well in the same statement you are binding god to human ideas because we are so called 'married' by either a court system or in church, we get marriage liscenses. it's all a legallity. marriage in the sense of 'hey let's get married' on a certain date is only a formality. if god is real he is in no way bound to that. marriage in god's eyes in my opinion would be a state of emotional attachment. and another thing: keep in mind that by the 'bible' as you call it, lust (or wanting to have sex with someone) is a sin. so see that brings up the question, how can the bible be real as it defies that very thing which is natural? there are sexual urges and desires by nature. it's not a sin, only naturality. acting on that should be judged by one's own self, and i think if 2 people are emotionally ready to have sex then they should have sex. i don't think your god would have a problem with that either. he's not bound by your social status of being 'married.' Interesting post. Marriage isn't a man-made doctrine. It is God made. Marriage is referred to several times in the bible. Some men take God out of the wedding and the marriage and make it into a legal thing. I agree with that. But I also agree that if someone is married "without God", in God's eyes they are not married. Wanting to have sex outside of marriage is NOT a natural thing. It is a man thing. I have no desire to have sex again before I am married. Every single one of my Christian friends share the same view. Wanting to have sex outside of marriage may be natural to some, but not to me. No God is not bound by our social status of marriage. We are bound by His view of marriage. Lust is a sin. Obviously not something you can go to hell for directly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackalo Posted December 5, 2002 Share Posted December 5, 2002 Saying that you believe, is saying that you guess/think. Saying that you know, is saying that it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Posted December 5, 2002 Share Posted December 5, 2002 I would like to give my opinion about the whole thing; feel free to disagree with me, but let's keep it gentle! ;) Why do animals have sex, you think? Is it because they want to give birth? Hell no! In nature, having young ones means being weaker towards your natural enemies. It makes the individual less flexible and less focussed, thus an easier prey. There is no interest for the individual, although it does strenghtens the sort. Why is it then, that all animals are hungry for sex? Just for the fun of it! It's the orgasm that drives animals towards sex. Nature pulls a dirty trick on them: in their search for an orgasm they reproduce and the future of their species rest assured. Humans - often referred to as intelligent beings :cry: - are the only animals who have found the knowledge to resolve the link between sex and procreation: anticonception. The point is: wether you're having sex for fun or to make children (which doesn't mean you cannot enjoy it :happy: ), make sure to act like the intelligent being you're supposed to be! Want to have fun? Protect yourself! Show respect for yourself and for your partner. Want to have childeren? Be prepared! Raising childeren is a hard task and an engaging decission which should not be taken lightly. In my personal opinion marriage is not a safe conduct for sex... common sense, maturity and respect, though, should be sufficient. Dude, the only reason animals have sex is to mate. Having young ones means they are STRONGER in the wild. Let's take Lions for example (just saw this on discovery channel). You have one male lion in a pride (group), females, and the kids. The females do ALL the hunting for food, while the male protects his territory. Now they showed another male lion that had just run off the previous leader of the pride. So this new male lion is the leader, and the old one is screwed. What is the first thing this new male lion does? Kills the previous lions offspring, because they are a threat to his leadership, being from a different male. Having young ones is a sign of power in the animal kingdom. They are there to take over the group when the father dies, and to continue to serve for the pride. Animals do not have sex just to have sex. They want to procreate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deron Dantzler Posted December 5, 2002 Share Posted December 5, 2002 (edited) superfula: and i guess that's why dogs hump people's legs or inanimate objects? let's not forget the 'sin of onan' here ;). i'm afraid i agree w/ kobayashi...animals don't understand that sex causes babies at all. they do it for pleasure and the biproduct is creation. Edited December 5, 2002 by deron dantzler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deron Dantzler Posted December 5, 2002 Share Posted December 5, 2002 I think that research showed that dolphins are sensitive a/b sexual things like humans though. Not sure but I've heard dolphins referred to as second smartest creatures on earth (first humans), and I THINK that's one of the things they exhibit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshie Posted December 5, 2002 Share Posted December 5, 2002 Animals do not have sex just to have sex. They want to procreate. Um, so I take it you haven't read about all the observations of same sex activities among animals, not to mention the use of sex to establish dominance? That sure has nothing to do with procreation. And yeh, like Jackalo said, knowing means it is, believing means you think/assume/etc it is. These are dictionary definitions, dude. Don't be one of those *cough*s who redefines easy words so you can be/stay 'right'. Assurance doesn't mean knowledge. And believing doesn't mean assurance. Assurance comes from an outside force, such as other people, and stuff like that. All that means is other people also believe, and just because many people believe something doesn't mean it's true. Believing is within yourself, so it alone can't breed assurance. Your equation is blah. And don't just go making this more complicated for yourself. This is a very easy angle to understand. Like I said, people hang on to what they believe to be true and even with evidence against it, won't do much more than just slightly alter their beliefs to match the new evidence. And that's all you can really do at this point, so don't bother. :/ There is nothing you can say on the matter that I haven't heard and considered. Trust me. But if you really want to try, go ahead. It'll bore the crap out of me, though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts