Jump to content
Eternal Lands Official Forums
conavar

Religion

Recommended Posts

solorni

the already accepted books would be the old testament. i agree with the source you provided in that yes he did not collate the bible. he more or less set the stage for the unification of the faith. meaning that while he might not have had a direct hand in the bible and its contents the church leaders voting in the council did. basically the new testament imo is a large piece of popular papal oppinion. (try saying that 3 times fast)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea has a pretty good article on the council though i havent finished reading it myself.

 

Kidberg7

did god fax the bible to mankind?AFAIK man has been the writer of the bible and as we all know man as a species has made many mistakes. as well that was old testament whereas constantine helped to shape the new testament.

 

conavar

Lucifer is actually satan. that is just his angel name before he rebeled. Interesting fact: sinistre (latin for left) is in modern times a synonem for evil. when the church started a new campaign focused on teaching reading and writing left handed kids were often swatted on their fingers and taught to write with their right hands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So far, one of my favourite books is the book of Tobit (also known as Tobias). I doubt many, if any have read this book. Anyhow, I find it a very good teacher on how to live your life. Tobit himself was a simple man who helped people out. He would bury dead Jews and so got punished for it. Anyhow, I find it a very simplistic guide that is not "Popular". Which is why I enjoy it, I don't really like hearing the same quotations again and again from Priests etc.

 

Btw, has anyone read the Book of Thomas?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

solorni

the already accepted books would be the old testament. i agree with the source you provided in that yes he did not collate the bible. he more or less set the stage for the unification of the faith. meaning that while he might not have had a direct hand in the bible and its contents the church leaders voting in the council did. basically the new testament imo is a large piece of popular papal oppinion. (try saying that 3 times fast)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea has a pretty good article on the council though i havent finished reading it myself.

 

Kidberg7

did god fax the bible to mankind?AFAIK man has been the writer of the bible and as we all know man as a species has made many mistakes. as well that was old testament whereas constantine helped to shape the new testament.

conavar

Lucifer is actually satan. that is just his angel name before he rebeled. Interesting fact: sinistre (latin for left) is in modern times a synonem for evil. when the church started a new campaign focused on teaching reading and writing left handed kids were often swatted on their fingers and taught to write with their right hands.

Ok let me rephrase this...Man wrote the Bible...yes...But the Bible was inspired by God. God gave everyone of these men that wrote this 66 part book which I try to live my life by the words to put into it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Conavar

 

I guess my problem with following your argument is that what you have quoted seems to support the Bible being non-corrupted...the passage you quoted seems to say that there were 2 versions with seperate developmet: the textus receptus that the king james was based on, and the heretical ones that constantine was involved in. And I still don't understand the Satan reference, but it's ok. I do think critics of religion are way to quick to dismiss the hostorical authenticity of the Bible, given how many old copies of it that are in 100% agreements are available to us. But debating the authenticity of the Bible is a different topic than the original post...if you feel like discussing than we should start a new post. :laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

for what gandalf was saying, every animal has the free will too do what they want, but they don't. ants were disciplined so that they rebuild now, mourn later. its just like saying dogs don't have a choice too walk you to school. i am indian so i follow the ways of the great spirit, and believe that there is a higher place in life than humans. the way your saying, no offense too anyone, is that your are arrogant because you believe that humans are the highest there is in smarts. again, no offense, but you cam on a bit thick. i also don't believe that if you do something wrong in life you get eternal punishment, because in all reality, what kind of father would do that? this will be my first and last post, but I will read through but dont expect a reply

 

I would like to explain my take on this. I never said animals have free wills. If you meant they do have free wills ok. But I must explain what I think about this without fussing about it.

 

I dont believe animals have free wills. I've never seen a any mourn right after the any hills torn down, or after words. As for a dog following you to school, your his owner, you feed him, you take care of him. Without you he couldn't servive. He follows you because he has the instunct to protect and follow you. Have someone try and act like their hurting you. If the dog thinks his/shis really trying to hurt you he will protect you. thats what I believe on the subject

 

 

As what I think kidberg said, I've studied probibly to much. has there ever been something you just cant explain? Or how about ask your self this questions. Why arent other animals building huge things like we are, Why arent other animals more like us? I believe what I believe. Its hard for alot of people to have faith, To believe without seeing. Its one of the hardest things. How can you believe in something if you cant see it? All I can say is have faith that its there.

 

 

 

 

 

 

All of this is what I believe, but I cant, and wont change what I believe to make people happy. And I hope you wont either. If you believe in something, you should stick to it. But the trick is finding what you trully believe in.

 

If you take this as I'm a thick headed moron, than Ok.

 

 

 

Well this will be my last post on here.

 

My final word is, I hope yall find what makes yall happy.

 

 

P.S. if yall have anythign to say about this post, please post here and I will read it or PM me

my only problem with this is the animals not mourning part. Elephants are one animal that there is proof of mourning in that they carry a dead relative's bones with them to god only knows where. but IMO this seems to be a clear sign of mourning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Conavar

 

I guess my problem with following your argument is that what you have quoted seems to support the Bible being non-corrupted...the passage you quoted seems to say that there were 2 versions with seperate developmet: the textus receptus that the king james was based on, and the heretical ones that constantine was involved in. And I still don't understand the Satan reference, but it's ok. I do think critics of religion are way to quick to dismiss the hostorical authenticity of the Bible, given how many old copies of it that are in 100% agreements are available to us. But debating the authenticity of the Bible is a different topic than the original post...if you feel like discussing than we should start a new post. :D

 

 

I had the same problem as you finding un-biased comments on the net . ( They are either Chritian websites or Da vinci Theory and both are biased towards themselves).

 

 

That is true debate for a differant post but i must admit to pleading ignorant and not knowing that there were so many Differant kinds/versions of the Bible. You would have thought being based on Gods word etc they would all be the same .

 

 

lol @ the dog analagy a more apt animal would be a cat which is very free willed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some animals I guess do mourn, but is it still the same way we do? I.m not the smartist person on religion. I stat what I believe, if the way I stat is wrong in some ways Im sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

solorni

the already accepted books would be the old testament. i agree with the source you provided in that yes he did not collate the bible. he more or less set the stage for the unification of the faith. meaning that while he might not have had a direct hand in the bible and its contents the church leaders voting in the council did. basically the new testament imo is a large piece of popular papal oppinion. (try saying that 3 times fast)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea has a pretty good article on the council though i havent finished reading it myself.

 

Kidberg7

did god fax the bible to mankind?AFAIK man has been the writer of the bible and as we all know man as a species has made many mistakes. as well that was old testament whereas constantine helped to shape the new testament.

conavar

Lucifer is actually satan. that is just his angel name before he rebeled. Interesting fact: sinistre (latin for left) is in modern times a synonem for evil. when the church started a new campaign focused on teaching reading and writing left handed kids were often swatted on their fingers and taught to write with their right hands.

Ok let me rephrase this...Man wrote the Bible...yes...But the Bible was inspired by God. God gave everyone of these men that wrote this 66 part book which I try to live my life by the words to put into it.

I dont doubt that god may have inspired these men to put those words onto paper. what i am saying is that maybe god inspired many other people whose scriptures were rejected by members of the council. heck there are three historic reports from men who were there saying that they each counted 318 council members there. perhaps some scriptures that were also directly inspired by god were rejected because they did not serve the purpose of a majority? someone said earlier in this thread that even christians screw up. no matter how holy you try to live your life there is always the possibility that your own selfish interest might get in the way of your moral duties. i believe that back then people and selfish wants of theirs are much like that of now. in short: they had the exact same capacity to screw up as you do.

 

and on to starting the idea in this thread that maybe some parts of the bible are fiction: i was only trying to help people to formulate stronger arguements. I may not be atheist and i may not be christian but for some reason playing the devils advocate on both sides seems to come naturally. and my comment on there really being no proof in many scientific theorys was to show that the "you have no concrete evidence of god or gods so i shall believe science on this one" idea is flawed logic since science has no physical concrete evidence of the big bang and other theories. basically one side demanding that proof from the other means automatically that their arguement is completely illogical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also believe the bible is God's inspired word. Men wrote it under the guidance of the holy spirit. Men also translated it under that same guidance. Still it's helpful when researching any given matter to use several diferent versions of the bible as cross references to each other. I myself also use the greek and hebrew versions to cross refernce the words used there along with the many translations of those words including the translations of the words as they apply in different passages. Not that I know how to read greek or hebrew, but if you do this enough you can manage to be fairly proficient at looking up the meanings and cross referencing them.

 

Still Jesus himself was quoted as saying there will be many false profits in the days to come. These people would certainly try to defile God's word. And wether you believe the bible we have today is divinely inspired or marred is up to you. In my experience studying and cross referencing it, I have found it to be complete, true, and accurate in every case. Sometimes it took A LOT of digging to get there tho.

 

The thing I find most interesting is that the bible (especially the new testament) was written about and by eye witnesses to the events written about. In such an barbaric age, do you really think that a conspiracy of this magnitude could have been hatched and still be thriving 2000+ years later? I personally find it hard to discount the words of the 4 authors of the Gospel; Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. They were apostles who lived with Jesus and eventually wrote an account of it. Luke also wrote Acts - the account of the first Christian church's birth and toddler years (if you will).

 

Then there is Paul.. a person who persecuted and killed christians. Jesus met him and Paul's life did a 180. He became the most prolific contributor of the new testament. Why or How would all these seperate people write about something and comit to it even to the point of death? They must have really believed. For some seeing is believing, for others faith in the messenger is enough.

 

You know, when I stop to think about it I cant think of any other contraversy that has lasted nearly as long with people so passionate on either side about it. I wonder why that is...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

You know, when I stop to think about it I cant think of any other contraversy that has lasted nearly as long with people so passionate on either side about it. I wonder why that is...

 

 

Easy when you think about it. Because there is no PROOF either way people will believe there way is right .You cant prove he exists I cant prove he doesnts = Never ending arguement

Edited by conavar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And what do you do with the eyewitness accounts? Do you consider them, write them off, what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And what do you do with the eyewitness accounts? Do you consider them, write them off, what?

 

they are only eyewitness accounts if you believe the book to be true .If you believe like an aethist does that the bible is a fictious book they do not count and cant eyewitness accounts be falsified ?..

 

" I was in the gulf war killed 5 people " << my eyewitness account total BS but simple example

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they are only eyewitness accounts if you believe the book to be true .If you believe like an aethist does that the bible is a fictious book they do not count and cant eyewitness accounts be falsified ?..

 

" I was in the gulf war killed 5 people " << my eyewitness account total BS but simple example

 

Yet all these books of the new testament written by many different people over a span of many years in distant places from each other all corroborate each other. Seems like quite an elaborate hoax considering that the books were not compiled together till a few hundred years later. How would they have know each others stories in order to ensure unitity between them?

 

There just seem to be too many players in too barbaric a time to manage such a hoax.

Edited by WizzKidd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Mora Here!

 

Most people who don't believe in a God say they can prove it. No one has, in the last 40 years on beleving and trusting in God and His Son Our Savior Chris Jesus. You say there is no God. How do you know? You would have to be God to know that there is not a God which is impossible. If you had a honest desire to find God you would. You only need to look to Jesus to fine Him. Most people don't want to find God because if there is a God ( and there is) we will have to face the reality of who we are and our own sin. So Is God real to us here is a moot point if you have no desire to seek out the answer. Fortunaly God Has Given us His greatess gift in His Son who He sent here for us and we need only to receive Him Christ Jesus. His love is for all who would only seek Him out. I hope you will take the time and find Him.

 

Mora Out!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yet all these books of the new testament written by many different people over a span of many years in distant places from each other all corroborate each other. Seems like quite an elaborate hoax considering that the books were not compiled together till a few hundred years later. How would they have know each others stories in order to ensure unitity between them?

 

There just seem to be too many players in too barbaric a time to manage such a hoax.

 

 

I can answer the whole statement just by saying HOW DO YOU KNOW ?

 

how do you know many people wrote the new testament ? Because its what you have been told ?.Because the bible says that what happened .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also believe the bible is God's inspired word. Men wrote it under the guidance of the holy spirit. Men also translated it under that same guidance. Still it's helpful when researching any given matter to use several diferent versions of the bible as cross references to each other. I myself also use the greek and hebrew versions to cross refernce the words used there along with the many translations of those words including the translations of the words as they apply in different passages. Not that I know how to read greek or hebrew, but if you do this enough you can manage to be fairly proficient at looking up the meanings and cross referencing them.

 

Still Jesus himself was quoted as saying there will be many false profits in the days to come. These people would certainly try to defile God's word. And wether you believe the bible we have today is divinely inspired or marred is up to you. In my experience studying and cross referencing it, I have found it to be complete, true, and accurate in every case. Sometimes it took A LOT of digging to get there tho.

 

The thing I find most interesting is that the bible (especially the new testament) was written about and by eye witnesses to the events written about. In such an barbaric age, do you really think that a conspiracy of this magnitude could have been hatched and still be thriving 2000+ years later? I personally find it hard to discount the words of the 4 authors of the Gospel; Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. They were apostles who lived with Jesus and eventually wrote an account of it. Luke also wrote Acts - the account of the first Christian church's birth and toddler years (if you will).

 

Then there is Paul.. a person who persecuted and killed christians. Jesus met him and Paul's life did a 180. He became the most prolific contributor of the new testament. Why or How would all these seperate people write about something and comit to it even to the point of death? They must have really believed. For some seeing is believing, for others faith in the messenger is enough.

 

You know, when I stop to think about it I cant think of any other contraversy that has lasted nearly as long with people so passionate on either side about it. I wonder why that is...

 

I do beleive that a conspiracy could carry on that long. Look at the war over the holy land and how long that has been going on. if the war over one peice of land next to a really big lake can carry on that long then the suppression of ideals which are much stronger than any piece of land ever will be, can and in most cases will last longer.

I do not have the best knowledge of your position in the church but a friend of mine has a relative who is a Deacon. She has personally seen and read some of the gospel of mary. from what i gather as she was almost finished he walked in and asked what she was doing. needless to say she didnt get to finish and ask asked to leave the room. to me this means that there is still information that the Catholic church posesses and is unwilling to release to the general public.

How do i know she isnt BSing me? she has pictures of herself kneeling before the pope with her relative standing next to them. more or less i believe what she has to say. im not going to reveal any names since in a year perhaps two she will have a scholarship from the church to study art in verona and i really dont wish to jeapardize it.

The only real reason that i can think of for this controversy is that it is one of those few questions that we cannot find an answer for without dieing first. in impossible question with many possible answers with each being as unverifiable as the next will always be a "hot topic" amongst all of mankind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slightly off topic .

 

But my self personally as an aethist believe there is not a God but i cannot prove that so I might be wrong .Can beleivers of any faith admit the same you cannot prove a god exists so you might be just as wrong as i am .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't bother to read everyone's argueing, don't wanna get people biting my nose off for giving a bad reply. :blush:

 

My thought about religion? god? Other biblish creatures and stuff?

 

Lets start with god (I don't write a capital, its got a purpose.) Imo, he doesn't exist and I don't believe he exists, unless you can prove it to me.

 

But to define the existence of god in the philosophical way (quoted from my bro who studied philosophy)

gods existence does not belong to the impossibilities.

Meaning it could go either way and the existence is right now, based on your own thoughts and opinions.

But in the end, noone knows anything for sure.

 

About religion itself.

I don't really know, but I guess later on I might totally ban religion away from me.. Why?

History classes learn you some things. It kinda made me think religion is a fake.

 

In history class you hear a lot about how people acted in the medieval times. Religion was a very important thing at that time, yet if I listen to the stories, I think its a sad thing it was so important.

 

It was used to scare the people and keep them under control, if you were doing bad you'd go to hell and burn forever. But if you were good, you'd meet god and have a good afterlife. Nice way to bring fear to your people, isn't it? Certainly kept many under control.

 

The people who worked for the religion were big cheats. If you committed a sin, you had to go see a priest, write a letter and only if you paid some gold on top of it, you'd be forgiven and your letter be sent to god.

Why would god ask money to forgive us?

Yea, yea, I know, he wouldn't. His priest just took the money to the tavern and drunk more on his own then a whole town together. Pretty corrupt I gotta say.

 

god says to forgive and forget, yet wasn't it a pope who decided on the holy crusades and going to war? Tsk tsk, bad pope and you are the closest one to god on earth? Beh, get lost. Oo

 

 

What I do believe.

 

 

In the end, I made up things in my mind and my fantasy and dreams is what I believe.

 

About good and evil (god and satan), I don't think there are gods like them, but I guess there can be "creatures" or something that represent pure good or pure evil.

 

About death, you don't go to hell or heaven, your spirit gets away from your mortal and dead body, you walk the world in another dimension, you can see the humans and watch them, but cannot interact with them. There's another small part about death, read the next thingy.

 

About heaven and hell, easy said. Heaven? Damn you, you don't need to die for that. Heaven is where you are right now. Earth is heaven, it has everything we can ask for, but unfortunatly, our power-greedy instincts made it go to waste and now it isn't such a heaven anymore. Kinda makes you disgust your own race huh?

Damn us humans.. We suck. Anyway..

As far as hell goes, like I said in the last part about death, I actually believe there are 2 things, the spiritual human world, where you can wander as spirit and see the world where you used to live. Or the home of the dead, the hell or the underworld. Where you can also wander to interact with other spirits.

 

 

Well, this is what I think, I live in a dream and fantasy world, I know. What I believe, is not a religion, it is something more... pure. The pure and innocent dreams of a young lad. It is what I would call my heaven, I guess.

I wouldn't be surprised if more people had a fantasy like this they believe in.

 

-Blee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It was used to scare the people and keep them under control, if you were doing bad you'd go to hell and burn forever. But if you were good, you'd meet god and have a good afterlife. Nice way to bring fear to your people, isn't it? Certainly kept many under control.

 

 

That is true . Religion was used to subjegate the masses during medievil times thats why I try to keep my views about Religion and the Church seperate.Because the church isnt a good reflection on the religion ,so i would never blame Religion for any troubles but the church is a differant demon.

Does make you wonder how many of the ten commandments were actually put in place by the church to keep people under control .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I dont think I could more accurately describe my position or my beliefs than I already have. I also dont think that even if I did anyone would be open to it.

 

So, I bid this thread fare well.. enjoy everyone.

Edited by WizzKidd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I dont think I could more accurately describe my position or my beliefs than I already have. I also dont think that even if I did anyone would be open to it.

 

So, I bid this thread fare well.. enjoy everyone.

 

This post was originally about peoples beliefs one way or the other and I for one would like to thank you and everyone who as posted for sharing them beliefs with us .

 

 

Note: If people want to take this post off its original topic but keep it about religion (all religions) then fine by me.If people want to chat about the Church ( of all religions) as a seperate entity from Religion which I believe it is then post your comments.

As say this for the reason :

 

Religion as an entity can do no wrong its the ppl who worship etc said religion that do the wrong sometimes in its name sometimes not.

Im not a believer myself but i strongly think that Religions of all faiths have been taking away from what there where originally supposed to be about .Wether by accident or by some misguided individual or even conciously to further groups own aims

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a nondenominational Christian. The people who are atheists are operating on just as much faith as anyone who believes in a god. The big bang is nothing more than a theoretical quantum event. There is zero proof of it and until we can actually see the events as they happened a theory is all it will remain. Scientists operate on just as much faith in their principles as people who believe in gods do. Dark matter and dark energy anyone? String theory and a few others? The massive gaps in the theory of evolution which is why it is still a THEORY. Yet scientists believe it as if it had been irrefutably proven already.

 

An atheist does not believe in a being of higher power but it does not mean they do not have FAITH in something else. Science could not operated without assumptions and beliefs. Scientists and preachers have more in common than not.

 

The church was nothing more than christians gathering together and witnessing to each other until the roman priests cannonized it in pursuit of secular power and wealth. They did a great job of it too. Nearly every religion has perverted its teachings for secular or political gain. The christains and muslims being the most guilty of that. As you may have noticed I don't appreciate organized religion. There are small churces that are not party to this corruption and they should definitely be applauded. They show what religion can be,and that it can be a force for good.

 

I believe in the Bible as it was written, not as it was translated. In Genesis god created the worlds not the world. Later in Moses it says you will have no other gods before me and it means none that are of greater importance than Yaweh not that there are no other gods. The old and new testaments are verified by archaeological evidence and texts written by the enemies of christianity as well. The instances of the original greek and hebrew being intentionally mistranslated in the King James version of the bible are too numerous to list but it is very close to the original text.

 

If existence as we perceive it is not the daydream of some being we cannot comprehend, and there is no proof that it isn't, and our peceptions are not completely self delusional then you have two reasonable creation myths. The big bang as a quantum accident where all of the energy and matter that make up the universe just somehow has always existed burbled out of quantum nonexistance into the universe as we know it. Oh by the way? If the whole thing was a cosmic accident what is to stop a new universe from creating itself in the same fashion and anililating existence as we know it? The other reasonable myth is that God created himself and then created the universe but did so in such a way that it was a perfectly balanced system. Intelligent Design is the theory that God used the Big Bang to create the universe so that there would be no proof of his existence.

 

There is no such thing as faith in the face of proof. You have knowledge when you proven something not faith. You cannot have free will if you have proof that God exists and has the power to make you pay for any choice he does not like. Choosing a God or Gods is personal and not choosing a god is too. The fact of the matter is that we all have faith in something even if it is just that the time-space continuum will work the same way tomorrow as it did today. Life requires faith but it does not require a faith in a God or Gods. I choose to believe because of evidence that is provided, and the Judaeo/Christian Bible is corroborated in a multitude of ways, and because I find comfort in the idea that I don't have wake up every morning wondering if a new quantum accident is going to happen and destroy our universe while creating the new one.

 

TirunCollimdus

Edited by TirunCollimdus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just found this thread. Don't have time to pursue it (really busy right now), but suggest investigating the prophecies about the Messiah found throughout the Old Testament (c. ref. traditional Judaism teachings, which are separated from Christianity and can serve as an independent source) as a starting point for proof of Jesus being the Messiah, hence Son of God, hence a valid teacher of the nature of God and reality. I think it was generally accepted in the thread above already that the Old Testament's historicity is valid. If you can link the Old Testament's prophecies about the Messiah to the New Testament's accounts of Jesus, the argument for the validity of the New Testament and the message of the Gospel becomes much stronger.

 

Rather exhaustive research may be necessary. Many Biblical scholars have devoted their entire lives to the study of this topic.

 

-Lyn-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. I think it was generally accepted in the thread above already that the Old Testament's historicity is valid.

-Lyn-

 

Only by thoughs who already are believers in which case they will believe it.

 

 

Take into consideration the folklore of Native Americans and Ancient norse people which have been passed from generation to generation couldnt Religion be like them a folklore that people have believed ? The point that it is written down doesnt mean it is any more valid or true

Edited by conavar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×