Questioning Christianity

[wrist cutter]

[QUOTE=Siren]Here's a question for anyone who feels like answering.

If God does exist, why haven't we seen Him?[/QUOTE]

Wouldn't that make things too easy? And for once I'm not being sarcastic.

[Baron Samedi]

[size=1]wrist cutter is right...

But anyway, I don't believe in God. I agree with you Alex. But I'm sure that a 'believer' will be able to fill us in on the real deal with the situation.[/size]

[Guest ScirosDarkblade]

We can't see electrons, but we know they exist based on how things interact in certain experiments. Maybe religious people are convinced of God's existence the same way (although in one case you're dealing with substantial evidence and in the other you're dealing with bull)...

Alex, that's what makes religion different from science. One is based on [i]faith[/i].

[Adahn]

[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=darkolivegreen]Let's see if I can answer everyone's questions in 5 minutes before class. Azurewolf, you basically said, in every drawn out paragraph, that the Christians and I interpret the Bible differently. Good job. What I want is for someone to question my interpretation. If you won't do that, I won't reply to any of your posts. Baron and Siren, God showed himself 2,000 years ago, and he did a pretty good job of it. Is He going to come back because people say, "It's been too long! We need to see you again, or we won't believe in you!"? Also, it is my belief that He lives inside of me. Yes, I've talked to Him, but I'm talking to the truth. You ever debate with yourself about things you'd like to change internally? He speaks with your voice. It's actually pretty fun talking to Him. He has all the answers.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]EDIT: Out of class, let me go more in depth.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]Must we constantly see reminders of what we know is true for it to remain true? Do I have to go stand by an apple tree and wait for an apple to fall to make sure there is still gravity? If God shows himself to us in our lifetime, it's only a matter of time before people whine that they've never seen Him. It's been 2,000 years, perhaps next time it will be 200 before people complain. And then 20. Then we'll need a reminder every 2 years. He came and took care of it all 2,000 years ago, and if you won't believe that any of those things happened, why would you believe anything now?[/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f][/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]Oh, and Baron. I'll reply to your other post a.s.a.p., but I need someone else to post first.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[Kitty]

[COLOR=Blue][SIZE=1]Frankly, I don't believe in God, Satin, or angels. And especially not what saints say about God. Those who "talk" to God, really, they're just insane.

Call me stupid and irrational, but I need evidence. Proof. When we die, we rot in our graves. Our conciousness disappears and never comes back. You live one life. That's all you get.

You don't talk to God, you talk to yourself. Your own dependance on believing that there is someone that started all this, that there was never nothingness where you're standing (or sitting) this moment, is what makes you "hear" Him. Your belief in His existance makes you feel like you know he's there.

He isn't really there.

But, then again, that's just my opinion. Me being an athiest, I've come to hate most God believers for getting so much **** about what I've chosen to believe. That's also why I'm in a personal war with my own mother. Religion is basically ********, lies to make us feel better. Nothing more. Nothing less.

I wait to see how people respond to my above text. Or rather, I wait to get bashed.[/SIZE][/COLOR]

[Adahn]

[quote name='Kitty][color=blue][size=1]Frankly, I don't believe in God, Satin, or angels. And especially not what saints say about God. Those who "talk" to God, really, they're just insane.[size=2'].[color=#000000][/quote][/color][/size][/size][/color]
[color=blue][size=1][size=2][color=#000000][/color][/size][/size][/color]
[size=1][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=darkolivegreen][b]Well, you have a right to say almost all this. I assure you, satin is real, and it's soft and wonderful. I agree that most people who talk to God are just kidding themselves. The reach out with their minds, not expecting an answer. I reach in with my mind, and I get my answers.[/b][/color][/size][/font][/size]
[color=blue][size=1][size=2][color=#000000][/color][/size]
[QUOTE=Kitty]
Call me stupid and irrational, but I need evidence. Proof. When we die, we rot in our graves. Our conciousness disappears and never comes back. You live one life. That's all you get. .[color=#000000][/QUOTE][/color]
[color=#000000][/color]
[font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f][b]What you need is for lots of people to tell you what to believe. Do you have proof that atoms exist? Everybody sure says a whole lot about them. Chemistry and Christianity are actually extremely similar. They both require faith, and they both answer alot of questions. Yes, I do know people who don't believe in chemistry. You're no more irrational than they are. You use the same logic.[/b][/color][/size][/font]
[color=#000000][/color]
[QUOTE=Kitty]
You don't talk to God, you talk to yourself. Your own dependance on believing that there is someone that started all this, that there was never nothingness where you're standing (or sitting) this moment, is what makes you "hear" Him. Your belief in His existance makes you feel like you know he's there.

He isn't really there..[color=#000000][/QUOTE][/color]
[color=#000000][/color]
[font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f][b]You can't physically hear your own voice in your head when you talk to yourself. Therefore, since the mind has no physical representation, it doesn't exist. It isn't really there. To me, you don't exist. You're just words on OB. Until I can see you or hear you or touch you, you're nothing.[/b][/color][/size][/font]
[color=#000000][/color]
[QUOTE=Kitty]
But, then again, that's just my opinion. Me being an athiest, I've come to hate most God believers for getting so much **** about what I've chosen to believe. That's also why I'm in a personal war with my own mother. Religion is basically ********, lies to make us feel better. Nothing more. Nothing less..[color=#000000][/QUOTE][/color]
[color=#000000][/color]
[font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f][b]I know people who hate God-believers, too. Here's something to make you warm and comfy. To me, you're no better or worse than the millions of Christians out there. Their hell doesn't exist. They will end up in the same place as you; in the dirt. I, personally, believe in rebirth as a punishment. Your consciousness doesn't exist, and your body rots, but no part of you burns eternally. Anybody who bitches at you for that reason is an asshole. I think a part of you will live on; your soul. You have chosen to throw your life away, so you will be born again with another chance. Perhaps I'll recognize you when we live in a perfect world where everyone has denied hell and death and accepted Jesus in their hearts.[/b][/color][/size][/font]
[color=#000000][/color]
[QUOTE=Kitty]
I wait to see how people respond to my above text. Or rather, I wait to get bashed.[/size][/color][/QUOTE]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]You probably don't even find this insulting. However, this would make most Christians turn over in their graves. I can tell you this. You have a better chance of being saved than they do.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[Brasil]

The existence of God still comes into question, however, even as one quotes the Bible, because the Bible is still written by humans, and humans are liable to make mistakes, misinterpret, and most importantly, apply their own meaning to things.

The Bible is an interesting piece of literature, simply because it's nothing more than a mythological text blown way out of proportion. If you were to look at the various creation stories throughout the world, various mythos of particular races and cultures, you will find there is a very similar trait about them:

All of those stories attempt to explain the unexplainable (at least, what was scientifically impossible to explain back then).

An example of this is ancient Sumerian/Babylonian/Mesopotamian texts like Epic of Gilgamesh, texts that attributed the flooding of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers to the gods. It was nature that scared them. It was nature that they did not understand. It was nature viewed as a threat to mankind, and thus, the humans were forced to create mythos (rationalizations) in order to better cope with this destruction.

Odyssey and Iliad are other examples. Nearly the entire works are filled with sacrifices, praise songs, verses, etc, all dedicated to the gods, so that the gods will smile upon them by granting Odysseus safe voyage on the seas. Regularly, they sacrificed to Poseidon so they could travel safely.

Beowulf is yet another example of a personification of death (Grendel and Grendel's mum) to better cope with death itself. Beowulf kills Grendel and Dam. What does that say about the story? What does that say about the purpose? It's a feel-good story, albeit an incredibly gory and bloody one. It's written to entertain and improve morale.

The Bible is no different. It's a collection of short stories written over many years (Gilgamesh, Iliad, Beowulf, anyone?) that attempt to engage the reader in a comfortable manner, to teach them a moral lesson, life lesson, and so on. Yet, it's been elevated to Canon status, when if you were to look at it objectively, it's just another subjective look at nature and the human condition, just like Gilgamesh, Iliad, Beowulf, et al.

I'm not saying that anyone written of in the Bible was hallucinating or anything, because that's just silly. What I [i]am[/i] saying, though, is, like I've said previously, I seriously doubt the..."realness" of what the Bible says, because let's face it. Back then, those people were far, far more impressionable and simple than we are now, and they would "see" things in a much more fantastic way, because that's the only way they could explain things ("God wants it to be this way").

How old is the Bible these days? 2000 years old? 2500? More than that? We've seen throughout literary history that the stories of Victorian England, Ancient Rome, India, Russia, Mesopotamia, Greece, America, Germanic England, etc, are all interchangeable. You'd be surprised that you can remove something like the story of Abraham and replace it with portions of the Bhagavad Gita and nobody would know the difference thematically. Character-wise, yes, there's a difference, but that's a minor difference.

Anything you read in the Bible can be found countless times in other pieces of literature, some dated after the Bible, but some dated far, far before.

What I'm saying is...the Bible isn't true. God isn't real. It's all a giant ancient rationalization that fits into the larger rationalization of ancient literary history. Like Iliad and Beowulf, the Bible is a simple mythology based on nature.

Adahn, in talking with yourself, you're doing simply that: talking with yourself. You are still supplying your own answers, and the only reason you believe God (or truth) to be talking to you is because you believe God (or truth) to be talking to you. That doesn't mean He is, however. It's not objective; it's subjective, and subjectivity is not truth.

[Adahn]

[quote name='Siren']The existence of God still comes into question, however, even as one quotes the Bible, because the Bible is still written by humans, and humans are liable to make mistakes, misinterpret, and most importantly, apply their own meaning to things.[/quote]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=darkolivegreen]This applies to everything. One must therefore be critical of everything he himself has not written, and take no one's interpretation as fact. However, some things that have been written do have a certain amount of truth to them. My ideas are based on impressions I get when I think certain things. This is occasionally started by what I read in a book. I describe theories and ideas I've never seen before, all the time. I apply my own meanings because I am distrustful of anyone elses. Everybody else isn't right all the time. I am.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[QUOTE=Siren]
The Bible is an interesting piece of literature, simply because it's nothing more than a mythological text blown way out of proportion. If you were to look at the various creation stories throughout the world, various mythos of particular races and cultures, you will find there is a very similar trait about them:[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Siren]

[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]You do realize that you are seeing parallels in certain texts, and are basing your conclusion that all is untrue upon those parallels, right? I always thought that when certain things show up over and over (periodic trends in chemistry, for example), there is some sort of truth driving them. If you'll notice, I have read the Bible, and drawn out those parallels which can be found in other religions. I believe the first reply to this thread called me a Christian-Buddhist hybrid. Your logic seems a little backwards to me.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

All of those stories attempt to explain the unexplainable (at least, what was scientifically impossible to explain back then).[/QUOTE][QUOTE=Siren]

[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]Most of the stories surrounding Jesus did not attempt to explain anything unexplainable, but rather placed before us certain events that were unexplainable. Jesus didn't create rivers and valleys or turn people into dolphins. He raised the dead.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

An example of this is ancient Sumerian/Babylonian/Mesopotamian texts like Epic of Gilgamesh, texts that attributed the flooding of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers to the gods. It was nature that scared them. It was nature that they did not understand. It was nature viewed as a threat to mankind, and thus, the humans were forced to create mythos (rationalizations) in order to better cope with this destruction.[/QUOTE]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]The old testament follows this very well, what with plagues and droughts. However, the new testament doesn't deal with any of that at all, and that is where I get most of my ideas from. If you can find something that fits anything you said here in the new testament, I would appreciate seeing it.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[QUOTE=Siren]
Odyssey and Iliad are other examples. Nearly the entire works are filled with sacrifices, praise songs, verses, etc, all dedicated to the gods, so that the gods will smile upon them by granting Odysseus safe voyage on the seas. Regularly, they sacrificed to Poseidon so they could travel safely.[/QUOTE]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]The old testament, again, is full of sacrifice, I view Jesus as the final sacrifice, and that anything further is not only displeasing to God, but it is insulting.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[QUOTE=Siren]
Beowulf is yet another example of a personification of death (Grendel and Grendel's mum) to better cope with death itself. Beowulf kills Grendel and Dam. What does that say about the story? What does that say about the purpose? It's a feel-good story, albeit an incredibly gory and bloody one. It's written to entertain and improve morale.
The Bible is no different. It's a collection of short stories written over many years (Gilgamesh, Iliad, Beowulf, anyone?) that attempt to engage the reader in a comfortable manner, to teach them a moral lesson, life lesson, and so on. Yet, it's been elevated to Canon status, when if you were to look at it objectively, it's just another subjective look at nature and the human condition, just like Gilgamesh, Iliad, Beowulf, et al.[/QUOTE]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]The Bible is far from what you would call a look at nature and the human condition. The Bible throws humanity in our face, telling us that we were not meant to live and die. It says we can achieve eternal life on earth. That is the most unnatural thing someone could say.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[QUOTE=Siren]
I'm not saying that anyone written of in the Bible was hallucinating or anything, because that's just silly. What I [i]am[/i] saying, though, is, like I've said previously, I seriously doubt the..."realness" of what the Bible says, because let's face it. Back then, those people were far, far more impressionable and simple than we are now, and they would "see" things in a much more fantastic way, because that's the only way they could explain things ("God wants it to be this way").[/QUOTE]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]These were not "things" that were just happening. This was a person that everyone could touch and see, performing personal miracles. He didn't call lightning down or transform people into animals. He took people that had been deformed all their life and made them perfect with his touch. Again, this is not explaining the unexplainable. This is throwing reality in our faces and telling us that we're just not getting something.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[QUOTE=Siren]
How old is the Bible these days? 2000 years old? 2500? More than that? We've seen throughout literary history that the stories of Victorian England, Ancient Rome, India, Russia, Mesopotamia, Greece, America, Germanic England, etc, are all interchangeable. You'd be surprised that you can remove something like the story of Abraham and replace it with portions of the Bhagavad Gita and nobody would know the difference thematically. Character-wise, yes, there's a difference, but that's a minor difference.
Anything you read in the Bible can be found countless times in other pieces of literature, some dated after the Bible, but some dated far, far before.
[/QUOTE]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]Again, if you see parallels in different texts, is it not more logical to search for an underlying truth, rather than make the assumption that it is all false?[/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f][/color][/size][/font][/b]
[QUOTE=Siren]
What I'm saying is...the Bible isn't true. God isn't real. It's all a giant ancient rationalization that fits into the larger rationalization of ancient literary history. Like Iliad and Beowulf, the Bible is a simple mythology based on nature.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Siren]

[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]Again, the Bible presents the most unnatural idea to us. The idea that it is possible for someone to live and not die.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

Adahn, in talking with yourself, you're doing simply that: talking with yourself. You are still supplying your own answers, and the only reason you believe God (or truth) to be talking to you is because you believe God (or truth) to be talking to you. That doesn't mean He is, however. It's not objective; it's subjective, and subjectivity is not truth.[/QUOTE]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]Things go on with me that are completely out of my control. There is a driving force with its own will that lives inside me, and I don't know what it is. I can't control it. I can't talk to it. I can only try and understand what its motives are. It's never led me astray, and this is the direction it's pushing me in, now. I trust more in myself than I do in any book or anyone's teachings. He that is inside me can do me no harm.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[AzureWolf]

[quote name='Adahn][b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=darkolivegreen]Azurewolf, you basically said, in every drawn out paragraph, that the Christians and I interpret the Bible differently. Good job. What I want is for someone to question my interpretation. If you won't do that, I won't reply to any of your posts.[/B][/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR][/QUOTE] [FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]XD Oh man, this is just hilarious. Give me a moment to quote myself. [QUOTE']Oh man, do you even think before you write?[/quote] That sentence is important because you seem to run away from my [B]questions to your interpretations[/B] either by accident or by sheer ignorance. I'm guessing it's the latter since you have ran away from so many of my comments and just made a vague, unapplicable reply and hoped no one would notice. I'm not going to just let it go this time, though.

On the other hand, your response to my post - YET AGAIN - could be applied to favor my argument. My paragraphs draw out your flaws, which you thankfully (after 90+ posts) now noticed: you have not said even ONE good reason why you are right. If you can't really defend your beliefs with vague, illogical, and hypocritical support, then this thread should just be closed because of how spammy your posts are. Yeah, I just threw your reply - as I predicted I could - right back at you.

Now, if you could, by any glory of your mind, spit out some support that doesn't consist of roundabout logic, then by all means, do so. As it stands, you have only shown how you arrived at your conclusions, and even that took an exhaustive time and effort to get out of you. I mean, it wasn't supported at all, but at least it was a start (and should have been in your first post). Now, is there any reason (that can't be used to support the opposing argument) that you are right and Chrisitianity's interpretation is wrong?

If "because I am me" is your best hit, pack up and go home, kid.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[Adahn]

[QUOTE=Adahn][i]1Cr 15:12 Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead? [/i]
[i]1Cr 15:13 But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen: [/i]
[i]1Cr 15:14 And if Christ be not risen, then [is] our preaching vain, and your faith [is] also vain. [/i]
[i]1Cr 15:15 Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not. [/i]
[i]1Cr 15:16 For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: [/i]
[i]1Cr 15:17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith [is] vain; ye are yet in your sins. [/i]
[i]1Cr 15:18 Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. [/i]

The first few lines establish that there is a resurrection. The last line speaks of those that have died not being able to be reborn. To show this, he uses the word "asleep" instead of "dead". Those that sleep can wake up, but if Christ did not do as was said, then those that sleep can never wake up again.

[i]1Cr 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.[/i]

If we all died in Adam, does that not mean there is a part of us within him, and him within us? If there is anything that can be passed through all of humanity, it is the human soul.

[i]1Cr 15:26 The last enemy [that] shall be destroyed [is] death.[/i]

This is pretty straightforward. No more death. Not much interpretation. Jesus destroyed death, so we wouldn't have to endure it any longer. Of course, you can still die if you deny that he destroyed it. Your choice.


[i]1Cr 15:32 If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not? let us eat and drink; for to morrow we die.[/i]

This says there's no point in living if you're going to die. Life is meaningless if death is the end. Do what you want, it doesn't matter, it's not like you're going to [i]live forever[/i] .

[i]1Cr 15:35 But some [man] will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come? [/i]
[i]1Cr 15:36 [Thou] fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die: [/i]
[i]1Cr 15:37 And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other [grain]: [/i]
[i]1Cr 15:38 But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body.[/i]

The meaning of this is a little hazy to me, but it says that seeds are souls, and God gives souls bodies. I think it speaks of reproduction here. If you attempt to reproduce, you are providing the flesh for the body which God may or may not put a soul into.

[i]1Cr 15:42 So also [is] the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: [/i]
[i]1Cr 15:43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: [/i]
[i]1Cr 15:44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.[/i]

This says that we are reborn into sin, but we can attain immortality through faith in Jesus. It tells of the difference between those that are saved from death and those that have faith in death. If you live in a natural body, you will die a natural death. If you live in a spiritual body (saved by Christ) then you are free from death.

[i]1Cr 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam [was made] a quickening spirit. [/i]
[i]1Cr 15:46 Howbeit that [was] not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. [/i]
[i]1Cr 15:47 The first man [is] of the earth, earthy: the second man [is] the Lord from heaven.[/i]
[i]1Cr 15:48 As [is] the earthy, such [are] they also that are earthy: and as [is] the heavenly, such [are] they also that are heavenly. [/i]
[i]1Cr 15:49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. [/i]

This further distinguishes the spiritual and the natural. Adam was made to be perfect, but he was changed by sin into a quickening spirit, one that rushes towards death over and over. Jesus was brought into this world to save us from the law of sin and death. If we are as he is, we will be like those that are heavenly, which is without death. We bear the images of the earthy and the heavenly because we have a choice between faith in death and faith in eternal life.

[i]1Cr 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. [/i]
[i]1Cr 15:51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,[/i]
[i]1Cr 15:52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. [/i]
[i]1Cr 15:53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal [must] put on immortality. [/i]
[i]1Cr 15:54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.[/i]

This says that if you are earthy (of flesh and blood) you cannot have eternal life. He refers to sleep here as death, saying that some people will achieve eternal life without death, and others will sleep (die). Eventually, all of us will be changed, but why continue to die and be reborn if we can have our eternal life now? When this happens to all of us, death will be gone from everyone, forever.

[i]1Cr 15:55 O death, where [is] thy sting? O grave, where [is] thy victory? [/i]
[i]1Cr 15:56 The sting of death [is] sin; and the strength of sin [is] the law. [/i]
[i]1Cr 15:57 But thanks [be] to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.[/i]
[i]1Cr 15:58 Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord. [/i]

This talks of how Jesus has defeated death. It also says that sin and death are very closely related, and it can be said that when Adam sinned, Adam brought death into the world. It says that one should continue to do God's will throughout life, because we are clearing the path for death to be taken from everyone, whether they like it or not.[/QUOTE]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=darkolivegreen]Here, Azurewolf. I'll repost the entire thing. You didn't question anything I said here. If you had, I would have argued back, and given more support. However, since you didn't question it, I don't exactly know what you're trying to get at. I'd also like to point out that you are extremely disrespectful and self-righteous. I dare you to disagree.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[AzureWolf]

[quote name='Adahn][b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=darkolivegreen]Here, Azurewolf. I'll repost the entire thing. You didn't question anything I said here. If you had, I would have argued back, and given more support. However, since you didn't question it, I don't exactly know what you're trying to get at. I'd also like to point out that you are extremely disrespectful and self-righteous. I dare you to disagree.[/color][/size][/font][/b][/QUOTE][FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]Adahn, here, I'll repost [B]what I just said[/B]: [QUOTE]Now, if you could, by any glory of your mind, spit out some support that doesn't consist of roundabout logic, then by all means, do so. [B]As it stands, you have only shown how you arrived at your conclusions, and even that took an exhaustive time and effort to get out of you. I mean, it wasn't supported at all, but at least it was a start (and should have been in your first post).[/B'] Now, is there any reason (that can't be used to support the opposing argument) that you are right and Chrisitianity's interpretation is wrong?[/quote]I bolded something you should read, if not the entire thing. That entire post you are referring to: how does it disprove Christianity? It's only your reasoning behind your beliefs. It doesn't show how Chrisitianity is wrong, or why you are right. All it shows is that you arrived at (as much as I hate to admit it) logical conclusions based on what was written in the Bible.

Still, that's all there is. Why/how is your interpretation more right than Christianity's?

Disrespectful and self-righteous? I do disagree! I was aiming more towards cynical, really, but it's the thought that counts, I guess.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[Adahn]

[QUOTE=AzureWolf][font=book antiqua][size=2][color=blue]Adahn, here, I'll repost [b]what I just said[/b]: I bolded something you should read, if not the entire thing. That entire post you are referring to: how does it disprove Christianity? It's only your reasoning behind your beliefs. It doesn't show how Chrisitianity is wrong, or why you are right. All it shows is that you arrived at (as much as I hate to admit it) logical conclusions based on what was written in the Bible.

Still, that's all there is. Why/how is your interpretation more right than Christianity's?

Disrespectful and self-righteous? I do disagree! I was aiming more towards cynical, really, but it's the thought that counts, I guess.[/color][/size][/font][/QUOTE]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=darkolivegreen]Ah, a touch of humanity, you have gained some respect from me (whether or not this matters to you, I do not know). Why is my interpretation more right? By today's Christian definition, everyone is born into sin (I agree with this). This means that 1, 2, and 3 year olds that don't even have to ability to accept Jesus go to hell and burn eternally. They are not born innocent, nobody is innocent. By their definition, thousands of small children burn eternally in hell for every one person who makes it to heaven. This seems wrong to me. My solution is reincarnation. You said yourself I arrived at this conclusion logically, but I actually read the bible myself and got that [i]feeling.[/i] With what I believe, everybody has many, many chances to live forever, and nobody burns in eternal hellfire (except satan, lol). All the children that die are given another life, and their fair chance. If Christians would think about what they believe, they'd realize that my idea is better, they'd know it in their hearts, but they would close their mind because of their life's worth of lies that have been drilled into them as truth. People hate Christianity because of its hell, and it's belief in death and eternal damnation. I have done my best to show that there is another, better answer, with just as much support as they have, and taken from the same book. Nobody has argued with this, because they know in their hearts that what I say is true. I've dared them, challenged them, insulted them, and they say nothing. If they can't disprove me, then I ask them something else. Take what I say to heart, at least think about it. This is why my interpretation is better than Christianity's.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[Baron Samedi]

[size=1][quote name='Kitty']Frankly, I don't believe in God, Satin, or angels. [/quote]

I can't vouch for the others, but satin is real. Real, soft and smooth.

[quote name='Adahn']Everybody else isn't right all the time. I am.[/quote]

Meaning...what exactly? That you will not accept any other views, and are a stubborn ***? In regards to donkeys, that is.

If God is the voice in your head, why do I reason out the flaws in God's existence?

Siren's analysis of the Bible is spot on; It is incredibly similar to the myths of other cultures, but because it was adopted by an Empire which spread across the world, and still survives now, it has never fallen as the Sumerian, Babylonian, Aztec, Greek or Roman beliefs did. Or any other of the boundless local religions that sprang up in the early period of civilisation.

[b]Edit[/b]: Well, ignore Roman if you wish. I was just referring to their original pantheon of gods, and how they never spread that. Thats all ~_^[/size]

[Guest ScirosDarkblade]

[quote name='Baron Samedi][size=1'] It is incredibly similar to the myths of other cultures, but because it was adopted by an Empire which spread across the world, and still survives now, it has never fallen as the Sumerian, Babylonian, Aztec, Greek or Roman beliefs did.[/size][/quote]
Ironically, the Roman beliefs didn't live on because the Romans didn't let them. It was the Roman Empire itself that spread Christianity. Which you did mention, but I just thought it was funny that you threw "Roman" in there along with Aztec and stuff.

Anyway, Adahn for some reason assumes that the Bible speaks the truth, and all that's needed to unlock that truth is to interpret it properly or what not. I think that since his "logical approach" is actually quite illogical, maybe he should just be left to his own devices, much like Crimson Spider was way back when. I mean, after a certain point, you just realize that you're talking to a brick wall, right?

[Kitty]

[quote name='Baron Samedi][size=1']I can't vouch for the others, but satin is real. Real, soft and smooth. [/size][/quote]
Damn it. You know I meant the devil. Critizing my spelling is irritating...

[quote name='Adahn']You have a better chance of being saved than they do.[/quote]
[COLOR=Blue][SIZE=1]And what does this mean? Saved from what I wonder? Do you mean I have a better chance to reunite with Jesus?

Jesus was a man that got himself killed by claiming to be the son of God. Since I don't think God exists, I don't think he could POSSIBLY have been the son of God. Him coming back to life didn't happen, either. As I've said, when he died, he'd rot in his grave.

Jesus is dead. Long dead.[/SIZE][/COLOR]

[Brasil]

[quote name='Adahn']This applies to everything. One must therefore be critical of everything he himself has not written, and take no one's interpretation as fact. However, some things that have been written do have a certain amount of truth to them. My ideas are based on impressions I get when I think certain things. This is occasionally started by what I read in a book. I describe theories and ideas I've never seen before, all the time. I apply my own meanings because I am distrustful of anyone elses. Everybody else isn't right all the time. I am.[/quote]
It applies to everything, yes, but we're specifically talking about the Bible and its use in discerning the reality of God. Now, with these very specific foci here, and with the realization that man is flawed, using the Bible as support for the existence of God is inherently flawed, because the Bible was written by man, a man that sought to establish a higher power.

This makes the Bible a broken support point in defending the existence of God, because the purpose and intent of writing the Bible was to create God.

[QUOTE]You do realize that you are seeing parallels in certain texts, and are basing your conclusion that all is untrue upon those parallels, right? I always thought that when certain things show up over and over (periodic trends in chemistry, for example), there is some sort of truth driving them. If you'll notice, I have read the Bible, and drawn out those parallels which can be found in other religions. I believe the first reply to this thread called me a Christian-Buddhist hybrid. Your logic seems a little backwards to me.[/QUOTE]
My point with raising the (very clear to anyone with a sufficiently thorough study of world literature) parallels is that the Bible's themes, messages, contexts, and ideas are not exclusive to the Bible itself, so to elevate the Bible to the level of pure truth, proving the existence of God, and seemingly ignore the other identically-constructed texts (like Beowulf, Iliad, Gilgamesh, etc) is questionable, to say the least, because the Bible is nothing special, because you can find identical texts nearly everywhere in literary history, both before and after the Bible's original penning date.

[QUOTE]
Most of the stories surrounding Jesus did not attempt to explain anything unexplainable, but rather placed before us certain events that were unexplainable. Jesus didn't create rivers and valleys or turn people into dolphins. He raised the dead.

The old testament follows this very well, what with plagues and droughts. However, the new testament doesn't deal with any of that at all, and that is where I get most of my ideas from. If you can find something that fits anything you said here in the new testament, I would appreciate seeing it.

The old testament, again, is full of sacrifice, I view Jesus as the final sacrifice, and that anything further is not only displeasing to God, but it is insulting.

The Bible is far from what you would call a look at nature and the human condition. The Bible throws humanity in our face, telling us that we were not meant to live and die. It says we can achieve eternal life on earth. That is the most unnatural thing someone could say.

These were not "things" that were just happening. This was a person that everyone could touch and see, performing personal miracles. He didn't call lightning down or transform people into animals. He took people that had been deformed all their life and made them perfect with his touch. Again, this is not explaining the unexplainable. This is throwing reality in our faces and telling us that we're just not getting something.[/QUOTE]
You're missing a key point here, and it's a point that can be found in every single literary work I've mentioned:

Overexaggeration.

In the Odyssey, there is mention of a cyclops, Polyphemus (which Odysseus kills), harpies, sirens, minotaurs, being lost at sea for twenty-some years, coming across all types of horrid, monstrous beasts. In Gilgamesh, a king slays the demon, Humbaba, guardian of a Cedar Forest. The ground shakes under Humbaba as he walks. Beowulf slaughters a night demon named Grendel, and then impales Dam with his sword, which subsequently disintegrates from the blood of Dam.

These events may have happened in some way or another, though it's highly unlikely that there were 100-foot demons running around, but [i]if[/i] (and this is an important "if") these events did happen, do you believe they were so fantastic in reality? Meaning, do you really believe that Beowulf fought Grendel in hand-to-hand combat, ripping Grendel's left arm out of its socket? Did Gilgamesh slaughter Humbaba so easily in reality? Was Humbaba so huge in reality? Was Grendel so lethal in reality? Did Grendel even exist to begin with? Did Humbaba even exist to begin with?

See where I'm going with this?

What happens in the Bible didn't happen as it's chronicled, because it was heavily overexaggerated. That's what mythology is: making things bigger than life, and I think we can all agree that Christ healing lepers was a bit bigger than life, and those storytelling techniques were eerily similar to the techniques used in Gilgamesh or the Odyssey.

[QUOTE]Again, if you see parallels in different texts, is it not more logical to search for an underlying truth, rather than make the assumption that it is all false?[/QUOTE]
The underlying truth [i]is[/i] that they're all tall tales--overexaggerations--really no different from Paul Bunyan and Babe the Blue Ox.


[quote]Things go on with me that are completely out of my control. There is a driving force with its own will that lives inside me, and I don't know what it is. I can't control it. I can't talk to it. I can only try and understand what its motives are. It's never led me astray, and this is the direction it's pushing me in, now. I trust more in myself than I do in any book or anyone's teachings. He that is inside me can do me no harm.[/QUOTE]
You only "feel" Him there because part of you wants to. It isn't spontaneous, and it's not something unexpected, either. There's a part of you that wants to hear Him, and so, you hear Him.

That isn't proof that He exists, because He only exists because a part of you that you are unaware of, wants Him to exist.

The entire subject about the Bible, God, a higher power, spirituality, etc, can be explained in one sentence:

"God did not create Man; Man created God."

[Adahn]

[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=darkolivegreen]Before I reply to you, Baron and Siren, I need to know one thing. Have either of you read the Bible?[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[QUOTE=Kitty]Damn it. You know I meant the devil. Critizing my spelling is irritating...


[color=blue][size=1]And what does this mean? Saved from what I wonder? Do you mean I have a better chance to reunite with Jesus?

Jesus was a man that got himself killed by claiming to be the son of God. Since I don't think God exists, I don't think he could POSSIBLY have been the son of God. Him coming back to life didn't happen, either. As I've said, when he died, he'd rot in his grave.

Jesus is dead. Long dead.[/size][/color][/QUOTE]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]I'm sorry, Kitty, I couldn't help myself. You have a better chance of being saved from death. Not spiritual death, but physical death. You put no glory in it, while it is all the Christians' glory. As for you saying Jesus died and rotted, well, he didn't leave behind a corpse, so much. If you don't believe he came back to life, how can you be sure of his existence, period?[/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f][/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]And Sciros, I'm not a brick wall. Let me just say I appreciate you saying that my interpretation is illogical without backing it up whatsoever. If you would so kindly point out the obvious flaws in my interpretation, I would appreciate it very much.[/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f][/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f](I apologize in advance if either Siren, Baron Samedi, or Azurewolf have read the Bible)[/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f][/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]Nobody who has replied to me has dared challenge any of my [i]interpretations.[/i] Sciros happily pointed out that they were illogical without anything to back himself up, and Cyriel and Midnight Rush have been rather quiet. I will need to know the extent of your knowledge of the Bible before I address any of your points, Siren. Same goes for you, Baron, since you say Siren's analysis is "spot on".[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[Brasil]

[QUOTE=Adahn][b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=darkolivegreen]Before I reply to you, Baron and Siren, I need to know one thing. Have either of you read the Bible?[/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f][/color][/size][/font][/b]

[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]Nobody who has replied to me has dared challenge any of my [i]interpretations.[/i] Sciros happily pointed out that they were illogical without anything to back himself up, and Cyriel and Midnight Rush have been rather quiet. I will need to know the extent of your knowledge of the Bible before I address any of your points, Siren. Same goes for you, Baron, since you say Siren's analysis is "spot on".[/color][/size][/font][/b][/QUOTE]
Having done an extensive study of it in World Masterpieces, various Religion courses, and a Religion and Psychology course, and also having read the entire New Testament in preparation for a thesis debunking any and all notions to compare Prince Hamlet to Jesus Christ, I think I've had more than ample experience in Biblical studies for this little discussion.

Adahn, your interpretation has been...that Christianity is misinterpreting the Bible and/or religion, that your interpretation of the Bible is correct, because you believe Reincarnation is the "proper" or "right" answer, because Christianity's Original Sin is barbaric and cruel. That's what your entire argument boils down to.

The Christianity misinterpreting the Bible/religion is blatantly obvious to begin with, so I don't see how you're making any groundbreaking observations there that we have to magically debunk, because you're really just stating the obvious. It's clear to anyone that there are significant flaws in the [i]application of religion[/i] (incidentally, I did mention the mis-application of religion in my very first post in this thread, some 7 pages back).

With your preaching that Reincarnation is the answer, that people will be given a second chance, that Christianity is unfair because of Original Sin, your argument holds a major flaw.

With Universal Reincarnation (which is what you're telling us is the answer), everyone can do whatever they please, with no fears at all of any type of consequence, because they will always have another chance, regardless of who they are, or what they did.

Simply put, one of the flaws in your interpretation is that human beings would never have to put in the effort to be rewarded.

At least Christianity would have people working for the reward. You're just giving it to them. Just giving something to people without having them [i]earn[/i] it isn't doing anyone any good; it just makes them lazy and further cements them in the Ideology that they don't have to lift a damn finger and they'll still get what they want.

You're enabling people to fail by preaching Universal Reincarnation.

The Christian Doctrines of Original Sin and so forth aren't all that peachy-keen, I agree, but your idea isn't much better, if it's better at all. In fact, it's just as skewed as Christianity's Original Sin, except your idea is on the other extreme end of the spectrum.

[Adahn]

[quote name='Siren']Having done an extensive study of it in World Masterpieces, various Religion courses, and a Religion and Psychology course, and also having read the entire New Testament in preparation for a thesis debunking any and all notions to compare Prince Hamlet to Jesus Christ, I think I've had more than ample experience in Biblical studies for this little discussion..[/quote]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=darkolivegreen]Good, I was just curious as to how you came to the conclusion that the new testament essentially follows the guidelines of a tall-tale.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[QUOTE=Siren]
Adahn, your interpretation has been...that Christianity is misinterpreting the Bible and/or religion, that your interpretation of the Bible is correct, because you believe Reincarnation is the "proper" or "right" answer, because Christianity's Original Sin is barbaric and cruel. That's what your entire argument boils down to.[/QUOTE]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]Original Sin is true. I believe a spiritual rebirth is necessary for eternal life.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[QUOTE=Siren]
The Christianity misinterpreting the Bible/religion is blatantly obvious to begin with, so I don't see how you're making any groundbreaking observations there that we have to magically debunk, because you're really just stating the obvious. It's clear to anyone that there are significant flaws in the [i]application of religion[/i] (incidentally, I did mention the mis-application of religion in my very first post in this thread, some 7 pages back).[/QUOTE]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]I'm showing exactly [i]how [/i]it is being misinterpreted, and am doing my best to interpret correctly.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[QUOTE=Siren]
With your preaching that Reincarnation is the answer, that people will be given a second chance, that Christianity is unfair because of Original Sin, your argument holds a major flaw.
With Universal Reincarnation (which is what you're telling us is the answer), everyone can do whatever they please, with no fears at all of any type of consequence, because they will always have another chance, regardless of who they are, or what they did.[/QUOTE]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]The Christian idea of hell is unfair, not Original Sin. Let me get one thing straight. Reincarnation is not hell, but it is a [i]very bad thing[/i]. It is the ultimate punishment; death. This punishment is brought upon people because of their failure to accept that Jesus took death away. There are no souls burning in some imaginary hell, but when you die, you will be born again, and your life will have been completely and utterly wasted.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[QUOTE=Siren]
Simply put, one of the flaws in your interpretation is that human beings would never have to put in the effort to be rewarded.[/QUOTE]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]The reward is eternal life, right here on earth. The effort is having faith in eternal life. This is not an easy thing. If I told you it were possible for you to be immortal through faith, you'd call me crazy, but that's [i]exactly[/i] how I am interpreting the Bible.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[QUOTE=Siren]
At least Christianity would have people working for the reward. You're just giving it to them. Just giving something to people without having them [i]earn[/i] it isn't doing anyone any good; it just makes them lazy and further cements them in the Ideology that they don't have to lift a damn finger and they'll still get what they want.[/QUOTE]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]This makes absolutely no sense to me. The reward is eternal life. I am not giving it to them. If they want to waste their lives and die, then yes, they are getting what they want.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[QUOTE=Siren]
You're enabling people to fail by preaching Universal Reincarnation.[/QUOTE]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]Reincarnation is bad. If you think wasting your life completely and dying is a good thing, then by all means, waste away.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[QUOTE=Siren]
The Christian Doctrines of Original Sin and so forth aren't all that peachy-keen, I agree, but your idea isn't much better, if it's better at all. In fact, it's just as skewed as Christianity's Original Sin, except your idea is on the other extreme end of the spectrum.[/QUOTE]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]I don't see how my idea isn't better. Hmm, no children burning in hell. A punishment that doesn't involve eternal suffering. Explain to me, in your own words, how my idea isn't much better. By the Christian definition, if my family were to die today, every one of them would burn in hell eternally. These are the sorts of things that push people away from God. Sure, the Christians get alot of people to fear hell and embrace death, but by my interpretation there is no salvation after death.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[Guest ScirosDarkblade]

Adahn, you keep wanting us to criticize specifically your [i]interpretations[/i] of certain passages of the Bible. What you don't seem to understand is that your interpretation, whatever it may be, is largely beside the point because you start off on the premise that you are interpreting something TRUE. You think the Bible has literal truth written in it. [i]There[/i], Adahn is your flaw. Siren, AzureWolf, Baron, everyone has pointed that out to you. You don't understand it. Therefore it is like talking to a brick wall.

[Adahn]

[quote name='ScirosDarkblade]Adahn, you keep wanting us to criticize specifically your [i]interpretations[/i] of certain passages of the Bible. What you don't seem to understand is that your interpretation, whatever it may be, is largely beside the point because you start off on the premise that you are interpreting something TRUE. You think the Bible has literal truth written in it. [i]There[/i'], Adahn is your flaw. Siren, AzureWolf, Baron, everyone has pointed that out to you. You don't understand it. Therefore it is like talking to a brick wall.[/quote]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=darkolivegreen]Let me get this straight. My flaw is that I think the Bible has truth in it? I initially directed this whole thread at Christians, who (if you haven't noticed) cannot bring themselves to reply to me. My debates with you atheists/non-Christians is all I have, not that I'm ungrateful. However, I will not allow you to say that the Bible is completely untrue, and say that my inability to accept this "fact" makes me stubborn. I think I've carried on the debates fairly well (people are still debating with me), so I guess I don't really understand what you're trying to point out to me, here. I should admit defeat because I've been opposed? Is that what you're trying to say?[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[Baron Samedi]

[size=1]Adahn, the only Biblical text I've ever read, was the Easter Story, lol. I do have a general idea of the...plot of this 'novel' though ~_^

Sorry. Couldn't help myself, lol. Anyway, just from an un-educated layman's point of view, there are a lot of similarities in the main events between various myths. Christianity is more like the more peaceful version of the older tales. Somewhat.

Anyway, here is a quote which may illustrate somewhat, the difficulty that must be had in dealing with Biblical texts.

[quote]Hebrew is comprised primarily of consonants; vowels must be supplied by the reader. The appropriate vowels depend on the context. Thus, the text (line 4) may be translated as "and the Prince of the Congregation, the Branch of David, will kill him," or alternately read as "and they killed the Prince." Because of the second reading, the text was dubbed the "Pierced Messiah." The transcription and translation presented here support the "killing Messiah" interpretation, alluding to a triumphant Messiah (Isaiah 11:4).

In September 1992, "Time Magazine" published an article on the War Rule fragment displayed here (object no. 12) exploring the differing interpretations. A "piercing messiah" reading would support the traditional Jewish view of a triumphant messiah. If, on the other hand, the fragment were interpreted as speaking of a "pierced messiah," it would anticipate the New Testament view of the preordained death of the messiah. The scholarly basis for these differing interpretations--but not their theological ramifications--are reviewed in "A Pierced or Piercing Messiah?"[/quote]

And yes Adahn, your flaw is that you cannot view this topic with any...equilibrium in you. You cannot accept either

a) the possibility that you are wrong, or

b) the possibility of mistakes, or rather, untruth in the Bible.

And that is a vital flaw. If you can't look at what the other side is saying, how can you defend your own position? Right here, I could say that the Bible is untrue. I found it to be so in my heart, and now I know [through my 'need' for knowledge] that it is untrue. And you're wrong.

I couldn't prove that. Same as you cannot prove your point, because it is based on faith, not proof. And faith comes out of a 'desire' to believe. You want to believe.[/size]

[Adahn]

[QUOTE=Baron Samedi][size=1]Adahn, the only Biblical text I've ever read, was the Easter Story, lol. I do have a general idea of the...plot of this 'novel' though ~_^

Sorry. Couldn't help myself, lol. Anyway, just from an un-educated layman's point of view, there are a lot of similarities in the main events between various myths. Christianity is more like the more peaceful version of the older tales. Somewhat.

Anyway, here is a quote which may illustrate somewhat, the difficulty that must be had in dealing with Biblical texts.



And yes Adahn, your flaw is that you cannot view this topic with any...equilibrium in you. You cannot accept either

a) the possibility that you are wrong, or

b) the possibility of mistakes, or rather, untruth in the Bible.

And that is a vital flaw. If you can't look at what the other side is saying, how can you defend your own position? Right here, I could say that the Bible is untrue. I found it to be so in my heart, and now I know [through my 'need' for knowledge] that it is untrue. And you're wrong.

I couldn't prove that. Same as you cannot prove your point, because it is based on faith, not proof. And faith comes out of a 'desire' to believe. You want to believe.[/size][/QUOTE][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=darkolivegreen][b]Forgive me for being blunt, Mr. Samedi, but you haven't read the damn book. You are therefore in no position to make any statement about its truth or untruth, and any and all comments from you regarding its "rightness" can be taken with a grain of salt.[/b][/color][/size][/font]

[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]No **** I can't prove the Bible. The funny thing about religions is that they cannot be proven, or they wouldn't be based on faith anymore. Could it all be wrong? It's possible. Could it all be right? It's possible. Which is better? The Bible being right. You can't prove me wrong, and I can't prove you wrong. That debate cannot bear intellectual fruit, but I will go through the motions nonetheless. As I said to start, and as my voice will ring throughout eternity, this thread was directed at those who believe in Christianity, in one form or another. They still have their chance to reply, but until then, I will banter back and forth with you people, especially Siren, because he's just so damn smart.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]EDIT: If at all possible, I would appreciate your opinions as to whether my interpretation is, in fact, better than the Christians', (on a moral or logical standpoint), or if my views are inherently morally wrong and/or illogical.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[Baron Samedi]

[size=1]And because I have not read the Bible, my opinions are worth nought, and my logic, illogical?

I have yet to see you reply to some of my earlier posts, indeed your last post was basically a rant, ignoring the contents of the very post you quoted o_O

Your argument is based on faith, faith in the veracity of the Bible, and after that, faith in your own reasoning. Thats fine. Don't assume that you are right though. Because you may well not be. Your blind faith means that your opinions on the matter may be taken with a grain of salt too.

I'd like to see you take a look at some of my posts in this thread, ones that you seem to have glazed over, and I'd like to see you answer them. Because, this is going nowhere.[/size]

[Adahn]

[QUOTE=Baron Samedi][size=1]And because I have not read the Bible, my opinions are worth nought, and my logic, illogical?

I have yet to see you reply to some of my earlier posts, indeed your last post was basically a rant, ignoring the contents of the very post you quoted o_O

Your argument is based on faith, faith in the veracity of the Bible, and after that, faith in your own reasoning. Thats fine. Don't assume that you are right though. Because you may well not be. Your blind faith means that your opinions on the matter may be taken with a grain of salt too.

I'd like to see you take a look at some of my posts in this thread, ones that you seem to have glazed over, and I'd like to see you answer them. Because, this is going nowhere.[/size][/QUOTE]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=darkolivegreen]You're arguing against the veracity of a book you've never read. Repost you ideas, as bluntly as possible, and I'll address them. There are about 120 posts here, and I'm not going to search yours and 40 some of mine to figure out what I didn't get to. If nobody will argue with me, why can't I assume I'm right? My faith is anything but blind. It was, once, before I hadn't read the Bible. My opinions are worth more than yours, because not having read the Bible, you essentially don't have a clue as to what you're talking about. Read the book yourself, and speak for yourself.[/color][/size][/font][/b]