[quote]Makavali wrote:
My point is that religion is very easy to use to manipulate the masses. It shows just how weak minded a lot of religious people are.[/quote]
There are weak minded people on both sides. How about this for weak minded
Blacks are only 2/3 humans, You want to make a bet that it wasn’t just Christians who used to believe this.
Face it People in general are weak minded if you think its just religion then you are also weak minded in thinking it is only them.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
If you are a non believer, what do you care where you go?
I said “see Purgatory.”
Does the Bible translation alter what it teaches?[/quote]
Firstly yes the different translations do teach different things and secondly, please tell me where purgatory is mentioned in the bible.
[quote]John S. wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
You suggest that I read it, I have read many different bibles. I have also read a number of texts that are contemporary but were excluded by the first council of Nicea. Maybe you should actually try doing some reading, then you would actually know what it is that you claim to believe.
John S. said to read the Bible, not Gnostic texts, not Manichaeism, or Mandaeanism texts, not the Apocryphon, or the text of the Nag Hammadi. Those have nothing to do with Christianity as it is practiced today.
We are talking about Christianity here, right?
I am, not sure if you are given that you don’t think I will go to hell for being a non-believer.
I ask again, which Bible? There are lots of them to choose from, I a mean are we talking Peshitta, the Diatessaron or a Vetus Latina or Latin Vulgate? Possibly the Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus or Codex Alexandrinus?
Maybe he follows the Orthodox Cannon and includes a number of books not included in the western cannon. My guess is that he is actually referring to the King James bible which is widely agreed by textual critics to be one of the worst available translations.
New International Version(NIV) is what I read.[/quote]
The poetry of the King James makes it much more enjoyable to read and the New International Version does have some iffy translations where you lose the figurative nature of the earlier documents and it does have a tendency to smooth over the discrepancies between the gospels but hey, it’s a popular choice if you don’t mind missing out on the deuterocanonical books.
Any reason why you chose that bible over the other options?
[quote]John S. wrote:
Makavali wrote:
My point is that religion is very easy to use to manipulate the masses. It shows just how weak minded a lot of religious people are.
There are weak minded people on both sides. How about this for weak minded
Blacks are only 2/3 humans, You want to make a bet that it wasn’t just Christians who used to believe this.
Face it People in general are weak minded if you think its just religion then you are also weak minded in thinking it is only them.[/quote]
I agree, that is pretty much what I was saying a page or so back. That is why we have religion.
[quote]John S. wrote:
Makavali wrote:
My point is that religion is very easy to use to manipulate the masses. It shows just how weak minded a lot of religious people are.
There are weak minded people on both sides. How about this for weak minded
Blacks are only 2/3 humans, You want to make a bet that it wasn’t just Christians who used to believe this.
Face it People in general are weak minded if you think its just religion then you are also weak minded in thinking it is only them.[/quote]
I know people in general are weak. But religious people are by far the easiest to manipulate into doing what would otherwise be an unspeakable atrocity.
[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
…the New International Version does have some iffy translations where you lose the figurative nature of the earlier documents and it does have a tendency to smooth over the discrepancies between the gospels but hey, it’s a popular choice if you don’t mind missing out on the deuterocanonical books.
[/quote]
Which I’m guessing that John, as a Protestant, probably considers heretical anyway, if he considers them at all.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
John S. wrote:
Makavali wrote:
My point is that religion is very easy to use to manipulate the masses. It shows just how weak minded a lot of religious people are.
There are weak minded people on both sides. How about this for weak minded
Blacks are only 2/3 humans, You want to make a bet that it wasn’t just Christians who used to believe this.
Face it People in general are weak minded if you think its just religion then you are also weak minded in thinking it is only them.
I know people in general are weak. But religious people are by far the easiest to manipulate into doing what would otherwise be an unspeakable atrocity.[/quote]
I don’t think that is necessarily true though the fact that they are used to accepting dogmatic statements without questioning them does open them up to having that trait exploited. I know plenty of so called athesists who won’t walk under a ladder for fear of bad luck. It really is human nature.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
…the New International Version does have some iffy translations where you lose the figurative nature of the earlier documents and it does have a tendency to smooth over the discrepancies between the gospels but hey, it’s a popular choice if you don’t mind missing out on the deuterocanonical books.
Which I’m guessing that John, as a Protestant, probably considers heretical anyway, if he considers them at all.[/quote]
Well most of it is there in the King James as part of the Apocrypha.
This is why if someone tells me something is in the bible I ask them which one, it really does make a difference.
[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
If you are a non believer, what do you care where you go?
I said “see Purgatory.”
Does the Bible translation alter what it teaches?
Firstly yes the different translations do teach different things and secondly, please tell me where purgatory is mentioned in the bible.[/quote]
Are you an athiest or an evangelical?
Which TRANSLATION (not heretical sect) says that Jesus was not the son of God?
Which translation does Jesus tell his followers to hate their neighbor?
Which translation does Jesus tell his followers to kill non-believers?
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
…the New International Version does have some iffy translations where you lose the figurative nature of the earlier documents and it does have a tendency to smooth over the discrepancies between the gospels but hey, it’s a popular choice if you don’t mind missing out on the deuterocanonical books.
Which I’m guessing that John, as a Protestant, probably considers heretical anyway, if he considers them at all.[/quote]
I don’t consider them at all, I am Protestant non denominational. My good old NIV tells me everything I need to know.
Do unto others as you would have done unto you.
Have no other gods before him(Make him the most important person in your life)
Jesus was born of a virgin lived a perfect life died for my sins rose again and ascended to heaven.
everything I need to know is right there.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
John S. wrote:
Makavali wrote:
My point is that religion is very easy to use to manipulate the masses. It shows just how weak minded a lot of religious people are.
There are weak minded people on both sides. How about this for weak minded
Blacks are only 2/3 humans, You want to make a bet that it wasn’t just Christians who used to believe this.
Face it People in general are weak minded if you think its just religion then you are also weak minded in thinking it is only them.
I know people in general are weak. But religious people are by far the easiest to manipulate into doing what would otherwise be an unspeakable atrocity.[/quote]
Wrong everyone is easy. You could use science to move people too. check out this global warming fad or is it global cooling I can never keep up with them. While that may not be an atrocity they used to use science to fool people into thinking that jews were not people, blacks were not people, so on and so on.
Ok, getting back to the topic…if Jesus would oppose the US, what would Mohammad say about modern day Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, the Taliban?
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Ok, getting back to the topic…if Jesus would oppose the US, what would Mohammad say about modern day Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, the Taliban?[/quote]
Of course not, Muhammad was scum by today’s standards.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Yeah ok, so the fact that you (I assume based on the widely accepted tennets of your faith,) think that I will go to hell and be tortured for eternity is not at all douche baggy then?
And lets not forget Islam, lots of tolerance for other beliefs there.
We have no idea whether or not you are going to hell.
Hell is for people like Mao Tse Tung, Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot and many many others who committed crimes against humanity and it is gives comfort to victims who believe that although these people did not suffer any consequences on earth during their lifetimes, they are suffering eternally for their crimes.
That’s the reason for the belief in hell. Whether it is a real place or a concept, it exists because of all the injustice in the world.[/quote]
I hesitate to get involved with this discussion, but this is one of the major problems I have with organized Christianity.
According to what many teach (and John S. mentioned this earlier), we all fall short of the glory of god, in other words, we all sin and are deserving of hellfire. The only way that we can escape this is by professing Jesus is the one and only son of God and asking for his forgiveness (repentance).
Also, once you repent your sins are automatically/instantaneously forgiven (after all Jesus died for all the sins of mankind through all of eternity).
So, according to this line of thinking, if Hitler (or really any mass murdering, child molesting rapist) repented with his last dying breath his sins, he would be automatically forgiven and he would get to go to heaven. He would not suffer for his crimes against humanity.
On the other hand, someone else could live a relatively moral life. They could make it a point to avoid lying, never kill or sexually assault anyone, never steal, be faithful to their spouse, help those in need, etc… but never profess Jesus as the son of God. And according to the above line of thinking, this person (who was an overall good person) would burn in hell for all eternity.
Does that really make sense?
I think Jesus was a great man and one of the most influential people to ever live (supposing he did). But people (church leaders, Constantine, etc…) have long since realized his influence and added terms of allegiance which people must adhere to in order to control them.
[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Yeah ok, so the fact that you (I assume based on the widely accepted tennets of your faith,) think that I will go to hell and be tortured for eternity is not at all douche baggy then?
And lets not forget Islam, lots of tolerance for other beliefs there.
We have no idea whether or not you are going to hell.
Hell is for people like Mao Tse Tung, Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot and many many others who committed crimes against humanity and it is gives comfort to victims who believe that although these people did not suffer any consequences on earth during their lifetimes, they are suffering eternally for their crimes.
That’s the reason for the belief in hell. Whether it is a real place or a concept, it exists because of all the injustice in the world.
I hesitate to get involved with this discussion, but this is one of the major problems I have with organized Christianity.
According to what many teach (and John S. mentioned this earlier), we all fall short of the glory of god, in other words, we all sin and are deserving of hellfire. The only way that we can escape this is by professing Jesus is the one and only son of God and asking for his forgiveness (repentance).
Also, once you repent your sins are automatically/instantaneously forgiven (after all Jesus died for all the sins of mankind through all of eternity).
So, according to this line of thinking, if Hitler (or really any mass murdering, child molesting rapist) repented with his last dying breath his sins, he would be automatically forgiven and he would get to go to heaven. He would not suffer for his crimes against humanity.
On the other hand, someone else could live a relatively moral life. They could make it a point to avoid lying, never kill or sexually assault anyone, never steal, be faithful to their spouse, help those in need, etc… but never profess Jesus as the son of God. And according to the above line of thinking, this person (who was an overall good person) would burn in hell for all eternity.
Does that really make sense?
I think Jesus was a great man and one of the most influential people to ever live (supposing he did). But people (church leaders, Constantine, etc…) have long since realized his influence and added terms of allegiance which people must adhere to in order to control them.[/quote]
If hitler was to truly proclaim Jesus was the sun of God then yes he would go to heaven. Jesus died for all of our sins great and small. His forgiveness is that great. If you look at the bible it is not all that hard to get into heaven. Yes there have been things added to the different denominations that why I choose no denomination I get my word from the bible and know were else.
…people aren’t interested in god, they have only eyes for the people that represent god. That way the followers have something tangible, something real to look up to, just as long as they are not left to their own devices. Perhaps even because they desire to be in their place, or something like that in church, to live vicariously in the light of god through the adoration of others…
[quote]John S. wrote:
Sentoguy wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Yeah ok, so the fact that you (I assume based on the widely accepted tennets of your faith,) think that I will go to hell and be tortured for eternity is not at all douche baggy then?
And lets not forget Islam, lots of tolerance for other beliefs there.
We have no idea whether or not you are going to hell.
Hell is for people like Mao Tse Tung, Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot and many many others who committed crimes against humanity and it is gives comfort to victims who believe that although these people did not suffer any consequences on earth during their lifetimes, they are suffering eternally for their crimes.
That’s the reason for the belief in hell. Whether it is a real place or a concept, it exists because of all the injustice in the world.
I hesitate to get involved with this discussion, but this is one of the major problems I have with organized Christianity.
According to what many teach (and John S. mentioned this earlier), we all fall short of the glory of god, in other words, we all sin and are deserving of hellfire. The only way that we can escape this is by professing Jesus is the one and only son of God and asking for his forgiveness (repentance).
Also, once you repent your sins are automatically/instantaneously forgiven (after all Jesus died for all the sins of mankind through all of eternity).
So, according to this line of thinking, if Hitler (or really any mass murdering, child molesting rapist) repented with his last dying breath his sins, he would be automatically forgiven and he would get to go to heaven. He would not suffer for his crimes against humanity.
On the other hand, someone else could live a relatively moral life. They could make it a point to avoid lying, never kill or sexually assault anyone, never steal, be faithful to their spouse, help those in need, etc… but never profess Jesus as the son of God. And according to the above line of thinking, this person (who was an overall good person) would burn in hell for all eternity.
Does that really make sense?
I think Jesus was a great man and one of the most influential people to ever live (supposing he did). But people (church leaders, Constantine, etc…) have long since realized his influence and added terms of allegiance which people must adhere to in order to control them.
If hitler was to truly proclaim Jesus was the sun of God then yes he would go to heaven. Jesus died for all of our sins great and small. His forgiveness is that great. If you look at the bible it is not all that hard to get into heaven. Yes there have been things added to the different denominations that why I choose no denomination I get my word from the bible and know were else.
[/quote]
So, the evil man gets to go to heaven, and the good man has to go to hell? What’s the incentive to live a moral life then?
Also, if Jesus died for all of mankind’s sins great and small, then all of mankinds sins have already been forgiven and we’re all going to heaven anyhow.
It’s the whole “we’re the only ones who are right, everyone else is damned and must be converted” mindset that caused the Crusades, Spanish Inquisition, slaughtering of the indigenous peoples of the Americas, the conflict in current day Isreal, Muslim suicide bombers, etc…
Basically, most of the atrocities that have been done in the name of God use this same general concept as their justification (regardless of denomination or sect).
[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
So, the evil man gets to go to heaven, and the good man has to go to hell? [/quote]
Heaven for the climate, hell for the company. If Fred Phelps is going to heaven, and George Carlin to hell, I know where I want to end up.
Albert Schweitzer said it best: “Reverence for Life affords me my fundamental principle of morality, namely, that good consists in maintaining, assisting, and enhancing life and that to destroy, harm, or to hinder life is evil.”
Google “Lord’s Resistance Army.” Atrocious people can find justification for their atrocity anywhere. Or as Plato said, “Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws.”
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Sentoguy wrote:
So, the evil man gets to go to heaven, and the good man has to go to hell?
Heaven for the climate, hell for the company. If Fred Phelps is going to heaven, and George Carlin to hell, I know where I want to end up.
What’s the incentive to live a moral life then?
Albert Schweitzer said it best: “Reverence for Life affords me my fundamental principle of morality, namely, that good consists in maintaining, assisting, and enhancing life and that to destroy, harm, or to hinder life is evil.”
Basically, most of the atrocities that have been done in the name of God use this same general concept as their justification (regardless of denomination or sect).
Google “Lord’s Resistance Army.” Atrocious people can find justification for their atrocity anywhere. Or as Plato said, “Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws.”[/quote]
I agree with you.
I was not arguing that religion is what makes a person good or bad, nor am I in favor of living an immoral life.
My point was that, most religions/mythologies hold a concept of hell as an afterlife meant to punish those who were wicked in life, and heaven as a place where the good are rewarded.
If christianity is suggesting that the deeds committed in life have no bearing on where one goes in the afterlife, and the single determining factor is simply whether or not that individual utters a specific phrase, then why so much emphasis on right and wrong?
This suggests that the only thing punishable by hellfire is not uttering a phrase of words and that all other offenses (pretty much breaking every single one of the ten commandments, multiple times possibly) are forgiveable. Those are some messed up priorities IMO.
[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
If christianity is suggesting that the deeds committed in life have no bearing on where one goes in the afterlife, and the single determining factor is simply whether or not that individual utters a specific phrase…
[/quote]
It isn’t.