Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
apart from you're need to go on a anti-religious/god crusade to save the rest of the world ...
... from M&FGM, creationism, religious persecution, religious terrorism, religious bigotry, religious intolerance, and for freedom of religion.
And if you are against this, then you must be FOR M&FGM, creationism, religious persecution, religious terrorism, religious bigotry, religious intolerance, and AGAINST freedom of religion.
To people of faith it is the faith itself which is the proof.
...and yet, even though I have asked you repeatedly to explain why 'faith' should be considered as a reliable method of determining what is true when it can be proven to be the worst method, you still haven't explained.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzzyRules
Why? Christianity is not text-based. It's based on a real person...
So you believe!
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzzyRules
The fact is that without Jesus Christ, we wouldn't even have an Old Testament. It would have faded into obscurity. That is one proof that convinces me.
So it's also a 'fact' that without the Hindu gods, the Bhagavad Gita would have faded into obscurity...yes? Why are you not convinced of the truth of the Gitas. After all, they have been around about 2000 years longer than your Christianity
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzzyRules
How does that work exactly? How did the religion spread so fast WITHOUT any of the gospels yet written?
Easy. People were given a choice to convert to the new religion or die. It's a no-brainer really!
Suppose God is NOT Omni-anything, Thrill, just God. At the risk of giving Arq the admission he has been seeking from me forever, I will acknowledge that my certainty that God's Holy Spirit (consciousness) was made available to us by the death and rebirth as Spirit of Jesus stems from my encounter in deep meditation. First, I am absolutely certain that based on my first 30 years of life. I would NOT have been chosen to be the "special" recipient of the encounter. So I believe it is available to all of us whether or not we are aware of its influence on our thoughts. It is what I attribute the inspirations of God to. Second, the descriptions of the Holy Spirit and the demonstration by Jesus in the Christian narrative exactly matched the consciousness I encountered. This enabled me to ignore the many corruptions and ignorant interpretations of our ancestors in the Bible, achieve a resonance with Jesus (the "mind of Christ") and develop what I consider a far more reasonable interpretation of His achievement. So for me, the many things that disturb you and present stumbling blocks to your faith in the Jesus narrative have NO EFFECT on me or my faith.
I'm about 4 pages late to respond, but I want to say, Mystic - yes. I get and even respect the belief that you have because you had it and I believe you when say that you had it. I even don't rule out the possibility that you have had a brush with the divine. it was the 'Divine' that i was looking to have the same rub down from when I selected Buddhism as the most sure-fire way of doing it.
The disagreements that we have, Mystic mate aren't about that, and not even about your ruling out any possible interpretation but yours, but you utter lack of respect for anyone who disagrees with your belief about your experience. It's not your fault - it's what Religious faith (we all know what I mean here ) so no semantics, please) does to people. It makes beliefs Personal, and the people who hold them very hostile to anyone who has a voice for expressing disagreement.
The glass eglise is eggshell fragile, but the barrier of denial erected about it could be used for nuclear shielding.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzzyRules
Your mistake (and the mistake of most atheists) is referring to it as "The Bible". As if it were just one book.
It's NOT a book and never has been.
Christianity was formed and SOLIDIFIED by an event: The resurrection of Jesus Christ. The book came centuries later, and many Christians throughout history have never even read it.
It's a COLLECTION of books. As long as you keep thinking it's a book it will NEVER make sense.
It makes no difference At All Ozzy. No difference whatsoever - apart from emphasising the contradictions. Which is what My Book is all about If i ever get it done.
I do agree with you though that the central event is the resurrection. Paul's remark ( though he actually meant something a bit different) says it all. 'If the resurrection isn't true, our faith is in vain'. Bible literalism, the OT, the wonderful teachings - all that is utterly irrelevant. God is not disproven if evolution is true - just this Genesis -literalists fad -club. The 10 commandments and OT don't matter a Hoot - Jesus threw all that out the window. You don't honor your father and mother - you hate them...unless they are in the same cult.
You don't go to church - you stroll through the fields nibbling corn. The Gospels are about replacing the Old Law with faith in Jesus, and you may take my word for it. And whether that faith is valid stands and falls on the resurrection. That is the only thing that really matters.
But... all the rest Has to matter as it is the circumstantial evidence that decides the central issue - is it true and all the contradictions just 'eyewitness error?' Or is it false, despite the central claim? The cumulative mass of 'evidence' -starting with the nativities - and lack of them builds up or tears down the credibility of these 'books' and the religion of the gospels is either true - the only one that is (As Judaism and Islam deny the resurrection) or it goes utterly down the tube, and the only remaining Q is whether the rest of the bible takes all the other Abrahamic religions down the tube with it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
Oh it isn't? Then why are so many christian proselytizers constantly quoting scriptures?
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzzyRules
Because they have lost their way, or they have not yet found it.
There are two ways of being a Christian apologist - either you use the Bible as a textbook for everything and quote from it all the time, using it as a guide, or you use a fixation on Jesus as a sort of spirit -guide and sun - god and you completely sideline having to defend the Bible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
Oh oh. There he goes again. Deciding who the real christians are.
The ones who read the Bible and quote from it are doing that, too No. Ozzy is simply doing what the Gospel -writers wanted; to put Faith in Jesus at the heart of the Religion and the scriptures were not themselves so important.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 06-20-2019 at 02:34 PM..
I'm about 4 pages late to respond, but I want to say, Mystic - yes. I get and even respect the belief that you have because you had it and I believe you when say that you had it. I even don't rule out the possibility that you have had a brush with the divine. it was the 'Divine' that i was looking to have the same rub down from when I selected Buddhism as the most sure-fire way of doing it.
The disagreements that we have, Mystic mate aren't about that, and not even about your ruling out any possible interpretation but yours, but you utter lack of respect for anyone who disagrees with your belief about your experience. It's not your fault - it's what Religious faith (we all know what I mean here ) so no semantics, please) does to people. It makes beliefs Personal, and the people who hold them very hostile to anyone who has a voice for expressing disagreement.
The glass eglise is eggshell fragile, but the barrier of denial erected about it could be used for nuclear shielding.
This is perhaps your best post in disagreement yet, Arq. I too chose Buddhism as the path but was not seeking the Divine, just the end game of Samsara - the elimination of karma and the achievement of Nirvana. We had different outcomes and that presents uncomfortable issues for my Universalism views, but as you point out, I still have Faith, Hope, and Love. You are a worthy adversary despite your concrete, pragmatic shield that seems as impregnable as my "nuclear shield."
This is perhaps your best post in disagreement yet, Arq. I too chose Buddhism as the path but was not seeking the Divine, just the end game of Samsara - the elimination of karma and the achievement of Nirvana. We had different outcomes and that presents uncomfortable issues for my Universalism views, but as you point out, I still have Faith, Hope, and Love. You are a worthy adversary despite your concrete, pragmatic shield that seems as impregnable as my "nuclear shield."
The different outcome makes no real difference, Mystic. It hasn't at all altered my view that the Mystic experience is real, and is either contact with the "Divine" or a human experience. The disagreements, both with yourself and with every other believer who thinks the god in their head is the only one giving them true facts, Doctrine and interpretation - and you are no different in this, old mate - in is the validity if the 'evidence' put forwards to support both the belief and the disbelief. The possibility has never been the disagreement, the high probability of credibility (or not) - based on evaluation of the 'evidence' - has always been the disagreement.
The possibility has never been the disagreement, the high probability of credibility (or not) - based on evaluation of the 'evidence' - has always been the disagreement.
Then I hope one day you have a 'knockyoursocksoff' credible experience one day...
Then I hope one day you have a 'knockyoursocksoff' credible experience one day...
I may have already have had it. If deconversion is (as I suspect) the same experience as conversion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 303Guy
It's based on a real person? Really? I hate to break this to you but .....
It may be based on a Historical Jesus - but that helps the cause of Christianity about as much as St Nicholas of Smyrna or wherever helps to Make jolly old Santa and his sleigh real.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzzyRules
What does that even mean?
Christianity is the gospel spread by word of mouth. The book doesn't even factor in.
The gospels are what the word was, whether spread by mouth or by reading. And the believers were Interpreting the word differently and damning each other as heretics even before the Books were codified into the Bible..which is of course Not the one in use by US Christians today.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 06-20-2019 at 02:43 PM..
I do agree with you though that the central event is the resurrection. Paul's remark ( though he actually meant something a bit different) says it all. 'If the resurrection isn't true, our faith is in vain'.
I have my own unique criteria for rendering Christianity completely void: forget about the resurrection. It can neither be proved or disproved so that's a stalemate. What CAN be proved however, is that Jesus NEVER said "...that whosoever [doesn't] believe in him shall perish and [NOT] have everlasting life" (John 3:16)and "If you don't believe in me you will die in your sins." John 8:24
Take away the threat of eternal torment and Christianity is rendered meaningless because there's nothing for Jesus to save us from.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If i ever get it done. 
