Thread: God

  1. #346
    Christian
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    612
    No its not.

    Islam is centered on a actual person who is even mentioned in the bible. As is Buddhism. Get your facts right! Ohhh thats right you are not concerned with FACTS just FAITH.
    Islam: Mohumaid was not a peaceful person, and I have yet to enconter him in the Bible. If your refuring to Moses then still he also is not the perfect role model.


    So by your actions you gain salvation? ie no sin = saved How is this different to christianity?
    You don't gain salvation by works, you gain it through the the Grace of Christ.

    How is this differnet to christianity?
    Nope Christinity does not teach that I will be saved by doing Certain things, I am only saved by Grace.

    OK, though I could argue this is not true for Buddhism for one. It is definately not correct for Austrailan Indegenous Religions. It is very hard to become the Rainbow Serpent or reach 'Dreamtime'.
    Buddhism is a a moral philosophy, an ethical way of life. There lacks a defininte devine being.

    Buddhism also strive to seek enlightenment and stop the reicarnation round-about ie achive Nirvana and become part of god. How is this different?
    For starters you can't sin one time, in your entire life. Second the only person to achive this is Jesus who is Devine. Budda was not devine and could achive Nirvana thus it's possible by normal people to achive.

    This statement is nonsense. Of course man would. Just as man would invent things to explain that he can not understand. If he wanted you to fail and have to resort to god.

    Do you read this stuff before you cut and paste it?

    As to the statement by Gluck IN 1959 from a religious web site that does not have a quote from earlier than 1959. Haven't there been any discoveries since 1960 of note?

    http://www.makeitclear.org/edevotional.htm

    Again just because it appears on a religious propaganda web site does not make it true. I can find sites that claim the holocaust did not take place, does that mean it did not?
    God created the universe to work, no where does the Bible state that God is controling everything. He can control it and perform a miricle but the rest of the time it run's itself. When you write programs do they constently require you to interven with them.


    Second as for the discoveires since 1960 well we have sodom and Gomarrah, I'm sure there are other such discoveires as well.

    “Thou shalt not kill,”

    he ordered death for all opposition, wholesale drowning and mass exterminations; punishes offspring to the fourth generation (Ex. 20:5); ordered pregnant women and children to be ripped up (Hos. 13:16);

    Who carried the cross?
    Read

    Mathew 27:32
    Mark 15:21

    and then
    John 19:17

    See any differences?

    What were Jesus’ last dying words on the cross?

    Mathew 27:46 “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”
    Luke 23:46 “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit.”
    John 19:30 “It is finished.”


    First off it's thou should not murder, voiding your first section.


    John says that Jesus went out carring the Cross, both Mathew Mark say that they meat Simon on the way there. So what happend is that Jesus carried the cross until they came upon Simon who was then forced to carry it. This makes sence given how Jesus's weakend state might have killled him if he had had to carry the cross the entire way. They wanted to tourcher him, not kill him until he was on the cross.

    Jesus said 7 things on the cross, not all of them were recored in each indiviudal Gospal:

    1. Father forgive them; for they know not what they do. Luke 23:34a
    2. Woman here is your son; son here is your mother. John 19:25-27
    3. Truly I say unto you, today you will be with me in paradise. Luke 23:43b
    4. My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? Matthew 27:46; Mark 34
    5. I am thirsty. Matthew 27:48; John 19:28-29
    6. It is finished. John 19:30
    7. Right before dying Jesus said, "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit." Luke 23:46a

    SO AGAIN
    Supply ONE indesputable fact to prove the bible is correct and all other religious texts false.

    At least I took the time to become informed on all the major religions before I made my choice (to have faith or to renounce it). As I have stated before I was raised a methodist and without doubt I have spent more time in chruch than you.


    Look up the 'Jerusalem Syndrome', there is even a special clinic to help the victims, then prahaps you might understand the power of desire on the human mind.
    Fact: Not one person has disproved the resuraction of Christ, and given any natural explains on how it happend.

    This, failure to understand the point at hand STAGGERS me:

    *In a court room near you....*

    Prosecution: The defendant is on trial for Murder!..... The prosecution rests.

    Defense: This is ridiculous THERE IS NO EVIDENCE SUPPORTING THE PROSECUTIONS CLAIM, judge throw this case out.... The defense rests.

    Judge Setak: GUILTY absence of evidence doesn't mean it didnt happen!

    The prosocustion is right though the defended is on trail for murder.

    >This argument, this failure to grasp the very basics of HOW to reason, lies at the crux of almost every religious debate i've had. How do YOU work out what to believe and what not to believe in during everyday life? Why do you believe there is a keyboard under your fingers right now, and not that a voracious pack of wolves are about to burst into your house and eat you alive? Answer that question and apply the same reasoning to God. He will vanish.<

    How can I explain what I my self don't understand.
    I shall call egypt the harmless dragon

    -Isaiah 30.7

  2. #347
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    559
    Originally posted by Sentaku senshi
    Fact: Not one person has disproved the resuraction of Christ, and given any natural explains on how it happend.
    Does this need any refutation? I read a story where William Shakespeare came back from the dead. No one has disproved his resurrection, or given any natural explanations on how it happened.
    How can I explain what I my self don't understand.
    Good question. Keep asking it.
    Truth is a malleable commodity - Dick Cheney

  3. #348
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    559
    Originally posted by Sentaku senshi
    The prosocustion is right though the defended is on trail for murder.


    How can I explain what I my self don't understand.
    Maybe you didn't understand the ellipsis there. The prosecution made an assertion and presented it as ultimate proof. Anyone can do the same. Do you understand?
    Truth is a malleable commodity - Dick Cheney

  4. #349
    Christian
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    612
    Does this need any refutation? I read a story where William Shakespeare came back from the dead. No one has disproved his resurrection, or given any natural explanations on how it happened.
    Slight problem in that theory you see Shakesphere is still in his grave, on the other hand Jesus is not still in his grave.

    Shakespheare grave:
    Burial:
    Holy Trinity Church
    Stratford-Upon-Avon, Warwickshire, England
    Plot: The Chancel

    1. Both Romain and Jewish officals wanted to kill of christinity, and if Jesus grave still had him in there they would of presented the body. Were not even talking years for this stuff to develop were only speaking of days.
    I shall call egypt the harmless dragon

    -Isaiah 30.7

  5. #350
    S Sang-drax's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Göteborg, Sweden
    Posts
    2,072
    Originally posted by Nick
    Believing in science is saying that the mathematical
    models that result follow nature. I don't see how
    this contradicts believe in god who created the natural
    laws.
    It doesn't contradict a god who created everything.

    Read my post.

    The only thing that cannot exist according to modern physics is an omniscient entity.
    Last edited by Sang-drax : Tomorrow at 02:21 AM. Reason: Time travelling

  6. #351
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    272
    Anyone can do the same. Do you understand?
    I think I'm fairly safe in the assumption that after god knows how many posts that no he doesn't understand; and while he is living in lala land I doubt he ever will.

    He's making teh baby jesus cry.
    Joe

  7. #352
    My point is that we have freewill and this somehow means
    that God as chosen not to know what our actions will be.
    You're confused. Your thought patterns follow no logical path that I can discern. Why does having "free will" (whatever thats supposed to mean) in any way indicate that nobody can know what we will decide? If somebody places an apple pie and a raisin pie in front of me, asking me to chose one, does the fact that somebody _knows_ I will chose the apple (seeing as how I dont like raisins) in any way indicate that I had no choice in the matter?

    Besides; if god is intentionally limiting himself, then he is no longer perfect... Problem there.

    >>First off it's thou should not murder, voiding your first section.

    Uhm...

    v. mur·dered, mur·der·ing, mur·ders
    v. tr.

    1. To kill (another human) unlawfully.
    2. To kill brutally or inhumanly.
    3. To put an end to; destroy: murdered their chances.
    4. To spoil by ineptness; mutilate: a speech that murdered the English language.
    5. Slang. To defeat decisively; trounce.


    >>Fact: Not one person has disproved the resuraction of Christ

    See? Its like theres nobody else even talking to this guy. *cups hands around mouth* Hellooooooo! Have you been listening?
    "There's always another way"
    -lightatdawn (lightatdawn.cprogramming.com)

  8. #353
    Christian
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    612
    Uhm...

    v. mur·dered, mur·der·ing, mur·ders
    v. tr.

    1. To kill (another human) unlawfully.
    2. To kill brutally or inhumanly.
    3. To put an end to; destroy: murdered their chances.
    4. To spoil by ineptness; mutilate: a speech that murdered the English language.
    5. Slang. To defeat decisively; trounce.

    The commandment is refering to the first defination, there is a difence between killing and murder.

    See? Its like theres nobody else even talking to this guy. *cups hands around mouth* Hellooooooo! Have you been listening?
    I must of missed were someone here mysterously proved that the resuraction was fake despite the fact that for 1, 970 year they have been tring to disprove it.
    I shall call egypt the harmless dragon

    -Isaiah 30.7

  9. #354
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    272
    I must of missed were someone here mysterously proved that the resuraction was fake despite the fact that for 1, 970 year they have been tring to disprove it.
    I disproved it last year. My own god (who is a much superior god to your mini-god) told me so. He also says your god smells.
    Joe

  10. #355
    >>I must of missed were someone here mysterously proved that the resuraction was fake despite

    Ya, it was right near that part I must have missed where someone proved that it happened!

    >>My own god (who is a much superior god to your mini-god) told me so. He also says your god smells.

    Dont be offensive, Joe. ... Smells is such an aweful word. 'Pleasant Odour Challenged' is the phrase we use around here to describe the christian god.


    ... Okay, now I'm just being rude... But how many times do you people need to hear the same thing? Arg! I should probably take myself out of this conversation again [before I experience the worlds largest, instant, mental-trauma-induced, Aneurysm].
    "There's always another way"
    -lightatdawn (lightatdawn.cprogramming.com)

  11. #356
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    559
    Sentaku, with all due respect, you'r getting almost comical here.
    Originally posted by Sentaku senshi
    Slight problem in that theory you see Shakesphere is still in his grave, on the other hand Jesus is not still in his grave.

    Shakespheare grave:
    Burial:
    Holy Trinity Church
    Stratford-Upon-Avon, Warwickshire, England
    Plot: The Chancel
    Billy's grave: verifiable = science
    Jesus grave : unverifiable = faith
    My grave : Not there yet
    How do you know that's really Willy in there? . Of course, since Jesus isn't buried anywhere, according to scripture, you lose this argument by default You know, Sentaku et al, there hasn't been to much attack on your beliefs here as much as a challenge to logically justify them.
    Your arguments rely on acceptance of a priori facts, i.e. God & Jesus. Until you can justify at least the god part, you're dead in the water.


    [/B][/QUOTE]
    Truth is a malleable commodity - Dick Cheney

  12. #357
    Blank
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    1,034
    You're confused. Your thought patterns follow no logical path that I can discern. Why does having "free will" (whatever thats supposed to mean) in any way indicate that nobody can know what we will decide? If somebody places an apple pie and a raisin pie in front of me, asking me to chose one, does the fact that somebody _knows_ I will chose the apple (seeing as how I dont like raisins) in any way indicate that I had no choice in the matter?
    If someone knew which way you were going to decide before
    hand in every decision then there would be no
    sin. Everything you do would do by fate. It would
    also mean you are not responsible for your actions.
    But we would not be a perfect creation without freewill.

    Besides; if god is intentionally limiting himself, then he is no longer perfect... Problem there.
    Your applying human ideas of perfection.

    Got any proof that god exists yet, Nick?
    How can I prove something using the very logical
    laws it created?

  13. #358
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    272
    Dont be offensive, Joe. ... Smells is such an aweful word. 'Pleasant Odour Challenged' is the phrase we use around here to describe the christian god.
    My god mentioned something about a gorilla and sweaty genitalia. I think smells is the right word. Perhaps yahweh is having a shower when he 'has chosen not to know what our actions will be'.

    How can I prove something using the very logical
    laws it created?
    Why can't you?
    Joe

  14. #359
    Blank
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    1,034
    Why can't you?
    god exist above the logical laws he created. How
    would anyone shows that he exist or more
    importantly does not exist using logic?

  15. #360
    Gnosticism as Anti-Religion - The Negative Old Testament God
    Common to almost all schools of Gnosticism were four of what one could say were moral judgments:

    The God of the Old Testament is evil. He keeps the divine sparks or Spirit enslaved in matter.
    The cosmos is likewise evil or negative; as it is the evil god's creation
    The Good God is a transcendent Spiritual being, who is utterly alien to this world, and had nothing to do with its creation
    The Savior - whether Christ, Seth, the Thought (Ennoia) of God, or some other figure - is an emissary of the transcendent God who has descended into this lower world to confer gnosis on those able to receive it (the gnostic race).
    The three latter points follow normally enough, if you accept the premise of the Gnostics that this world is bad (the anti-worldly mystical tendency). But the first point seems rather strange. Why should the God of the Old Testament be considered evil?

    Well, there are perhaps three ways of answering this question: the psychological, the theological, and the literal. Obviously, not all these explanations were what the early Gnostic writers had in mind

    Psychologically, the God of the Old Testament is the metaphor for the ego, the part of psyche taht considers itself all-important, and doesn't like to face the fact the cosmos is a lot of bigger than it is, and that there is more of relevance than just its own small needs.

    Theologically, the God of the Old Testament is quite like the God of the religious fundamentalist: a supernatural dictator who keeps the mind (= "spirit") enslaved with dogma, and demands absolute belief. Anyone who doesn't believe him goes to hell (the supernatural equivalent of the concentration camp).

    Literally, that is, biblically, the Old Testament God does appear to be a rather shifty character. As one very early Gnostic writing - surviving as a fragment in the much later Nag Hammadi tractate The Testimony of Truth - explains in a commentary on the biblical God:

    "He envied Adam that he should eat from the tree of knowledge. And the fact that he said "Adam, where are you?" shows that he did not have foreknowledge.
    He cast man out of the garden because he did not want him to eat from the tree of life and live forever.
    He said "I am a jealous God, I will bring the sins of the fathers upon the children for three or four generations" [Exod. 20:5]
    And he said "I will make their heart thick, and I will cause their mind to become blind, that they might not know nor comprehend the things that are said" [Isa. 6:10]
    And all this mind you to those who believe in him and serve him!"
    [John Dart, The Laughing Savior, p.63]
    Significantly, the style here is typical of certain Jewish literature (the Midrash or commentary) from around the beginning of the Christian era. The writer was familiar not only with Jewish Scriptures but also with the terminology and speculations of early Rabbinic circles. Except that this was written from a Gnostic rather than a Jewish perspective. What was wrong with Adam eating from the tree of knowledge? And wasn't this God angry because he was envious of Adam's knowledge rather than because Adam had disobeyed him? [Dart, Laughing Savior, pp.63-4 (out of print)]. According to Gnostic scholar Birger Pearson this is actually a gnostic midrash utilising Jewish traditions, and dating perhaps from the first century B.C.E. of Palestine or Syria [Ibid, p.64].

Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. what race is god?
    By Leeman_s in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 02-22-2004, 05:38 PM
  2. God II
    By Leeman_s in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-09-2003, 01:42 AM
  3. GOD and religion
    By Unregistered in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 10-14-2001, 05:13 PM
  4. Foundations
    By mithrandir in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 10-05-2001, 02:18 PM