Only One Truth

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
282

lothario1132, I requested that an accredited theologian or historian be cited to prove any alleged similarities between Christianity & Hinduism. That site fails to fulfill this criteria. Second of all, the site you posted bears no information as to how the idea of a Triune God was transmitted from the Hindues to the Christians. It tries to associate Saint Paul’s teachings with the Hindu religion, while all scholars recognize the fact that St. Paul was a devout Jew before converting to the Christian Faith. You’ve proven nothing. Maybe others find the site interesting - I didn’t. I can attack the points in that site one-by-one and the information listed therein will sink quicker than a canoe gettin pierced by a torpedo.

I could make all sorts of inferences by observing similarities between any two people/cultures/religions, etc. To actually allege (as pookie did) that one borrows from the other is a critical statement that needs to be supported by credible evidence.

This goes for ANYONE making all kinds of wild claims they try to pass off as being scientifically or historically acknowledged:
PUT UP OR SHUT UP!

283

mertdawg,
Our opponent is proven to be a hypocrite who fails to live up to his own standards of criticism and debate. He first fills in the cracks of his belief system with sheer speculation and then has the audacity to claim that the Bible can be read by simply using one’s own “power of reasoning”.

Let us contrast this double-standard he so conveniently applies:

[quote]opponent wrote:
Mertdawg your reply embodies my rejection of your take on scripture. The scripture is very clear and simple and you summarily add your own idea, that is not in the scripture, and come to a ‘conclusion’.[/quote]
And later says:

[quote]opponent wrote:
8?Philip said to him: ?Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.?
(If Philip felt he had literally just seen the Father, in Jesus, why would he ask this question?)

9?Jesus said to him: ?Have I been with YOU men so long a time, and yet, Philip, you have not come to KNOW me? He that has seen me has seen the Father [also]. How is it you say, ?Show us the Father??

A lot of comments from Jesus about the importance of KNOWING him aren’t there? If Jesus was actually God and was saying that to physically see him was to physically see his Father, to know him was irrelevant. Any ol’ passerby who saw Jesus, without even knowing who he was, had just physically seen God if that was what Jesus words meant. No, but obviously Jesus was not talking about physically seeing the Father but that when they came to the realization that KNOWING Jesus was to ‘SEE’ or KNOW the Father they wouldn’t ask to physically see the Father, being as it was unnecessary as they were ‘one’ in thought, objective and purpose. Take note that Philip and the others clearly did not think Jesus and the Father were the same individual, hence his question.[/quote]
Two sentences from Scripture elicited an entire commentary on his part, all in attempts to prove his view that Jesus Christ is not God (which the Bible never states). Yet he accuses you of “adding your own idea” and “drawing your own conclusions.”

Again, his hypocrisy will be revealed:

[quote]opponent wrote:
First, I don’t interpret anything. Let the bible interpret itself.[/quote]
And later says:

[quote]opponent wrote:
And the ‘teach them to observe’ part. If you knew your bible you’d recognize NOBODY became a Christian without being taught. No, simply reading the bible(or part thereof) would leave you in the same boat as the Ethiopian Eunuch who answered Philip’s question if he knew what he was reading(from Isaiah) with the words ‘How could I ever do so unless someone guided me?’[/quote]
In the first instance, he proclaims that the Bible sufficiently expresses itself. In the second instance, our opponent proclaims that we need to be guided and taught to understand any passages in the Bible. Seems he now abandons his ardent defense for the “power of reasoning” and the simple clarity of Biblical passages.

Next, I’d like to draw attention to a severe error on our opponent’s part. In attempts to justify his faulty view that the Bible is completely sufficient for the righteous man, he proclaims this:

[quote]opponent wrote:
The apostles had God’s spirit and were able to understand and teach the bible. They certainly did not deviate from what it said though. Their teaching was BASED ON THE BIBLE nothing else.[/quote]
Our opponent says that the teachings of the Apostles were based upon the Bible, even though the Bible was not compiled until hundreds of years after all the Apostles died. Any scriptures in the Bible had not yet even begun to be written until around 52 AD. If there was no Bible, then what were the Apostles teaching Christians from 33 AD to 52 AD; they were orally transmitting the teachings & traditions of Jesus Christ to the faithful.

This concept is a strongpoint in our favor that our opponent still continues to evade. Armed with the knowledge of the Faith, if the Truth is with us, who can stand against us?

Peace be with you brother!

284

[quote]stellar_horizon wrote:
Assuredly, whoever does not believe in the Lord & Savior Jesus Christ will not enter the kingdom of God. Bye-bye to all the non-Christians…

As for Protestants & Roman Catholics… Protestants fail to meet this standard; ie. when Jesus Christ commands His faithful to partake of the Eucharist so they may inherit eternal life and the Protestants fail to adhere to this teaching, what does logic imply that their final fate shall be?

Regarding the Roman Catholics, they have the traditions but they’re teachings are substantially corrupted with heresy; the Bible explains that heretics will not enter the kingdom of God.
[/quote]

That is so freakin’ awesome! Everyone is going to hell but you guys. What a truly original theological perspective that is! You have the ONE TRUE teaching! And therefore you are right and everyone else is wrong and they are going to burn in hell forever if they don’t believe in your loving God! Or even if they do believe in Him, but don’t eat the crackers just the right way.

I congratulate you on having chosen the one true religion in all the earth.

Oh, speaking of the way Jesus did things, you know the last supper was Kosher, right? Jesus was an observant Jew. As were his disciples. He also said that not “one jot or one tittle” of the law should pass till “heaven and earth pass.” Last time I checked, neither heaven nor earth passed.

What? Paul taught differently? Really? Well, what would Jesus say about that: "Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven."

So, I’m sure you have not fallen for the other heresy that the torah is irrelevant, since Jesus followed torah law and talked about its importance until the end of time.

Because we all know, heretics don’t get into heaven.

285

[quote]stellar_horizon wrote:
This goes for ANYONE making all kinds of wild claims they try to pass off as being scientifically or historically acknowledged:
PUT UP OR SHUT UP!
[/quote]

I know what you said chief, but I did mention that the site didn’t try to make any claims as to any influences or origins for either religion. Nor was I trying to infer as such.

Face it, man… Hindu and Christian beliefs have a lot in common. What’s so bad about that? I think it’s remarkable that IF they did arise independently of each other, what a coincidence it is that they both share so much in their respective trinities, the idea of a savior, etc.

Don’t you think that’s cool?

P.S. I AM WRITING IN BOLD AND ALL CAPS NOW!!!

:slight_smile:

286

futuredave: You sound bitter, man. I formally welcome you into the ranks of those who are destined for eternal pain. You see, the funny thing here is that stellar doesn’t realize that only mormons make it into heaven.

287

mertdawg,
Our opponent is a brilliant master of the strawman tactic. Not only does he fail to address any of our strongpoints, but his reverence towards God & the Scriptures is swiftly deteriorating.

First let us review his comments on Biblical passages:

[quote]stellar_horizon wrote:
It’s obvious our opponent fails to accept the early Church dogma on the the Holy Trinity which manifests Itself in Three Persons by the Essence of One God; the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The Trinity is one of the deepest mysteries of the inner life of God. Since God in His essence is one, then all of God’s characteristics - His immortality, omnipotence, omnipresence, and others belong in equal measure to all Three Persons of the Holy Trinity. In other words, the Son of God and the Holy Spirit are eternal and omnipotent, as is God the Father.

Aside from Apostolic teachings that bore testimony to the Holy Trinity, the plurality of the Triune God is indicated in the Old Testament as well as the New Testament.

Genesis 1:26
“Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.”
opponent wrote:
Us, uhhhhhhh, usually refers to more than one person. Perhaps God was schizophrenic and liked talking to himself?[/quote]
All readers should examine this response. How further from anything rational is his reply. Guess this was the “power of reason” he brags about having.

[quote]stellar_horizon wrote:
Genesis 3:22
“Behold, the man is become as one of us.”
opponent wrote:
Ditto.[/quote]
And again…

[quote]stellar_horizon wrote:
Genesis 11:7
“Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language.”
opponent wrote:
Ditto again.[/quote]
And again…

[quote]stellar_horizon wrote:
1 John 5:7
“For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.”
opponent wrote:
There you go again using highly disputed scripture texts to try and prop yourself up. The wording you quote above has been firmly established as spurious to the authentic Greek text which reads: ?For there are three witness bearers, the spirit and the water and the blood, and the three are in agreement." A verse altered by those wishing to support the Trinity belief.[/quote]
Then he strawmans the obvious plurality of the Triune God by claiming I’ve used four passages of “disputed scripture” to support the dogma of the Holy Trinity. Also important to note, the passage our opponent cites above is not 1 John 5:7, but 1 John 5:8. Yet another blunder on his part.

After citing four passages from the Bible that verify the early Church dogma on the Holy Trinity, our opponent puts forth no rational explanation to his defense. Rather, he deflects our attention to a 4th century biographer who bears no relevance on the matter! Let’s witness his final response:

[quote]stellar_horizon wrote:
Our opponent rejects the early Church dogma of a Triune God because he lacks the mental capacity, as do all humans, to understand this unfathomable mystery. The most edifying manner by which this dogma can be presented is described by the Holy Equal-to-the-Apostles Cyril in 869 AD during a discussion with Muslims when he pointed to the sun and said to them: “See, in the sky there stands a shining circle, and from it light is born and warmth is emitted. God the Father, like the solar disk, is without beginning or end. From Him, the Son of God is born, like light from the sun, and as warmth goes from the sun together with rays of light, proceeds the Holy Spirit. Each can distinguish separately the solar disk, and light, and warmth, but the sun is one in the sky. So is the Holy Trinity: three Persons in Him, but one and indivisible God.”

http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/god.htm

May this be edifying for all those rejecting the early Church dogma of a Holy Trinity.

opponent wrote:
Stella, I’m sure you know the name Eusebius Pamphili from the Nicean Council. He put his name to that council decision. HOWEVER, did he really subscribe to its views? These espressions of his recorded by his biographer Valesius give us the answer: ?As not inquiring into truths which admit of investigation is indolence, so prying into others, where the scrutiny is inexpedient, is audacity. Into what truths ought we then to search? Those which we find recorded in the Scriptures. But what we do not find recorded there, LET US NOT SEARCH AFTER. For had knowledge of them been incumbent upon us, the Holy Spirit would doubtless have placed them there .?.?. Let not anything that is written be blotted out .?.?. Speak what is written and the strife will be abandoned.?

Might do you good to re-read that a few times.[/quote]
Absolutely none of his replies were of any use or relevance. Our opponent realizes he has no defense against our strongpoints [heat seeking missiles] so he launches the strawman tactic [firebursts] so he can live to fight another day.

I’ve got two words for our opponent:
ENEMY DOWN.

Peace be with you brother. This mission is accomplished.

288

[quote]futuredave wrote:
So, I’m sure you have not fallen for the other heresy that the torah is irrelevant, since Jesus followed torah law and talked about its importance until the end of time.

Because we all know, heretics don’t get into heaven.[/quote]

The Law was fulfilled in Christ, so the Torah is no longer the exclusive guide for spiritual direction. Orthodox Christians abide by the teachings and traditions of the Apostles. Basically, if the Apostles taught it, we must do it. Why? Because they were appointed by Jesus Christ, God Incarnate, to lead the faithful into a sound Christian upbringing. Certain things in the Torah are not to be followed; ie. stoning to death an adulterous wife or a loose-tongued child. Be careful about how you understand the spiritual maturity of God’s people or else you might get arrested and spend hard time in the slammer!

What’s your zip code? You sound pretty amped up about Orthodox Christianity. That’s the spirit!

289

[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
Face it, man… Hindu and Christian beliefs have a lot in common. What’s so bad about that? I think it’s remarkable that IF they did arise independently of each other, what a coincidence it is that they both share so much in their respective trinities, the idea of a savior, etc.[/quote]

lothario, whether it’s cool or not I guess that’s for every individual to decide by their own opinion or experience. I do know one thing though. God has a desire for all of us to be on the right path. A million paths lead to hell while only one path leads to heaven. Certain religions have concepts that bear a small fraction of truth about God. Hinduism may convey, I don’t know, 5% truth? I have no clue. The rest of their theology is based upon demon worship. Jesus Christ tells us that we must find 100% of the Truth and nothing less. That’s Orthodox Christianity.

Check out that link I sent you. Peace be with you.

290

God doesn’t even exist, because :smiley:

291

[quote]stellar_horizon wrote:
mertdawg,
Our opponent is a brilliant master of the strawman tactic. Not only does he fail to address any of our strongpoints, but his reverence towards God & the Scriptures is swiftly deteriorating.

First let us review his comments on Biblical passages:

stellar_horizon wrote:
It’s obvious our opponent fails to accept the early Church dogma on the the Holy Trinity which manifests Itself in Three Persons by the Essence of One God; the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The Trinity is one of the deepest mysteries of the inner life of God. Since God in His essence is one, then all of God’s characteristics - His immortality, omnipotence, omnipresence, and others belong in equal measure to all Three Persons of the Holy Trinity. In other words, the Son of God and the Holy Spirit are eternal and omnipotent, as is God the Father.

Aside from Apostolic teachings that bore testimony to the Holy Trinity, the plurality of the Triune God is indicated in the Old Testament as well as the New Testament.

Genesis 1:26
“Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.”

opponent wrote:
Us, uhhhhhhh, usually refers to more than one person. Perhaps God was schizophrenic and liked talking to himself?

All readers should examine this response. How further from anything rational is his reply.
Guess this was the “power of reason” he brags about having.

stellar_horizon wrote:
Genesis 3:22
“Behold, the man is become as one of us.”
opponent wrote:
Ditto.
And again…

stellar_horizon wrote:
Genesis 11:7
“Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language.”
opponent wrote:
Ditto again.
And again…

stellar_horizon wrote:
1 John 5:7
“For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.”

opponent wrote:
There you go again using highly disputed scripture texts to try and prop yourself up. The wording you quote above has been firmly established as spurious to the authentic Greek text which reads: ?For there are three witness bearers, the spirit and the water and the blood, and the three are in agreement." A verse altered by those wishing to support the Trinity belief.

Then he strawmans the obvious plurality of the Triune God by claiming I’ve used four passages of “disputed scripture” to support the dogma of the Holy Trinity. Also important to note, the passage our opponent cites above is not 1 John 5:7, but 1 John 5:8. Yet another blunder on his part.

After citing four passages from the Bible that verify the early Church dogma on the Holy Trinity, our opponent puts forth no rational explanation to his defense. Rather, he deflects our attention to a 4th century biographer who bears no relevance on the matter! Let’s witness his final response:

stellar_horizon wrote:
Our opponent rejects the early Church dogma of a Triune God because he lacks the mental capacity, as do all humans, to understand this unfathomable mystery. The most edifying manner by which this dogma can be presented is described by the Holy Equal-to-the-Apostles Cyril in 869 AD during a discussion with Muslims when he pointed to the sun and said to them: “See, in the sky there stands a shining circle, and from it light is born and warmth is emitted. God the Father, like the solar disk, is without beginning or end. From Him, the Son of God is born, like light from the sun, and as warmth goes from the sun together with rays of light, proceeds the Holy Spirit. Each can distinguish separately the solar disk, and light, and warmth, but the sun is one in the sky. So is the Holy Trinity: three Persons in Him, but one and indivisible God.”

http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/god.htm

May this be edifying for all those rejecting the early Church dogma of a Holy Trinity.

opponent wrote:
Stella, I’m sure you know the name Eusebius Pamphili from the Nicean Council. He put his name to that council decision. HOWEVER, did he really subscribe to its views? These espressions of his recorded by his biographer Valesius give us the answer: ?As not inquiring into truths which admit of investigation is indolence, so prying into others, where the scrutiny is inexpedient, is audacity. Into what truths ought we then to search? Those which we find recorded in the Scriptures. But what we do not find recorded there, LET US NOT SEARCH AFTER. For had knowledge of them been incumbent upon us, the Holy Spirit would doubtless have placed them there .?.?. Let not anything that is written be blotted out .?.?. Speak what is written and the strife will be abandoned.?

Might do you good to re-read that a few times.
Absolutely none of his replies were of any use or relevance. Our opponent realizes he has no defense against our strongpoints [heat seeking missiles] so he launches the strawman tactic [firebursts] so he can live to fight another day.

I’ve got two words for our opponent:
ENEMY DOWN.

Peace be with you brother. This mission is accomplished.[/quote]

I must honestly express Stella, I have never met someone who activated less neurons before he expresses himself than you! I can just see you now foaming at the mouth, rocking back and forth stuttering and stammering as you repetitively mutter ‘Nope can’t beat me, nope can’t beat me’ while sticking your fingers in your ears.

Can’t wait till I get home from work and have time to ‘deal’ with you.

Signed your owner,
Fishlips

292

[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
mert: lol

But actually, it’s not logical at all. Even if we throw in Sulu and Chekov, too. And that fine chick with the nice rack that always wore blue and worked in the infirmary with Bones.

[/quote]

I think she was Roddenberrys wife.

293

[quote]makkun wrote:

The kind of T-Man that stands up against someone who resorts to an antisemitic tone when he’s not pleased with the answers of someone else, whom he “suspects” to be jewish. I hope I misunderstood you on that one, because that would massively suck.

As I said earlier, I know that mocking is perhaps not the right way of taking part in the discussion, but quite honestly, your holier-than-though attitude is indeed a bit overbearing at times; as is calling people liars when they don’t share your belief system.

Makkun[/quote]

So mocking Christians is OKAY, but if someone asks if another poster is Jewish, he’s all of assuden anti-Semetic? That’s rediculous.

If this has been addressed later on in the thread, I appologize, if not, think about it for a while.

Matthew9v9: not Jewish, fundamentalist, Orthodox, Roman Catholic, atheist, nor pagan.

(This thread has taken on a life of it’s own.)

294

[quote]pkradgreek wrote:
Realize that there is only one truth and any deviations from it make something a lie.[/quote]

That’s an interesting concept.

Can I apply it like this:

There are four gospels witnessing the life of Christ.

Those four gospels are not completely coincidental with one another; they do not relate the same events in the same way; and some completely omit events that other mention.

So, since there is only one thruth; we must deduce that at least 3 of the 4 gospels are lies; since “any deviation” from the thruth equals a lie.

It is also unlikely that there would be one completely correct gospel and three erroneous ones. The likelyhood would be for each gospel to contain a similar amount of “deviations” from the “One Truth”. I’m not even considering the various retranscriptions and translations; all of which have a high possibility of adding at least one “deviation”.

For “One Truth” to be possible, you’d have to know which gospel is the true one and be completely certain that there was never a single mistake made during its original redaction and subsequent retransriptions by thousands of faillible men.

Ergo, by your definition of “only one truth” all four gospels are lies. Following any church, be it orthodox, catholic, protestant, etc and I’ll skip a few means that you are following a church based on lies.

QED.

…of course, either that or your original “One Thruth” premise is crap.

295

Found a few moments here at work and would like to briefly respond to someone who’s thinking rationally but just missing a few points.

Pookie, you’re are doing what you should and using logic but after I’m done hopefully that logic will still kick in to acknowledge the logic behind the explanation.

Would we need 4 gospels if they all simply said the same thing? Only 1 gospel would be necessary then. The 4 gospels bring to life many different facets of Jesus life and ministry. Not all the apostles were present at all times together. Therefore ones would have heard and witnessed things others didn’t, at least not first hand. They also would have had different perspectives on the same events being different people with their own personalities, backgrounds etc. Luke was a physician so you’ll note at times he makes mention of specific physical maladies people had. Matthew was a tax collector and is more detailed with numbers etc. The important point is they don’t contadict each other.

An important point that is oftentimes lost on many is that the bible is God’s word. Would He not have the power to ensure it’s accuracy through time and translations? Some versions and translations will do a poorer job than others but it becomes readily evident when a direct effort to mislead is introduced as it disrupts the internal harmony of the scriptures and God will not allow the truth in his word to be completely obscured. Hence the regular encouragment in the scriptures to ‘look’ for truth, ‘search’ for it etc. denoting effort is involved which will be rewarded.

Does this response make sense and satisfy you? I trust your query was in sincerity and not simply argumentative.

296

[quote]Fishlips wrote:
I must honestly express Stella, I have never met someone who activated less neurons before he expresses himself than you! I can just see you now foaming at the mouth, rocking back and forth stuttering and stammering as you repetitively mutter ‘Nope can’t beat me, nope can’t beat me’ while sticking your fingers in your ears.

Can’t wait till I get home from work and have time to ‘deal’ with you.[/quote]

Bravo Fishlips! You copy & paste another post between me to mertdawg, of which I was careful not to mention your tag so as not continue publically embarassing you, but now you want to call me out?

Thanks for yet another brilliant use of the strawman tactic. Answer a f*ckin question and quit jumping off on tangents already! It’s obvious to everyone you have nothing to dish out but an endless supply of strawmen. Well, I’ve got enough heat-seeking missiles to burn em all down to the ground!

Three words for you:
CRASH AND BURN

297

Stella, you get one chance at this to prove that you just may have one iota of rationality to you.

This is a yes or no question, I’m keeping it simple for you.

Is the word ‘us’ used when more than one individual is involved?

If you get this wrong you have proven yourself incapable of intelligent discussion and I officially give up on this fruitless conversation.

298

[quote]Fishlips wrote:

The important point is they don’t contadict each other.

[/quote]

Jesus’ last words

Matt.27:46,50: “And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, “Eli, eli, lama sabachthani?” that is to say, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” …Jesus, when he cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.”

Luke23:46: “And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, “Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit:” and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.”

John19:30: “When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, “It is finished:” and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.”

Seems like they could have at least agreed upon the guy’s last words.

299

This is for Tank and Machine Gun, stop wasting your ammo. You know it is expensive. This land is barren and is not worth fighting for. You know the most important battle is the one engaged for your own soul so i find it best to fight that battle rather then battle the living dead. laters pk

300

If light has both wave characteristics, and particle characteristics, then which one of them is it. It is both. Maybe that will help with the Trinity analogy. laters pk

301

You have no ability to interpret the Gospel. You are trying to interpret to the author what the author wrote himself. You are not part and have no knowledge of the Gospel. Talk to us about something you do know about. maybe physics. laters pk