[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
ephrem wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:No wonder you don;t like Christianity - you don’t even know what it is . . .
…if i don’t know what it is, then how can i not like it? Besides, over 1100 recognized branches of christianity exist, so what kind of christian are you?
the true kind . . .[/quote]
See this is the kind of thing that puts me off. When you say you are a “true” Christian. How do you know that?
[quote]ephrem wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
ephrem wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:No wonder you don;t like Christianity - you don’t even know what it is . . .
…if i don’t know what it is, then how can i not like it? Besides, over 1100 recognized branches of christianity exist, so what kind of christian are you?
the true kind . . .
…lol, then there must be untrue kinds of christians as well, eh? You can’t even agree on what to believe is true within the same religion, and you deny something that has been proven to be true? Yeah, that makes sense…
[/quote]
wow -figured that out on your own. Pardon my facetious reply (the true kind). It was a poor attempt at humor knowing how you would respond given the generally nature of this subject.
The reality is, by the definition of true - that yes are false variations on the Christian faith . . . taken into the larger context, there would have to be variations on monotheism and polytheism that would have to false, to a larger context there would have to be variations of deism that would have to false and in the larger context there would have to be variations of atheism/theism that would have to false - didn’t realize we had to take the trouble to state all of the obvious permutations of a simple construct - if we do,we will undoubtedly overwhelm the servers . . .
[quote]ephrem wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
ephrem wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:No wonder you don;t like Christianity - you don’t even know what it is . . .
…if i don’t know what it is, then how can i not like it? Besides, over 1100 recognized branches of christianity exist, so what kind of christian are you?
the true kind . . .
…lol, then there must be untrue kinds of christians as well, eh? You can’t even agree on what to believe is true within the same religion, and you deny something that has been proven to be true? Yeah, that makes sense…
[/quote]
I assume you are referring to your non-religious scientific evolutionism - well good for you - because you are all obviously in agreement on that one . . .let’s keep that discussion in its thread for now.
Did you find him yet Mak?
[quote]Makavali wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
ephrem wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:No wonder you don;t like Christianity - you don’t even know what it is . . .
…if i don’t know what it is, then how can i not like it? Besides, over 1100 recognized branches of christianity exist, so what kind of christian are you?
the true kind . . .
See this is the kind of thing that puts me off. When you say you are a “true” Christian. How do you know that?[/quote]
Again - let me apologize for a facetious reply - it was meant to entertain and instead has apparently dredged up horrible suppressed memories of some horrific sunday school experience - sheesh . . . .
now, do I believe I am on the path of true understanding about life, the universe, God, etc. Yes, because I am constantly challenging my beliefs to see if any ever ring false. As I have said dozens of times now - I demand extraordinary proof for extraordinary claims. I have dismissed many religions as false because I can verifiably point to their origins and errors.
As I stated earlier in this thread - my faith is based on a reasoned and rational examination of the world around me. That’s why I don’t fit on Varg’s denominational tree and why you will find my Christian faith much more challenging than your run-of-the-mill pablum you have encountered along your journey.
Fair enough?
[quote]Makavali wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
ephrem wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:No wonder you don;t like Christianity - you don’t even know what it is . . .
…if i don’t know what it is, then how can i not like it? Besides, over 1100 recognized branches of christianity exist, so what kind of christian are you?
the true kind . . .
See this is the kind of thing that puts me off. When you say you are a “true” Christian. How do you know that?[/quote]
Why does it put you off? If you don’t find Christianity true at all, what does it matter that Christians may disagree as to how much truth each denomination may or may not contain?
[quote]Makavali wrote:
Well not really. But I have been looking at the philosophies of Buddhism, and they really piqued my interest.
(So yes, I’m still a Godless heathen “insert smiley face”)
Here’s an really great read “Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism” writen by Chogyam Trungpa. It open my eye’s to Buddhism, I’ve never looked back.
[quote]Growing_Boy wrote:
Did you find him yet Mak?[/quote]
Outside Barnes and Noble. Nice guy, sold me a bag of weed.
[quote]streamline wrote:
Makavali wrote:
Well not really. But I have been looking at the philosophies of Buddhism, and they really piqued my interest.
(So yes, I’m still a Godless heathen “insert smiley face”)
Here’s an really great read “Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism” writen by Chogyam Trungpa. It open my eye’s to Buddhism, I’ve never looked back.
[/quote]
Thanks, can I pick that up at any bookshop?
Regarding the original post I will say that if you do end up being Buddhism that will probably put a damper on most other aspects of your life.
I’ve been to Buddhist monasteries in the Far East and from what the monks have said I gather that if you truly believe in Buddhism than you would have to dedicate your life to achieving Nirvana.
Some of the monks didn’t really understand how a person could be a Buddhist and not be part of a Monastery where you could spend all your day reading and discussing scripture as well as mediating all in an attempt to attain nirvana.
Of course this view might be specific to whatever branch of Buddhism the monastery was.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
streamline wrote:
Makavali wrote:
Well not really. But I have been looking at the philosophies of Buddhism, and they really piqued my interest.
(So yes, I’m still a Godless heathen “insert smiley face”)
Here’s an really great read “Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism” writen by Chogyam Trungpa. It open my eye’s to Buddhism, I’ve never looked back.
Thanks, can I pick that up at any bookshop?[/quote]
Yes you should be able to. His writings are very popular. He is a Tibetain Monk educated at Harvard. This is important because there is no for translation and therefore no mistranslations. Enjoy the read.
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
forlife wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
Same challenge - bring it 
Don’t you agree that the god of the old testament is jealous, petty, vindictive, capricious, and cruel? He gets a much needed facelift in the new testament, thank…god.
As I mentioned in the other post - if we are to have this discussion, we need to know what the ground rules are.
Are we discussing from a position that accepts scripture as infallible? Are we discussing from a position that holds scripture is just mythology? It’s important to know the context because that affects quite a bit about the discussion.
For example, if we are going to hold that scripture is literal - that will affect a lot of the interpretations. If we hold it is figurative a lot of things - for example miracles - go out the window.
The pre-suppositions made about the bible by most people completely change how it is read and understood.
So in what context are we to discuss this?[/quote]
From my perspective, the bible (and every other holy book) is an interesting cultural commentary on man’s search for meaning in the universe, but it is nothing more than that. I don’t take anything literal in any of these books.
But the more relevant question is how you perceive the bible. For example, do you believe that “god” actually commanded Israel to commit infanticide against their enemies?
[quote]Vegita wrote:
forlife wrote:
Vegita wrote:
This is wrong, He provides you with existence and opportunity. Anything else and you would take him for granted.
If that’s the case, why do people bother to pray? No reason to ask for blessings if your god gives you nothing beyond existence and opportunity.
Speaking of which, what about the millions of people that never receive even basic existence and opportunity (killed during childbirth, born brain dead, etc.)? Does their god not care about them?
You really need to think long and hard about omnipotence, Omniscience, omnipresence, etc… To imply that god cares about some and does not care about others one must look at what caring means.
Care - to have an inclination, liking, fondness, or affection (usually fol. by for): Would you care for dessert? I don’t care for him very much
So to imply that god has a liking for something must imply that he has a dislike for something as well. For he can’t like all things, or he would also like the situation of a baby born during birth. And to imply that god has a dislike for something, one must assume that god does not have the power to change things he dislikes, If he did have the power to change things he disliked, then everything in existance would be things god liked, back again to the very real situations where babies die.
Another possibility is that god is not actually good, but instead indifferent, he doesn’t care if people live or die, he doesnt care period, he already knows all outcomes of all things so what would there be to care about. Also god doesn’t ask people to pray, people tell people to pray. God has never told me to pray, and I don’t believe accounts of other people, If god is all powerful he has no reason to communicate to me through a really really old book, which isn’t even written in a language I can read. So know I have to trust origional human authors, then further trust more human translators etc…
If god really wanted me to pray, I think he would simply ask me to. And also, how could god WANT anything, Simply the act of wanting, means you lack something. the notion of god implies he does not lack anything, therefore he cannot want, and i’m sure if god didn’t have everything, and he did in fact want something, it wouldn’t be for me to pray. It’s really a silly notion.
V[/quote]
Ok, just trying to understand where you are coming from. Many Christians of course disagree with you, since they believe “god” is in fact benevolent, omniscient, and omnipotent.
As Epicurus summarized:
If a perfectly good god exists, then there is no evil in the world.
There is evil in the world.
Therefore, a perfectly good god does not exist.
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
It is this denial of Christ, according to scripture, that condemns all unrepentant/unsaved men to eternal damnation - as long as they deny God’s work on their behalf, they cannot accept his salvation.
[/quote]
What if the denial is born out of a sincere belief that Jesus was not the son of God and the Savior of the world, but at best was just another human being trying to find his way in life? What if you have read the bible numerous times, and even spent many years believing that Jesus was the Savior, only to realize later in your spiritual journey that Jesus was just a man after all?
Would a just and benevolent God condemn you based on the sincere pursuit of truth?
[quote]Makavali wrote:
No one actually knows where NZ is.[/quote]
I lived in NSW for a couple of years and have several Kiwi friends, so guess I’m an exception to the rule.
[quote]forlife wrote:
Makavali wrote:
No one actually knows where NZ is.
I lived in NSW for a couple of years and have several Kiwi friends, so guess I’m an exception to the rule.[/quote]
I’ve looked at a map, so I guess I am too.
[quote]forlife wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
forlife wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
Same challenge - bring it
Don’t you agree that the god of the old testament is jealous, petty, vindictive, capricious, and cruel? He gets a much needed facelift in the new testament, thank…god.
As I mentioned in the other post - if we are to have this discussion, we need to know what the ground rules are.
Are we discussing from a position that accepts scripture as infallible? Are we discussing from a position that holds scripture is just mythology? It’s important to know the context because that affects quite a bit about the discussion.
For example, if we are going to hold that scripture is literal - that will affect a lot of the interpretations. If we hold it is figurative a lot of things - for example miracles - go out the window.
The pre-suppositions made about the bible by most people completely change how it is read and understood.
So in what context are we to discuss this?
From my perspective, the bible (and every other holy book) is an interesting cultural commentary on man’s search for meaning in the universe, but it is nothing more than that. I don’t take anything literal in any of these books.
But the more relevant question is how you perceive the bible. For example, do you believe that “god” actually commanded Israel to commit infanticide against their enemies?
[/quote]
Kewl - well, if you don’t take them literally, why would my opinion about it matter?
[quote]forlife wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
It is this denial of Christ, according to scripture, that condemns all unrepentant/unsaved men to eternal damnation - as long as they deny God’s work on their behalf, they cannot accept his salvation.
What if the denial is born out of a sincere belief that Jesus was not the son of God and the Savior of the world, but at best was just another human being trying to find his way in life? What if you have read the bible numerous times, and even spent many years believing that Jesus was the Savior, only to realize later in your spiritual journey that Jesus was just a man after all?
Would a just and benevolent God condemn you based on the sincere pursuit of truth?[/quote]
Are you asking what I believe about Christianity and what it says, or are you asking what I think as an individual watching your search for truth?
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
Kewl - well, if you don’t take them literally, why would my opinion about it matter?[/quote]
Well, you said “bring it on” or somesuch…so I thought you were going to provide objective evidence supporting your stance that it (or at least parts of it) should be taken literally. No prob if that wasn’t your objective.