How Much Do You Know About Christianity?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
801

Once again, someone jumps in saying “You don’t know” without actually pointing anything out. Thanks bud. Good job patting yourself on the back by hinting at your superior knowledge of a topic without saying anything of meaning.

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Oleena wrote:
Pushme and IrishSteel, I am going to give you a chance to convert me back to Christianity right now. I swear to you that I am being serious, and if there is a good answer to this that does not involve the following, I will return to Christianity (when I was a Christian, I loved being a Christian) 1. Saying God is anything less than all knowing, because that’s been clearly stated in the Bible or 2. You cannot hold God to the same standards as men, because in this case the grievance is enormous and I would not want to follow someone who was this petty/selfish/unethical according to the most basic parenting standards. In other words, as a parent, it is your responsibility to look out for the well being of your offspring. Not 1% or less of them, but all of them.

First of all, as I mentioned, it’s stated that God is all knowing (Psalm 139:2-6; Isaiah 40:13-14)

In Revelations it states that most of the earth will be destroyed in the endtime, and only a very small percentage of all of humanity that ever existed will make it into the kingdom of Heaven.

Now I ask you- if you were going to have 10 children, and you knew from far before the moment that you conceived them that 9 of them were going to CHOOSE TO BURN IN HELL, would you have 10 children?

Think carefully on this answer as not to be hypocritical. If you support or use birthcontrol in any manner, you are choosing in the opposite direction that God did.

I cannot ethically follow a God who plays games with his children, the end result of which is far more than 99% burning in hell.

I find it almost impossible to believe that you spent that much time around anything even vaguely resembling historic Christianity, Catholic or Protestant, and missed the most foundational doctrines contained in any children’s catechism. Once again, I’m more convinced than ever, if that’s possible, that epistemology is the only meaningful arena for ultimate questions.[/quote]<<< Also, how is the idea epistemology being the only meaninglful arena for ultimate questions contradicted by a debate on Christianity? I can’t speak for everyone, but I am concerned with the cultural implications of god-fearing religions and don’t bother debating ultimate questions due to a lack of experience. My questions regarding christianity involve the here and now ethical and cultural effects.

802

[quote]THE_CLAMP_DOWN wrote:

you honestly think this added anything:
“Oh but I have done exactly what you asked - I rejected all belief systems and started over from the very beginning/basics (accepting NO presuppositions) to build my world-view and to come to the point where I can rationally accept my beliefs about God and Christianity (along with input from Buddhism, Taoism and a few other belief systems)”

-For one, my questions were set in the present moment.
-For two, it is possible to reprogram a programmable creature. ie- believing 2+2=5. Think 1984. But it takes time.
-For three, anyone who doesn’t see our free-will is severly limited is only doing so because their “knowledge bank” will not allow them to believe which further proves my point. THINK!
-For four, even in a state of “total disbelief”-- you will retain beliefs. Thats just silly.
-For five, my standard was never “Have you ever in all your life believed Jesus Christ wasnt your savior”. Of course you will have different conditioning and a different brain at different stages in your life which would produce different beliefs. Nothing is static.

Im done. You have misconstrued every post I have written either because you felt that was the only way to win the debate or because you are simply retarded. Add some psychology,philosophy, biology, etc. books to your library (now you will say “I have blah blah blah already” To which I say " READ them"). Peace.
[/quote]

Absolute silliness . . . petty petty petty . . .

As a 28 year old man, I completely discarded all beliefs - I started with the very supposition that your proposed - I had to be willing to believe anything and willing to not believe everything - blank slate, no pre-suppositions - everything was possible and nothing was possible - I was able to believe/not believe in no free will, and complete free will, able to believe/not believe evolution as well as creation - nothing was predetermined to me and I wanted to build from a position of absolute zero - interestingly enough I used mathematics as the foundational system as I began and I used your exact quote 2+2=5 as I began my personal examination - I had to be able to believe that all math was wrong to begin with a honest assessment of math.

To this day - I am able because of free will to do the exact same thing - just don’t want to go through all of the mental labor again that is required to start from absolute zero. I can choose to deny my faith - and as a rational human I would start all over to find out how I was wrong - after all, not going to going changing my beliefs without a rational reason - that’s a lot of work. If you have never done an “absolute zero” personal belief construct - I highly recommend it to you - very liberating.

Your point about free will is that if it were “truly free” I would be able to switch my believe from absolute acceptance of Jesus Christ as my savior to absolute denial of Jesus Christ as my savior at this very moment - and my response is that I could! I don’t know why you don’t understand that I have no problem with your point - either free will allows you to completely reverse what you believe or it is limited free will - and I say I can and so it is not limited - is that plain enough yet?

I’ve not misconstrued your posts - I’ve agreed with you all along and said that I can change my beliefs in a complete expression of free will - no limitation at all . . .

803

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
IrishSteel, for what it’s worth I have very much enjoyed reading through your posts about your faith. [/quote]

Thanks - I appreciate you taking time to say so!

804

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Oleena wrote:
pushharder wrote:
Oleena wrote:

pushharder wrote:
Oleena wrote:
Actually, agnosticism would be an utter lack of faith in anything.

Like I said, it is inverted but it is a faith. An agnostic has a faith that his so-called lack of faith is “the ticket.”

Again, as I said earlier, an agnostic is a copout. A fence rider. A pussy. So you are going along with some actual belief so as to help define yourself as “not an indecisive pussy”? when you admit that you really don’t know, and therefore don’t have 100% faith?

I admitted no such thing but it must humor you greatly to think so.

That we will. Good luck all of us :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

You’ll be the one in need of some luck. My faith has me covered.

Not if it turns out that you picked the wrong religion. It could be that the Muslims have it right, or the mormons know best, or the goddesss is still pissed that everyone forgot about her with these stupid monotheistic male religions, or the buddhists have it going on with reincarnation. <<If that’s true you’ll have nothing to worry about. You’ll probably come back as a male chicken that gets to live in a nice farmer’s backyard and breed with all the hens.

It’s not a matter of picking the right or wrong religion. It’s what YOU (or I) have done with what God has revealed to us.[/quote] You have to admit that’s your best guess according to the previous knowledge and training you’ve received through the vantage point of christianity. You’ve hinted at the fact several times before that it really is impossible to know.

[quote]Just so I’m a free range rooster. Will you possibly join me? I’d welcome a feisty hen.[/quote] Nope. I want to find out if dolfins really do have faster processing abilities than humans :slight_smile: Either than or come back as a bonobo. Those creatures have all the fun!

805

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
THE_CLAMP_DOWN wrote:

you honestly think this added anything:
“Oh but I have done exactly what you asked - I rejected all belief systems and started over from the very beginning/basics (accepting NO presuppositions) to build my world-view and to come to the point where I can rationally accept my beliefs about God and Christianity (along with input from Buddhism, Taoism and a few other belief systems)”

-For one, my questions were set in the present moment.
-For two, it is possible to reprogram a programmable creature. ie- believing 2+2=5. Think 1984. But it takes time.
-For three, anyone who doesn’t see our free-will is severly limited is only doing so because their “knowledge bank” will not allow them to believe which further proves my point. THINK!
-For four, even in a state of “total disbelief”-- you will retain beliefs. Thats just silly.
-For five, my standard was never “Have you ever in all your life believed Jesus Christ wasnt your savior”. Of course you will have different conditioning and a different brain at different stages in your life which would produce different beliefs. Nothing is static.

Im done. You have misconstrued every post I have written either because you felt that was the only way to win the debate or because you are simply retarded. Add some psychology,philosophy, biology, etc. books to your library (now you will say “I have blah blah blah already” To which I say " READ them"). Peace.

Absolute silliness . . . petty petty petty . . .

As a 28 year old man, I completely discarded all beliefs - I started with the very supposition that your proposed - I had to be willing to believe anything and willing to not believe everything - blank slate, no pre-suppositions - everything was possible and nothing was possible - I was able to believe/not believe in no free will, and complete free will, able to believe/not believe evolution as well as creation - nothing was predetermined to me and I wanted to build from a position of absolute zero - interestingly enough I used mathematics as the foundational system as I began and I used your exact quote 2+2=5 as I began my personal examination - I had to be able to believe that all math was wrong to begin with a honest assessment of math.[/quote] Do you still believe that 2+2=4 or that it’s possible for 2+2=5 to be true? Or do you believe that because you have free will you can believe that 2+2=5 making it “true for you”?

[quote]Your point about free will is that if it were “truly free” I would be able to switch my believe from absolute acceptance of Jesus Christ as my savior to absolute denial of Jesus Christ as my savior at this very moment - and my response is that I could! I don’t know why you don’t understand that I have no problem with your point - either free will allows you to completely reverse what you believe or it is limited free will - and I say I can and so it is not limited - is that plain enough yet?[/quote] I don’t even know where to start. Holy hell. Do you even know what truth is? Refer to the guy above who mentioned epistemology. I think you could stand to look into that stuff yourself.

[quote]I’ve not misconstrued your posts - I’ve agreed with you all along and said that I can change my beliefs in a complete expression of free will - no limitation at all . . .
[/quote] Oh my god.

One final question, although I am now scared out of my mind to ask you> what is your system for deciding if something is true or not? Are you making your own reality?

806

[quote]Oleena wrote:

I give up. I’ve pointed out numerous times that in BOTH Islam religious teachings and christian religious teachings woman are described as precious, and I have also pointed out that at different points in time different societies have “twisted” the words of both religions to support the abuse of women. If you can’t understand the difference between muslim society and Islam religion that is not my fault. You seem very capable of understanding the difference between different societies that have accepted christianity as their faith and the actual christian religion.

As I said, you are unable to see the similarities. Do you even know who Martin Luther was or why that article mentioned him? Do you have any knowlege of what previous christian societies were like, say, 500+ years ago? You claim to have a basic understanding of christianity, but in failing understand that current muslim culture is similar to older christian cultures you display a clear lack of either mental ability or simply historic knowledge. BTW, if you choose to answer this, make sure to mention who Martin Luther is and why he’s important. Note, I’m not referring to Martin Luther King. Think several 1000 years before that.

when have I expressed a hatred towards god? I have spent an entire thread expressing dismay towards a definition of a god in a book that no one to this point in the thread has been able to prove the validity of because, honestly, you haven’t died, so you just don’t know.

[/quote]

O - I have experienced the Islamic faith firsthand, I know what it teaches about women - It is not the fault of the Islamic society that its women are treated so badly - it is the teaching of Islam (not the watered down version you get to hear about in the West) that advocates the way women are abused. On the other hand - it is a society which willingly violates or misinterprets plain Christian teachings about women that leads to any abuse of women in a nominally christian society.

Again - let me be plain - Islam teaches/advocates/allows for the mistreatment of women and Islamic society follows suit, Christianity forbids abuse of women and it is “christian” societies which have altered biblical teaching to justify the mistreatment of women.

Did you even know that in America is was Christians that advocated women’s suffrage?

My point cannot be any simpler. There is a fundamental difference in the way Islam and Christianity value and treat women . . . final proof - which society has advanced women’s rights the fastest/farthest? Oh, wait - that would be Christian America . . . Which societies are still way way way behind on women’s rights - Oh wait for it - Yep, that’s right Islamic nations . . .wow!

Don’t even think you have a leg to stand on with me when it come to religious history . . . I actually have a copy in my library of his 95 Theses - have you ever even read them? Just because he was an important figure to some branches of reformed theology doesn’t mean he was some kind of new prophet - he was still wrong on a lot of issues - so am I to be surprised that he was wrong on this issue as well? Hardly . . .

I’ll let others be a judge of whether or not you have expressed a hatred for the Christian God. It seems pretty plain to me . . .

807

[quote]Oleena wrote:
Do you still believe that 2+2=4 or that it’s possible for 2+2=5 to be true? Or do you believe that because you have free will you can believe that 2+2=5 making it “true for you”?

I don’t even know where to start. Holy hell. Do you even know what truth is? Refer to the guy above who mentioned epistemology. I think you could stand to look into that stuff yourself.

Oh my god.

One final question, although I am now scared out of my mind to ask you> what is your system for deciding if something is true or not? Are you making your own reality?

[/quote]

Why do you even want to know - this is getting really old. Someone asks me a question - I answer it - and then you come on and tell me that my answer is not valid. BS!

How hard is this? - by rational discovery for myself I proved that 2+2=4, but prior to the conclusion I was blank to the outcome (remember the part about starting from absolute zero belief and presupposition?) - I chose to believe that 2+2=5 and even came up with a couple of screwy theories to prove it - theories that were eventually proven wrong - so I went from being able to believe that 2+2=5 and from being completely unattached to the outcome to being able to rationally deduced that 2+2=4 and that my belief about 2+2=5 was wrong - if someone were to come up with a way to demonstrate 2+2=5, I could change my belief in 2+2=4 in a heartbeat, but now I want some really good proof before I change my belief because I have invested a lot of time and thought into destroying my belief in 2+2=5.

THIS IS THE IMPORTANT PART!

I chose to believe in 2+2=5, applied my reason to my faith, found the object of my faith to be false and changed my belief from 2+2=5 to 2+2=4 based on incontrovertible evidence of the validity of 2+2=4.

So when I was asked if I, with free will, could believe in 2+2=5 and I answered yes, I could, because I had, and could again . . . now - is that not an answer to TCD’s question? Seems like an answer to me.

Now substitute in any other belief you want, and I have done the exact same thing to come to the beliefs I hold to be true today - I have the free will to chose what I believe, the reason to understand and to challenge what I believe and the judgment to discern for myself what I will or will not retain as a belief based on the evidence and results of those challenges.

I will say it again - you will not find many people like me who have invested the time and energy it takes to build a belief system from absolute zero - but I would recommend the process to each and every one of you . . .

808

My point, which you’re still missing, broken down further:

Islam was completed as a religion about 1400 years ago, christianity came fully into existance about 2000 years ago, meaning that Islam is 600 years younger than christianity.

About 600 years ago in the 1300s, christianity was taking over paganism by force, through bloodshed and starvation, and spread over into other countries through the bloody means of the inquisistion, which everyone loves to forget and make escuses for.As for women: Most women of the Middle Ages were totally dominated by men. Any man in the family could order a woman to do as he wished. If a woman refused, she was beat into submission, as disobedience was considered a crime against God.

^^^^Huh. That’s a lot like Islamic religion right now. Weird.

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
Oleena wrote:

I give up. I’ve pointed out numerous times that in BOTH Islam religious teachings and christian religious teachings woman are described as precious, and I have also pointed out that at different points in time different societies have “twisted” the words of both religions to support the abuse of women. If you can’t understand the difference between muslim society and Islam religion that is not my fault. You seem very capable of understanding the difference between different societies that have accepted christianity as their faith and the actual christian religion.

As I said, you are unable to see the similarities. Do you even know who Martin Luther was or why that article mentioned him? Do you have any knowlege of what previous christian societies were like, say, 500+ years ago? You claim to have a basic understanding of christianity, but in failing understand that current muslim culture is similar to older christian cultures you display a clear lack of either mental ability or simply historic knowledge. BTW, if you choose to answer this, make sure to mention who Martin Luther is and why he’s important. Note, I’m not referring to Martin Luther King. Think several 1000 years before that.

when have I expressed a hatred towards god? I have spent an entire thread expressing dismay towards a definition of a god in a book that no one to this point in the thread has been able to prove the validity of because, honestly, you haven’t died, so you just don’t know.

O - I have experienced the Islamic faith firsthand, I know what it teaches about women - It is not the fault of the Islamic society that its women are treated so badly - it is the teaching of Islam (not the watered down version you get to hear about in the West) that advocates the way women are abused. On the other hand - it is a society which willingly violates or misinterprets plain Christian teachings about women that leads to any abuse of women in a nominally christian society.

Again - let me be plain - Islam teaches/advocates/allows for the mistreatment of women and Islamic society follows suit, Christianity forbids abuse of women and it is “christian” societies which have altered biblical teaching to justify the mistreatment of women.

Did you even know that in America is was Christians that advocated women’s suffrage?

My point cannot be any simpler. There is a fundamental difference in the way Islam and Christianity value and treat women . . . final proof - which society has advanced women’s rights the fastest/farthest? Oh, wait - that would be Christian America . . . Which societies are still way way way behind on women’s rights - Oh wait for it - Yep, that’s right Islamic nations . . .wow!

Don’t even think you have a leg to stand on with me when it come to religious history . . . I actually have a copy in my library of his 95 Theses - have you ever even read them? Just because he was an important figure to some branches of reformed theology doesn’t mean he was some kind of new prophet - he was still wrong on a lot of issues - so am I to be surprised that he was wrong on this issue as well? Hardly . . .

I’ll let others be a judge of whether or not you have expressed a hatred for the Christian God. It seems pretty plain to me . . . [/quote]

809

[quote]Oleena wrote:
My point, which you’re still missing, broken down further:

Islam was completed as a religion about 1400 years ago, christianity came fully into existance about 2000 years ago, meaning that Islam is 600 years younger than christianity.

About 600 years ago in the 1300s, christianity was taking over paganism by force, through bloodshed and starvation, and spread over into other countries through the bloody means of the inquisistion, which everyone loves to forget and make escuses for.As for women: Most women of the Middle Ages were totally dominated by men. Any man in the family could order a woman to do as he wished. If a woman refused, she was beat into submission, as disobedience was considered a crime against God.

^^^^Huh. That’s a lot like Islamic religion right now. Weird.

[/quote]

Wow - you have the Sesame Street version of history down pat . . . . good for you . . . makes sense since most of your views are based in gross oversimplifications and horrible generalizations . . . but good luck with that!

810

Well that’s a huge relief. So what is your system for deciding truth regarding ultimate questions?

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
Oleena wrote:
Do you still believe that 2+2=4 or that it’s possible for 2+2=5 to be true? Or do you believe that because you have free will you can believe that 2+2=5 making it “true for you”?

I don’t even know where to start. Holy hell. Do you even know what truth is? Refer to the guy above who mentioned epistemology. I think you could stand to look into that stuff yourself.

Oh my god.

One final question, although I am now scared out of my mind to ask you> what is your system for deciding if something is true or not? Are you making your own reality?

Why do you even want to know - this is getting really old. Someone asks me a question - I answer it - and then you come on and tell me that my answer is not valid. BS!

How hard is this? - by rational discovery for myself I proved that 2+2=4, but prior to the conclusion I was blank to the outcome (remember the part about starting from absolute zero belief and presupposition?) - I chose to believe that 2+2=5 and even came up with a couple of screwy theories to prove it - theories that were eventually proven wrong - so I went from being able to believe that 2+2=5 and from being completely unattached to the outcome to being able to rationally deduced that 2+2=4 and that my belief about 2+2=5 was wrong - if someone were to come up with a way to demonstrate 2+2=5, I could change my belief in 2+2=4 in a heartbeat, but now I want some really good proof before I change my belief because I have invested a lot of time and thought into destroying my belief in 2+2=5.

THIS IS THE IMPORTANT PART!

I chose to believe in 2+2=5, applied my reason to my faith, found the object of my faith to be false and changed my belief from 2+2=5 to 2+2=4 based on incontrovertible evidence of the validity of 2+2=4.

So when I was asked if I, with free will, could believe in 2+2=5 and I answered yes, I could, because I had, and could again . . . now - is that not an answer to TCD’s question? Seems like an answer to me.

Now substitute in any other belief you want, and I have done the exact same thing to come to the beliefs I hold to be true today - I have the free will to chose what I believe, the reason to understand and to challenge what I believe and the judgment to discern for myself what I will or will not retain as a belief based on the evidence and results of those challenges.

I will say it again - you will not find many people like me who have invested the time and energy it takes to build a belief system from absolute zero - but I would recommend the process to each and every one of you . . .

[/quote]

811

How many history and sociology college texts and articles are you going to throw out the window with your own version of history? Are you going to claim that christian women were not mistreated in the middle ages in the name of god? Are you going to pretend that the inquisistion is not a part of christian history because it doesn’t match your belief of the correct way to apply the bible?

I know personally know christian women who have been encouraged to stay in abusive relationships by their christian church, and not just one church/denomination, or one woman. It has gotten better, but it’s still happening today. Islam is 600 years younger, so one can only guess that it’s going to take them at least a few more years to figure out the “correct translation” of their texts concerning women. Hopefully it doesn’t take nearly as long as it did for the christians or we may not survive that.

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
Oleena wrote:
My point, which you’re still missing, broken down further:

Islam was completed as a religion about 1400 years ago, christianity came fully into existance about 2000 years ago, meaning that Islam is 600 years younger than christianity.

About 600 years ago in the 1300s, christianity was taking over paganism by force, through bloodshed and starvation, and spread over into other countries through the bloody means of the inquisistion, which everyone loves to forget and make escuses for.As for women: Most women of the Middle Ages were totally dominated by men. Any man in the family could order a woman to do as he wished. If a woman refused, she was beat into submission, as disobedience was considered a crime against God.

^^^^Huh. That’s a lot like Islamic religion right now. Weird.

Wow - you have the Sesame Street version of history down pat . . . . good for you . . . makes sense since most of your views are based in gross oversimplifications and horrible generalizations . . . but good luck with that! [/quote]

812

[quote]Oleena wrote:
Well that’s a huge relief. So what is your system for deciding truth regarding ultimate questions?

[/quote]

that’s it? - you go from mocking my answers to “that’s a huge relief”? I deal with every issue, objection and comment you post and you never manage to acknowledge it. Instead you jump off into a new topic like nothing ever happened.

Go bother someone else . . .

813

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
Oleena wrote:
Well that’s a huge relief. So what is your system for deciding truth regarding ultimate questions?

that’s it? - you go from mocking my answers to “that’s a huge relief”? I deal with every issue, objection and comment you post and you never manage to acknowledge it. Instead you jump off into a new topic like nothing ever happened.

Go bother someone else . . .[/quote]

Longest troll job on record? Heh.

814

[quote]Oleena wrote:
How many history and sociology college texts and articles are you going to throw out the window with your own version of history? Are you going to claim that christian women were not mistreated in the middle ages in the name of god? Are you going to pretend that the inquisistion is not a part of christian history because it doesn’t match your belief of the correct way to apply the bible?

I know personally know christian women who have been encouraged to stay in abusive relationships by their christian church, and not just one church/denomination, or one woman. It has gotten better, but it’s still happening today. Islam is 600 years younger, so one can only guess that it’s going to take them at least a few more years to figure out the “correct translation” of their texts concerning women. Hopefully it doesn’t take nearly as long as it did for the christians or we may not survive that.

[/quote]

sunshine - i’ve read the histories, I have the texts, i’ve studied the accounts - you simplified thousands of years, hundreds of societies, many religious movements, uncountable individual lives down to a horrible generalization of history to try to prove your point - now who’s throwing out histories and texts? That would be you - just in case you missed it.

People with my Christian beliefs were being tortured and killed by other Christians just a few centuries ago - so don’t try to lecture me on what evil men can do in the name of a religion. My point was that the plain teaching of Christianity (as taught by Christ and the apostles - you know, in the beginning?) had to be grossly altered in horrible ways to even try to justify the mistreatment of women, not that it didn’t happen. Which is the opposite of what occurs in Islam - how plain do I have to say that for you to be able to understand it?

Nice effort to skip (once again) the points I raised for you . . .

Like I said above - go bother someone else . . . .

815

[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
Oleena wrote:
Well that’s a huge relief. So what is your system for deciding truth regarding ultimate questions?

that’s it? - you go from mocking my answers to “that’s a huge relief”? I deal with every issue, objection and comment you post and you never manage to acknowledge it. Instead you jump off into a new topic like nothing ever happened.

Go bother someone else . . .

Longest troll job on record? Heh. [/quote]

Yeah - my tolerance and compassion makes a victim of me yet again . . .

816

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
katzenjammer wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
Oleena wrote:
Well that’s a huge relief. So what is your system for deciding truth regarding ultimate questions?

that’s it? - you go from mocking my answers to “that’s a huge relief”? I deal with every issue, objection and comment you post and you never manage to acknowledge it. Instead you jump off into a new topic like nothing ever happened.

Go bother someone else . . .

Longest troll job on record? Heh.

Yeah - my tolerance and compassion makes a victim of me yet again . . .[/quote]

Don’t worry - while you’re enraptured in eternity, Oleena will be forced to read this thread over and over and over again. It’s gonna be hell.

817

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
Oleena wrote:
Well that’s a huge relief. So what is your system for deciding truth regarding ultimate questions?

that’s it? - you go from mocking my answers to “that’s a huge relief”? I deal with every issue, objection and comment you post and you never manage to acknowledge it. Instead you jump off into a new topic like nothing ever happened.[/quote]The fact that you consider this a new topic and do not see what it has to do with our previous discussion or why I was frightened of your original answers to the_clamp_downs questions is simply amazing>>So what is your system for deciding truth regarding ultimate questions?

[quote]Go bother someone else . . .[/quote] Buddy, you answered my thread and I have been responding to you for that reason. I guess this is another example of your weird reasoning. If you feel bothered by me, why engage in my thread?

818

[quote]Oleena wrote:
<<< My questions regarding christianity involve the here and now ethical and cultural effects.
[/quote]

There is nothing superior about me. I apologize if I came off that way. I know much better than that. Epistemology is the word philosophers gave to the question of how we know anything at all. Every single person that ever existed has an epistemology even if they’ve never heard of that word. It’s the all governing underlying assumption from which flows every other conclusion.

[quote]Romans 1:18-23
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four footed beasts, and creeping things.[/quote]

Above is a concise exposition of Biblical epistemology. Embedded in the very existence of every human being is the inescapable knowledge that they are created in his image. Every particle of everything, and especially themselves, indeed their very fact-ness screams in unmistakable universal language that he is there and they are accountable to him while their every thought word and action is a concerted personal campaign to convince themselves that that is not the case.

Once it is assumed that a God who creates universes by fiat command is in charge or not, all other debates are over. Those are the only 2 epistemological positions. We are witnessing in glaring grotesque fashion as I type this exactly what happens the further a society moves from allowing itself to be influenced by the former.

At the risk of sounding arrogant I haven’t heard an argument even remotely new to me in opposition to this in at least 20 years. Yes, I’ve seen all the science and where some claim to find facts that disprove what I believe I find an ever expanding empirical catalog of his mind numbing “eternal power and Godhead”. I’ve had this debate more times than I can count face to face with more kinds of people than you’d probably believe and I welcome the opportunity to do so again. I promised myself I would never get into this on an internet forum and I should’ve stood by that.

820

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
Oleena wrote:
How many history and sociology college texts and articles are you going to throw out the window with your own version of history? Are you going to claim that christian women were not mistreated in the middle ages in the name of god? Are you going to pretend that the inquisistion is not a part of christian history because it doesn’t match your belief of the correct way to apply the bible?

I know personally know christian women who have been encouraged to stay in abusive relationships by their christian church, and not just one church/denomination, or one woman. It has gotten better, but it’s still happening today. Islam is 600 years younger, so one can only guess that it’s going to take them at least a few more years to figure out the “correct translation” of their texts concerning women. Hopefully it doesn’t take nearly as long as it did for the christians or we may not survive that.

sunshine - i’ve read the histories, I have the texts, i’ve studied the accounts - you simplified thousands of years, hundreds of societies, many religious movements, uncountable individual lives down to a horrible generalization of history to try to prove your point - now who’s throwing out histories and texts? That would be you - just in case you missed it.

People with my Christian beliefs were being tortured and killed by other Christians[/quote] The fact that you know this and still don’t have a problem with christianity is mindboggling [quote]just a few centuries ago - so don’t try to lecture me on what evil men can do in the name of a religion. My point was that the plain teaching of Christianity (as taught by Christ and the apostles - you know, in the beginning?) had to be grossly altered in horrible ways to even try to justify the mistreatment of women, not that it didn’t happen.[/quote] It doesn’t have to be altered that far. [quote] Which is the opposite of what occurs in Islam - how plain do I have to say that for you to be able to understand it?[/quote] And how clear do I have to make it that some Islamics argue the same thing that you do about christianity- that much of their society is miscontruing their texts and that the texts do not mean to condone the mistreatment of women?

You say you have personal experience with Islamic religion and that their relgion does condone the abuse of women and that their society is based off of that religion.

I say that I have personal experience with christian religion and that I have personally witnessed that the religion condones the abuse of women and that not current society, but past society has been based off of christianity.

Then you tell me that the two are different because the many christians have mistinterpreted christiantiy. I point out that some Islams feel the same way about other Islams. You then get pissed and point out that you have personal experience with Islam and your vantage point is that the society is based off the religion and that therefore the society must have correctly interpretted the Islamic texts. At which point this discussion repeats itself.

[quote]Nice effort to skip (once again) the points I raised for you . . .

Like I said above - go bother someone else . . . .[/quote]<<Once again you act like a persecuted victim who lacks the free will to get the fuck out of my thread :smiley: