Christianity, Islam, Judaism, etc: Religion

[Illyria99]

If everyone already has a good moral compass to know right from wrong, why then do we need gods teachings?

We don't.

 

[casualuser]

I have nothing wrong with science - I love science. How wonderful ability to observe & learn, science, a gift from God for us to better understand his creation and the world around us. Imo it compliments the existence of God. The denial of God's existence contradicts both science and common sense. The Big Bang theory describes the initial event as a great explosion (or expansion) which brought forth all the energy and matter in the universe. Most of those who don't believe in God say that the Big Bang was a chance event. In other words, the great explosion that brought the universe into being was a cosmic fluke. But this is an unsupportable position to take, because things just don't happen like that in science. Explosions, big or small, do not come about without someone or something causing them, cause and effect.

Take a look around, do things appear out of no where? Nope, and the belief that everything comes from nothing, is an absurd contradiction to the laws of science itself. Sure, the universe may have been a single dense point of molten hot something and then expanded, but how did that something get there, and what caused it to expand? Came from nothing? By itself? Sorry science, you're falling a bit short and according to my science teacher it takes "something" to cause "something". The only reasonable and logical conclusion is that a higher power has designed and created it ensued by the vibration & voice of God. And don't get me started on this "How did God get there or where did He come from?" Because the laws of science and physics don't apply to God. Our limitations of human intelligence in this life will never understand the true nature of God, we are not God. After this life, His light will shine upon us and it is only then that his infinite, immaculate, inconceivable knowledge and bliss will be poured upon us.

God didn't just create life. He sustains life. The Earth, its size is perfect. Earth's gravity holds a thin layer of mostly nitrogen and oxygen gases, only extending about 50 miles above the Earth's surface. If Earth were smaller, an atmosphere would be impossible. If Earth were larger, its atmosphere would contain free hydrogen. The moon, perfect in size and distance from the earth for the gravitational pull and effects on the ocean. The sun, we are located near the perfect distance from the sun, any farther and earth would freeze up, and any closer and we would burn. Not to mention all the other processes in biology, magnetics & kinetics, nature, the mind/body and human capabilities, it blows my mind. This universe and existence screams intelligent design all over it. Science, physics, biology, psychology, philosophy, you name it, those are all the echo of God. If you believe in that many trillions of possibilities, coincidences, and chances that somehow came together perfectly and here we are; then surely you would be foolish to not also consider the possibility of God and Intelligent Design.

I love God, Jesus is my King, nothing can or ever will pull me away from that. All I can say on judgement day is I Trust In Jesus. Even if I am cast into the fires of hell, my love for the Lord will not be diminished and I will be praising God in the depths of flame if so be it. God is an infinite source of love, wisdom, and euphoria that I so thankfully have the privilege to feel. When I meditate I like to focus on what I call the "God Awareness/Consciousness" and it is nothing but pure enlightenment & peace.

There are actually a few ways science can explain the cause/effect problem(it's also known as the problem of infinite regression). Claiming that god is the original cause is in my mind a logical fallacy; sure it would have to be excluded from the normal laws of physics but why couldn't it be just a "super natural" event from outside out universe where our laws of physics do not apply, why must that source be god personified as a sentient omnipotent being? There is another possible explanation as well, the problem of infinite regression only exists because we treat time as linear. If we treat time as cyclical then that problem ceases to exist. Furthermore there are parts of string theory and other such ideas that allow for that cyclical function to exist without the need of initial causation. In my opinion it is our limited capabilities of understanding science that prevent us from grasping fully those other options. In time, with advancement in science we may be able to solve it more completely or we may never be able to know fully. Either way I see it as unwise to assign that lack of understanding to be gods hand when there are at the least other options to consider and especially when there is no more evidence for that being god than there is for the other possibilities. As for the perfect conditions for life existing on earth, I would argue it is chance, but it's a lot more likely than one is initially inclined to believe as the universe is unfathomably huge. Additionally those "perfect" conditions could have been a lot better, why did it take so long for god to get it right? 99.9% of all the species that ever existed are now extinct, seems like a whole lot of waste just to give rise to a slightly advanced primate. And why make such a huge universe when our solar system doesn't rely on the billions of other galaxies, let alone the billions of other stars within our own galaxy, to sustain life?

The only thing I would say to that is if people had been raised to believe in God and His judgement, were taught strong morals against the killing of human life, things might of turned out differently. But I don't like to speculate. However, what kind of morals does science teach?

But you used that original statement to counter the point that religion has been/is being used to harm countless innocent people. In my mind at best that leaves you back where you started on this particular point... While the "hard" sciences don't explicitly give us a moral code, used in conjunction with the "soft" sciences i.e. sociology/psychology I believe it can, but I'll get into that more with my own source of moral values.

This isn't directed at you specifically, more to the op, but I sometimes I wonder, what is it about atheists that they would spend so much time, attention, and energy refuting something that they don't believe even exists? What causes them to do that? Perhaps the reason that the topic of God weighed so heavily on the mind, was because God was pressing the issue. It might be that the underlying reason atheists are bothered by people believing in God is because God is actively pursuing them. God loves You! Through all the highs - and all the lows - He will be there right beside you. He has faith in us, through after it all, we may have a glimpse of paradise and become One with the All Mighty.

But Yes, please do share your development of your own morality! The more discussion from any and all perspectives - the better!

I can't speak for the OP but the main reason I participate in discourse on any subject is to learn more, refine my ideas, and improve my communication of them. For the religion subject specifically, I feel religion in general, but mainly the weight society gives religious based opinions especially in public policy decisions causes a lot of needless suffering and overall it impedes the advancement of society. So I attempt to at least get people to consider other points of view and while I don't necessarily think religion should be completely removed from society I want to end things like teaching creationism in schools, persecution of LGBT individuals, anti abortion laws, and the negative connotations associated with atheism, ect. as I feel they are immoral(not saying you specifically support those ideas or others but I don't think they would exist or at least wouldn't be nearly as big of a deal if religion was taken out of the argument).

Since this reply is already quite lengthy, I'll follow up with another one explaining how I formed my own moral values.

 

[casualuser]

So as I mentioned a few posts back I don't believe that wholly objective knowledge is attainable by us as humans, whether or not it actually exists. With that pretext it makes proving truth difficult since there is no objective baseline from which to compare it. Therefor I split truth into two categories, perceived truth and actual truth. As an example the idea was once held that the world was flat, because it was widely accepted as true no one wished to risk being wrong in order to disprove it, thus while the world was never actually flat the perception that it was, in a sense made it true until Magellan proved otherwise. Slavery could be used as another example better pertaining to ethics; the perception that certain people had more value than others allowed those deemed as less to be owned as property while in reality race plays a negligible role in determining a persons intellectual, moral, and physical capacities(sources of determining value beyond the inherent value all life has).

The individual is my baseline for objective truth within morality and simply put it is the golden rule; treat others as you would wish to be treated. There are two possible problems with this however. The first being a persons belief that they deserve better treatment than another and second a societies belief that one group deserves better treatment that another. These beliefs would be an example of perceived truth, two examples being an individual that does not help another because that other failed to help themselves or a society that lives decently while another dies of starvation but declines full aid. Both situations are normally justified through reasoning that sacrificing ones own well being for that of another is unfair especially when the one in need of help is believed to be in need because of their own failures or that giving the amount of aid required to eliminate the suffering would compromise the ability they have of providing for themselves. I contend that reasoning to be morally flawed because while we are all not exactly equal in capacity to act we are all equal in capacity to suffer. Furthermore the capacity we have to act nor the degree to which we are subjected to suffer is hardly, if at all, of our choosing. I.e. The 15 million children that starve to death every year didn't choose to be born into that suffering nor did they choose to be born in a region where their capacity to survive was basically reduced to zero. That is obviously a drastic example and it wouldn't appear to be that cut and dry of a situation every time but I would argue the extent to which our free will can keep us out of suffering is much more limited than it appears, especially on the individual level. Additionally I contend that even having the choice at some point to prevent ones future suffering and failing to do so does not automatically make one morally responsible nor exclude others from having the moral responsibility to alleviate that suffering, unless society has already provided ample and equal opportunity to avoid it.

With my belief that the individual has considerably less free will than it would appear(which is an entirely separate discussion, that I'd be more than willing to get into at a later time) the primary burden of moral responsibility is given to society and more specifically those in power. If society had a much more uniform structure providing equal opportunity that burden of moral responsibility would also be more evenly spread but it is my firm belief that, currently, even in western democracies societal power has accumulated among the few and thus the most moral responsibility is held by them.

How this influences me in my daily life and long term goals would be this: Overall I attempt to work within the current system, causing as little "collateral damage" as possible, to accumulate as much influence/power as my capacity allows and in turn use that full capacity to advocate for a more equal system of opportunity and the relief of unnecessary suffering. The same can be said for my day to day activities in so far as my acts of avocation and relief do not severely compromise my overall capacity to influence change for the better.

I made this a very general description and probably left a few holes in its argument but I'll be more than happy to follow up on anything you have questions about or would like me to clarify as well as how I would use this in specific examples you might provide.

 

[Thorns Have Roses]

Tromps and raas, have you read The Imitation of Christ? If not, I'd highly recommend it. Also, St. Ignatius' spiritual exercises.

 

[Raasyvibe]

^ No. Just looked it up and it sounds amazing. Thanks so much for the post. I've neglected reading on spirituality outside of the bible. I think the book recommended would be a good start.

 

[modern buddha]

It's completely fine to live your life on this earth without religion, especially Christianity... If you don't have a plan on making it to heaven.

If heaven is your destination after this long journey, then you know what you need to do.

If you don't believe in heaven, then why argue with someone who does? You choose to live your lives with different mental goals. How can you sit here and argue with one another on the presence/ lack of presence of God when you believe exactly the opposite of one another?

 

[casualuser]

It's completely fine to live your life on this earth without religion, especially Christianity... If you don't have a plan on making it to heaven.

If heaven is your destination after this long journey, then you know what you need to do.

If you don't believe in heaven, then why argue with someone who does? You choose to live your lives with different mental goals. How can you sit here and argue with one another on the presence/ lack of presence of God when you believe exactly the opposite of one another?

I can't speak for the OP but the main reason I participate in discourse on any subject is to learn more, refine my ideas, and improve my communication of them. For the religion subject specifically, I feel religion in general, but mainly the weight society gives religious based opinions especially in public policy decisions causes a lot of needless suffering and overall it impedes the advancement of society. So I attempt to at least get people to consider other points of view and while I don't necessarily think religion should be completely removed from society I want to end things like teaching creationism in schools, persecution of LGBT individuals, anti abortion laws, and the negative connotations associated with atheism, ect. as I feel they are immoral(not saying you specifically support those ideas or others but I don't think they would exist or at least wouldn't be nearly as big of a deal if religion was taken out of the argument).

^tis why I argue

 

[Tromps]

If everyone already has a good moral compass to know right from wrong, why then do we need gods teachings?

We don't.

It is true with all the influences from man in our world - we form our own opinions on right vs wrong. But why stop at our own conclusions? It's proven our emotions lie to us. Hold ourselves accountable to a higher standard and stay objective. Our opinions may change and alter all the time, but God's truth does not and what is good to God does not.

Jesus took what was good for the people - water - and by God's grace alone turned it into wine - excellence.

Christ came to those in suffering, what was minuscule to the poor, a few good loaves of bread, multiplied good by God's grace, turns it to excellence for the people.

When we are good with the gifts God has given us, to ourselves and others, those who have heard Christs' words as truth - believe in and preach what he has spoken; we are filled with the grace of God. And those good gifts, are transformed to excellence through Christ, by God's grace alone. Satisfaction in the eyes of our Father.

What I'm trying to say if you haven't realized it yet. Is yes there is basic moral good. The Lord has came and has proclaimed what is perfectly good for us, with faith in him and the One who sent him and by his grace alone, turns it to excellence. Excellence will be in our hearts and in the Heavens.

Matthew 9:12 - Luke 5:31: The Pharisees complained to Jesus's disciples, saying, "Why does he eat and drink with sinners?" Jesus said to them in reply, "Those who are healthy do not need a physician, but only the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but the sinners to repentance."

You see you are missing the point. There are those in the world who are alone, broken, sick, flawed, hopeless, depressed, among the list of all our own faults. We are not all perfect. Jesus is the light in the darkness. He came to save the sinners from hell, he is the one who saves us from the flames and influence of the devil. He shows us the true way to his paradise, but if you choose not to believe or want to walk your own path, that is your choice, and where you lead yourself, you may not even know. He doesn't choose anything for you, but his healing hand is always there to help those in need and he is there for those who want to walk with him to his paradise.

Good to Jesus and good for us is love, compassion, forgiveness, charity, respect, honor, honesty, patience etc and faith in the One that sent Him. There should be little distinction of what is good vs wrong. Jesus did the perfect job showing us the example of true righteousness. If there is something you don't understand or are confused about, ask an intelligent devout Christian or look up & research the context.

If you think you are better off on your own or think you are doing good on your terms, that's fine and great. Like he said, Jesus did not come to call the righteous but to save the sinners to call them to repent and show us true righteousness, along with the path that will lead us to his Father's kingdom. God won't intrude on our choices. But for all of us, even if you don't like him, he loves you endlessly, and our Lord will always rejoice to take us back. And I hope that if tragic things happen in your life or things go downhill, that He will be there to give you the strength to pick yourself back up, and you might even find something within-side yourself that you never knew existed before.

treat others as you would wish to be treated.

It's a good rule yes. However not all people treat themselves with respect. Many people are self-destructive and want to cause as much harm to themselves as possible so why would they care about other people, even less so. That's the only flaw I have with that moral rule.

Furthermore the capacity we have to act nor the degree to which we are subjected to suffer is hardly, if at all, of our choosing. I.e. The 15 million children that starve to death every year didn't choose to be born into that suffering nor did they choose to be born in a region where their capacity to survive was basically reduced to zero.

I do agree on many of the noble truths of Buddhism. Most of our sufferings in life are attached to desires, and when we don't get something we want, we suffer. But that being said I know there are countless numbers of people born into suffering, but I believe that is because of the mistakes/flaws and suffering of the people who brought them into the world, and it is tragically transferred down to those who are innocent. God doesn't choose anyone to be born into suffering, all of our souls are created equal, feel blessed by the people and environment in which you were raised. In your example of starving children dying (mainly Africa), I would argue that is mans choice for bringing them into the world through sinful actions when they know they wouldn't be able to care for an infant. Suffering is the result of evil desires within man.

The root of suffering goes all the way back to the birth of man in the garden where man had decided he wanted his own desires. For those innocent, tragic victims who have suffered and already died, we don't have to worry about them, for it has been said they will be blessed and their place in Heaven be of most high. Jesus, an innocent and tragic victim to the evils, flaws, and desires of man, suffered and died the most excruciating death possible, but is now seated at the right hand of the Father. Those who are innocent tragic victims to evil or suffering, as Jesus was, they (in my belief) will be in the highest heights of the Heavens. Jesus knows what it is like more then anyone, he understands and he will be the first to welcome those children & innocent souls into paradise.

But there are still many who are alive and still suffer and we need to care for them as much as possible. I donate money to organizations that feed the hungry when I have spare money. I volunteer at feed my starving children when I have time available. But as a nation and as a world, there is much more we need to be doing to provide basic living necessities to people equally and I am very liberal when it comes to that. Though I am no politician nor any lawmaker so the most I can do is pray and do my part.

Tromps and raas, have you read The Imitation of Christ? If not, I'd highly recommend it. Also, St. Ignatius' spiritual exercises.

Nope I have not, but at quick glance it looks very interesting and I'll dig into it when I have some spare time.

@casualuser there is much more I want to discuss with you, I read your post, but I don't have time at the moment to respond to it all, been busy with school work etc which is why it took me a few days to reply. But I'll get back and discuss more with you in the future soon.

 

[casualuser]

Our opinions may change and alter all the time, but God's truth does not and what is good to God does not.

That is my point, even if god's truth does exist any attempt by us to interpret it will cause its objective nature to be lost. Even the texts themselves are subject to the opinions and societal norms of the times in which they were recorded, i.e. slavery was considered perfectly acceptable in both the old an new testaments because it was seen as such within the society/times in which it was written. While parts said one should treat their slaves with kindness that doesn't absolve the practice of owning another person as property from its inherent immorality nor did it prevent people from using certain parts of the bible as a defense for the social injustice that slavery caused.

What I'm trying to say if you haven't realized it yet. Is yes there is basic moral good. The Lord has came and has proclaimed what is perfectly good for us, with faith in him and the One who sent him and by his grace alone, turns it to excellence. Excellence will be in our hearts and in the Heavens.

I do get what your saying but like I said above, out interpretations of what he proclaimed dilutes the possible excellence it tries to show and often falls far short of even a good interpretation of it, sometimes causing the very things it proclaims against i.e. the crusades or suffering in general. My argument is because of the huge range in peoples interpretations and the ambiguous nature of much of the doctrine from which those interpretations are derived a better moral code can be formed from a combination of sources, one source could be the teachings of Jesus but they must be checked and balanced with other sources/opinions and by treating Jesus's teaching as the absolute source of moral truth you allow its ambiguous nature to foster ideas such as homophobia and the moral justification of things like the crusades while severely impeding any attempt to refine those teachings into something better(either closer to the excellence god intended or otherwise).

You see you are missing the point. There are those in the world who are alone, broken, sick, flawed, hopeless, depressed, among the list of all our own faults. We are not all perfect. Jesus came to save the sinners from hell, he is the one who saves us from the flames and influence of the devil. He shows us the true way to his paradise, but if you choose not to believe or want to walk your own path, that is your choice, and where you lead yourself, you may not even know. He doesn't choose anything for you, but his healing hand is always there to help those in need and he is there for those who want to walk with him to his paradise.

I don't think I'm missing the point but I may be wrong... What of the millions that live without ever hearing the teaching of Jesus(in any context)? Or those that only hear a corrupted version(such as that given by the westboro babtist church)? My point is that our ability to choose is much more limited than it appears to be, especially so for those who are never shown another point of view. Like I said I'd like to hear your thoughts on free will and share mine but that is for another discussion.

Good to Jesus and good for us is love, compassion, forgiveness, charity, respect, honor, honesty, patience etc and faith in the One that sent Him. There should be little distinction of what is good vs wrong. Jesus did the perfect job showing us the example of true righteousness. If there is something you don't understand or are confused about, ask an intelligent devout Christian or look up & research the context.

I do agree with many of the teachings of Jesus, when they are interpreted "well." But therein lies the problem such intelligent and devout christians are few and far between leaving many without ever hearing a different perspective than the severely flawed one they were given. Because many are not the most intelligent or devout they cannot be blamed for their ignorance but if a better/simpler moral code was formed such flawed interpretations would be much less frequent and easier to spot as such.

It's a good rule yes. However not all people treat themselves with respect. Many people are self-destructive and want to cause as much harm to themselves as possible so why would they care about other people, even less so. That's the only flaw I have with that moral rule.

That is a very good point, though I would argue that those self destructive/selfish tendencies are merely a product of the lack of depth of understanding from poor teachings of even poorer interpretations. Which is why those in power are responsible and it is the duty of the more intelligent and gifted to use their power to foster a better understanding within those unable to do it for themselves. Instead many use it to control which if applied the golden rule should guard against(I'm sure many in power would not want to see their roles reversed with those they have power over). All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.

I do agree on many of the noble truths of Buddhism. Most of our sufferings in life are attached to desires, and when we don't get something we want, we suffer. But that being said I know there are countless numbers of people born into suffering, but I believe that is because of the mistakes/flaws and suffering of the people who brought them into the world, and it is tragically transferred down to those who are innocent. God doesn't choose anyone to be born into suffering, all of our souls are created equal, feel blessed by the people and environment in which you were raised. In your example of starving children dying (mainly Africa), I would argue that is mans choice for bringing them into the world through sinful actions when they know they wouldn't be able to care for an infant. Suffering is the result of evil desires within man.

The root of suffering goes all the way back to the birth of man in the garden where man had decided he wanted his own desires.

I see your point though again I would argue the ignorance that led those to bring such innocent people into this world is not theirs but merely the result of those who do know better and fail to show them another way. The general population in Africa and India don't understand how basic reproduction works, they act on their sexual evolutionary instincts because they know nothing else nor comprehend the extent to which such actions can have negative effects. Can we blame those that don't know any better through no fault of their own? If not is all the blame to be held by Adam and Eve? Furthermore(more out of curiosity), do you believe that as literal or do you believe in evolution, or some hybrid of the two? Regardless, I see it as unfair to judge the individual for something they see as only natural especially when they have no knowledge of an alternative. Overall I see the story of Adam and Eve and it's theme as an example of one of the biggest problems I have with christian teaching; commanding someone against an action or idea without sufficient explanation of the negative effects it can have; it's like telling a child not touch a pot that is on the stove because it is hot and then scolding the child when he burns himself from touching the pan once it was taken off the stove even when the child was never shown that said pot can remain hot once taken off the stove.

But there are still many who are alive and still suffer and we need to care for them as much as possible. I donate money to organizations that feed the hungry when I have spare money. I volunteer at feed my starving children when I have time available. But as a nation and as a world, there is much more we need to be doing to provide basic living necessities to people equally and I am very liberal when it comes to that. Though I am no politician nor any lawmaker so the most I can do is pray and do my part.

While I am glad you do such things(though I think prayer can't do much to help others, I do think it can be useful as an analogs practice to meditation) being in a democracy I see it as we are all "politicians" and must do as much as we can with our power to vote, protest, and discuss important issues with our peers to end the practices that lead to such suffering.

@casualuser there is much more I want to discuss with you, I read your post, but I don't have time at the moment to respond to it all, been busy with school work etc which is why it took me a few days to reply. But I'll get back and discuss more with you in the future soon.

That is quite alright, take your time, I'm sure there will be points where I take equally as long to respond.

 

[rickolasnice]

I'm backing out of this thread for a bit to let others have their say.. but just a couple of things..

What a ridiculous scenario. I already said most Christians are against capital punishment. God would not justify us killing someone unless our life was at direct threat. The Church is strongly against killing anyone for even the most horrible reasons.

"If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)

Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. "The LORD your God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him." (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)

And he smote of the men of Beth-shemesh, because they had looked into the ark of Jehovah, he smote of the people seventy men, `and' fifty thousand men; and the people mourned, because Jehovah had smitten the people with a great slaughter. And the men of Beth-shemesh said, Who is able to stand before Jehovah, this holy God? and to whom shall he go up from us? (1Samuel 6:19-20 ASV)

The glory of Israel will fly away like a bird, for your children will die at birth or perish in the womb or never even be conceived. Even if your children do survive to grow up, I will take them from you. It will be a terrible day when I turn away and leave you alone. I have watched Israel become as beautiful and pleasant as Tyre. But now Israel will bring out her children to be slaughtered." O LORD, what should I request for your people? I will ask for wombs that don't give birth and breasts that give no milk. The LORD says, "All their wickedness began at Gilgal; there I began to hate them. I will drive them from my land because of their evil actions. I will love them no more because all their leaders are rebels. The people of Israel are stricken. Their roots are dried up; they will bear no more fruit. And if they give birth, I will slaughter their beloved children." (Hosea 9:11-16 NLT

"Then I heard the LORD say to the other men, "Follow him through the city and kill everyone whose forehead is not marked. Show no mercy; have no pity! Kill them all – old and young, girls and women and little children. But do not touch anyone with the mark. Begin your task right here at the Temple." So they began by killing the seventy leaders. "Defile the Temple!" the LORD commanded. "Fill its courtyards with the bodies of those you kill! Go!" So they went throughout the city and did as they were told." (Ezekiel 9:5-7 NLT)

And at midnight the LORD killed all the firstborn sons in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn son of Pharaoh, who sat on the throne, to the firstborn son of the captive in the dungeon. Even the firstborn of their livestock were killed. Pharaoh and his officials and all the people of Egypt woke up during the night, and loud wailing was heard throughout the land of Egypt. There was not a single house where someone had not died. (Exodus 12:29-30 NLT)

This is what the Lord of hosts has to say: 'I will punish what Amalek did to Israel when he barred his way as he was coming up from Egypt. Go, now, attack Amalek, and deal with him and all that he has under the ban. Do not spare him, but kill men and women, children and infants, oxen and sheep, camels and asses.' (1 Samuel 15:2-3 NAB)

The LORD is a jealous God, filled with vengeance and wrath. He takes revenge on all who oppose him and furiously destroys his enemies! The LORD is slow to get angry, but his power is great, and he never lets the guilty go unpunished. He displays his power in the whirlwind and the storm. The billowing clouds are the dust beneath his feet. At his command the oceans and rivers dry up, the lush pastures of Bashan and Carmel fade, and the green forests of Lebanon wilt. In his presence the mountains quake, and the hills melt away; the earth trembles, and its people are destroyed. Who can stand before his fierce anger? Who can survive his burning fury? His rage blazes forth like fire, and the mountains crumble to dust in his presence. The LORD is good. When trouble comes, he is a strong refuge. And he knows everyone who trusts in him. But he sweeps away his enemies in an overwhelming flood. He pursues his foes into the darkness of night. (Nahum 1:2-8 NLT)

Let's not forget Gods act of mass genocide when he decided to somehow flood the world, saving only Noah and a couple of every animal on the planet 8)

And there's many many more..

Before you say "but that's the old testament.. Jesus wasn't like that".. you said yourself Jesus is God - God is Jesus. DOES NOT COMPUTE. Plus there is a lot of parts of the bible that seem to indicate Jesus wasn't actually the messiah.. wan't me to find them for you?

So to your "what a silly statement".. ORLY?

Imo an ignorant and childish comment that is. Islam is actually a very peaceful religion, please hear me out, but it is tragically the least understood and victimized by hardcore extremists. The Quran specifically prohibits the killing of innocent people. Chapter 5:32 of the Quran states, "We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one is to kill a person - unless it be for murder or for criminal acts - it would be as if he kills the whole people; and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people."

You completely missed the point.

Originally Posted by rickolasnice
Of course he existed..

Originally Posted by rickolasnice
There isn't enough evidence for me to believe he existed

lol make up your mind. please, and honestly, for the love of God, if you want to have this debate go to a priest/pastor/religious institute and bring your questions to them, instead of reading hogwash on the internet, because on the internet you will find anything and everything that fits what you want to believe...

Now; what did the next bit of that first quote you used say? He exists as a fictional character. Talk about taking things out of context

I've had debates with religious highers.. they all do the same.. avoid the question with an answer that has nothing to do with my question, etc etc..

Oh.. and another shitty thing the church does.. Stops people using condoms.. I mean wtf.

NSFW:

Can you really not see what a flawed, man-made fairytale the bible / God / Jesus / religion really is?

 

[Raasyvibe]

^^^ FFS, have you even read the earlier posts in regards to the OT? The issue has been addressed many times on this thread now

 

[rickolasnice]

^ Yeah.. not properly..

Law of the land bollocks? No.. Those quotes were GODs orders or quotes from the big guy in the sky himself.. I didn't know God obeyed whatever the human laws of the time are?

And if Jesus is God.. then? I still haven't heard a rebuttal that answers it / makes any sense.

 

[Illyria99]

The issue has been addressed many times on this thread now

Whatever relevance this topic may have had is long gone, yes.

 

[Raasyvibe]

^ Yeah.. not properly..

Law of the land bollocks? No.. Those quotes were GODs orders or quotes from the big guy in the sky himself.. I didn't know God obeyed whatever the human laws of the time are?

And if Jesus is God.. then? I still haven't heard a rebuttal that answers it / makes any sense.

NO, these orders were mans incorrect pre-conception of God. Jesus cleared it all up in the NT. If you want to know this in more detail,re-read the thread or do some research yourself.

 

[Tromps]

Before you say "but that's the old testament.. Jesus wasn't like that".. you said yourself Jesus is God - God is Jesus. DOES NOT COMPUTE.

And if Jesus is God.. then? I still haven't heard a rebuttal that answers it / makes any sense.

Here we go

Jesus replied. When you know me, then you will also know my Father.

Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. The words that I speak to you I do not speak on my own. I am within the Father and the Father within me. Amen amen I say to you whoever believes in me will do the works that I do and will do greater ones than these, because I am going to the Father.

I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. Provided you know me, then you will also know my Father.

Even if you do not believe me, believe the works, so that you may realize that the Father is in me and I am in the father.

Jesus replied, "This is the work of God, to believe in the one whom He has sent ... Everything that the Father gives me will come to me, and I will not reject anyone who comes to me, because I came down from heaven not to do my own will but the will of the one who sent me. And this is the will of the one who sent me, that I should not lose anything of what he gave me, but that I should raise it on the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in him may have eternal life, and I shall raise him on the last day."

Jesus replied (to the Jews), The works I do in my Father's name testify to me. But you do not believe because you are not among my sheep. My sheep hear my voice; I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life and they shall never perish. No one can take them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one can take them out of the Father's hand. The Father and I are one.

A good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep... I am the good shepherd, and I know mine and mine know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I will lay own my life for the sheep. I have other sheep that do not belong to this fold. These also I must lead, and they will hear my voice, and there will be one flock, one shepherd. This is why the Father loves me, because I lay down my life in order to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down on my own. I have power to lay it down, and power to take it up again. This command I have received from my Father.

When you study and know what Jesus did, you will see and know the kind of person he is, and you will understand that is who God is. Jesus is one with the Father and the Father is one with Jesus. Though he is both fully human and fully divine. Jesus is pure love, nothing can dispute that. Christ is the Messiah. Hebrew Old Testament and Biblical prophecies were fulfilled.

“For unto us a Child is born,
Unto us a Son is given;
And the providence will be upon His shoulder.
And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor,
Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Of the increase of His providence and peace
There will be no end,
Upon the throne of David and over His kingdom,
To order it and establish it with judgment and justice
From that time forward, forever.
The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this”

“Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel”

The virgin’s Child will be called ‘Immanuel’, which means ‘God with us’. His name will be called “Mighty God” Isaiah 9:6

This can refer to no other than the Messiah, the Anointed One, the Christ, the Great King predicted by the prophets. And there is only one person in history who has fulfilled these predictions, Jesus of Nazareth.

^^^ FFS, have you even read the earlier posts in regards to the OT? The issue has been addressed many times on this thread now

Let's give him a break he either doesn't understand or is trying to pull at a spirit that is unbreakable. But if he is ignoring much of what has already been repeatedly stated regarding OT context that is his misunderstanding. The Israelite's at that time acted out in fear of the Lord, but the Lord came down from the heavens to proclaim we should act not out of fear for God, but to act out of love for our Lord. It's frustrating trying explain to someone the good news that Jesus proclaimed when all someone wants to do is look at the negatives in past history, but we should have patience and someday the light may be revealed to him. To be fair for everyone, if someone doesn't want to believe, they shouldn't be forced to, but if someone believes, they shouldn't be forced to not believe as well.

Just to reiterate the power of the spirit that is before us, to the op that no one can diminish the faith. John 10:28 - "I give them eternal life and they shall never perish. No one can take them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one can take them out of the Father's hand. The Father and I are one."

He exists as a fictional character.

Fictional or not, Jesus is the greatest character in history. We should all strive for his attributes depicted.

 

[rickolasnice]

-_-

So did God do that stuff in the old testament or not?

 

[Raasyvibe]

^ Yes and no.


Something fishy is going on here isn't it? Some of the law seems all prophetic and Jesus is down with it. Yet some of it he's completely disobeying...

What's going on?

 

[rickolasnice]

^ It's a mish mash of different stories by different people.

So did God, or did he not, commit mass genocide by flooding the planet?

 

[casualuser]

^ Yes and no.


Something fishy is going on here isn't it? Some of the law seems all prophetic and Jesus is down with it. Yet some of it he's completely disobeying...

What's going on?

This is the essence of the point I've been trying to make to Tromps... Even though there are ways to interpret the bible to have a "good" message and there are certainly people that do; in its base form the bible is very confusing/contradictory/ambiguous leading to the average person misunderstanding it and allowing the powerful to use it to manipulate people.

 

[Psyduck]

Fictional or not, Jesus is the greatest character in history. We should all strive for his attributes depicted.

qft. To be a christian is to imitate the Life of Christ rather than read/isolate some words "written about" Christ. If Jesus wanted to provide a clever/intellectual/logically-consistent story, he would have abandoned the world, and started writing a book in his room providing us "all the intellectual cleverness which we are so found of" ... but he did the exact opposite, he rolled up his sleeves and lived a life in the concrete world -- a rather unique one.

I have added an interesting article w.r.t. Christianity & Existence (Pascal, Kierkegaard)