Fun With Religion

Off Topic
21

[quote]Vash wrote:
Fishlips wrote:
brider wrote:
So, while that is the Catholic DOCTRINE regarding immaculate conception, what is the BIBLICAL support for the belief?

Easy answer brider - there isn’t any. The Bible is quite clear. Romans 3:23"All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." then Romans 6:23"The wages sin pays is death." Did Mary die? Of course. Only sinners die as an unavoidable eventuality. Jesus only died because he was murdered otherwise, being perfect as some assert Mary to be, he would not have died and neither would she if perfect, unstained by sin.

Which leads to a real conundrum for those who believe we have some immortal part of us, a ‘soul’, that lives on after our death. If humankind was meant to be perfect and had that situation never changed, what good would a an immortal soul do you if you never died?

Fish

This is my own interpretation from reading the Bible, and has the possibility of being incorrect. But, being that I said it, it’s probably not

I am under the impression that the “death” at issue is not the physical death, but the sentence of Hell after the earthly passing.[/quote]

See Genesis Chapters 2 & 3 - regarding the issue of Physical vs. Spiritual death. Although the complete physical death (as punishment for sin) was not immediate, as in Acts Chapter 5, from that point on, the relationship between God and man changed because of sin.

The sin nature in man was formed thru disobedience to God. The ramifications of Adam and Eve’s sinful actions can be seen in that God (Gen 3:21) killed animals then made clothes of the animal fur to cover Adam and Eve’s sin. The Bible records that man no longer dwelt with God in the Garden of Eden, but (because of this sin barrier) God only visited man on occasion.

(This barrier between God and Man remained until Jesus’ ressurrection, when the vail between God and man was torn, and we (man) became justified to God thru Jesus’ shed blood.)

Additionally, Jesus speaks about the Soul and Spirit of men living on apart from the body in Mark chapter 9, and he himself releases his Spirit from his body on the cross (Luke 23:46).

Hell is not death, but punishment. It was not created for humans, but rather it was made for those fallen angels who followed Lucifer (Matthew 25:41).

The God of the Bible is not a blood-thirsty angry god who is waiting for you to die to administer punishment; he loves you so much that he made a way for all to be reconciled to himself.

22

[quote]bandgeek wrote:
Oh, heck, here’s three more: Russian elementary school.

Snark away, tiffy :)[/quote]

please oh please expound upon this topic…

23

the Isaiah prophecy is a perfect example of the writers of the New Testament writing Jesus’ life to conform to prophecies, to justify belief in him as a messiah.

24

…and there names were Charlie, Frances, and Ivan…oh wait! wrong thread

25

Off topic but related -

Who would agrree that Athesim seems to be the coolest thing out there today…many would disagree that they are atheist because its the rder of the day…however atheism belivers are atheist because they hate religion but aqtheism itself is a religion.

26

What kind of crap is that? I have been hearing how “atheism” is cool for about a month now, I don’t know what started it, but I don’t think you can describe atheism as a trend movement because really doesn’t have an aggressive agenda. Atheism is not “hate of religion” but simply the denial of the existence of god(s). I know many people who believe in god who are a lot more “anti-religion” than most of the atheists I know. Hell, atheists will laugh at fundamentalists for some of the stuff they do but they don’t have an ardent passion against religion.

Wow, and I thought atheism was a commonly understood concept. No wonder I have such problem explaining agnosticism to people.

27

[quote]Stevemax wrote:
Off topic but related -

Who would agrree that Athesim seems to be the coolest thing out there today…many would disagree that they are atheist because its the rder of the day…however atheism belivers are atheist because they hate religion but aqtheism itself is a religion.
[/quote]

Well, I can see no difference between the any of them. Wether it is an athiest or a buddhist or a christian. Really it is all the same. All three of them (in the aforementioned example) are centered on God. If someone really belived (although “believe” is not the right word) there was no god, there would be no need to have a belief about it because it would instantly be rejected and forgotten. For example, I do not believe in Leprochauns. Now, why would i need to follow a doctrine/belief/whatever that tells me there is no such thing as a leprochaun? It is useless. If I do not believe, it is dropped, and I will never pick it up again.

If you reject one, they all must be rejected. So, if that is the case, what is left after the rejection?

If an athiest hates religion, based on the above post, what is the point? If one “hates” something and doesn’t believe in it, why would one want to follow a system or any thought process about it at all? If one truly doesn’t believe, it is all over. Nothing more needs to be said about it at that point. Athiesm is just another way of having something to hang on to. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

I am not saying one is right or wrong or anything of that kind. I am just saying there is no difference.

28

[quote]Stevemax wrote:
Off topic but related -

Who would agrree that Athesim seems to be the coolest thing out there today…many would disagree that they are atheist because its the rder of the day…however atheism belivers are atheist because they hate religion but aqtheism itself is a religion.
[/quote]

I have to agree with you on this point. But I also think that if you belong to a “group” religious or whatever, you are confined to that groups way of thinking. If you have a different interpretation of a passage or a different idea, it could go against your group’s way of thinking. That could mean… let’s just say you are 86’d out of the group or ostracized.

I was asked not to long ago what religion I practiced. My response was “None”. My co-workers scoffed at me thinking “Here we go, not another atheist”! I simply explained “I’m pretty much open, to the tens of thousands of deities that have been worshipped, since the beginning of man”.

I know that must sound wishy-washy, but let me put it into an anology: Let’s compare it too… weight training. Let’s say there is a group that says “Heavy duty is the right way to train”. And then another group says “No Westside training is the right way to train”. We are not even counting the other programs that are going to suggest that they are the “right” way to train. It can get downright confusing, maybe even frustrating!!

If you were to draw a circle, put all of the worlds religions from Christianity to Atheism outside the circle. Then put just one of the religions inside that circle, whatever religion is inside the circle, could do a 360 degree turn telling all the others “I’m right you are wrong”.

I was just lucky that my grandfather and father, let me make a choice. If I would have been born in a different continent, I just might have to be into:Shinto,Buddhism,Hinduism,Islam, etc.

You can believe whatever you want, just don’t wake me up on an early weekend!!!
“Sancho”

29

[quote]Takuin wrote:
CDarklock wrote:
That does not make sense. See, this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca lives on Endor. That does not make sense. Why would a seven foot tall Wookiee want to live on Endor with a bunch of little stumpy Ewoks? Here – look at the monkey. Look at the silly monkey.

Isn’t Chewbacca from Kashyyk? But I digress…[/quote]

AGH! U NERD!

30

wasn’t that the immaculate reception?

31

Does anybody know the 2 key differences between Christianinty and all other world religions?

32

[quote]Stevemax wrote:
Off topic but related -

Who would agrree that Athesim seems to be the coolest thing out there today…many would disagree that they are atheist because its the rder of the day…however atheism belivers are atheist because they hate religion but aqtheism itself is a religion.
[/quote]

Heres the defintion of religion
1. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
2. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
3. The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
4. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
5. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.

Tell me where atheism fits into one of those.

Atheism : Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.

I’m sure someones thinking its
5. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.

Well tell me what you would say if someone asked you whether or not believed in leprechauns? Maybe you would say the belief of leprechauns was “instantly be rejected and forgotten” and if this was your opinion on religion then that matches the defintion of atheism pretty well.

33

[quote]DLM wrote:
Well tell me what you would say if someone asked you whether or not believed in leprechauns? Maybe you would say the belief of leprechauns was “instantly be rejected and forgotten” and if this was your opinion on religion then that matches the defintion of atheism pretty well.[/quote]

All I was saying is that if it is rejected there is no attachment to it. If there is no attachment to it, there is no need to call yourself an Athiest. Athiests are still interested in God, otherwise that word “Athiest” would not exist for them in that capacity. If one rejetcs religion, one must reject Athiesm as well. That was all I meant in the last post.

34

As made clear by my first post, I was a bit taken back by the ‘atheists hate religion’ post, but none the less… this leprechaun example is a bit farcical. Atheists don’t believe in god, you don’t believe in leprechauns. So far so good, but god and religion are vastly different hings. I don’t know a single atheist who doesn’t believe in religion. It is a fact, everywhere you go you find religious people and as such, they are very much an aspect of life for people whether they do believe in god or not. I tend to not think about religion much because I am not a religious person but when someone is accosting me with a firey sermon, I can’t very well not notice the presence of affects of religion.

I only think it’s fair that if we are going to hardball one guy on his semantics and lack of logic, that the same should be done across the field.

35

[quote]great421 wrote:
Vash wrote:
Fishlips wrote:
brider wrote:
So, while that is the Catholic DOCTRINE regarding immaculate conception, what is the BIBLICAL support for the belief?

Easy answer brider - there isn’t any. The Bible is quite clear. Romans 3:23"All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." then Romans 6:23"The wages sin pays is death." Did Mary die? Of course. Only sinners die as an unavoidable eventuality. Jesus only died because he was murdered otherwise, being perfect as some assert Mary to be, he would not have died and neither would she if perfect, unstained by sin.

Which leads to a real conundrum for those who believe we have some immortal part of us, a ‘soul’, that lives on after our death. If humankind was meant to be perfect and had that situation never changed, what good would a an immortal soul do you if you never died?

Fish

This is my own interpretation from reading the Bible, and has the possibility of being incorrect. But, being that I said it, it’s probably not

I am under the impression that the “death” at issue is not the physical death, but the sentence of Hell after the earthly passing.

See Genesis Chapters 2 & 3 - regarding the issue of Physical vs. Spiritual death. Although the complete physical death (as punishment for sin) was not immediate, as in Acts Chapter 5, from that point on, the relationship between God and man changed because of sin.
True, but does that mean God then stuck a separate spirit ‘soul’ in them at that point, being as there was no need for it before?
The sin nature in man was formed thru disobedience to God. The ramifications of Adam and Eve’s sinful actions can be seen in that God (Gen 3:21) killed animals then made clothes of the animal fur to cover Adam and Eve’s sin.
Animals died naturally before God made the skin clothing for Adam and Eve. God told them they would die if they disobeyed. That statement would be meaningless and not a warning if they had never witnessed death. 2 Pet. 2:12(in part)“…like unreasoning animals born naturally to be caught and destroyed…” The Bible never refers to death as natural for humans but calls death ‘the enemy’ ,however, for animals it is called natural.
The Bible records that man no longer dwelt with God in the Garden of Eden, but (because of this sin barrier) God only visited man on occasion.

(This barrier between God and Man remained until Jesus’ ressurrection, when the vail between God and man was torn, and we (man) became justified to God thru Jesus’ shed blood.)

Additionally, Jesus speaks about the Soul and Spirit of men living on apart from the body in Mark chapter 9, and he himself releases his Spirit from his body on the cross (Luke 23:46).
I can see only one possible reference in Mark 9 you are thinking of but again it doesn’t fly. He talks about going into Hell or Gehenna where the fire does not go out. But if he’s symbolically speaking of cutting off your hand, foot or eyes(representing something that’s a moral problem for you) to avoid being going there then obviously the place, Hell or Gehenna, is symbolic also.
Jesus was dead for 3 days so how did he give his spirit, which is supposed to be him in another form anyway so why speak of it as something separate, to his Father at that point. He was just dead. Also Jesus was in Hell: ?His soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.? Acts 2:31 How could that be if Hell means anything more than death?

Hell is not death, but punishment. It was not created for humans, but rather it was made for those fallen angels who followed Lucifer (Matthew 25:41).
When Jesus said the words of this scripture he was talking about people so how can it not be for humans?

The God of the Bible is not a blood-thirsty angry god who is waiting for you to die to administer punishment; he loves you so much that he made a way for all to be reconciled to himself.[/quote]
I agree.

36

The interesting thing about atheism is that, logically, you cannot defend this belief. Let me explain:

Atheism is the belief that God or gods do not exist.

The dialog would go like this

p=philosopher
a=athiest

P: Do you believe in the existence of a SCRZRG ?

A: What’s a SCRZRG ?

P: The SCRZRG is a creature that has 2 eyes, 20 legs and 16 stomachs.

A: No, that doesn’t exist.

P: So you hold the belief that the SCRZRG doesn’t exist?

A: Correct, I believe it doesn’t exist.

P: Have you seached every corner of the universe?

A: No

P: So, possibly, the SCRZRG could exist in some corner of the universe that you haven’t been to?

A: That is possible

P: So therefore the most you can say, for certain, is that you have not encountered a SCRZRG and that you DO NOT KNOW if it exists or not.

Notice that the last statement is the definition of Agnosticism.

Just replace SCRZRG with “God” or “gods”, and “2 eyes, 20 legs and 16 stomachs” with whatever quality or qualities you feel God or gods should possess. The argument remains the same.

38

In reference to silly things we’ve heard from religions I have a couple.

Christian Scientists (I think) refuse medicine or medical treatment because supposedly it’s an insult to God’s power to heal.

In Saudi Arabia (again, I think) there was a fire that broke out in an all girls school a couple of years ago. The girls naturally tried to escape the burning building, only to be beaten back inside and the doors barred. Why? Their heads and faces weren’t covered when they tried to escape. Needless to say, many died.

To-Shin Do

39

[quote]RockClimberjoe wrote:
The interesting thing about atheism is that, logically, you cannot defend this belief. Let me explain:
[/quote]

Of course, you can “defend” it logically, you just can’t prove it logically. That is what “belief” means. This is not in any way “interesting”.

40

[quote]stallone wrote:
As a Steelers fan, I must point out that the Immaculate Reception occurred not in a Super Bowl but in the 1972 AFC Divisional Playoff against the Raiders. Rainjack might have been thinking of Lynn Swann’s spectacular grab against the Cowboys in Super Bowl X (1976). [/quote]

My bad - both catches were nausiating.

41

[quote]Stevemax wrote:
Off topic but related -

Who would agrree that Athesim seems to be the coolest thing out there today…many would disagree that they are atheist because its the rder of the day…however atheism belivers are atheist because they hate religion but atheism itself is a religion.
[/quote]

i wouldn’t say that most athiests hate religion. most really couldn’t care less, until they have someone push religious views on them. that’s when athiests start to get upset. it’s pretty entertaining to see religious people try to logically explain their hatred of other religions, abortion, gay marriage, etc, without trying to force their own religious values on other people.