Thread: Religion

Hmmm...I guess it isn't the best book for someone that doesn't already hold Christian beliefs.

The Christians that believe that there is no Hell are simply weak Christians. Many people think of every Christian as a Bible thumper and therefore are turned off by them. These weak Christians know this, and they feel that if they compromise with society, then they will fit in. These are the same kinds of people that believe in theistic evolution(the thought that God created evolution). They are compromising the Bible's teachings so that they will be less hated...

I'd like to break something down here:

>>the "f" word means explicit sex, which is prohibited by the Bible.

explicit adj. 4 describing or representing nudity or sexual activity.

So what your saying here is the "f" word (as you so eloquently put it) describes sex. And sex is prohibited by the Bible? ... ... We're all in a lot of trouble.

>>the "d" word means to condemn to hell, and that is for only God to do.

damn adj. 1 An uttered curse [B]2[B] Expressing emphatic annoyance, frustration, approval, etc.

So it depends on you what you want it to mean. If i say 'Damn you to hell' then yes, in fact i am wishing you would go to hell. But if i say 'Damn' when i stub my toe, I am expressing annoyance.

>>the "b" word was not originally insulting, but in the context of its worldly use, it is not allowed by the Bible.

Says where? What about b*tchin stuff? As in: This computer is totally b*tchin! (Not that i would ever say something like that.) What about: 'Stop b*tching'?

>>I also am trying to stop using slang, because slang is just a replacement for these words...

Which all have perfectly legitimate meanings. Why limit yourself to the words you will allow yourself to use?


>>so that they will be less hated...
Its disturbing when i see Christians trying to make out that they're persecuted. Of all the persecution going around (and there's plenty to go around), Christians are the leaders in the field of dishing it out.

>whatever you do just don't critisize the Bible.

Why ? Is it so fragile it shatters at the first thought of critisism ?

Well said. Thank you.

I just wanted to share this..even though I know it doesnt pertain to all books like this (or i hope not):

This summer two women were going house to house to spread the word of god (or thats what I gathered)...I got inot a discussion with them about drugs and the bible amoung other things...eventually the women told me that she had a book she thought I might like that attempted to prove religion through science. I said great, and a few days later she dropped it off. I wish I could remmeber the name of that book

Most of it's arguments were real beauties...'evolution argues that over millions of years small genetic changes slowly evoloved life into more complicated things...such as humans'...there scientific argument against? 'Come on! What the hell are the chances of that? Think how many things would have to occur for that to happen! The luck involved!'

Another was like...science argues the world is billions of years old. Come on? Billions? Do you know how long that is?

It also used some quite outdated theories or twisted theories on physics to argue a bit more. I was actually very very dissapointed. I wished I remebered the name of the book. Its supposed to be quite famous, and written by a pretty famous guy. But it left me sorley dissapointed.

(you religious guys...don't take that as "all those books that try to prove religion with science are jokes"...I'm just saying this one sure was. It made me laugh more than most dilbert books)

>whatever you do just don't critisize the Bible.

Why ? Is it so fragile it shatters at the first thought of critisism ?

I think you hit the nail on the head on that one! (no pun intended ) What I don't understand is why so many believe the bible to contain words of truth, words communicated down from god himself (if Xian).

However, I have pointed out discrepancies in the bible that even a pastor couldn't explain/defend. People read the bible and take it at face value, and do not question where those words came from...humans. Now whether these humans actually communicated with a greater entity (be it god or something else) is what should be in question.

I will admit, there are many lessons contained in the bible which are important lessons everyone should learn, but the book (in and of itself) is filled with many discrepancies and hypocrisies.

Originally posted by lightatdawn
[B]I'd like to break something down here:

>>the "f" word means explicit sex, which is prohibited by the Bible.

explicit adj. 4 describing or representing nudity or sexual activity.

So what your saying here is the "f" word (as you so eloquently put it) describes sex. And sex is prohibited by the Bible? ... ... We're all in a lot of trouble.

>>the "d" word means to condemn to hell, and that is for only God to do.

damn adj. 1 An uttered curse [B]2 Expressing emphatic annoyance, frustration, approval, etc.

So it depends on you what you want it to mean. If i say 'Damn you to hell' then yes, in fact i am wishing you would go to hell. But if i say 'Damn' when i stub my toe, I am expressing annoyance.

>>the "b" word was not originally insulting, but in the context of its worldly use, it is not allowed by the Bible.

Says where? What about b*tchin stuff? As in: This computer is totally b*tchin! (Not that i would ever say something like that.) What about: 'Stop b*tching'?

>>I also am trying to stop using slang, because slang is just a replacement for these words...

Which all have perfectly legitimate meanings. Why limit yourself to the words you will allow yourself to use?


>>so that they will be less hated...
Its disturbing when i see Christians trying to make out that they're persecuted. Of all the persecution going around (and there's plenty to go around), Christians are the leaders in the field of dishing it out.


Well said. Thank you.

Alright, by explicit sex, I meant fornication, outside of the bounds of marriage.

I am not a Bible scholar and do not know what the Bible has to say about every word in every context, although, even if it isn't against the Bible to say "b*tching", I still woudln't use it, because of its closeness to the context of the word when it is insulting. I think the same about the word "damn". It may be okay to say, but I will still stay away from it.

Now to slang. They mean the same thing as the words, and as I have just stated, I do not want to say them. I accept that fact that you will say them, but not saying them won't damage me in any way.

>>Its disturbing when i see Christians trying to make out that they're persecuted. Of all the persecution going around (and there's plenty to go around), Christians are the leaders in the field of dishing it out.

I am not saying that I am constantly hated by people. I'm talking about those so called "Bible Thumpers", who try to force you to be a Christian. It's annoying even to me. People HATE these people because they are so annoying. These are the people that call themselves hated.

Now, I understand what you are talking about when you say that "Christians are the leaders in the field of dishing it out." Many Christians do have hate more than any others. But, many Christians also have more love than any others. On the one side, the KKK said they were Christians and slaughtered African Americans. On the other side, Martin Luther King, who's father was a pastor, was PEACEFULLY fighting for civil rights.

If you look at the negative side of things, they will always look bad.

BTW, DrakkenKorin, mind posting some of these discrepencies?

Why cant I critisize the bible......It means jack sh#t to me..... If I were to say you cant critisize war or philosophy that would be obsurd......

Just cuz some people revere that stuff doesnt mean I have to.

Personally, I would like to say live and let live - you want to be a christian....well good luck.....but I hate the idea that christians should want to "convert" me or impress thier ideals on me......that sux

>f word

Just a small tidbit everyone might want to know: The f-word is actually derived from medieval England, it means Fornication Under Consent of the King.

>I also am trying to stop using slang, because slang is just a replacement for these words...

Quite true. It is really the meaning of the word you say that is bad...not the word itself. Therefore, in some cases, replacing a word with another doesnt always work....it is better to replace them...but in some cases its not all the way there...

>where they were free to put whatever slant on these supposed events that they saw fit.

The Bible is very historically accurate for the most part. The Catholic Church, in the medieval ages, however, did have several not so good monks. Some of these monks did omit certain parts in the Bible, but it was mostly just be changing around a word or two, or maybe omitting one phrase, but for the most part there is still at least one reference to about every Christian doctrine there is.

Take baptism for the dead for example. Many are like, "why baptize for dead people?" Check out 1st Corinthians 15:29, and all the verses before that verse.

Now...I want to direct my thoughts to all those people who said that they dont believe in God...so if you are one of them...listen...


I speak unto you who deny the revelations of God, and say that there are no revelations, nor prophets, nor gifts, nor healing, nor speaking with tongues, and the interpretation of tongues.

He who denies these things knoweth not the gospel of Christ. He has not read the scriptures. If he has, he does not understand them.

In the Bible, do we not read the God is unchanging. That he is the same yesterday, today, and forever? That there is no variable in him?

The reason why God ceaseth to do miracles among men is because they dwindle in unbelief, and depart from the right way, and know not the God in whom they should trust.

If you believed in Christ, and read the scriptures, and understood them, and doubt NOTHING, I promise you, that whatsoever you ask of God, in the name of Christ, it shall be granted to you.

>Define unclean, please. You previously said that the only way not to go to Heaven was to turn your back on God.

The Kingdom of Heaven in most cases refers to the highest level of heaven, for it is what we should all aim for. All men, whether they have repented of their sins or not, shall be made clean. If you go through the 1st resurrection when the Savior comes again, youre made clean...that doesnt mean you repented of your sins. But no unclean thing can enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Therefore, you are judged with your sins still with you, and then you are made clean and sent to where you are supposed to go.

If you have been an extravigant sinner and must lie in torment for 1000 years (as it says in Revelations), you are made clean after the 1000 years of Hell. Then you go to where you need to be. Even if you have turned your back on the Holy Ghost and go to Hell for eternity, after 1000 years you are made clean, but then you just go to the place where you deserve because of your actions here on Earth.

Originally posted by gnu-ehacks
BTW, DrakkenKorin, mind posting some of these discrepencies?

Sure, I'll do that by posing a question:

What are the 10 commandments? (Now I'm not looking for a deep philosophical explination of what they are, I actually mean list them out for me)

After that's done, I'll point out the discrepancy I've yet to get a reasonable explination for.

Let me put it in modern English, for those that find it hard to understand.

you shall have no other gods before me

don't make idols in any form whatsoever

don't say the Lord's name in vain

keep the sabbath day holy

honor your father and your mother

don't murder

don't commit adultery

don't steal

don't lie

don't covet

Okay, so when good'ol Mo comes down from the mountain (Sinai if memory serves), what does he see?

He sees the Israelites worshipping the golden calf.

But, if you look through the Old Testament, especially Judges, you will notice that the Israelites have drifted from God a whole lot...

I don't think that's much of a discrepency though. What is the problem with this?

Bear with me now.

So Mo, see's these heathen's worshiping the golden calf.

O, I forget, what does he do? What is it he says to them?

They weren't Heathens, they were Israelites...

Let's see...I think he broke the stone tablets right? I'm not quite sure, I can't find the verses with this story...

I don't really believe in hell, but I do believe it what goes around, comes around. Yes there is certainley a lot of evil around, and in that sense "satan" does exist, but a world where demons poke you with pitchforks and you are in extreme physical pain seems a bit silly to me.

The same goes for the idead of Jesus being conceived while Mary was still a virgin. I do believe that Joseph was his father, and not just looking after Mary. My theory is that Jesus was just a man (born like any other) who was able to reach a higher level of thinking than most people. Something like a savant, but a spiritual savant if you will. If God is everywhere, and we are part of God, why cannot a man reach the level of God? Whatever God may actually be, I don't know, but there must have been some underlying plan in the universe for Jesus to be born and spread his message, and to me the above seems like a plausible explanation given what is known about Jesus' life.

>what does he do?

Breaks the tablets...and ground the calf to powder...

Then he asked Aaron what happened...

>What is it he says to them?

"Who is on the Lord's side? let him come unto me." All the sons of Levi gathered themselves together unto him.

Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, "Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbor."

I am guessing that last quote is the discepency you talk about...I can explain it...I know exactly how to...but it is dinner time...I will explain it in about an hour or so.