Re: Religion.

by proust. Mon 30 Mar 2009, 12:06 am

Can't you accept Jesus after you're dead too?
What bothers me about Hell is the eternal damnation, not the punishment itself, the fact that you have no way out of it.

by **more adventurous.** Mon 30 Mar 2009, 12:13 am

Well, it's a little late after your dead, isn't it?
That's like, "Oh, now that I'm in hell I'll follow Jesus."

by bittersweet. Mon 30 Mar 2009, 12:21 am

GhostNinja wrote:And i'm gunna be honest here and say I don't understand why Satan would punish people in Hell cause they're pretty much on his side. It makes little sense to me.

I'm pretty sure Satan doesn't torture them, because he's tortured, too. It's hell for him as well as people.

kafka. wrote:Can't you accept Jesus after you're dead too?
What bothers me about Hell is the eternal damnation, not the punishment itself, the fact that you have no way out of it.

I think the reason you can't is because you need to do it on faith. It takes faith to believe He exists while you're here on earth, but when you see Him...it's obvious that He exists.

by proust. Mon 30 Mar 2009, 12:27 am

Start the engines wrote:Well, it's a little late after your dead, isn't it?
That's like, "Oh, now that I'm in hell I'll follow Jesus."

I think He'd be able to tell real faith from fake one.
As for making sure God exists or not, there are people who have seen Jesus and seen His miracles [we base our faith on the fact that they were sincere in their accounts of those facts], I don't understand why they'd be less likely to go to Heaven just because they've seen Him.
Moreover, there's the issue of people who lived before year 1, or just people who couldn't have had contact with the Christian faith thus never knew of it.

by **more adventurous.** Mon 30 Mar 2009, 7:48 am

kafka. wrote:
Start the engines wrote:Well, it's a little late after your dead, isn't it?
That's like, "Oh, now that I'm in hell I'll follow Jesus."
I think He'd be able to tell real faith from fake one.

If you're in hell, then wouldn't it be obvious that God exists? People end up in hell because they didn't follow or turned their back on God. So, once you're in hell you'd know that God existed. You can't then decide, "Oh, I don't want to be here. I'm going to believe in God now."

You have to have faith. As in, you can't know for sure but you honestly believe. You have to believe, before you're dead.

by proust. Mon 30 Mar 2009, 4:50 pm

Start the engines wrote:
kafka. wrote:
Start the engines wrote:Well, it's a little late after your dead, isn't it?
That's like, "Oh, now that I'm in hell I'll follow Jesus."
I think He'd be able to tell real faith from fake one.
If you're in hell, then wouldn't it be obvious that God exists? People end up in hell because they didn't follow or turned their back on God. So, once you're in hell you'd know that God existed. You can't then decide, "Oh, I don't want to be here. I'm going to believe in God now."

You have to have faith. As in, you can't know for sure but you honestly believe. You have to believe, before you're dead.

But God reveals Himself to us through Revelation [supernatural or natural], we don't believe in God just because someone told us to, we believe because we have proof of His existence, we know that Jesus lived and then died on the cross, we know about prophets, about genesis and the apocalypse and the rest of the information in the Bible, we know that it's all true. In short, faith is not the antonym of reason, not in my opinion at least, if they were why would God give us reason?

I reread the passage in Peter's epistle about Jesus descending to Hell, it's the first letter, chapter 3
18For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, 19in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, 20because they formerly did not obey, when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water.
I am honestly just trying to understand.

by **more adventurous.** Sun 05 Apr 2009, 12:12 pm

^ Honestly, there are so many things I don't understand about God and religion--but that's okay.

Obviously, I don't have the answer. I don't think we get the answer until we die.

by proust. Wed 08 Apr 2009, 8:04 pm

But why would God do that to us? Not tell us everything, I don't understand why God can't be logical, since He gave us reason and the ability to examine our world through logic in the first place. Probably the information's out there but out of my reach, I just have to look for it.

by violet crayon of delirium Mon 11 May 2009, 1:51 am

Is it okay to revive this? I like interfering in religion topics.

Oh my Goddess Y_Y... There are a lot of Christians here. I doubt a lot of people here will like me... I don't really have a religion. I mean, I was born into Catholicism, and I even have Confirmation, but I just let go of it all because I wasn't taken in by it anymore.
I mean, my beliefs don't actually reject the existence of God. It's quite the opposite actually, because I can accept the existence of anything but the fact is that only what I let in has any power. You see, the only ultimate truth I believe in is Nothing. Everything else is simply thoughts that go on to spawn thoughts of their own. But that also implies that everything is Nothing, the source of all things, which you may as well call God. But if you are Nothing then you are God, you're just a part of God that was born believing that you weren't. I mean, if you want a purpose, you can learn to cancel out your beliefs and become a part of true Nothing again, but in my opinion, that's boring, and something I can do after I get sick of existing. Honestly I think the spirit is immortal, and you can't escape existence until you condition yourself not to.

But onto the discussion of Christianity. I do believe, that if you're following God and the bible, the only thing that matters is that you offer yourself as his servant and value him more than anything else. Essentially you're trying to prove you're the perfect servant because Heaven isn't about fun, it's about contented servitude. All the rules documented in the bible are simply handy hints on how you should behave. I'm sure God would love a schizophrenic Christian who believed God was telling him to slaughter people who didn't worship God. I mean, read the bible, it's all about fearing God and doing what he tells you to do. Honestly, I don't see much difference between God's ideals and Hitler's ideals.
Now Jesus, the person, I like. He was quite an awesome revolutionary, but he was NOTHING like God. I do believe their are some good preachings to be read in the New Testament, but I also think the bible is corrupted by propaganda from people looking to use religion for power. Especially Rome. I think the Catholic church was what really bastardised the point of Christianity. I find it a joke that the gospels written by people who ACTUALLY knew Jesus are dismissed as heresy, and didn't make it into the bible. I think a church should just be a preacher preaching, the church building isn't needed either, it's just for aesthetic sense. But a church shouldn't be a hierarchy of power, that is simply too manipulative.
Of course, the religious message still is that to get into heaven you have to prove yourself a good servant who values God/Jesus over anything else, the only difference is a Love approach rather than a Fear approach. (Unfortunately, the Churches still use fear instead of love at times.)

It's also amusing to hear Christians and Jews scoff at Paganism and the like when Christianity and Judaism is laced with it. Baptism, marriage (especially using a ring), circumcision, and plenty of their symbolism comes from Pagan faiths. And the Old Testament had a lot of people sacrificing animals too. In modern times, Christmas and Easter are only Christian by a cheap label sticker. It's over commercialised these days, but Christmas has an awful lot of focus on the fact that it's Winter, It's practically Midwinter celebrated on the wrong day. It's especially ridiculous in the Southern Hemisphere because it's summer at the time that people are doing awfully Winter-ful things. And Easter even derived it's name from Paganism. People are obviously celebrating Spring at that time.
Of course Paganism can be corrupt too. But the examples that people discriminate against, tend not to be those corrupt types. The corrupt ones tend to be the ones that manipulate from the shadows

Of course, the truth is the truth that's right for the individual. People will find the outcome that they believe in at the end of it all. I guess my point is just that I find that the bible speaks poorly for the beliefs that most Christians have.

And kafka, God didn't give humans reason and logic. Humans got logic because they at the fruit God told them not to eat. God didn't want humans to have logic and reason... That's the 'original sin' that every human is supposed to be born tainted with. Eden, before Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit, is actually a good model to assume what Heaven is supposed to be like. Where you DON'T have reason and logic. Besides, something so perfect provides no joy. Without conflict, you can only ever be content.

Haha... This post is hell long~

by proust. Tue 12 May 2009, 9:18 pm

violet crayon of delirium wrote:And kafka, God didn't give humans reason and logic. Humans got logic because they at the fruit God told them not to eat. God didn't want humans to have logic and reason... That's the 'original sin' that every human is supposed to be born tainted with. Eden, before Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit, is actually a good model to assume what Heaven is supposed to be like. Where you DON'T have reason and logic. Besides, something so perfect provides no joy. Without conflict, you can only ever be content.

Haha... This post is hell long~

To reply the whole post would take forever, so I'll just reply to the part that was specifically aimed at me.

The world is an extension of God's Will, the world exists through God's Will, thus everything within the world is God's Will. I don't understand how reason could be stripped away from the human soul once we died. It's an interesting assumption, I'm just not sure I understand it completely. Reason doesn't leave us once we are baptized -i.e. get rid of the original sin. Reason is the essence of the human nature, without it we would be nothing more than animals. If in Heaven we no longer have reason, wouldn't that mean that all animals also go to Heaven?

by violet crayon of delirium Wed 13 May 2009, 9:22 am

Well that's why to get into heaven you have to prove how much of a servant you are. God is powerless to remove your reason, so he just chooses the people who don't use it very much, or will use them for his advantage.

I think it would be voluntary brainwashing that will remove your reason? If it happens. And whether animals get into heaven or not depends on God's prejudices. I mean, Noahs Ark was NOT two of every animal. There was like six of every bird and four of "clean" animals and two of every "unclean"... Or something like that, can't be definite about the numbers without looking at a bible. But the point was that their was a favouritism to the amount of each animal he brought on board.

Your godparents are supposed to guide you down the path of God. And so you could argue that you're not removing original sin, but beginning the path to removing original sin. You aren't supposed to be raised to question the world, your supposed to be raised as a servant to God. You're not supposed to even question him.

by bittersweet. Thu 14 May 2009, 3:42 pm

violet crayon of delirium wrote:[1]I mean, read the bible, it's all about fearing God and doing what he tells you to do. [2]Honestly, I don't see much difference between God's ideals and Hitler's ideals.
[3]but he was NOTHING like God.
[4]I find it a joke that the gospels written by people who ACTUALLY knew Jesus are dismissed as heresy, and didn't make it into the bible.
[5]But a church shouldn't be a hierarchy of power, that is simply too manipulative.

[6]In modern times, Christmas and Easter are only Christian by a cheap label sticker. It's over commercialised these days, but Christmas has an awful lot of focus on the fact that it's Winter,
[7]It's practically Midwinter celebrated on the wrong day.

[1] I will admit that in the Old Covenant (God's old agreement with people, before Jesus; basically, there was no grace and you had to sacrifice, et cetera, to cleanse yourself of sin.
[2] I don't even know what to say to this. Where does it say in the New Testament that God wants non-Christians dead? Or tortured? Why do you say this?
[3] Yeah, He was different from God. They're two different entities. He also ushered in the New Covenant (where there is grace and forgiveness, from His blood), so He preached forgiveness when before, there was none.
[4] It was a rigorous test to get a book into the Bible. A lot of the gospels 'by the disciples' were corrupted and it was decided that only Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were real.
[5] I can understand this, I guess, in some way. But like any organization, it would most likely fall apart without a hierarchy.
[6] Uh, maybe by most of the world. Some people, actually do focus on the meanings of them.
[7] I think it's less important the day we remember Jesus' birth than that we actually do.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:Well that's why to get into heaven you have to prove how much of a servant you are. God is powerless to remove your reason, [1]so he just chooses the people who don't use it very much, or will use them for his advantage.

I think it would be voluntary brainwashing that will remove your reason? If it happens. And whether animals get into heaven or not depends on God's prejudices. I mean, Noahs Ark was NOT two of every animal. [2]There was like six of every bird and four of "clean" animals and two of every "unclean"... Or something like that, can't be definite about the numbers without looking at a bible. But the point was that their was a favouritism to the amount of each animal he brought on board.

Your godparents are supposed to guide you down the path of God. And so you could argue that you're not removing original sin, but beginning the path to removing original sin. You aren't supposed to be raised to question the world, your supposed to be raised as a servant to God. [3]You're not supposed to even question him.

[1] Honestly, I find this kind of offensive. What if I told you that anyone who believes in Nothing isn't using their reason?
[2] Don't quote me on this, but I think it was because of their likelihood to carry disease. I'm not sure exactly, though.
[3] I find questioning Him can help. Like, not thinking He's wrong, but delving deeper into why you believe instead of just believing because you were raised to. It's helped me, at least.

by violet crayon of delirium Sun 17 May 2009, 5:49 am

Well if Hell exists then it does mean God wants non-god worshippers dead and tortured. And God seems to want to bring about peace by having everyone follow the same ideal.

While I would call God and Jesus separate entities, Religion seems to call that heresy, because "there can only be one god". Essentially though, if you're going to connect Jesus to God, then you have to keep the same agenda, which is, worship God more than anything and become his servant. It highlights it more, because it means it doesn't matter what you do as long as your heart is intending to serve God by the time you die.

I get the idea that it would be hard to choose what was real gospel. And that Matthew, Mark, Luke, John were the 'reliable' sources. But that doesn't remove the fact that they didn't accept any of it. And if you were truly interested in the teachings of Christianity, you'd want to hear from people who had an inside perspective.

My point was that churches shouldn't need to be an organisation. Churches are a get together to pray and preach from the bible. They are only organisations because they choose to be. Just like why they waste money on elaborate cathedrals.

I was only going on about how pagan Christianity expresses itself as... Usually there are the people who follow things right or whatever, but I'm highlighting where some people are being hypocritical in a naive way.

The thing is that you can't really not believe in Nothing. It's the absence of something, and is the space you fill when something comes into being. It's not a deity but a phenomena. It's like cold and dark... Neither coldness or darkness exists. Cold is just the absence of heat, and dark is the absence of light. Essentially you can't really reason if you don't allow for a zero.
But I'm not saying believing in God in unreasonable. I believe in God, I just don't care about him. What I'm saying is that God wants servants. Perfect servants that want question or disobey him. He'll have peace and harmony because everyone is following the same ideal, the one God is promoting. Reasoning and questioning usually lead to doubt. Or allows the mind to wander elsewhere. It's more that it would be much easier for God if humans didn't have sentience. And seeing as he created humans without sentience, and punished them once they had it, it gives the impression that human's reasoning annoys him.
Honestly, it's reasonable that some people are willing to serve God and live amongst others serving God. But it's not the life for me, and it's not what some feet-dipping Christians assume it to be.
But then again, my beliefs suggest that your beliefs will dictate your life and afterlives, so it doesn't matter. It's just that if you like fun and freedom, the bible is a poor choice of religious evidence.

And anyway, fortifying your belief in God is what I'd call an advantageous use of reason to him, he just dislikes people that reason themselves away from him.

by proust. Sun 17 May 2009, 2:45 pm

violet crayon of delirium wrote:Well if Hell exists then it does mean God wants non-god worshippers dead and tortured. And God seems to want to bring about peace by having everyone follow the same ideal.

While I would call God and Jesus separate entities, Religion seems to call that heresy, because "there can only be one god". Essentially though, if you're going to connect Jesus to God, then you have to keep the same agenda, which is, worship God more than anything and become his servant. It highlights it more, because it means it doesn't matter what you do as long as your heart is intending to serve God by the time you die.

What makes you think that "God" and Jesus have such radically different agendas? Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. (Matthew 5:17)

violet crayon of delirium wrote:I get the idea that it would be hard to choose what was real gospel. And that Matthew, Mark, Luke, John were the 'reliable' sources. But that doesn't remove the fact that they didn't accept any of it. And if you were truly interested in the teachings of Christianity, you'd want to hear from people who had an inside perspective.

But apocryphal gospels weren't written by the Apostles. They were written by early Christians in the 2nd century or later.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:My point was that churches shouldn't need to be an organisation. Churches are a get together to pray and preach from the bible. They are only organisations because they choose to be. Just like why they waste money on elaborate cathedrals.

Notre Dame, St. Stephen's Cathedra in Vienna or Saint Peter's Basilic in Vatican are such huge wastes of money. Same goes for Medieval manuscripts, Hieronymus Bosch's work, the Sistine Chapel ceiling or most of Filippo Lippi paintings. People forget that the "evil money grabbing" Church was the main cultural institution until a few hundred years ago and Western culture would not have survived without it.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:The thing is that you can't really not believe in Nothing. It's the absence of something, and is the space you fill when something comes into being. It's not a deity but a phenomena. It's like cold and dark... Neither coldness or darkness exists. Cold is just the absence of heat, and dark is the absence of light. Essentially you can't really reason if you don't allow for a zero.

Actually, people believe in horror vacui until around the 17th century. Aristotle said that nature abhors empty spaces and thus tries to fill everything thus nothingness/emptiness doesn't exist.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:But I'm not saying believing in God in unreasonable. I believe in God, I just don't care about him. What I'm saying is that God wants servants. Perfect servants that want question or disobey him.

I'm assuming that you've come to that conclusion after prolonged study.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:He'll have peace and harmony because everyone is following the same ideal, the one God is promoting.

What's wrong with universal love, pacifism, humbleness, etc. ? Wouldn't that way of life bring benefits to everyone?

violet crayon of delirium wrote: Reasoning and questioning usually lead to doubt. Or allows the mind to wander elsewhere. It's more that it would be much easier for God if humans didn't have sentience. And seeing as he created humans without sentience, and punished them once they had it, it gives the impression that human's reasoning annoys him.

Reasoning doesn't "annoy" God, Adam and Eve were kicked out of Eden because
a/ if they ate from the Tree of Life they because immortal thus completely godly
b/they lied about eating the forbidden fruit.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:Honestly, it's reasonable that some people are willing to serve God and live amongst others serving God. But it's not the life for me, and it's not what some feet-dipping Christians assume it to be.
But then again, my beliefs suggest that your beliefs will dictate your life and afterlives, so it doesn't matter. It's just that if you like fun and freedom, the bible is a poor choice of religious evidence.

And anyway, fortifying your belief in God is what I'd call an advantageous use of reason to him, he just dislikes people that reason themselves away from him.

I think you can have "fun and freedom" by being a good person.
The rules from the Bible are not absurd -I'm not denying that some people's interpretation of them is- but if you look at Christianity's core and take away it's divine worship factor it offers pretty simple rules to live by: be humble, help others, love others, live in peace, treasure the things around you, etc. It's not that hard to follow.

by P R I N C E S S Sun 17 May 2009, 4:56 pm

kafka. wrote:
violet crayon of delirium wrote:I get the idea that it would be hard to choose what was real gospel. And that Matthew, Mark, Luke, John were the 'reliable' sources. But that doesn't remove the fact that they didn't accept any of it. And if you were truly interested in the teachings of Christianity, you'd want to hear from people who had an inside perspective.
But apocryphal gospels weren't written by the Apostles. They were written by early Christians in the 2nd century or later.

And secondly, Mathew, Mark, Luke and John weren't chosen for being 'reliable', they were selected under Constantine to become the synoptic gospels because they contained the most complete and similar account of Jesus' life, and aftermath. However, even they do not all agree, most noteably John is very diferent to the other three.

These gospels have been included continually as time and beliefs have developed because they fit with the way the church is moving. The way one interprets the gospels independent of the church is your own choice. You seem to believe that God is a dictator, who wants to control all his followers and treat us like servants. But if you actually look at the gospels in a less shallow manner than what your understanding seems to be you will notice that the 4 supposedly most "reliabl" sources tell of a loving jesus and god who protects his people. The Great Commandment itself is ofcourse the commandment of love, and Jesus says this rule comes before all others. To love yourself and others around you surely you cannot be a slave to God? Yes love your god, but also love yourself and those around you.

Yes, the Catholic church has been very corrupt in the past, and I do believe that the current pope is less progressive than the last pope which is not what we need. However, contemporary Christains (or more specifically Catholics) have more freedom, church once a week (and most don't even do that), be a generally good person- don't steal, be adulterous, physically/metally injure people and try not to break the law (which shouldn't rely on religion anyway), don't kill people and your pretty much sweet. Wow your right that really is slavery. The excessive commitments some catholics and christains force themselves to follow are not dictations from god, or even jesus. Most are not even mentioned in the bible. They are interpretations of the church and are in no way related to the controlling god you seem to think exists. Unless you are suggesting that being allowed to kill people is something that we need to have the option of inorder to not be slaves?

Past cultures needed the church, as has previously been stated the church was the back bone of society. The law enforcer in many cases. Look at how many of today's laws and morals can be traced to the ten commandments.

And on the matter of sentience, God did create the serpent that told Eve to eat the fruit did he not? So through that did he not give the original humans the choice? The curiosity and the sentienence to question things. The free will to decide if they wanted to take it or not?

by violet crayon of delirium Sun 17 May 2009, 9:30 pm

Y_Y
I'm not saying the New Testament is invalid... I'm only saying that Christians could benefit from accepting more scriptures that were written about him. And that bible was put together by a certain group of people using religion as a source of power, who were subject to their own beliefs and prejudices anyway. You can interpret it how you want, but the selection of detail does favour theirs.

I never said that what God wants is bad... I'm saying that it's not something for everyone. I mean I wouldn't want to go to heaven, because it would be hell to me. I don't think Hitler's ideals were bad either, I just don't want to live in a totalitarian dictatorship. I'm chaotic, and so is the world. Everyone is different and have different ideals and value different things. Heaven is good for being an exclusive world for people who want to serve. But it's only appropriate for people who want to serve. It's not that you don't have the freedom to go around doing things, it's just that you always have to value God more than anything else and must obey whatever he tells you to do.
And besides... I told you before that your belief was the deciding factor. It doesn't matter what other's believe and value, it's only about what you believe and value.

And I already said that God and Jesus have different approaches but the same agenda. I may dislike God, but I respect Jesus. I just don't wish to serve, I value chaos over order.

People seem to misunderstand my view on the matter. I don't hate the values of Christianity and other God following faiths. They are just unsuitable to me.

kafka wrote:but if you look at Christianity's core and take away it's divine worship factor it offers pretty simple rules to live by: be humble, help others, love others, live in peace, treasure the things around you, etc.

I like when that's what Christian's ideals are, but as I said, it's not my cup of tea(I don't even like tea all that much anyway, I like coffee better :p). I'd be friends with Jesus, but a wouldn't follow him unless I felt like it.

Of course the interpretations of forbidden fruit story can vary. It might be anger at disobedience or fear of them going further and eating immortality fruit. But I think it's a fair enough assumption to assume that God didn't REALLY want humans to have sentience. I mean if "original sin" is supposed to be inherited, it makes more sense to assume that sentience is that sin you're born with. I think God can live with the fact humans have sentience now, but it doesn't change that it complicates things for him.
Obviously if God is the creator then it's his fault. But maybe God made a mistake. Alternatively, maybe God made Lucifer so that he had an antagonist to give himself a challenge (and a scapegoat for his mistakes), Then you could say Lucifer put the trees there.
I guess it doesn't matter though, because the fact is that you still need to use your sentience to serve God/Jesus if you want to get into heaven.

And the thing is... It didn't HAVE to be Christianity that gave the world culture and law. Other religions or beliefs could of filled it's place, it just didn't in this reality. I mean, the other religion wouldn't be any better, but they would be different and would cater to different types of people.

You can say nothing doesn't exist, but nothing IS non-existence. Try to prove anything without using belief in it as an example? You need to accept the laws of nature in some way before you can say that there is a computer in front of you. If someone honestly believed there wasn't a computer in front of them, they wouldn't be able to comprehend one. It's like if I tried to convince you that I had a friend standing next to me. If you didn't believe I had a friend here and believed that I was crazy instead, then you're in a different environment and context, so no ones right or wrong. It's like arguing over whether 1 + 1 = 2 or 10. Both are true, it's just that one side is using binary.
I guess it's more like, Nothing is the rest state of everything. Belief makes nothing into something, but the believer is also just a something, that decides to spawn more something. Its like when people say God is in everything and that everyone is a part of God. Well I substitute the word God, for Nothing. And if you want to become part of the source again, you stop believing in anything, including yourself. Otherwise you use your power of belief to do what ever the hell you want. I mean, usually people start off by playing the game that they woke into existence in, but people don't realise until later that "being a part of God" means you have his power too, and that you can control your environment too. But as everyone is God, you just move away from the environment others are in, while still retaining copies of the people who didn't believe.

But yeah, my belief even allows for you to not believe in them :p. I don't worship nothing, I empower myself as an aspect of her. The great thing about my belief is that people don't need to follow my belief. Of course, at the moment, I'm still playing reality with you all, because I don't want to throw away the interesting experience, but I'm still creative in my spirituality. (Laugh if you want, but instead of praying for God's help, I command servant spirits to help me out with things. :p)

by proust. Sun 17 May 2009, 10:27 pm

violet crayon of delirium wrote:Y_Y
I'm not saying the New Testament is invalid... I'm only saying that Christians could benefit from accepting more scriptures that were written about him. And that bible was put together by a certain group of people using religion as a source of power, who were subject to their own beliefs and prejudices anyway. You can interpret it how you want, but the selection of detail does favour theirs.

And I'm just saying that other scriptures are invalid. Personally, I think the Bible is a huge block of knowledge and offers enough detail.

And, why do you automatically assume that they were trying to "make religion a source of power"? It's exactly the same thing as saying that the people who wrote the American constitution were trying to make an instrument of power out of democracy. The ecumenical councils are vital for Christianity because they put order in beliefs. A religion shouldn't be a confusing haze of beliefs from which everybody interprets everything however they want.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:I never said that what God wants is bad... I'm saying that it's not something for everyone. I mean I wouldn't want to go to heaven, because it would be hell to me.

That's an oxymoron. whatnow? O_O

violet crayon of delirium wrote:I don't think Hitler's ideals were bad either, I just don't want to live in a totalitarian dictatorship.

Which of Hitler's ideals? Because they all seemed to involve totalitarianism.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:I'm chaotic, and so is the world. Everyone is different and have different ideals and value different things. Heaven is good for being an exclusive world for people who want to serve. But it's only appropriate for people who want to serve. It's not that you don't have the freedom to go around doing things, it's just that you always have to value God more than anything else and must obey whatever he tells you to do.
And besides... I told you before that your belief was the deciding factor. It doesn't matter what other's believe and value, it's only about what you believe and value.

You don't have the freedom to go around doing things in democracy either. You have to obey to the laws of the state you're in and you have to serve your country too.
Again, God doesn't ask you to do absurd things, just to swallow your pride most times.
And the world is pretty orderly actually, the whole universe is ruled by the same laws.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:And I already said that God and Jesus have different approaches but the same agenda. I may dislike God, but I respect Jesus. I just don't wish to serve, I value chaos over order.

I don't understand how that is possible unless you've had a personal conversation with either God or Jesus.
There's the Old Law in the Old Testament and the New Covenant in the New Testament, and the Father and Jesus do have different roles in the creation of the world, but They both want to impose the same values on humanity.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:Of course the interpretations of forbidden fruit story can vary. It might be anger at disobedience or fear of them going further and eating immortality fruit. But I think it's a fair enough assumption to assume that God didn't REALLY want humans to have sentience.

Then why didn't He just stop them from it?

violet crayon of delirium wrote: I mean if "original sin" is supposed to be inherited, it makes more sense to assume that sentience is that sin you're born with. I think God can live with the fact humans have sentience now, but it doesn't change that it complicates things for him.

The original sin is erased through baptism, reason is obviously not.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:Obviously if God is the creator then it's his fault. But maybe God made a mistake.

God cannot make mistakes because God is perfect.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:I guess it doesn't matter though, because the fact is that you still need to use your sentience to serve God/Jesus if you want to get into heaven.

How could sentience be a requirement to get to Heaven if God didn't want people to have it?

violet crayon of delirium wrote:And the thing is... It didn't HAVE to be Christianity that gave the world culture and law. Other religions or beliefs could of filled it's place, it just didn't in this reality. I mean, the other religion wouldn't be any better, but they would be different and would cater to different types of people.

They could've, but they just didn't. During the Middle Ages while Western culture was at a standstill, Arabic and Byzantine culture made impressive advancements. We can read Plato or Sophocles today because their manuscripts were preserved in the East. Yet, (Western?) European culture is the only culture that managed to impose itself as universal.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:You can say nothing doesn't exist, but nothing IS non-existence. Try to prove anything without using belief in it as an example?

I guess it's more like, Nothing is the rest state of everything. Its like when people say God is in everything and that everyone is a part of God. Well I substitute the word God, for Nothing.

Tell all that to Aristotle. :]
Plus, if you say that Nothing exists in everything, then you're already contradicting yourself because if Nothing is non-existence, then it cannot exist in anything.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:But yeah, my belief even allows for you to not believe in them :p. I don't worship nothing, I empower myself as an aspect of her. The great thing about my belief is that people don't need to follow my belief. Of course, at the moment, I'm still playing reality with you all, because I don't want to throw away the interesting experience, but I'm still creative in my spirituality. (Laugh if you want, but instead of praying for God's help, I command servant spirits to help me out with things. :p)

No offense, but you mix together so many different beliefs and things, it's unbelievable and confusing. How can you genuinely believe in something just to change it into something completely different the next day?

And this is indeed a very long post. x_x

by violet crayon of delirium Mon 18 May 2009, 1:09 am

Y_Y
You just don't understand what I'm saying... Because you're arguing against conclusions you made about what I said, not against what I said.

kafka wrote:It's exactly the same thing as saying that the people who wrote the American constitution were trying to make an instrument of power out of democracy. The ecumenical councils are vital for Christianity because they put order in beliefs. A religion shouldn't be a confusing haze of beliefs from which everybody interprets everything however they want.

The people who wrote the American constitution WERE trying to get power in introducing democracy. The problem is that you take things to be bad, or unusual when they aren't. Obviously you need people who agree on something if you wish for an ordered decision on something. But just because one group agree on something, doesn't mean the other groups are wrong. Essentially what you're saying in that case is that people who aren't satisfied with what they're given, can go f*** themselves, (Only, they can't because masturbation is immoral :p). But what I mean is, that it's fine to be satisfied, but you have to acknowledge that some people aren't.
The funny thing is even if you say it shouldn't, It still is. Christianity has split into so many forms and everyone has different interpretations of the same thing. Christianity itself was split from Judaism, and Islam is similar anyway. The only way for something to have one truth, is to eliminate the people who don't follow that truth. Heaven takes all people who value the same thing and excludes everyone else.

It's only an oxymoron is you keep everything literal. Hell was a metaphor. If my only purpose was to serve for eternity, I'd rather destroy myself. Or did you mean the previous sentence? I guess it's because I don't have morals that I can say that something isn't bad while I dislike it. God and Heaven is great for people like you, but it's horrible for people like me. The statement about Hitler was the same. Some people would be happy living in totalitarian dictatorship if they idolised their dictator, but if they didn't, they'd hate it (and be killed anyway if they showed resistance).

kafka wrote:You don't have the freedom to go around doing things in democracy either. You have to obey to the laws of the state you're in and you have to serve your country too.

Actually you don't. If I don't want to follow a law, I don't have to. I mean, law enforcers will try to enforce it against me, but that's assuming they can. It's like how you can flee to a different country or state to avoid prosecution. Consequences only come about because you leave yourself open to them. And it's not like some expert criminals don't get away with their crimes. You can argue that God has universal power, but that's just your belief and assumption.

kafka wrote:And the world is pretty orderly actually, the whole universe is ruled by the same laws.

That's only assuming that what you believe is an absolute truth. Order is only brought about from belief and conviction. And the fact is that while there is order, it's lots of different orders. And lots of different orders is still chaos. If you want order, everyone has to believe and value EXACTLY the same thing. And the simplest, most basic form of order, is when everything is in a state of nothing.

kafka wrote:I don't understand how that is possible unless you've had a personal conversation with either God or Jesus ... They both want to impose the same values on humanity.

Why do you need a personal conversation. If you read about what they did and what they said, you can get an idea about the type of person they are and the types of things they're likely to do. Add other related event in history that you've heard about, and it gives you more of an idea. I mean, you can have feelings about fictional characters can't you?
And didn't I say in that quote that they had the same agenda? So why are you repeating it back like it's an argument. I hate God for using fear and threats to inspire loyalty, and I like the loving and accepting approach Jesus uses.

God allowed humans to acquire sentience because he was going along with the rules and set up that he'd already made. It's like, "Well, it happened this way, so maybe I should countermeasure it by doing this to fix it up". I mean he let's f***ed up things happen to people, he just tries to direct it so it works to his advantage in the end.

How do you know that the way you interpret a passage is right? Like I mentioned before, the purpose of godparents is to raise you to be a follower of god. So baptism seems like, a forgiving that you were born with sentience, and starting you on a path where you won't use that sentience in a way that won't stray you away from him.

The only thing that says that he is perfect, is himself, and people that believe him. Even so, it doesn't have to be a mistake, per say. It can just be a negative consequence that he accepts and takes into account for his future calculations. Or a calculated negative circumstance placed so that a positive action can be implemented (Like how governments exploit a disaster to implement new laws or get approval for certain actions).

I never said sentience was a requirement, I said that using your sentience for his advantage is the only way to make up for the fact that you have it.

My only point was that Christianity was not necessary for the future of humans and such. It was essential for things to turn out this way, but it's not like there's anything significant about how thing turned out apart from the fact that it applies to your life at the moment.

As famous as Aristotle was, it really doesn't make a difference whether he believed in it or not. My point was that you can't proof anything unless people believe in your evidence. Nothing is doesn't have to exist to exist as an idea because the idea is that something is able to not exist.

You underestimate the value of zero, when there isn't any other value. That means that the potential is infinite and has no resistance. Everything is worthless ultimately, but you make up or accept imaginary values for it and so does everyone else.

It's not mixed up beliefs, it's just that I don't think anyone is wrong. I believe that everyone is right at the same time. I mean, it starts off being nihilistic, but it's topped off with a positive spin on the result of the idea. I'm staying pretty consistent with what I'm saying, I'm only elaborating, Or are you asking me how it works?

Your belief is controlling your reality. At the moment, you're just going along with the scenario that you were put into. You're assurance in the laws of nature are what's keeping their power over you. Your belief in God is what will likely lead you onto heaven after you die. But if you stopped believing in something and started believing in something else, your environment will change. You can hardly try now though, because you're skeptical. And even if you were dedicated, if you have doubts in your belief, they aren't complete.

Prayer for help and things work through the power of your belief. Magick, in the occult sense works in the same way.

by **more adventurous.** Mon 18 May 2009, 1:39 am

I'm just going to add something in.

God isn't a person. So saying you "get to know what kind of person they are" doesn't make sense to me.

by P R I N C E S S Mon 18 May 2009, 1:44 pm

kafka. wrote:
violet crayon of delirium wrote:Y_Y
I'm not saying the New Testament is invalid... I'm only saying that Christians could benefit from accepting more scriptures that were written about him. And that bible was put together by a certain group of people using religion as a source of power, who were subject to their own beliefs and prejudices anyway. You can interpret it how you want, but the selection of detail does favour theirs.
[font=times new roman]And I'm just saying that other scriptures are invalid. Personally, I think the Bible is a huge block of knowledge and offers enough detail.

Um.. I feel mildly like I am switching sides here, but anywho.

The other scriptures are not invalid. Look at the Gospel of Timothy for example. I haven't read the whole thing, but much of it shows a younger Jesus that is not portrayed very frequently in the accepted Christain bible (which has a few stories- such as the one where he teaches the rabbi's in the temple- and then mostly skips ahead to when he is older.) This scripture shows a pre-teen, pre- running away to the desert with Mary etc in one story he is playing a game similar to marbles and a boy cheats, he then tells his father (God) to strike him down, and the boy becomes ill. I think these scriptures are important, despite the fact that they are not included within the bible.

Yes, this was not selected for the bible because this story is not backed up by other gospels, but that does not mean it is less valid to those of the Christian faith. And the church did not try to hide it from it's followers, otherwise how would a 17 year old like me know about it? I think that seeing Jesus like this, as a more normal person is important in aiding his followers to relate to him.

God never used threats to get people to follow him. The church used fear, but that was it's belief at the time, and the belief of the people. They could have chosen not to believe.

I'm confused about the Hitler thing. Which beliefs do you think are okay? The one where Jew's are impure and should be made to walk until they die or reach gas chambers? Or the one where genecide is okay because Jew's aren't really human?

by Smile, Lovely Tue 19 May 2009, 12:26 pm

I thought that the 'original sin' was indulgence? And using personal gain in order to better yourself over others. Isn't that what Eve did with the apple? And then her sins were made worse when she lied to God, which was why she was banshed?

by bittersweet. Tue 19 May 2009, 3:39 pm

Smile, Lovely wrote:I thought that the 'original sin' was indulgence? And using personal gain in order to better yourself over others. Isn't that what Eve did with the apple? And then her sins were made worse when she lied to God, which was why she was banshed?

Original sin is things that we didn't do, but is passed down from father to son and daughter. So yes, original sin would be Eve's and Adam's doing.

by proust. Wed 20 May 2009, 12:04 am

violet crayon of delirium wrote:
The funny thing is even if you say it shouldn't, It still is. Christianity has split into so many forms and everyone has different interpretations of the same thing. Christianity itself was split from Judaism, and Islam is similar anyway. The only way for something to have one truth, is to eliminate the people who don't follow that truth. Heaven takes all people who value the same thing and excludes everyone else.

Christianity, Islam and Judaism are just three different religions, while Christianity doesn't deny that there is truth in the teachings of other religions it doesn't claim that they're all one universal religion- actually, I think that everybody accepting one universal religion is one of the signs of the coming of the Apocalypse.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:It's only an oxymoron is you keep everything literal. Hell was a metaphor.

Yes, I know what a metaphor is. But Heaven cannot be unpleasant, to say that you wouldn't feel perfect beatitude in Heaven is an oxymoron.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:Actually you don't. If I don't want to follow a law, I don't have to. I mean, law enforcers will try to enforce it against me, but that's assuming they can. It's like how you can flee to a different country or state to avoid prosecution. Consequences only come about because you leave yourself open to them. And it's not like some expert criminals don't get away with their crimes. You can argue that God has universal power, but that's just your belief and assumption.

No, you can't just flee the country when you do something illegal. International organization will get hold of you -if you manage to cross the border in the first place- and you'll still be trialed. You seem to think that to cheat the law is really easy.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:That's only assuming that what you believe is an absolute truth.

So the law of gravity is just a "belief"?

Replying the whole post would lead to another ridiculously long post. Your opinions on how Christianity views God are just awkward, you claim to know how Christians see/interpret God and bring no arguments in favor of it. whatnow? O_O

P R I N C E S S wrote:Um.. I feel mildly like I am switching sides here, but anywho.

The other scriptures are not invalid. Look at the Gospel of Timothy for example. I haven't read the whole thing, but much of it shows a younger Jesus that is not portrayed very frequently in the accepted Christain bible (which has a few stories- such as the one where he teaches the rabbi's in the temple- and then mostly skips ahead to when he is older.) This scripture shows a pre-teen, pre- running away to the desert with Mary etc in one story he is playing a game similar to marbles and a boy cheats, he then tells his father (God) to strike him down, and the boy becomes ill. I think these scriptures are important, despite the fact that they are not included within the bible.

Yes, this was not selected for the bible because this story is not backed up by other gospels, but that does not mean it is less valid to those of the Christian faith. And the church did not try to hide it from it's followers, otherwise how would a 17 year old like me know about it? I think that seeing Jesus like this, as a more normal person is important in aiding his followers to relate to him.

Up until this point, I've never heard of the Gospel of Timothy, but I don't think Christianity should promote the image of a vengeful, hateful God who strikes down boys who cheat at games. whatnow? O_O

by violet crayon of delirium Wed 20 May 2009, 3:07 pm

I'm not saying they're the same religion, I'm saying that religion ISN'T universal. There are heaps of ways of interpreting the bible and faith and well, You can look at anything in multiple different ways.
You're saying that there is only ONE way to interpret the bible, but saying that is immensely conceited. The only one validating your interpretation is you, and anyone else with the same conceited opinion. You're saying that anyone who doesn't see thing exactly the way you do are WRONG.

Heaven IS heaven for those who make it there, but if you put me in heaven, I would despise it. Utopia only caters to one group of people. The difference between utopia and dystopia, is whether you're the side benefitting from it.
I'm saying that you have to want heaven as it is for heaven to be desirable. Heaven is only the perfect place for SOME people, not everyone. I'd be more content in Hell.

I'm not saying that cheating the law is easy. I'm saying that it's possible to get away with crime. Some people are never caught for great crimes, and people get away with little crimes all the time. I mean thousands of people ignore copyright laws all the time and it's not like they're usually prosecuted.
I mean, what about when Christianity was illegal, What if it was made illegal again. Are you going to obey the law when it goes against who you are and what you belief in.

The law of gravity IS just a belief. You were born with the belief that it is the truth, but that doesn't mean that you have to stick with it. Your belief dictates your reality, so of course you'll see other people fall to their death when they believe they can fly. But you didn't believe it, so of course you couldn't see their sucess. They went off into a wavelength of reality where they were able to fly, and you stayed in your skeptical little world where they can't. You believed in opposites, so you're worlds deviated from each other. You'll think they're dead, or in hospital, and they'll be laughing at you for not believing in them.

The people who defy the odds are the ones that believe in themselves. You choose what restirctions you have, Truthfully, you have no restrictions, but life is more interesting when you believe you do. It's like how god-moding roleplayers are no fun to play with, people prefer to impose restrictions on themselves, so they can have forfillment in their journey.

If God isn't a person, the bible loses even more worth. There wouldn't be any talk of anyone communicating with God, they'll just be what appears. God needs personification before he can communicate with any human, Otherwise he's just a subtle influence and feeling. Agnostics tend not to think of God as a person, but rather, an energy. And it's fine to see God as an energy rather than a person. But Christianity does imply that God is a person, just a hopelessly powerful person.

Look up 2 Kings 2:23-25
It's a lovely little story in the bible where some people laugh and mock a prophet for being bald, and the prophet has God summon bears to maul them. So essentially, Christianity is already promoting that sort of message.

And honestly, I don't see what your argument against my credibility is. I'm saying that everyone is different, so essentially it's not like I'm saying everyone believes and does the same thing anyway. If you were to start a discussion of what Christianity is, made up purely of Christians, you'll find plenty of conflict and differing opinions and values.
The arguments and points of view are varied, so when you advocate Christianity, you need to clarify what your Christianity is and understand that there are many different approaches to Christianity. You can say that all others are wrong if you want, but you need to know your religious identity and be able to clarify and analyse your own beliefs. I'm picking at the flaws and contradictions that I can see, and expecting you to look at that subject for yourself and decide your idea on the subject.

If you remember, I'm Catholic to the point of Confirmation. Essentially that makes me a Christian too, just one that deviated elsewhere. I've gone to a Catholic private school and even in primary school I had religious education. I've got a bible and I've read it, it's funny how many Christians haven't read the bible. I still have my own idea of what Christianity is, I just don't worship God because of what I know Christianity to be.

Of course... This is a thread on religion, and I should be allowed to express my ideals and beliefs, and I'm prepared to discuss it. All you're telling me, is that I'm wrong because I don't agree with you.

by P R I N C E S S Wed 20 May 2009, 6:10 pm

No they shouldn't promote it. And therefore it is not included within the Bible. But I do not think gospels such as Timothy should be hidden either.

And dw if you haven't heard of it. I'm just a little bit nerdy when it comes to my religion and I like to know everything! lol

by Sponsored content