# Interesting......



## TheBishop (Apr 23, 2011)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity_and_intelligence


Now I certainly know this is not always the case, because I know and have met some extremely intelligent religious people.  I often wondered how they had the ability to set their logic aside. When asked it usually boiled down to them using faith as an escape.  Most of them are willingly  accept the possibility that they are wrong and are more tolerant of other people views.  

I have seen, in my personal experiences, the less educated individuals seem to be, the more intolerant, extreme and vigilant about religion the tend to be.  One only has to look as far as the middle east to see the examples.  I was a strong supporter for war in the middle east (I now know the situation is hopeless), but now realize without education, the religious extremism will continue.  

Now I consider myself educated, but by no means an academic.  One thing I was always taught, since my degrees are more philosophical, was:  Accept the possibility of other possibilities, but choose the possibility that is the most possible.  To me that's just logic and possibly the explanation of the correlation between religion and intelligence.


----------



## ted_BSR (Apr 23, 2011)

How about a study on the relationship between intelligence and using wikipedia as a source.


----------



## TheBishop (Apr 23, 2011)

I dint't cite it , nor did I say anything about it being factual.  I just found the information interesting.  The studies are real, and trust me if I was to write a paper I would not dare use wikipedia.


----------



## DavidB (Apr 23, 2011)

I would say that in general, the observation you put forth is true, however I would also point out that there is a huge difference between religion by definition, and a personal relationship with the Savior. I would put forth the fact that the greatest threat to Jesus' life and opposition to his teachings were religious people.  

I would also point out that some of the most faithful people are not necessarily all that educated. I say educated because some of the most intelligent people to ever live weren't necessarily well educated. There is always a point at which time an individual reaches the end of his/her intellect. What then? Faith is not necessarily a cop out, but an acknowledgment that there are absolutes in the world. Something that many " educated " people would argue. In which case the term intelligent becomes a misnomer.

In Hebrews 11:6 it states;

And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him. 

If one cannot acknowledge the truth of that, I guess all that is left is religion.

As for tolerance, an intelligent person will recognize that there should be a limit to how tolerant one should be. To doubt that would be to deny the reality of the condition this country finds itself in this very day.

As for me, would I have to choose between education and faith, give me faith every time.


----------



## ted_BSR (Apr 23, 2011)

TheBishop said:


> I dint't cite it , nor did I say anything about it being factual.  I just found the information interesting.  The studies are real, and trust me if I was to write a paper I would not dare use wikipedia.



Right, you just included it as the first line in your post. I am sure you didn't mean for anyone to take it seriously.


----------



## JFS (Apr 23, 2011)

DavidB said:


> a personal relationship with the Savior.



There it is again- personal "relationship" with something no one can demonstrate exists.  If you were 10 we'd write it off as your imaginary friend and hope you grow out of it.  People hear voices and we think they are crazy.  People claim a relationship with something no one can see, hear, or validate but that's ok when we call it religion   



> As for tolerance, an intelligent person will recognize that there should be a limit to how tolerant one should be. To doubt that would be to deny the reality of the condition this country finds itself in this very day.



How so?  The minorities getting too upity for you?




> As for me, would I have to choose between education and faith, give me faith every time



  Maybe you can find a Taliban meeting so you can all reminisce about the good old days before Copernicus and Galileo.


----------



## DavidB (Apr 23, 2011)

I am amazed at how quick you are to criticize something you apparently have no understanding of.

As for the racial remark, I don't know how you came to that conclusion. Do you really believe things are going well for America? I simply put forth the opinion that it is an excess of tolerance that has many things as screwed up as I believe they are today. Race has absolutely nothing to do with it.

And finally, my hope is not for the past but for the future. But I guess you wouldn't understand that either.

By the way, are you familiar with the expression " Ignorance gone to seed"?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 23, 2011)

DavidB said:


> I am amazed at how quick you are to criticize something you apparently have no understanding of.



For how long did you not believe in God?


----------



## DavidB (Apr 23, 2011)

bullethead said:


> For how long did you not believe in God?



For the first 28 years of my life.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 23, 2011)

Interestingly, I DID believe in both god and the bible for the first 20 years of my life.


----------



## DavidB (Apr 23, 2011)

Bullethead, I'm sorry to hear that you feel that way. If I might ask, what caused you to change your mind?


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 23, 2011)

TheBishop said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity_and_intelligence
> 
> 
> Now I certainly know this is not always the case, because I know and have met some extremely intelligent religious people.  I often wondered how they had the ability to set their logic aside. When asked it usually boiled down to them using faith as an escape.  Most of them are willingly  accept the possibility that they are wrong and are more tolerant of other people views.
> ...



How do you know your wife/girlfriends loves you?


----------



## TheBishop (Apr 23, 2011)

David I do not believe its intolerance that is destroying our country.  It is more the entitlement atitude than anything, and all to willingness to allow government to grow more powerful. That in itself is a whole different discussion for an entirely different place.


----------



## TheBishop (Apr 23, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> How do you know your wife/girlfriends loves you?



Belief based on action, experience, ect.. But then again one truely never knows, they just believe.  I accept the possibility she doesn't but based on evidence I have come to the logical conclusion she does. It is the best possible answer.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 23, 2011)

DavidB said:


> Bullethead, I'm sorry to hear that you feel that way. If I might ask, what caused you to change your mind?



No problem.I really started to read the whole bible in my late teens. The more I read the less I believed. I have read it cover to cover 5 times in the last 22 years. While very entertaining, to me it made me believe Man made God and not the other way around. It made me believe that man picked and chose what to include in it instead of including all the writings of the times and letting the readers get the entire picture. To me,the manner and way it is written is not divine at all. It does not feel like the work of a superior being. The scrolls from where the bible came from are a great source of the thoughts and happenings of the time period but there were many other scrolls that told different stories and were left out. The original language was changed as was text and meaning. It was written down in a book form thousands of years after the fact and it was done by man. I lost the feeling it was credible. While getting in to the bible I also started to read about other religions and beliefs. Pro, Con and as much as I could in between. In peoples hearts I do not believe anyone is wrong but I do not think anyone's personal beliefs are right for everyone else. It is an individual thing.


----------



## DavidB (Apr 23, 2011)

TheBishop said:


> David I do not believe its intolerance that is destroying our country.  It is more the entitlement atitude than anything, and all to willingness to allow government to grow more powerful. That in itself is a whole different discussion for an entirely different place.



I agree with what you have said, everything except that my point was excessive tolerance, not intolerance has in large part gotten us where we are today.


----------



## TheBishop (Apr 23, 2011)

David I have a question about your sig.  Why would you fear something that has unquestionable love for you?  And how does that fear bring you wisdom?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 23, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> How do you know your wife/girlfriends loves you?



For one thing she is physically there to see and touch. Her actions and emotions tell the story. Spending time with her gives an emotional and physical bond. It builds love, trust and a bond. It comes with both the good and the bad. It takes work and a long time to build. It takes two.

If she lived in the sky and I never saw her, I guess I could make up the "ultimate woman" who likes all the things I like and hates all the same things I do. Our relationship would be splendid and I would owe everything good that happens to her, while anything bad I would shrug it off as I did not please her enough and I deserved the consequences. Her nasty sister that lives below would be responsible for trying to always break us up. Anything bad that I cannot relate to "ultimate woman" will go to "evil ultimate sis".


----------



## DavidB (Apr 23, 2011)

bullethead said:


> No problem.I really started to read the whole bible in my late teens. The more I read the less I believed. I have read it cover to cover 5 times in the last 22 years. While very entertaining, to me it made me believe Man made God and not the other way around. It made me believe that man picked and chose what to include in it instead of including all the writings of the times and letting the readers get the entire picture. To me,the manner and way it is written is not divine at all. It does not feel like the work of a superior being. The scrolls from where the bible came from are a great source of the thoughts and happenings of the time period but there were many other scrolls that told different stories and were left out. The original language was changed as was text and meaning. It was written down in a book form thousands of years after the fact and it was done by man. I lost the feeling it was credible. While getting in to the bible I also started to read about other religions and beliefs. Pro, Con and as much as I could in between. In peoples hearts I do not believe anyone is wrong but I do not think anyone's personal beliefs are right for everyone else. It is an individual thing.



Wow, it's weird because I used to believe much of what you just stated. I wish I had something wise to say in response, but I don't. I only hope that God will in some way reveal Himself to you. I hope that last statement doesn't offend you as it wasn't meant to. I respect your right to to feel as you do and thank you for your candor.


----------



## JFS (Apr 23, 2011)

> I am amazed at how quick you are to criticize something you apparently have no understanding of.



You are welcome to explain.  As it stands I assume you mean the common definitions of the words you use.



> Do you really believe things are going well for America?



I think this is a great place to live.  Make a list of the things we as a society have become more tolerant of.  I think the majority are improvements. To the extent we have problems, I don't see many of them relating to tolerance.   

I think Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church are some of the leading advocates of saying America has problems because of too much tolerance.   Pat Robertson said hurricanes were hitting Orlando because Disney was too tolerant.  So how much more intolerance do we need?  Will it fend off hurricanes and military fatalities?


----------



## TheBishop (Apr 23, 2011)

bullethead said:


> If she lived in the sky and I never saw her, I guess I could make up the "ultimate woman" who likes all the things I like and hates all the same things I do. Our relationship would be splendid and I would owe everything good that happens to her, while anything bad I would shrug it off as I did not please her enough and I deserved the consequences. Her nasty sister that lives below would be responsible for trying to always break us up. Anything bad that I cannot relate to "ultimate woman" will go to "evil ultimate sis".


----------



## DavidB (Apr 23, 2011)

TheBishop said:


> David I have a question about your sig.  Why would you fear something that has unquestionable love for you?  And how does that fear bring you wisdom?



The word fear used in this context is not referring to fear from an emotional sense, but rather reverence toward God. I personally wouldn't have used the word fear, but hey, I'm just quoting the verse, I didn't write it!

So in that context to acknowledge one's creator and revere Him would be the foundation upon which all else that exists in one's life would be built.


----------



## JFS (Apr 23, 2011)

bullethead said:


> For one thing she is physically there to see and touch.



Yeah, that definitely helps with the "relationship"


----------



## DavidB (Apr 23, 2011)

JFS said:


> You are welcome to explain.  As it stands I assume you mean the common definitions of the words you use.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Look, it was never my intention to pick a fight with you, however from my own personal experience it is obvious to me that you don't understand what being a born again, spirit filled believer is. That's OK. I don't think I can say it any plainer than that. Obviously, you disagree. That's fine too.

The other two statements you made were ridiculous. I never even mentioned, nor did I imply race in my statement, but you responded as though I did. Is that your idea of an intellectually honest discussion? 

As for the condition of America, it is the greatest nation in the world. How did it come to be? I don't want to further inflame the issue, but it occurs to me that God has shown us favor because of the foundations upon which it was created. It surely won't continue to be so as we push God out of every aspect of our lives as a nation however. 

As for the Westboro people, nowhere in my Bible am I instructed to do any of the things they are doing. It bothers me greatly that some view all believers in the light of their behavior and the beliefs they espouse.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 23, 2011)

DavidB said:


> Wow, it's weird because I used to believe much of what you just stated. I wish I had something wise to say in response, but I don't. I only hope that God will in some way reveal Himself to you. I hope that last statement doesn't offend you as it wasn't meant to. I respect your right to to feel as you do and thank you for your candor.



Being raised as both catholic and protestant I got a good share of religious  upbringing and spent a lot of time in church, sunday school, and catechism. I can see why it is hard for many people of faith to not look outside of it because it has been a part of their teachings for as far back as they can remember. Especially when young, as in my case, you are told that these things are true and accept them as truth. As I got older and I didn't think they quite made sense, I dared not to even let those thoughts cross my mind because it was "wrong".  As I got older I also found out many other things that I was SURE were true were absolutely not true. I realized that I was told these things with good intentions but it was myths, fables and folklore. I wondered why other people in the world did not worship the same God i did, later on I decided to find out why. I put myself in their shoes and thought that if I was raised where they were and taught as they were, I would not believe for one second that what I once believed was true. After comparing each and finding every reason to believe either side, I wanted to find out why I shouldn't. The deeper I read and thought into it all the more I felt like I was duped. Cutting to the chase, no one can or should tell you what you must believe. There is no right or wrong outside of each individuals personal beliefs. No one can speak for god no matter how close that person feels their personal relationship with god is. It is between them. It won't work to push it on someone else. As much as one person believes so strongly in something there is another that believes the opposite with the same strength and conviction. I try to look at something at multiple ways and decide which way makes the best sense to me.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 23, 2011)

> As for the condition of America, it is the greatest nation in the world. How did it come to be? I don't want to further inflame the issue, but it occurs to me that God has shown us favor because of the foundations upon which it was created. It surely won't continue to be so as we push God out of every aspect of our lives as a nation however.



David that is a very slippery slope indeed and I have my doubts about the foundations on which every founding father stood for.
I REALLY doubt slaughtering 6 million Native Americans to push those ideals made any higher power happy. Were the Puritans right? did ALL of the founding fathers think alike?


----------



## DavidB (Apr 23, 2011)

Well, I can't say what every founding father believed, but I believe there is enough written evidence contained in the documents they produced that the majority were God fearing men.  Did they have faults, absolutely, were they infallible, absolutely not. You know it, I know it, and so did they. The exact reason they sought Divine direction in creating the foundations of this country.

As for what this country did to Native Americans, it was terrible and unjust. Unfortunately, we can't go back and undo what has been done. We can only hope to learn from the past in order to avoid making the same mistakes in the future.


----------



## TheBishop (Apr 23, 2011)

DavidB said:


> Well, I can't say what every founding father believed, but I believe there is enough written evidence contained in the documents they produced that the majority were God fearing men.  Did they have faults, absolutely, were they infallible, absolutely not. You know it, I know it, and so did they. The exact reason they sought Divine direction in creating the foundations of this country.
> 
> As for what this country did to Native Americans, it was terrible and unjust. Unfortunately, we can't go back and undo what has been done. We can only hope to learn from the past in order to avoid making the same mistakes in the future.



Ah, but our founding fathers knew the dangers of creating a government that favored any religion.  They took the needed precuations to prevent any one religions dominance.  They themselves could not agree on religious matters, and understood that an intolerant society would spell certain doom for their newly formed nation.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 23, 2011)

DavidB said:


> Well, I can't say what every founding father believed, but I believe there is enough written evidence contained in the documents they produced that the majority were God fearing men.  Did they have faults, absolutely, were they infallible, absolutely not. You know it, I know it, and so did they. The exact reason they sought Divine direction in creating the foundations of this country.
> 
> As for what this country did to Native Americans, it was terrible and unjust. Unfortunately, we can't go back and undo what has been done. We can only hope to learn from the past in order to avoid making the same mistakes in the future.



The Puritans came here to escape persecution in England where they were thought of as radicals. They were the same people that burned witches alive at the stake. Children could not play on the Sabbath(which when the 10 commandments were "written" was the last day of the week Saturday not the first day of the week Sunday), no music was allowed, people had to walk somberly, no affection, no walking or traveling unnecessarily, fines for not attending church,deacons would poke anyone mis-behaving in church,etc.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 23, 2011)

The Treaty of Tripoli, specifically article 11.
http://www.freedom.org/documents/tripoli.html


----------



## DavidB (Apr 23, 2011)

TheBishop said:


> Ah, but our founding fathers knew the dangers of creating a government that favored any religion.  They took the needed precuations to prevent any one religions dominance.  They themselves could not agree on religious matters, and understood that an intolerant society would spell certain doom for their newly formed nation.



The establishment clause (as it is  commonly referred to) found in the First Amendment of the Constitution was intended to prevent the Congress from passing laws to establish a State religion. It further prevents Congress from hindering its citizens from the freedom to worship as they saw fit. Historically, England went back and forth from Catholicism to Protestantism depending on the pleasure of the King on the throne at the time. Suffice it to say that those who refused to change were dealt with most harshly. The founding fathers sought to prevent this from ever occurring in America. I don't know if this completely agrees with your interpretation of events.


----------



## TheBishop (Apr 23, 2011)

Not completely. That is not all they were trying to prevent.  They wanted a government unbiased tward any religion, not only to prevent wrongful pursecutions like you stated,  but to make sure government could operate free from any religious constraints.  They understood that a government operating with religious influence is always detrimental to liberty.


----------



## JFS (Apr 23, 2011)

DavidB said:


> The other two statements you made were ridiculous. I never even mentioned, nor did I imply race in my statement, but you responded as though I did. Is that your idea of an intellectually honest discussion?



It's just the natural result of your generalizations.  What are the big areas we have become more tolerant as a nation- I'll give you three: gender equality, race relations, sexual orientation.  Maybe religious orientation too.   So when you advocate intolerance without further qualification, don't act surprised when your statement is deemed to include the obvious.  If you meant a narrow exception, it's your burden to specify if you don't mean the obvious.  Ironically I may agree with the point about too much support for certain activities, but that isn't what you said originally.




> As for the condition of America, it is the greatest nation in the world. How did it come to be? I don't want to further inflame the issue, but it occurs to me that God has shown us favor because of the foundations upon which it was created


.  

Did god favor the Romans, Ottomans, Mongols, British, etc?  I think you read too much into the ebb and flow of history.  Will it be god's favor that leads to China being a world power in 50 years?   I love our country but secular humanist ideals would have carried us to the same place.


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 23, 2011)

TheBishop said:


> Belief based on action, experience, ect.. But then again one truely never knows, they just believe.  I accept the possibility she doesn't but based on evidence I have come to the logical conclusion she does. It is the best possible answer.



Exactly! You have "faith".


----------



## TheBishop (Apr 23, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> Exactly! You have "faith".



Ok.....and your point is? My logic allowed me to deduce that my wife does loves me and that is the best possible answer.  Either that or all the crap I put her through she enjoys which doesn't seem likely.  So of all the possibilities, given the knowns, I can safely say I logically believe she loves me.  My faith is base on logic, whats yours?


----------



## DavidB (Apr 23, 2011)

I don't think that basing what you believe on factual knowledge constitutes faith. Faith requires the acceptance of something without the physical proof to conclude the outcome. For example:

Lets say your child is standing several steps up on a staircase. You're feeling playful so you tell him or her to jump and you'll catch them. Now most children are likely to at least hesitate for a moment. After considering it's dad who has always looked out for their well being, they decide it must be OK because he wouldn't ask them to do something that might hurt them. So off they go launching in to space. That would be faith. The expectation of a result without any specific knowledge of the outcome, but a trust in the source requiring that faith to be exercised.

Now the next time you perform this exercise, the child has some factual knowledge to base their belief on. Since the outcome was favorable the first time, faith is not required as logic now dictates that repeating the leap will render the same result.
Though the difference may seem subtle, there is a difference none the less.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 23, 2011)

So it would be wise to cross busy highways blindfolded because you have faith you will not be run over even though you have never done it before?

Faith is complete trust in something or someone, it has nothing to do with the outcome.


----------



## DavidB (Apr 23, 2011)

bullethead said:


> So it would be wise to cross busy highways blindfolded because you have faith you will not be run over even though you have never done it before?
> 
> Faith is complete trust in something or someone, it has nothing to do with the outcome.



While I agree that faith is complete trust in something or someone, I disagree that it has nothing to do with the outcome. It has everything to do with the outcome.

As for your busy highway analogy, that wouldn't be wise, obviously. Do you really believe that my analogy is the same as yours? I hope not.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Apr 23, 2011)

bullethead said:


> The Puritans came here to escape persecution in England where they were thought of as radicals. They were the same people that burned witches alive at the stake. Children could not play on the Sabbath(which when the 10 commandments were "written" was the last day of the week Saturday not the first day of the week Sunday), no music was allowed, people had to walk somberly, no affection, no walking or traveling unnecessarily, fines for not attending church,deacons would poke anyone mis-behaving in church,etc.


Hello bullethead, you seem to know a good deal about early church history. To me it's more than interesting, it's very revealing. Anyway, I was wondering, since I have come to many of the same conclusions yet with different outcome if you might comment on a few points of interest. For me, after realizing problems with the scriptures, I did not leave the faith because I saw things as non credible. Let me give an example, If I found out that my birth certificate was wrong, do I not exist. Poor example, I know, but you can gather where I'm going with this. So, do you consider that the events must have never happened based on some contridictions OR do you not believe the context even if there were no contridictions? Sorry to pry, but I find other peoples journeys in faith interesting. Especially when it is similar to my own, yet different outcome.


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 23, 2011)

TheBishop said:


> Ok.....and your point is? My logic allowed me to deduce that my wife does loves me and that is the best possible answer.  Either that or all the crap I put her through she enjoys which doesn't seem likely.  So of all the possibilities, given the knowns, I can safely say I logically believe she loves me.  My faith is base on logic, whats yours?



If you truly care do an advanced search of my user tag in the religious and atheist section. Pnome, Ambush80 and others have been discussing this topic for years...literally years on this forum. 

Are you a pure atheist, or do you believe in a God?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 23, 2011)

DavidB said:


> While I agree that faith is complete trust in something or someone, I disagree that it has nothing to do with the outcome. It has everything to do with the outcome.
> 
> As for your busy highway analogy, that wouldn't be wise, obviously. Do you really believe that my analogy is the same as yours? I hope not.



Having faith that dad will catch you, because he did it once, does not guarantee he will catch you again. That is confidence and neither faith nor confidence can change the outcome or guarantee it. If you slip through dad's hands and smack your head on the step all the faith that he was gonna catch you doesn't mean squat.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 23, 2011)

1gr8bldr said:


> Hello bullethead, you seem to know a good deal about early church history. To me it's more than interesting, it's very revealing. Anyway, I was wondering, since I have come to many of the same conclusions yet with different outcome if you might comment on a few points of interest. For me, after realizing problems with the scriptures, I did not leave the faith because I saw things as non credible. Let me give an example, If I found out that my birth certificate was wrong, do I not exist. Poor example, I know, but you can gather where I'm going with this. So, do you consider that the events must have never happened based on some contridictions OR do you not believe the context even if there were no contridictions? Sorry to pry, but I find other peoples journeys in faith interesting. Especially when it is similar to my own, yet different outcome.



Scripture is supposed to be the infallible words of an infallible god. To me it is not.

If god was in charge of and screwed up your birth certificate than he is not much of a god is he?

I believe that the places were/are real. I believe that some of the people were real. I also believe that the people of that time were slaves and oppressed. To cope with thousands of years of hardship they told stories and made up heroes to do what they could not. Real events were recorded that both agreed and disagreed with the way the bible says it all happened. ONLY the ones that fit the message made it in the bible. Unfortunately many of the events in the bible were not recorded anywhere outside of the bible despite the fact that local historians of the time wrote everything else down, like births, deaths, tax records, and census numbers. I have read where Nazareth did not historically exist until long after Jesus death, about the time some of the New Testament books were written, which is also LONG after the death of Jesus. Those books were written by people who were not alive when Jesus supposedly walked the earth, they never met him, never talked to him and never saw him in action. Was Jesus real, probably. Was he the son of god? I doubt it. His "story" was done many times long before he came about.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 23, 2011)

There are 613 commandments not 10, but we harp on 10. http://www.religionfacts.com/judaism/practices/613.htm 
 Henry the 8th  Reformed the church because Rome would not let him divorce his first wife. The bible was re-written and re-translated for the umpteenth time, this time in English as per his orders.  What was lost in that and each translation waters down the true meanings.

40 is significant in the bible:

It rained for 40 days and 40 nights when God wanted to cleanse the world and start over.
(Gen 7:12 KJV) And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.

Noah waited another 40 days after it rained before he opened a window in the Ark.
(Gen 8:6 KJV) And it came to pass at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made:

Embalming required 40 days (although this was an Egyptian custom, the Egyptians recognized the period of 40 for the preparation of going into a new life, what they called the afterlife)
(Gen 50:3 KJV) And forty days were fulfilled for him; for so are fulfilled the days of those which are embalmed: and the Egyptians mourned for him threescore and ten days.

Moses was on the mountain with God for 40 days (TWICE)
(Exo 24:18 KJV) And Moses went into the midst of the cloud, and gat him up into the mount: and Moses was in the mount forty days and forty nights.
(Exo 34:28-29 KJV) And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.
(Deu 10:10 NIV) Now I had stayed on the mountain forty days and nights, as I did the first time, and the LORD listened to me at this time also. It was not his will to destroy you.

Moses' face shone after the 40 days on the mountain.
(Exo 34:29 KJV) And it came to pass, when Moses came down from mount Sinai with the two tables of testimony in Moses' hand, when he came down from the mount, that Moses wist not that the skin of his face shone while he talked with him.

It took the spies 40 days to search out the promised land and bring back fruit
(Num 13:25 KJV) And they returned from searching of the land after forty days.

The Israelites spent 40 years in the wilderness, one year for each day they explored the Promised Land.
(Exo 16:35 KJV) And the children of Israel did eat manna forty years, until they came to a land inhabited; they did eat manna, until they came unto the borders of the land of Canaan.
(Num 14:33-34 NIV) Your children will be shepherds here for forty years, suffering for your unfaithfulness, until the last of your bodies lies in the desert. {34} For forty years--one year for each of the forty days you explored the land-you will suffer for your sins and know what it is like to have me against you.

Goliath came for forty days before being killed by David
(1 Sam 17:16 NLT) For forty days, twice a day, morning and evening, the Philistine giant strutted in front of the Israelite army.

Elijah strengthened by one angelic meal went forty days to Mount Horeb where the Lord passed by and he heard the voice of God
(1 Ki 19:8 KJV) And he arose, and did eat and drink, and went in the strength of that meat forty days and forty nights unto Horeb the mount of God.

Jonah warned the City of Nineveh they had 40 days until God would overthrow the city. The people repented in those 40 days and God spared the city.
(Jonah 3:4 and 10 KJV) And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.
And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

Jesus fasted for 40 days in the wilderness
(Mat 3:17 KJV) And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
(Mat 4:1-2 KJV) Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil. {2} And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward an hungered.

Jesus was seen in the earth 40 days after His crucifixion
(Acts 1:3 NIV) After his suffering, he showed himself to these men and gave many convincing proofs that he was alive. He appeared to them over a period of forty days and spoke about the kingdom of God.

40 seems to be common in early Judaism to mean "many". To me that sounds too much like man writing things in his own way, in his own words and not too precisely. I don't think God would say, it rained for many days and many nights, Noah waited many days, Moses wandered through the wilderness for many years, etc. If it came from gods lips it would be accurate...in my opinion.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 23, 2011)

Here is an excellent read no matter what your stance is about the Bible.
http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/


----------



## Swamp Angel (Apr 23, 2011)

I hold three Bachelor degrees, yet I believe that the _intelligence_ one finds at our colleges and universities isn't exactly based on scientific rationality. Science is supposed to be based on facts or observations which can be demonstrated and replicated in experiments. Consider the "Big Bang Theory" which so many of the "intelligent" and "educated" hold to as fast as any religious doctrine. It essentially boils downs to: "Well, you see, in the beginning, there was a whole bunch of nothing which suddenly exploded and expanded and. . ."

Seems to me that believing such an idea takes a whole lot more faith than is required by any religion. Good Lord! If it were possible for "nothing" to explode with such violence, I wouldn't dare to leave my house in the morning! My yard might just explode and create a new universe when I looked at it!

Just keep in mind that _two_ can never equal _three_, no matter how great the value of _two_ may be.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 23, 2011)

MAYBE a black hole, after it swallowed one, ten, a few hundred planets and stars, maybe thousands... finally started to swallow itself once there was nothing else to swallow. It kept diminishing in size, compacting and gaining strength until it got so small and so powerful that it EXPLODED with terrific energy releasing particles into the universe.


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 23, 2011)

bullethead said:


> MAYBE a black hole, after it swallowed one, ten, a few hundred planets and stars, maybe thousands... finally started to swallow itself once there was nothing else to swallow. It kept diminishing in size, compacting and gaining strength until it got so small and so powerful that it EXPLODED with terrific energy releasing particles into the universe.



Who or what created the initial black hole and the planets it swallowed?


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Apr 23, 2011)

bullethead said:


> Here is an excellent read no matter what your stance is about the Bible.
> http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/


Very interesting site, got any more having to do with early Christianity? 1st or 2nd century


----------



## bullethead (Apr 23, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> Who or what created the initial black hole and the planets it swallowed?



I don't know, you don't know, probably no one knows. It all could go back for so long that TIME is incomprehensible or unmeasurable. Possibly no one or no thing created any of it. They may have always been.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 23, 2011)

1gr8bldr said:


> Very interesting site, got any more having to do with early Christianity? 1st or 2nd century



I'd have to search through a couple hundred "bookmarks" I have saved on Religion. You would probably find things quicker if you typed in 1st or 2nd Christianity in your favorite search engine.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 23, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> Who or what created the initial black hole and the planets it swallowed?



If it is believable that god has always been it is also believable that those things have always been.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 23, 2011)

I wonder why in the New Testament( supposedly written 60A.D to 100AD), there is no mention of the Romans invading Jerusalem(between 66-73 A.D.) and destroying the Temple despite the Jewish historian Josephus recording it all. I would think with over a million killed and 100,000 taken captive it would have been mentioned somewhere in the New Testament.


----------



## Swamp Angel (Apr 24, 2011)

bullethead said:


> I wonder why in the New Testament( supposedly written 60A.D to 100AD), there is no mention of the Romans invading Jerusalem(between 66-73 A.D.) and destroying the Temple despite the Jewish historian Josephus recording it all. I would think with over a million killed and 100,000 taken captive it would have been mentioned somewhere in the New Testament.



Actually, there is one place where it is certainly mentioned. Look at Matthew chapter 24. Christ is warning his disciples of the fall of Jerusalem, *not* the end of the world. He described the signs to watch for, and to leave the city when these signs are evident, and he proclaimed woe upon those that were "heavy with child". Now, if he were describing the events leading to the end of the world, why would he tell them to flee the city? There's no escaping the catastophic end of an entire planet.

The idea behind the scriptures is for mankind to know how to be pleasing and acceptable to God. It doesn't teach us advanced mathematics, it doesn't give us many recipes (beyond certain dietary restrictions and guidelines given to the Hebrews), it doesn't explain planetary orbits or plate tectonics. It does tell us what we need to know to be good, righteous, yet humble, and thus pleasing and acceptable to an almighty God. 

Any questions you may have regarding why something isn't included in scripture can be answered by turning to Deuteronomy 29:29.

Now, one must also keep in mind that apart from the four books of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, the New Testament records the acts of the apostles after the resurrection and ascension of Christ, and the founding of the church on the day of Pentecost. After the book of Acts, you will find your New Testament consists of epistles, or letters, written to early Christians to provide the correct answers to questions regarding doctrine and rites of worship. 

Finally, the book of Revelation concludes the recording of inspired scripture. So many people look at Revelation as a Nostradamus-type mystic prediction of doom and gloom and the end of the world, and a period of time when Satan will rule the world and make us all his slaves, etc. . . In actuality, the book of Revelation tells of the horrors that Christians would face under the Roman empire, and some of its specific emperors, but that by persevering and not renouncing Christ the ultimate victory over death would belong to the Christian who was faithful and endured. (This is a message which isn't lost on faithful Christians in today's world either. Christians will be persecuted for their faith until the end of time. We are told it will be so, and thus it comes as no surprise to us.)

So, if one considers that the purpose of the New Testament was not to record history (current events to them at the time), but rather to establish Christianity and its accepted doctrine, why is there any need of a mention of the fall of Jerusalem? Under Christianity, Mosaic law becomes obsolete (see the book of Hebrews). If Mosaic law is obsolete, there is no longer any reason that Jerusalem would be any more important than any other city on the face of the earth, thus again, no reason to mention its destruction by the Roman armies.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 24, 2011)

The NT mentions it in warnings a few times but never as it is taking place and it was smack dab in the middle of taking place then. They have been at war with everyone in the region for thousands of years. It fell to the Romans, Turks, Persians, Egyptians and Hoards AFTER Jesus death and at least 20 times before his existence. A slight "be careful" of the fall of Jerusalem lightly mentioned is like saying "Be careful America, we are in for trouble ahead and this is what to do in case that happens", well no kidding.

I heard one man put it as, " Not mentioning the total annihilation and fall of Jerusalem while it happened as the Gospels were supposedly written is like reading the Diary of Anne Frank without it mentioning the Holocaust."

Yeah, Duet 29:29, we are on a need to know basis and we don't need to know.......


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 24, 2011)

bullethead said:


> If it is believable that god has always been it is also believable that those things have always been.



Stephen Hawkings is doing a flip in his chair right now.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 24, 2011)

I'd like to SEE that! 

Wasn't it Hawking that said that the Big Bang was inevitable due to the Law of Gravity with no intervention from a divine being?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 24, 2011)

Swamp Angel said:


> Actually, there is one place where it is certainly mentioned. Look at Matthew chapter 24. Christ is warning his disciples of the fall of Jerusalem, *not* the end of the world. He described the signs to watch for, and to leave the city when these signs are evident, and he proclaimed woe upon those that were "heavy with child". Now, if he were describing the events leading to the end of the world, why would he tell them to flee the city? There's no escaping the catastophic end of an entire planet.
> 
> The idea behind the scriptures is for mankind to know how to be pleasing and acceptable to God. It doesn't teach us advanced mathematics, it doesn't give us many recipes (beyond certain dietary restrictions and guidelines given to the Hebrews), it doesn't explain planetary orbits or plate tectonics. It does tell us what we need to know to be good, righteous, yet humble, and thus pleasing and acceptable to an almighty God.
> 
> ...



I am fairly well versed in the NT.

In my opinion it was/is the church's attempt to re-invent the wheel. It gave many of the answers people were looking for at the time in order to feed itself.  It differs so greatly from the OT because the Jewish people were not it's main target audience. Romans and Greeks were in charge now and Mosaic law was not in favor. Maybe that is why it differs from the OT???? Kind of like, Ok Here is the "NEW" set of rules, forget those old ones, even though Jesus still lived by them.....

Why do the very people that LIVED it not believe the NT now?


----------



## Swamp Angel (Apr 24, 2011)

bullethead said:


> I'd like to SEE that!
> 
> Wasn't it Hawking that said that the Big Bang was inevitable due to the Law of Gravity with no intervention from a divine being?




I say that without Divine action (not intervention, since you can't intervene with something when there is nothing) there is no law of gravity in the first place. Face it, the "scientific" explanation for our existence requires every bit as much faith,and even more, than the simple explanation given in scripture. 

I will agree that many who call themselves Christians and claim to follow the scriptures and all their teachings do have a rather simplistic view of things. Consider how, for so many centuries, "Christians" believed the earth to be the center of the universe. Of course, this belief was also held by pagans, wiccans, Bhuddists,Hindus, Muslims, and just about everyone else at the time. The idea that the earth is the center of all the universe is nowhere to be found in scripture. A lot of what is attributed to flawed scripture and bible stories is actually flawed reasoning by those who profess their faith, yet read more into what the scriptures say than is actually said. Simply out, mankind, Believers and non-believers alike, infer too much when reading their bibles. We as humans, also have rather large egos, and thus we "interpret" the scriptures to say what we want them to say rather than accepting them as saying what they _do_ say.

The flaw is not in religion, but rather it is mankind's flawed interpretation of religion. Either way, it's good for me. If we both live our lives as we desire, you living yours as if there is no God, and me living mine as if there is; and then we both die and there is nothing after death. . . well, all's well that ends well. We've both lived our lives fully and been happy, and now we're just dead.

If, on the other hand, there _is_ a God, and these 66 books that we call a bible actually _are_ his inspired word, and He expects us to follow the commandments he has put forth, . . . well now, that puts things into a l-i-i-i-i-i-i-ttle bit different perspective, doesn't it?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 24, 2011)

> Face it, the "scientific" explanation for our existence requires every bit as much faith,and even more, than the simple explanation given in scripture.



Actually no way does it. Science is seeing what is going on out there in space and it can get some in depth ideas of how it works now and ago.

It is human nature to owe it all to something that is just like us. A better "we". We cannot understand how it all happened so lets say someone made it. We can't fathom crawling out of the sea so lets say someone put 2 of "us" in a beautiful garden. Immediately they could walk and talk and start fires and go about fairly modern life, despite evidence that shows otherwise.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 24, 2011)

> I will agree that many who call themselves Christians and claim to follow the scriptures and all their teachings do have a rather simplistic view of things. Consider how, for so many centuries, "Christians" believed the earth to be the center of the universe. Of course, this belief was also held by pagans, wiccans, Bhuddists,Hindus, Muslims, and just about everyone else at the time. The idea that the earth is the center of all the universe is nowhere to be found in scripture. A lot of what is attributed to flawed scripture and bible stories is actually flawed reasoning by those who profess their faith, yet read more into what the scriptures say than is actually said. Simply out, mankind, Believers and non-believers alike, infer too much when reading their bibles. We as humans, also have rather large egos, and thus we "interpret" the scriptures to say what we want them to say rather than accepting them as saying what they do say.



Those large EGOS also caused us to create a god in our likeness, not the other way around.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 24, 2011)

> The flaw is not in religion, but rather it is mankind's flawed interpretation of religion. Either way, it's good for me. If we both live our lives as we desire, you living yours as if there is no God, and me living mine as if there is; and then we both die and there is nothing after death. . . well, all's well that ends well. We've both lived our lives fully and been happy, and now we're just dead.
> 
> If, on the other hand, there is a God, and these 66 books that we call a bible actually are his inspired word, and He expects us to follow the commandments he has put forth, . . . well now, that puts things into a l-i-i-i-i-i-i-ttle bit different perspective, doesn't it?



I'll give you that, IF there are only two choices it has to be one or the other. But since we are playing "what if".... what if neither of us have got it right?

What if you and I should be following another path, another belief, another religion.....did you also prepare for that?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 24, 2011)

Did you ever consider HOW those 66 books got to be his INSPIRED word? There were numerous other scrolls and writings of the time found with the others but MAN picked and chose what made it and what did not. MAN took the liberty of adding or deleting. MAN filled in the blanks where pages were missing due to deterioration.

Now take those commandments, not the 10 we all think are the most important and fit the "universal" masses but the entire 613 that include the proper way to sacrifice animals, how to properly pray,the ones that are specific to the Jews and Israelites and their cultures,the one that exempts a bridegroom from work, military service or guarding the wall for one year. and 600+ more..

Exactly which commandments do you recognize and follow and which ones do you dismiss?


----------



## DavidB (Apr 24, 2011)

bullethead said:


> Having faith that dad will catch you, because he did it once, does not guarantee he will catch you again. That is confidence and neither faith nor confidence can change the outcome or guarantee it. If you slip through dad's hands and smack your head on the step all the faith that he was gonna catch you doesn't mean squat.



For the second time you have misinterpreted my statements. Go back and re read it carefully. Faith was what was exercised in the first example. Logic was what was used in the second. This was my point and I stand by it. 

At no time was it said or even implied that the outcome was guaranteed. That was the point of the whole exercise in the first place. It appears as if you have missed that altogether. I notice that at least you haven't reiterated the idea that outcome has nothing to do with faith at least. Maybe I'm getting through at least a little.

If you note some lack of humility in my response, it isn't your imagination. It is only out measured by your own.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 24, 2011)

DavidB said:


> I don't think that basing what you believe on factual knowledge constitutes faith. Faith requires the acceptance of something without the physical proof to conclude the outcome. For example:
> 
> Lets say your child is standing several steps up on a staircase. You're feeling playful so you tell him or her to jump and you'll catch them. Now most children are likely to at least hesitate for a moment. After considering it's dad who has always looked out for their well being, they decide it must be OK because he wouldn't ask them to do something that might hurt them. So off they go launching in to space. That would be faith. The expectation of a result without any specific knowledge of the outcome, but a trust in the source requiring that faith to be exercised.
> 
> ...



I get your two different examples but that kind of faith is different from religious faith.

I know you have strong faith in God but you would not tell your children to leap off of those stairs because God will catch them. And I doubt when they are ill you rely solely on faith to heal them.

"Nothing is more deceitful than the appearance of humility. It is often only carelessness of opinion, and sometimes an indirect boast."
Jane Austen


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Apr 24, 2011)

bullethead said:


> I get your two different examples but that kind of faith is different from religious faith.
> 
> I know you have strong faith in God but you would not tell your children to leap off of those stairs because God will catch them. And I doubt when they are ill you rely solely on faith to heal them.
> 
> ...


I know a man who tries so hard to present himself as humble. In reality, it's not true humbleness. [false humility]


----------



## bullethead (Apr 24, 2011)

1gr8bldr said:


> I know a man who tries so hard to present himself as humble. In reality, it's not true humbleness. [false humility]



Who is that man?

"Humility is like underwear, essential but indecent if it shows."
Helen Nielsen


----------



## DavidB (Apr 24, 2011)

bullethead said:


> The Treaty of Tripoli, specifically article 11.
> http://www.freedom.org/documents/tripoli.html



Prayer of First Continental Congress-Sept. 7, 1774
http://chaplain.house.gov/archive/continental.html

The Paris Peace Treaty of 1783
http://www.earlyamerica.com/earlyamerica/milestones/paris/text.html

The Unanimous Declaration Of The Thirteen United States
http://www.earlyamerica.com/earlyamerica/freedom/doi/text.html

Constitution Of The United States (specifically the date in ArticleVII Paragraph 2)
http://earlyamerica.com/earlyamerica/freedom/constitution/text.html

Franklin Roosevelts D-Day Prayer delivered to the Nation on June 6, 1944
http://docs.fdrlibrary.marist.edu/odddayp.html

Supreme Court decision Holy Trinity Church vs. The United States
http://vftonline.org/EndTheWall/TrinityHistory.htm

National Motto

http://www.wisconsinmaritime.org/fi...ges/boy_and_cub_scouts/127_national-motto.pdf


----------



## bullethead (Apr 24, 2011)

DavidB said:


> Prayer of First Continental Congress-Sept. 7, 1774
> http://chaplain.house.gov/archive/continental.html
> 
> Ok, they still pray today before every session. I cannot find either then or now to which specific God they are praying to.
> ...


http://www.religioustolerance.org/nat_mott.htm 

http://articles.sfgate.com/2011-03-...onal-motto-ceremonial-character-supreme-court


I don't argue that the country was certainly founded BY Christians but for religious freedom for all. There is definitely a christian influence because of WHO came to America but even the founding fathers differed on on God and religion.


----------



## DavidB (Apr 24, 2011)

bullethead said:


> I get your two different examples but that kind of faith is different from religious faith.
> 
> I know you have strong faith in God but you would not tell your children to leap off of those stairs because God will catch them. And I doubt when they are ill you rely solely on faith to heal them.
> 
> ...





There was never any mention of "religious faith". Faith is faith. 3 plus 3 is 6. It doesn't matter if you apply that truth to math, science or how many fish are in the live well. The same can be said about faith. Whether used in a religious sense or everyday life, the principle remains the same. 

Thanatos (post #34)and The Bishop(post #35) were discussing "how do you know your wife loves you". My response (post #36) never mentioned anything about "religious faith" either. And as for my point, I never suggested the person jump in to the arms of God. He'd be laying on the floor with a bloody lip most likely. I never said anything about using faith alone when my son was sick either. Believe me when a doctor was needed, he was seen. That didn't exclude me from praying, however. God uses doctors all the time. Or, do you think that a doctor heals a broken leg? 

Has it occurred to you that there is a difference between  not seeing and refusing to see?


----------



## DavidB (Apr 24, 2011)

bullethead said:


> If it is believable that god has always been it is also believable that those things have always been.



This is a fact. Either God does exist, or He doesn't. If He doesn't exist ( which I don't believe for an instant-for the record), then I really haven't lost a thing. My life is far better for following the beliefs that I hold dear. I am most certainly a better man than I was before I was saved.

Now lets say for arguments sake, you are wrong. What have you lost? I think you can answer that just as well as I can, maybe even better.

Now I anticipate you'll possibly say it's not Gods existence but the Bible you doubt. Fair enough. My question then would be, does God Love His creation at all, and if so, how would He communicate that love?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 24, 2011)

DavidB said:


> There was never any mention of "religious faith". Faith is faith. 3 plus 3 is 6. It doesn't matter if you apply that truth to math, science or how many fish are in the live well. The same can be said about faith. Whether used in a religious sense or everyday life, the principle remains the same.
> 
> Thanatos (post #34)and The Bishop(post #35) were discussing "how do you know your wife loves you". My response (post #36) never mentioned anything about "religious faith" either. And as for my point, I never suggested the person jump in to the arms of God. He'd be laying on the floor with a bloody lip most likely. I never said anything about using faith alone when my son was sick either. Believe me when a doctor was needed, he was seen. That didn't exclude me from praying, however. God uses doctors all the time. Or, do you think that a doctor heals a broken leg?
> 
> Has it occurred to you that there is a difference between  not seeing and refusing to see?



Faith +Faith + Faith is 3 faiths?

I do not think a doctor heals a broken leg. I think he sets it in the correct spot to heal correctly. I do not think God heals a broken leg either.

You have given me great examples of not seeing and refusing to see, thank you.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 24, 2011)

DavidB said:


> This is a fact. Both of those beliefs cannot be right. If He doesn't exist ( which I don't believe for an instant-for the record), then I really haven't lost a thing. My life is far better for following the beliefs that I hold dear. I am most certainly a better man than I was before I was saved.
> 
> Now lets say for arguments sake, you are wrong. What have you lost? I think you can answer that just as well as I can, maybe even better.



If he doesn't exist and some other god really does, then you have missed the boat too.


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 24, 2011)

bullethead said:


> I'd like to SEE that!
> 
> Wasn't it Hawking that said that the Big Bang was inevitable due to the Law of Gravity with no intervention from a divine being?



He did say that a singularity was needed to begin time as we know it.  

There are lots of problems (i.e. holes) in our current scientific theories on the beginning of time and space. For example Einstein's General Theory of Relativity and Quantum Mechanics do not mesh well together. Right now researches are working diligently to meld these two theories together. This "holy grail" is called Quantum Gravity.   The Large Hardon Collider in Switzerland is doing great work in that field right now. Pretty cool stuff. Kinda sounds like us Christians trying to fit our ideas into our little boxes does it not?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 25, 2011)

DavidB said:


> This is a fact. Either God does exist, or He doesn't. If He doesn't exist ( which I don't believe for an instant-for the record), then I really haven't lost a thing. My life is far better for following the beliefs that I hold dear. I am most certainly a better man than I was before I was saved.
> 
> Now lets say for arguments sake, you are wrong. What have you lost? I think you can answer that just as well as I can, maybe even better.
> 
> *Now I anticipate you'll possibly say it's not Gods existence but the Bible you doubt. Fair enough. My question then would be, does God Love His creation at all, and if so, how would He communicate that love?*



You threw last last part in there after I answered the rest...

I don't think the God of the Bible exists. I think as humans we fill ourselves with the thirst of always wanting more and the reality of our mortality. We cannot fathom that this just might be it, so while alive and so we don't sit in the corner of a room constantly thinking about what happens when our time is up, we created another "Happy Hunting Ground". We convinced ourselves that YEAH, there has GOT to be something more after we die and it helps us cope now. But really, What do you remember from before you were born? I suspect we will know exactly the same after we die. Nothing.

Also to answer your question about god communicating with us to show us his love.... WHY did it stop? Why was there all this one on one activity with god and man between 6000BC and up until Jesus, and now not a single event since? Why did he make his presence known to the masses on a regular basis back then, but we get some ancient scraps of paper with writings on it to show his love???? Today when people say they have talked to or have seen god or claim to be on a mission from god we lock them up. Back then legend and folklore had the people mystified and the leaders took advantage of it. You'll not get hundreds, maybe thousands of people to wander through the desert with you for 40 years without having a good story to scare the living bananas out of them. Every now and then walk off and tell them your going to talk to god and come back with some new news and rules so they follow you some more. Write down your laws, err gods, so they can follow them. Those 613 commandments are not "universal". Most specifically deal with Jewish customs and laws. The church latches onto 10 that can cover everyone and we stick to those.

Getting back to communicating the "love".... where is it? Maybe we can find some new scrolls written in modern times by modern people from a little obscure place not well known to the rest of the world, and not knowing of the rest of the world(kinda like ancient middle east). Since we are all his children maybe some tribe in the Amazon has had similar experiences from god and wrote us an updated version to convince our updated minds. I'd read that to get inspired.


----------



## atlashunter (Apr 25, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> Kinda sounds like us Christians trying to fit our ideas into our little boxes does it not?



Except that it's not like it at all. Because faith doesn't require any evidence and can be accepted on assertion alone, you have no mechanism to test its truth. You also can't test many of the claims made by Christianity because of the nature of those claims.

Also scientists aren't claiming to have acquired knowledge by revelation from the creator of the universe. When you do that you kind of eliminate the right to change your mind. It's one thing for a fallible man to come up with a hypothesis and then through testing, discover he is wrong. Quite another to say you know you are right because God told you and then be found wrong.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 25, 2011)

DavidB, I can tell you this, some ancient fiction writings by a couple of ancient authors is pretty good. There were more writings but only so many were used to "back up" the religion. I also think that with all the people alive at the time witnessing all these incredible events that are both"the chosen people" and other nationalities from other countries and foreign lands, you would think there would be more of it jotted down. I know if i witnessed something god-like, something so awe inspiring and awesome I would record it.....today we'd use a cell phone to snap a pic but back then writing it down was just as good. With all of the hundreds of thousands and possibly millions alive and living right amongst the action, in a time where God presented himself fairly regularly, only a couple dozen guys saw it fit to write about it???


----------



## TheBishop (Apr 25, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> If you truly care do an advanced search of my user tag in the religious and atheist section. Pnome, Ambush80 and others have been discussing this topic for years...literally years on this forum.
> 
> Are you a pure atheist, or do you believe in a God?



I still do not get your point.  I would like to think I'm a diest.  But Im still searching for answers that make sense.  I have found none in religion.  Religion leaves me with more questions, doubt, and makes no sense. It seems more like grasping at straws, or like others have said fables and folklore.   

I even went to easter service yesterday, (not by choice of course but we must do what we have to to please our loved ones) and found it quite excruciating.  I listened close, and paid attention to everything.  I mean the preacher, the songs, the words, the congregation, reactions, and even the church itself.  I consider myself a somewhat astute observer and listener, and the revelation was quite predictable (as it is everytime I attend).  I found myself even more revolted. Granted I did already have a bias, but still the same, I looked for something genuine and found nothing but artificle.


----------



## Six million dollar ham (Apr 25, 2011)

bullethead said:


> For one thing she is physically there to see and touch. Her actions and emotions tell the story. Spending time with her gives an emotional and physical bond. It builds love, trust and a bond. It comes with both the good and the bad. It takes work and a long time to build. It takes two.
> 
> If she lived in the sky and I never saw her, I guess I could make up the "ultimate woman" who likes all the things I like and hates all the same things I do. Our relationship would be splendid and I would owe everything good that happens to her, while anything bad I would shrug it off as I did not please her enough and I deserved the consequences. Her nasty sister that lives below would be responsible for trying to always break us up. Anything bad that I cannot relate to "ultimate woman" will go to "evil ultimate sis".



That's awesome.  Well done.


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 25, 2011)

bullethead said:


> For one thing she is physically there to see and touch. Her actions and emotions tell the story. Spending time with her gives an emotional and physical bond. It builds love, trust and a bond. It comes with both the good and the bad. It takes work and a long time to build. It takes two.



You can have that exact same relationship with God...if you are humble enough to do so.


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 25, 2011)

bullethead said:


> If she lived in the sky and I never saw her, I guess I could make up the "ultimate woman" who likes all the things I like and hates all the same things I do. Our relationship would be splendid and I would owe everything good that happens to her, while anything bad I would shrug it off as I did not please her enough and I deserved the consequences. Her nasty sister that lives below would be responsible for trying to always break us up. Anything bad that I cannot relate to "ultimate woman" will go to "evil ultimate sis".



I love these comments because it truly shows your ignorance in Christianity's religious beliefs.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 25, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> You can have that exact same relationship with God...if you are humble enough to do so.



Physically touch him................go on.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 25, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> I love these comments because it truly shows your ignorance in Christianity's religious beliefs.



Another swing and a miss. I am WELL aware of Christianity and it's beliefs by NUMEROUS denominations. I just scrape off the icing and get right to heart of the cake. While I had a great Easter this one thing helped make it so, 3 hours of it was spent in DEEP religious conversation with my M-I-L who is a devout Catholic, a Eucharistic Minister, weekly lector and catechism teacher. I get my share of the Catholic faith and I try to read about many others.


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 25, 2011)

TheBishop said:


> I even went to easter service yesterday, (not by choice of course but we must do what we have to to please our loved ones) and found it quite excruciating.  I listened close, and paid attention to everything.  I mean the preacher, the songs, the words, the congregation, reactions, and even the church itself.  I consider myself a somewhat astute observer and listener, and the revelation was quite predictable (as it is everytime I attend).  I found myself even more revolted. Granted I did already have a bias, but still the same, I looked for something genuine and found nothing but artificle.



This would be like me going to an opera in a foreign language and then berating the creator of the play because he did not write the music and scenes in a way that I could understand. 

To sum it up quickly you are a tiny organism in the middle of space time that will quickly forget your existence. You hold in your brain .00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 of the knowledge in this universe. Relative to this knowledge we use "faith" everyday on our perceptions and beliefs we hold close. It make me laugh to see agnostics or atheist get up set because Christians (or other religious beliefs) need to be "smarter". If they were "smarter" and "enlightened" they would do away with their "faith".


----------



## bullethead (Apr 25, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> This would be like me going to an opera in a foreign language and then berating the creator of the play because he did not write the music and scenes in a way that I could understand.
> 
> To sum it up quickly you are a tiny organism in the middle of space time that will quickly forget your existence. You hold in you brain .0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 of the knowledge in this universe. Relative to this knowledge we use "faith" everyday on our perceptions and beliefs we hold close. It make me laugh to see agnostics or atheist get up set because Christians (or other religious beliefs) need to be "smarter". If they were "smarter" and "enlightened" they would do away with their "faith".



What percentage is that?


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 25, 2011)

bullethead said:


> Another swing and a miss. I am WELL aware of Christianity and it's beliefs by NUMEROUS denominations. I just scrape off the icing and get right to heart of the cake. While I had a great Easter this one thing helped make it so, 3 hours of it was spent in DEEP religious conversation with my M-I-L who is a devout Catholic, a Eucharistic Minister, weekly lector and catechism teacher. I get my share of the Catholic faith and I try to read about many others.



Well how do you explain this concoction of dribble that is nothing like a relationship between humans and Christ our Lord?



bullethead said:


> If she lived in the sky and I never saw her, I guess I could make up the "ultimate woman" who likes all the things I like and hates all the same things I do. Our relationship would be splendid and I would owe everything good that happens to her, while anything bad I would shrug it off as I did not please her enough and I deserved the consequences. Her nasty sister that lives below would be responsible for trying to always break us up. Anything bad that I cannot relate to "ultimate woman" will go to "evil ultimate sis".


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 25, 2011)

bullethead said:


> What percentage is that?



Pretty small. Exaggerated for effect.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 25, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> Well how do you explain this concoction of dribble that is nothing like a relationship between humans and Christ our Lord?



Oh jeepers you should know, the good lord created me and gave me those skills. It was his plan that I write that. It might be a little TOO close and that is why your upset.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 25, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> Pretty small. Exaggerated for effect.



Oh. I guess exaggerated for effect is what worked for my dribble above too????


----------



## JFS (Apr 25, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> Well how do you explain this concoction of dribble that is nothing like a relationship between humans and Christ our Lord?



Yeah BH, your parody makes way to much sense to be analogous.  Please throw in some more details like killing the babies of the annoying neighbors, dead relatives stopping by to visit and the part where one day she drowned everyone she didn't like.  And how she hates anyone who doesn't worship her is a key aspect too.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 25, 2011)

She is a jealous babe, but I love her, no seriously...she COMMANDS it or I have to sleep in the basement.


----------



## TheBishop (Apr 26, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> This would be like me going to an opera in a foreign language and then berating the creator of the play because he did not write the music and scenes in a way that I could understand.
> 
> To sum it up quickly you are a tiny organism in the middle of space time that will quickly forget your existence. You hold in your brain .00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 of the knowledge in this universe. Relative to this knowledge we use "faith" everyday on our perceptions and beliefs we hold close. It make me laugh to see agnostics or atheist get up set because Christians (or other religious beliefs) need to be "smarter". If they were "smarter" and "enlightened" they would do away with their "faith".



Uhmm no. Bad analogy.  It would be more like me (a highly conservative (fiscal anyway), educated, Political science major) listening to a lecture from a super liberal progressive professor, about  politics, in a room full of weak minded liberal students. The information was not hard to understand nor were the messages hard to interpret.  I found the way they were delivered misleading and the sustenance revolting. 

I do not get mad when christians refuse to get "smart" thats their perogative. I get mad (reallly not even then, I just find it sad )when they claim exclusivity to the truth, unverifiable, and cannot refute logic with aything other than faith.


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 26, 2011)

TheBishop said:


> Uhmm no. Bad analogy.  It would be more like me (a highly conservative (fiscal anyway), educated, Political science major) listening to a lecture from a super liberal progressive professor, about  politics, in a room full of weak minded liberal students. The information was not hard to understand nor were the messages hard to interpret.  I found the way they were delivered misleading and the sustenance revolting.
> 
> I do not get mad when christians refuse to get "smart" thats their perogative. I get mad (reallly not even then, I just find it sad )when they claim exclusivity to the truth, unverifiable, and cannot refute logic with aything other than faith.



How the message was delivered I can not argue because I was not in attendance. 

How about this one? For you to go to Easter church with your agnostic perspective and beliefs and leaving disheveled is the same as going to a forum on thermal dynamics and walking away mad that you did not understand it. 

Your last paragraph screams of hypocrisy. Every single day you live your life on faith in different people and ideas. You even have presumptions that are not logical. Everyone does. When it comes to looking at yourself and your thoughts and seeing how tiny you are relative to this universe and what it took to get me and you to this point of having this conversation...it is illogical for you to be sad that people have faith in a God greater than them.


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 26, 2011)

bullethead said:


> Oh jeepers you should know, the good lord created me and gave me those skills. It was his plan that I write that. It might be a little TOO close and that is why your upset.



So we designed a God and Savior that allowed himself to be tortured, spat on, nailed to a cross, then stabbed with a spear? Man you nailed it. Christian's did an awesome job of designing our hero. 

Come on...it is blatantly obvious. If 1st century citizens designed a hero he would have been more like Hercules, or some other super man that would go and whip some Roman butt. But instead we got a man who walked around to different cities talking to people. Then he walked around some more and talked again. Then he fed a few people. Then he walked to another city. Then a good friend of his sold him out to a Roman governor. He was tortured and crucified with no resistance. Heck, he lasted only a couple of hours on the cross. The average person would survive for a few days. Christians did a great job of creating their deity didn't they? 

Come to think about it...I want my tithe back! I want a new deity!


----------



## atlashunter (Apr 26, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> So we designed a God and Savior that allowed himself to be tortured, spat on, nailed to a cross, then stabbed with a spear? Man you nailed it. Christian's did an awesome job of designing our hero.



Would common themes to the above testify to the truth of other ancient stories?




Thanatos said:


> Come on...it is blatantly obvious. If 1st century citizens designed a hero he would have been more like Hercules, or some other super man that would go and whip some Roman butt. But instead we got a man who walked around to different cities talking to people. Then he walked around some more and talked again. Then he fed a few people. Then he walked to another city. Then a good friend of his sold him out to a Roman governor. He was tortured and crucified with no resistance. Heck, he lasted only a couple of hours on the cross. The average person would survive for a few days. Christians did a great job of creating their deity didn't they?



Sounding awfully jewish there thanatos.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 26, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> So we designed a God and Savior that allowed himself to be tortured, spat on, nailed to a cross, then stabbed with a spear? Man you nailed it. Christian's did an awesome job of designing our hero.
> 
> Come on...it is blatantly obvious. If 1st century citizens designed a hero he would have been more like Hercules, or some other super man that would go and whip some Roman butt. But instead we got a man who walked around to different cities talking to people. Then he walked around some more and talked again. Then he fed a few people. Then he walked to another city. Then a good friend of his sold him out to a Roman governor. He was tortured and crucified with no resistance. Heck, he lasted only a couple of hours on the cross. The average person would survive for a few days. Christians did a great job of creating their deity didn't they?
> 
> Come to think about it...I want my tithe back! I want a new deity!



He did nothing that wasn't claimed to have been done quite a few times before him. Immaculate conception,Virgin birth, Son of God, miracles,  death, risen from the grave... OLD NEWS by the time Jesus got there....only this time it(religion) stuck thanks to Constantine who saved it when it was on it's way out many years later.. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/why/legitimization.html  Odd that the people of the time,,HIS people, the Jews, only believe so much of that story and they were there!!! He may very well have been a real man claiming to be the messiah like a bunch of others before him. All you need to do is convince ONE other person that what your selling is the truth and you have a following. In Jesus case, like MANY others before him, it was a following or movement around a teacher, self proclaimed profit or preacher. Look up any cult for similar followers.

I have a hard time believing that such a powerful god HAD to send his son to do anything for us. He can do whatever he wants, save whoever he wants with the blink of an eye  and yet he chooses to get a regular ole woman pregnant with his child( and immediately make her an outcast in those times), let hundreds of children be murdered because they were after his son, and then put his child through all that KNOWING the outcome. PLEASE!


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 26, 2011)

atlashunter said:


> Sounding awfully jewish there thanatos.



What? The superman could beat up some jews too.


----------



## atlashunter (Apr 26, 2011)

bullethead said:


> He did nothing that wasn't claimed to have been done quite a few times before him. Immaculate conception,Virgin birth, Son of God, miracles,  death, risen from the grave... OLD NEWS by the time Jesus got there....only this time it(religion) stuck thanks to Constantine who saved it when it was on it's way out many years later.. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/why/legitimization.html  Odd that the people of the time,,HIS people, the Jews, only believe so much of that story and they were there!!! He may very well have been a real man claiming to be the messiah like a bunch of others before him. All you need to do is convince ONE other person that what your selling is the truth and you have a following. In Jesus case, like MANY others before him, it was a following or movement around a teacher, self proclaimed profit or preacher.
> 
> I have a hard time believing that such a powerful god HAD to send his son to do anything for us. He can do whatever he wants, save whoever he wants with the blink of an eye  and yet he chooses to get a regular ole woman pregnant with his child( and immediately make her an outcast in those times), let hundreds of children be murdered because they were after his son, and then put his child through all that KNOWING the outcome. PLEASE!





Well said.


----------



## atlashunter (Apr 26, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> What? The superman could beat up some jews too.



Think you missed it. Your description of a super man kicking some Roman butt sounds a lot like what jews were expecting from the messiah and the same reasons you gave are reasons they reject the claim that Jesus was messiah to this day.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 26, 2011)

Sound familiar?

http://www.near-death.com/experiences/origen047.html


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 26, 2011)

bullethead said:


> I have a hard time believing that such a powerful god HAD to send his son to do anything for us. He can do whatever he wants, save whoever he wants with the blink of an eye  and yet he chooses to get a regular ole woman pregnant with his child( and immediately make her an outcast in those times), let hundreds of children be murdered because they were after his son, and then put his child through all that KNOWING the outcome. PLEASE!



It is hard to believe because you are nothing more than a dew drop evaporating in the morning sun. Your questions are absolutely meaningless no matter how important YOU think they are. The quicker you learn this the less abrasive you will be to what people believe or what they choose not to believe.


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 26, 2011)

atlashunter said:


> Think you missed it. Your description of a super man kicking some Roman butt sounds a lot like what jews were expecting from the messiah and the same reasons you gave are reasons they reject the claim that Jesus was messiah to this day.



The point is that our "hero creation" was a sucky creation by hero or deity standards. I understood it.


----------



## atlashunter (Apr 26, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> The point is that our "hero creation" was a sucky creation by hero or deity standards. I understood it.



Pretty much. Especially considering the lack of originality.


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 26, 2011)

bullethead said:


> Sound familiar?
> 
> http://www.near-death.com/experiences/origen047.html



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krishna

No not really.


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 26, 2011)

atlashunter said:


> Pretty much. Especially considering the lack of originality.



Name the other deity the lived Jesus life?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 26, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> It is hard to believe because you are nothing more than a dew drop evaporating in the morning sun. Your questions are absolutely meaningless no matter how important YOU think they are. The quicker you learn this the less abrasive you will be to what people believe or what they choose not to believe.



Right, out of ammo so fire off personal insults. Whatever helps you sleep at night. you have ALL the right answers though so I'll ask another question to you,

Why did Jesus ask God: 'Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?' That is to say, 'My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?'"


----------



## bullethead (Apr 26, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krishna
> 
> No not really.



wikipedia??? I could go on there right now and edit it to say anything I wanted it to say.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 26, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> Name the other deity the lived Jesus life?



Have at it:
http://www.inplainsite.org/html/jesus_savior_fraud.html


----------



## bullethead (Apr 26, 2011)

If we have sin and pay for it because of Adam and Eve, then Jesus died for us to save us and take our sin away, WHY are we still punished for sin?


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 26, 2011)

bullethead said:


> Right, out of ammo so fire off personal insults. Whatever helps you sleep at night. you have ALL the right answers though so I'll ask another question to you,
> 
> Why did Jesus ask God: 'Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?' That is to say, 'My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?'"



Have you not been reading anything i've posted. NO ONE! NOT I! NO ONE has the answers!  

Im glad you brought that quote up. Beyond the physical pain Jesus endured the worst pain of all (one that none of us have felt on this earth) was the point when all of humanity's sin was put onto him. Because God is not the author of sin and blameless for these sins the Trinity was broken. Jesus died carrying our sin with him to H E L L and was no longer connected to God.


----------



## vowell462 (Apr 26, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> Name the other deity the lived Jesus life?



Greek Sky God, Horus. Strikingly similar.


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 26, 2011)

bullethead said:


> If we have sin and pay for it because of Adam and Eve, then Jesus died for us to save us and take our sin away, WHY are we still punished for sin?



Bullethead...you are REALLY killing yourself dude. If you are going to bash a religion and want to be credible at least know what you are talking about. 

Christians have everlasting life because of Christ death. He did not die to keep us from being accountable for our actions.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 26, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> Have you not been reading anything i've posted. NO ONE! NOT I! NO ONE has the answers!
> 
> Im glad you brought that quote up. Beyond the physical pain Jesus endured the worst pain of all (one that none of us have felt on this earth) was the point when all of humanity's sin was put onto him. Because God is not the author of sin and blameless for these sins the Trinity was broken. Jesus died carrying our sin with him to Edited to Remove Profanity ----Edited to Remove Profanity ----Edited to Remove Profanity ----Edited to Remove Profanity ---- and was no longer connected to God.



Well now. This is from a website that has put it like I would have asked it.
   " Jesus and God are one (John 10:30). Jesus could therefore no more tolerate sin than God. This position denies or ignores the true divinity of Jesus.
    Why would Jesus ask "why hast Thou forsaken Me?" if this was the plan all along? Jesus is God; had God actually forsaken Him, he'd know why. Do we think Jesus was just forgetful?
    If God would forsake His only begotten Son, at the very moment that He was making the ultimate sacrifice of absolute obedience and humility, then how can any of us have confidence in God to reward us for our pitiful attempts to be His children?
    A sacrifice has to be perfect at the time of its death (Lev. 22:21). If Jesus became actually guilty, then He deserved to die ("the wages of sin is death" - Rom. 6:23), and was no longer a perfect sacrifice.
    If the literal guilt for our sins could be transferred to Jesus, did it stay until He died? And if not, where did it go? And if God could just remove Jesus' actual guilt when He got ready, then where did He put it? Back on us? If so, then how are we better off now? Away somewhere? Then why not have just done that with our sins to start with, and (again) save Jesus the trouble and pain of coming and living as a man and dying for us?
    If Jesus became literally guilty, what was He guilty of? Vague generalities about sin, or specific sins that people have done? You can't have it both ways: He can't be literally guilty of all the sin of the whole world, but yet not be literally guilty of any specific sin. But if it's specific sin, how could He be guilty of sins not yet committed (mine, for instance)? And if He was guilty of things that I had not yet even done, then how did I end up being guilty of them too, and thus in need of His blood in baptism?
    If Christ became literally guilty of all sins ever committed, and then died for them, how is it that anyone can be lost? Christ, who became literally guilty of all sins of all time, has paid for their sins. Or did Christ's actual guilt only apply to those who would (later) choose to accept Him and be washed in His blood? Is God somehow going back and making Christ guilty of another sin there for a little while on the cross with each sin of which I'm forgiven?"


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 26, 2011)

vowell462 said:


> Greek Sky God, Horus. Strikingly similar.



Strike 2 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horus


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 26, 2011)

bullethead said:


> Well now. This is from a website that has put it like I would have asked it.
> " Jesus and God are one (John 10:30). Jesus could therefore no more tolerate sin than God. This position denies or ignores the true divinity of Jesus.
> Why would Jesus ask "why hast Thou forsaken Me?" if this was the plan all along? Jesus is God; had God actually forsaken Him, he'd know why. Do we think Jesus was just forgetful?
> If God would forsake His only begotten Son, at the very moment that He was making the ultimate sacrifice of absolute obedience and humility, then how can any of us have confidence in God to reward us for our pitiful attempts to be His children?
> ...



O jeez. We can start another thread to tear this apart if you want to.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 26, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> Bullethead...you are REALLY killing yourself dude. If you are going to bash a religion and want to be credible at least know what you are talking about.
> 
> Christians have everlasting life because of Christ death. He did not die to keep us from being accountable for our actions.



ReeeHeeeeHeeeeeeAAALLLLYYYYY? Did Jesus die so that we could be forgiven and go to heaven?


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 26, 2011)

bullethead said:


> ReeeHeeeeHeeeeeeAAALLLLYYYYY? Did Jesus die so that we could be forgiven and go to heaven?



Yes he did but we are still held accountable for our earthly actions. Without this mechanic we would not grow in our faith. Im out for the night. We will continue sparring tomorrow.  Been fun.


----------



## vowell462 (Apr 26, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> Strike 2
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horus



Srtike 2? I didnt bat the first time.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 26, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> Strike 2
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horus



Replay shows it was not a foul ball but just inside the line for a base hit.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa5b.htm


----------



## bullethead (Apr 26, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> Yes he did but we are still held accountable for our earthly actions. Without this mechanic we would not grow in our faith. Im out for the night. We will continue sparring tomorrow.  Been fun.



So then immediately after he died and the slate was wiped clean our sins started all over again? But God would KNOW that would happen and he sent his Son why? 

I do enjoy the conversation


----------



## vowell462 (Apr 26, 2011)

bullethead said:


> Replay shows it was not a foul ball but just inside the line for a base hit.
> http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa5b.htm



beat me to it.


----------



## atlashunter (Apr 26, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> Yes he did but we are still held accountable for our earthly actions. Without this mechanic we would not grow in our faith. Im out for the night. We will continue sparring tomorrow.  Been fun.



Seems you're trying to have it both ways. If you're held accountable for your actions then why the need for a human sacrifice on your behalf? And I was always taught that the sinner who converts and accepts Jesus on their deathbed got heaven everlasting. When and how are they held accountable for their earthly actions?


----------



## stringmusic (Apr 27, 2011)

bullethead said:


> He did nothing that wasn't claimed to have been done quite a few times before him. Immaculate conception,Virgin birth, Son of God, miracles,  death, risen from the grave... OLD NEWS by the time Jesus got there....only this time it(religion) stuck thanks to Constantine who saved it when it was on it's way out many years later.. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/why/legitimization.html  Odd that the people of the time,,HIS people, the Jews, only believe so much of that story and they were there!!! He may very well have been a real man claiming to be the messiah like a bunch of others before him. All you need to do is convince ONE other person that what your selling is the truth and you have a following. In Jesus case, like MANY others before him, it was a following or movement around a teacher, self proclaimed profit or preacher. Look up any cult for similar followers.
> 
> I have a hard time believing that such a powerful god HAD to send his son to do anything for us. He can do whatever he wants, save whoever he wants with the blink of an eye  and yet he chooses to get a regular ole woman pregnant with his child( and immediately make her an outcast in those times), let hundreds of children be murdered because they were after his son, and then put his child through all that KNOWING the outcome. PLEASE!



funny, I cant name one single other self proclaimed messiah, and without google or yahoo, very very few people on this earth could.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 27, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> funny, I cant name one single other self proclaimed messiah, and without google or yahoo, very very few people on this earth could.



Don't beat yourself up over it, one day when you take the time to broaden your religious horizons and want to learn about what else is out there you will be able to have in depth conversations while knowing what you are actually talking about. You won't have to believe in your current beliefs any less, just take the time to take off the blinders and educate yourself about what is out there worldwide.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 27, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> funny, I cant name one single other self proclaimed messiah, and without google or yahoo, very very few people on this earth could.



messiah; One who is anticipated as, regarded as, or professes to be a savior or liberator.

Ever hear of David Koresh? Many people are self proclaimed messiahs.


----------



## TheBishop (Apr 27, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> How about this one? For you to go to Easter church with your agnostic perspective and beliefs and leaving disheveled is the same as going to a forum on thermal dynamics and walking away mad that you did not understand it.
> 
> Your last paragraph screams of hypocrisy. Every single day you live your life on faith in different people and ideas. You even have presumptions that are not logical. Everyone does. When it comes to looking at yourself and your thoughts and seeing how tiny you are relative to this universe and what it took to get me and you to this point of having this conversation...it is illogical for you to be sad that people have faith in a God greater than them.



Uhhm..no agian. I do not find the material confusing, hard to decipher, or beyond understanding.  I am not feeble minded.  I hear the messages loud and clear. 

Not logical? Hypocrytic?  Really? Coming from someone claiming exclusivity of truth and understanding.  Please. 

You claiming my ignorance, as well as others, is only becuase of lack of faith in _your_ views. We are unable to understand, know, becuase we do not share your opinion, is certainly hypocritical.   I never said I find it sad that others have a faith in god.  I said I find it sad that people do as your doing, claiming exclusivity without the ability to verify, then claiming its illogical to doubt you. 

Case in point:  You obviously believe, (you claim to know without any ability to prove) that I cannot understand the message and prayers, becuase I dont have faith like you


----------



## stringmusic (Apr 27, 2011)

bullethead said:


> Don't beat yourself up over it, one day when you take the time to broaden your religious horizons and want to learn about what else is out there you will be able to have in depth conversations while knowing what you are actually talking about. You won't have to believe in your current beliefs any less, just take the time to take off the blinders and educate yourself about what is out there worldwide.



Oh don't worry, I'm not beating myself up for anything. I am glad to learn about other things that are out there and dont feel that I have any blinders on, I have no reason to. My post simply was to convey that without much research, many people know of Jesus Christ, while not knowing of many or any other self proclaimed Saviours. BTW thanks for the insults, if that is the type of "in depth" your speaking of....... no thanks.


----------



## TheBishop (Apr 27, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> My post simply was to convey that without much research, many people know of Jesus Christ, while not knowing of many or any other self proclaimed Saviours.



Thats just because its the most popular _story_ ever told. Thanks to one of the most powerful instituions ever assembled on the planet, the Roman Catholic Church.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 27, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> Oh don't worry, I'm not beating myself up for anything. I am glad to learn about other things that are out there and dont feel that I have any blinders on, I have no reason to. My post simply was to convey that without much research, many people know of Jesus Christ, while not knowing of many or any other self proclaimed Saviours. BTW thanks for the insults, if that is the type of "in depth" your speaking of....... no thanks.



Insults?


----------



## stringmusic (Apr 27, 2011)

TheBishop said:


> Thats just because its the most popular _story_ ever told. Thanks to one of the most powerful instituions ever assembled on the planet, the Roman Catholic Church.



I'm glad that you know that, I hope it serves you well in life.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 27, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> Oh don't worry, I'm not beating myself up for anything. I am glad to learn about other things that are out there and dont feel that I have any blinders on, I have no reason to. My post simply was to convey that without much research, many people know of Jesus Christ, while not knowing of many or any other self proclaimed Saviours. BTW thanks for the insults, if that is the type of "in depth" your speaking of....... no thanks.



Many people know of Jesus because it is the most popular religion in the USA. It was what most believers were taught before they could walk or talk. They became believers because it is all they know and out of repetition. I once NEVER thought about questioning everything I was ever told and taught about Christianity and the Bible. My thoughts went against everything in my upbringing. Most will never take the time to to find out why they believe by seeing what else is out there and comparing.


----------



## stringmusic (Apr 27, 2011)

bullethead said:


> Insults?



Your whole post seem to indicate, to me, that I was not very bright, if you didnt mean it that way, that is fine.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 27, 2011)

Sorry, and sincerely, I did not mean it that way at all. It was not a good way of suggesting what I wanted to say which is that to really know why you believe in what you do, it is best to learn about everything else so you can compare and get an idea of what and how and why others think like they do. We are not far apart in that we have strong convictions about our beliefs, just that our beliefs are not the same.


----------



## stringmusic (Apr 27, 2011)

bullethead said:


> Sorry, and sincerely, I did not mean it that way at all. It was not a good way of suggesting what I wanted to say which is that to really know why you believe in what you do, it is best to learn about everything else so you can compare and get an idea of what and how and why others think like they do. We are not far apart in that we have strong convictions about our beliefs, just that our beliefs are not the same.



Thanks, I appreciate that. I know some things(fundamental doctrines) of most of the top religions in the world, I am not any type of theologian by any stretch of the imagination. I have alot to learn and a lot more to read.


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 28, 2011)

TheBishop said:


> Uhhm..no agian. I do not find the material confusing, hard to decipher, or beyond understanding.  I am not feeble minded.  I hear the messages loud and clear.



You can hear the message, but how much time have you taken to truly try and understand the Gospel or the whole Bible? There are men that dedicate their whole lives to this and do not comprehend it all...yet you sit in a pew one Sunday morning and have the same knowledge to discern with as C.S. Lewis. Doubt it. 



TheBishop said:


> You claiming my ignorance, as well as others, is only becuase of lack of faith in _your_ views. We are unable to understand, know, becuase we do not share your opinion, is certainly hypocritical.   I never said I find it sad that others have a faith in god.  I said I find it sad that people do as your doing, claiming exclusivity without the ability to verify, then claiming its illogical to doubt you.



My apologies. I have miss-communicated my beliefs to you. What is illogical is to not believe in A God, or to be an Atheist. Choosing which God you believe is purely driven by the environment you were born into. If I was born in Japan I would probably be secular. If i was born in Saudi Arabia I would have probably been a Muslim, and so on and so forth. I choose to have FAITH in the Judeo Christian God after doing my due diligence. I held many of your agnostic views not to long ago. You must understand that every morning you wake up you are living your life full of your own faiths and beliefs. You just choose to accept or deny ones that other people choose to have or not  have. 



TheBishop said:


> Case in point:  You obviously believe, (you claim to know without any ability to prove) that I cannot understand the message and prayers, becuase I dont have faith like you



The reason you can not have faith like me is because you choose not to. You seem like a rational, intelligent person but you refuse to humble yourself, not accepting that you are a pot of wet clay being molded by God. Your trying your hardest to make your own way and you can not. You will come and go like the billions before you. Shaped perfectly for your purpose in this universe.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 29, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> You can hear the message, but how much time have you taken to truly try and understand the Gospel or the whole Bible? There are men that dedicate their whole lives to this and do not comprehend it all...yet you sit in a pew one Sunday morning and have the same knowledge to discern with as C.S. Lewis. Doubt it.
> 
> Geez, don't take this the wrong way but are you one of the men that understand it all without that lifetime of dedicated study? Maybe with more time spent your current thoughts will change??
> 
> ...



You admit that it is all about individual choice but you do not accept any other choice than the one you choose.


----------



## TheBishop (Apr 29, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> You can hear the message, but how much time have you taken to truly try and understand the Gospel or the whole Bible? There are men that dedicate their whole lives to this and do not comprehend it all...yet you sit in a pew one Sunday morning and have the same knowledge to discern with as C.S. Lewis. Doubt it.



I was indoctrinated in the roman catholic church for 18 years, sunday school every weekend. At least for the last eight I desperately searched for reasons to stay committed. The more I searched, the more disenchanted I became. Until eventually I decided it wasn't for me and went looking for something else. Argueably thats were I am at now. Do I claim to be a theologist? No.  But that is just another reason to stay my course.   If you have to be a religious scholar to understand his _word_, doesn't sound like a god of all. I have never talked to any religious scholar that could give me the rational answers I seek. I have had discussion with a range of individuals, preists, deacons, preachers, and even a bishop (title/ not name ).



> My apologies. I have miss-communicated my beliefs to you. What is illogical is to not believe in A God, or to be an Atheist. Choosing which God you believe is purely driven by the environment you were born into. If I was born in Japan I would probably be secular. If i was born in Saudi Arabia I would have probably been a Muslim, and so on and so forth. I choose to have FAITH in the Judeo Christian God after doing my due diligence. I held many of your agnostic views not to long ago. You must understand that every morning you wake up you are living your life full of your own faiths and beliefs. You just choose to accept or deny ones that other people choose to have or not  have.




First I'm not an athiest. Second it is not illogical to not believe in god, that statement is utterly ridiculous.  There is certainly more logic leading to question the exsistence of god rather proving his exsistence.  Even on this forum the stonger arguments have come from the atheist side.  Your right on one accout I am living my life full of _my_ beliefs and faith. They are based, on my observation, with influence from others , just like everyone elses in  the world. 



> The reason you can not have faith like me is because you choose not to. You seem like a rational, intelligent person but you refuse to humble yourself, not accepting that you are a pot of wet clay being molded by God. Your trying your hardest to make your own way and you can not. You will come and go like the billions before you. Shaped perfectly for your purpose in this universe.



I'm sorry but I seem to be making my own way just fine (a little tougher in this economy but that is another isssue for another place).  I have been humbled more times than I can count, with more dreams shattered and had to pick myself alot more than once.   I have never lost faith in myself or the will to push on.  If god is all loving, all powerful entity you claim, he sure going about molding me in a way I would never wish upon any I hold dear. 

Go back and read your replies to me.  Can you not make one were you _don't _ claim or exhibit exclusivity of the truth?  Can you not except the fact you might not _know_ what is the truth?


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 29, 2011)

bullethead said:


> You can hear the message, but how much time have you taken to truly try and understand the Gospel or the whole Bible? There are men that dedicate their whole lives to this and do not comprehend it all...yet you sit in a pew one Sunday morning and have the same knowledge to discern with as C.S. Lewis. Doubt it.
> 
> Geez, don't take this the wrong way but are you one of the men that understand it all without that lifetime of dedicated study? Maybe with more time spent your current thoughts will change??
> 
> ...



I wish people would read the threads before they post. I will be the first in line to tell you I dont know as much as I should about my religion. 

Sure...what your point about choice? Every one knows it is an individual choice. 

The problem with most agnostics or atheist is they form an *ignorant* opinion on Judeo Christianity.


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 29, 2011)

bullethead said:


> You admit that it is all about individual choice but you do not accept any other choice than the one you choose.



What?  When did I say that? The only thing I do not accept is the lack of belief in A God. My personal beliefs are that of a living Christ, but if you choose not to partake in his Grace that is your "choice".


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 29, 2011)

TheBishop said:


> I was indoctrinated in the roman catholic church for 18 years, sunday school every weekend. At least for the last eight I desperately searched for reasons to stay committed. The more I searched, the more disenchanted I became. Until eventually I decided it wasn't for me and went looking for something else. Argueably thats were I am at now. Do I claim to be a theologist? No.  But that is just another reason to stay my course.   If you have to be a religious scholar to understand his _word_, doesn't sound like a god of all. I have never talked to any religious scholar that could give me the rational answers I seek. I have had discussion with a range of individuals, preists, deacons, preachers, and even a bishop (title/ not name ).
> 
> 
> 
> ...



What questions do you seek answers too? I probably cant answer them, but I would like to know. You do not have to be a bible scholar to understand the Bible, but it takes more than sitting in a pew every Sunday to understand God's word...especially if you are a child. You definitely cant get on an outdoor forum and argue with rednecks like me to understand his word. What is your profession? I don't need to know the name of your company. Just your profession. 


The only way I got to my beliefs today was through questioning God. Did he exist? Why are we here? Why am I here? Why did he allow evil in this world...etc. It is my belief that you can NOT have a strong faith in something unless you are constantly questioning that belief. That goes for all aspects of my life. 

Last, when you go through adversity in life what does that do for you? Does it make you stronger? The same as when a knife gets dull. How do you make it sharp? You use another abrasive surface to hone the blade making it sharp again.


----------



## Thanatos (Apr 29, 2011)

TheBishop said:


> Go back and read your replies to me.  Can you not make one were you _don't _ claim or exhibit exclusivity of the truth?  Can you not except the fact you might not _know_ what is the truth?



I can not. What I know is the truth in my perspective. In you perspective it is fairy tales. I understand this. I hope and pray that you would investigate your lack faith in THIS subject because you can easily accept faith in other subjects. If you are interested I will send you a great book that answers many agnostic and atheist questions about Christianity.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 29, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> What?  When did I say that? The only thing I do not accept is the lack of belief in A God. My personal beliefs are that of a living Christ, but if you choose not to partake in his Grace that is your "choice".






> You seem like a rational, intelligent person but you refuse to humble yourself, not accepting that you are a pot of wet clay being molded by God. Your trying your hardest to make your own way and you can not. You will come and go like the billions before you. Shaped perfectly for your purpose in this universe.


EXACTLY! You do not accept someone else choosing not to believe in a God as you do.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 29, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> I wish people would read the threads before they post. I will be the first in line to tell you I dont know as much as I should about my religion.
> 
> Sure...what your point about choice? Every one knows it is an individual choice.
> 
> The problem with most agnostics or atheist is they form an *ignorant* opinion on Judeo Christianity.




I DO read the threads and I am not sure how you can suggest that someone believe in something they don't understand,which is also something that you do not understand, but recommend they believe in it. ONLY when they do not believe in it, then they are not getting out of it what you think they should....???

It is like saying read this book, it is a GREAT book, it changed my life.

"What is it about?"

Oh I really don't know, I didn't understand it, but I am going to live my life according to it.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 29, 2011)

The problem with most agnostics or atheist is they form an INTELLIGENT opinion on Judeo Christianity.


----------



## atlashunter (Apr 30, 2011)

Many agnostics and atheists are former believers who lost faith by studying the bible and subjecting it to critical thought. Calling them ignorant will get you no where. Show us our ignorance. Make the stronger case on these threads on a rational basis. The Christian side is generally the ones who look ignorant in this forum. Until that changes you aren't going to be very persuasive.


----------



## TheBishop (Apr 30, 2011)

atlashunter said:


> Many agnostics and atheists are former believers who lost faith by studying the bible and subjecting it to critical thought. Calling them ignorant will get you no where. Show us our ignorance. Make the stronger case on these threads on a rational basis. The Christian side is generally the ones who look ignorant in this forum. Until that changes you aren't going to be very persuasive.




x2


----------



## Thanatos (May 1, 2011)

atlashunter said:


> Many agnostics and atheists are former believers who lost faith by studying the bible and subjecting it to critical thought. Calling them ignorant will get you no where. Show us our ignorance. Make the stronger case on these threads on a rational basis. The Christian side is generally the ones who look ignorant in this forum. Until that changes you aren't going to be very persuasive.



The problem lies within the word "studying". It is such a subjective term. Let's look at some examples. The first is someone who studies for an algebra test. They open their book and redo a couple home work problems for an hour or two and they are prepared to make an A on their test the next day. Next example is someone who is studying for their medical boards to be able to practice medicine in their state. This takes weeks and even months to prepare for. Some people even pay tutors to help them study and prepare for their boards. 

Now, answer this. How dedicated were you at studying Judeo Christianity? Did you thumb through the Bible and read a parable about a bear coming down from the mountains and eating little kids and say, "What the...this book is crazy." Or, maybe you went online to look for some answers and you found some websites (like the ones listed above) who are without a doubt slanted in one direction on the topic and you decided to make your decision from that? Not a very good way to form an opinion is it? 

If Christianity "could" be true then you would need to study the material like a doctor would study for his boards. That means months of intensive studying and relying on others who are more knowledgeable about the subject to help prepare you for the test. That means reading from OBJECTIVE sources about the material. Not finding websites that are slanted one way, OR read slanted websites from both perspectives and create your own opinion that is some where in the middle. 

Please do not recite being "raised" a certain way either. When you 8 years old being force fed a religion all your thinking about is going home and riding your bike and playing video games. To make this VERY important decision you need maturity and knowledge. Not your perspective! You need honest to goodness objective information that would take months and years to compile in order to make a decision. 

Sorry for wall of text


----------



## bullethead (May 1, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> The problem lies within the word "studying". It is such a subjective term. Let's look at some examples. The first is someone who studies for an algebra test. They open their book and redo a couple home work problems for an hour or two and they are prepared to make an A on their test the next day. Next example is someone who is studying for their medical boards to be able to practice medicine in their state. This takes weeks and even months to prepare for. Some people even pay tutors to help them study and prepare for their boards.
> 
> Now, answer this. How dedicated were you at studying Judeo Christianity? Did you thumb through the Bible and read a parable about a bear coming down from the mountains and eating little kids and say, "What the...this book is crazy." Or, maybe you went online to look for some answers and you found some websites (like the ones listed above) who are without a doubt slanted in one direction on the topic and you decided to make your decision from that? Not a very good way to form an opinion is it?
> 
> ...



That door swings both ways, yet SO MANY base their beliefs without any of what you suggest. The answer is always that they don't NEED to study anything, their faith is all that is needed......


----------



## bullethead (May 1, 2011)

Why is so much required for the non-believers and so little for the believers?


----------



## atlashunter (May 1, 2011)

The condensed version of what you are saying Thanatos is that "you studied but you don't understand, study more". The simple fact of the matter is you refuse to acknowledge that people can fully comprehend what the bible says, in the context intended, and reject it on that basis. If you or anyone else here thinks that the non-believers side of the debate is ignorant then demonstrate it. When 2 Kings 2:23-24 is brought up, explain the story in the context that you think makes it not reflect so badly on God. Demonstrate to those using it how they are ignorant. You aren't doing that. Instead you're trying to take the easy way out and dismiss any objection to the bible by accusing people of not having spent enough time studying the bible to understand it as you do. Have YOU spent the requisite amount of time? If so then it should be easy for you to point out the errors. And yet that consistently doesn't happen on this forum.

Yes people can recite their upbringing as experience with the tenets of a religion. It's dishonest to say on the one hand that children should be brought up in the way that they should go so that when they are old they will not depart from it, and then when they do to tell them that they can't say anything or form any negative judgments based on what they were taught from early childhood. You want to spread your religion through childhood indoctrination (and such indoctrination is enshrined in scripture) then that indoctrination can certainly be cited as informing religious decisions when they don't go as intended.

One more point concerning ignorance. There is no such animal as a monolithic christian theology which all christians agree on. Nor is any one bound to accept your views on theological questions any more than you are bound to accept theirs. So when you accuse others of ignorance it may be a legitimate theological disagreement on which the ignorance dismissal could equally be tossed right back at you. That this is true just serves to demonstrate the human origins of your religion and it's text.


----------



## bullethead (May 1, 2011)

B-R-A-V-O atlas!


----------

