Page 48 of 74 FirstFirst ... 38434445464748495051525358 ... LastLast
Results 941 to 960 of 1473
  1. #941  
    I guess I'll throw my thoughts in, if that's ok.
    I used to be a born again christian (so they tell me), but I've given up on religion. With all the different ones (Catholic, Baptist, Buddism, Allah whatever, Rock and Tree worship, etc.) I wonder, they all claim to be the "true" religion so which one is right? what if all of them are wrong? I guess I can sum up my thoughts pretty easily,
    1. No one has ever been able to prove or disprove the existence of God (or whatever you want to call him).
    2. I guess it all boils down to a matter of your faith.
    3. Wait a minute, isn't faith based on the concept that one believes they are right and everyone else who doesn't believe the same way is wrong?
    4. Oh well, back to 1.
    Hope I didn't stray to far of the current road this thread is going down, if I did I apoligize.
    Great Ideas Need Landing Gear, As Well As Wings!
    Thanks,
    Birddog
  2.    #942  
    Originally posted by Birddogrdrgz
    I used to be a born again christian (so they tell me), but I've given up on religion.
    A re-born again heathen (actually, giving up all religions qualifies you for heathen, gentile, and infidel!).
    I wonder, they all claim to be the "true" religion so which one is right?
    This has been addressed, but to paraphrase: the claim that a particular religion is 'true' has been made by humans, and deserves the exact amount of blind faith any human decree deserves. Each of the major religions has a similar slate of beliefs (Christian are the odd-ones out with their belief in the divinity of Jesus - otherwise they fit in line nicely) that dictates a similar moral code (love thy neighbor, etc.)
    what if all of them are wrong?
    What I find more interesting is, "...what if all of them are right?"
    1. No one has ever been able to prove or disprove the existence of God (or whatever you want to call him).
    There are many proofs, for and against the existence of God.
    2. I guess it all boils down to a matter of your faith.
    and/or experiences and/or logic.
    3. Wait a minute, isn't faith based on the concept that one believes they are right and everyone else who doesn't believe the same way is wrong?
    no.
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  3.    #943  
    Originally posted by Toby
    Where does it say in the Bible that they have no soul?
    It's implied in the actions of Jesus. Would he have allowed the demons to possess the pigs had they no soul? If so, animals must have a less important soul than people (unless demonic possession is a spiritual honor - Jesus doesn't seem to act like it all that great, though). Slippery slope, anyone?
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  4. #944  
    A re-born again heathen (actually, giving up all religions qualifies you for heathen, gentile, and infidel!).
    No arguments there.

    What I find more interesting is, "...what if all of them are right?"
    That would make all of them wrong.

    There are many proofs, for and against the existence of God.
    I was speaking of hardcore evidence. I guess I should have been more specific, sorry


    no.
    I thought it did, see what I mean about being "born again" aka: brainwashed.
    Great Ideas Need Landing Gear, As Well As Wings!
    Thanks,
    Birddog
  5.    #945  
    Originally posted by Birddogrdrgz
    That would make all of them wrong.
    They are not mutually exclusive. I've spoken with priests and the local rabbi who have said that all worship the same God, merely different (not mutually exclusive) truths have been revealed. They have advised that one 'shop' for a religion that meets one's needs. Personally, I like them all.
    I was speaking of hardcore evidence. I guess I should have been more specific, sorry
    It's all good (although, at best you can only say that_you_have no hardcore evidence).
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  6. #946  
    (forgive me if this has been brought up earlier in this thread, I haven't been following it too closely, I just checking from time to time)

    Years ago, someone in one of my comparative philosophies of religions class suggested the idea that all religions and beliefs of mankind were created by the "devil" to wreak havoc with mankind, just look at all the pain, death, wars, chaos and suffering caused by man in the name of religion, I think that person was on to something... It's really the only thing that has ever made any sense to me when talking about god and various religious beliefs..
    Last edited by EricG; 06/15/2002 at 08:11 PM.
    "One of the most important things you learn from the internet is that there is no ‘them’ out there. It’s just an awful lot of ‘us’." -- Douglas Adams
  7.    #947  
    Originally posted by EricG
    Years ago, someone in one of my comparative philosophies of religions class suggested the idea that all religions and beliefs of mankind were created by the "devil" to wreak havoc with mankind, just look at all the pain, death, wars, chaos and suffering caused by man in the name of religion, I think that person was on to something... It's really the only thing that has ever made any sense to me when talking about god and various religious beliefs..
    I've tossed the idea around myself. I came to the conclusion that mankind needed to help killing itself. Just look at all the pain, death, wars, chaos, and/or suffering caused by nationalism, skin tone, abortion, sex, music, etc.
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  8. #948  
    Way back in the good ol' days (don't ask me what dynasty or year. I don't have my reference books with me): china had to deal with three major religions that were starting to pull at each other.

    They were Hinduism, Buddishm, and Confucianism (prolly misspelled those). The high priests and commoners from each religion would get together and (from one source) over hard liquor, discuss the three religions and try and decide which one was right.

    The answer they all arrived at was a great compromise: They decided on a doctrine of 1 truth, 3 ways.

    In other words: the three ways always arrived at the same truth which was improving self and others.

    I like the approach. They realized that they couldn't reconcile the different religions but they also had the foresight to look beyond those differences and say, "hey, we aren't that different after all."

    I can only hope jews/christians/muslims can do the same. After all, they technically worship the same god. They just have very different ways and ideas about what s/he is.
  9. #949  
    Originally posted by ****-richardson
    It's implied in the actions of Jesus.
    Jesus didn't read his Old Testament, then... Look at Job 12:9-10 and Ecclesiastes 3:19-21. They state pretty clearly that animals are pretty much the same as man in that regard.
    Would he have allowed the demons to possess the pigs had they no soul?
    I think you mean 'had they _a_ soul', but either the answer is he was ignorant of the Old Testament, or yes.
    If so, animals must have a less important soul than people (unless demonic possession is a spiritual honor - Jesus doesn't seem to act like it all that great, though). Slippery slope, anyone?
    No slippery slope at all. One could make the argument that man was given dominion over all other living things, and so hence was 'superior'. OTOH, since men wrote the bible, what else would they say. Perhaps in the Pig Bible, men are really tools of the Arch-Enemy Jesus who possessed their brethren long ago, hence they must pork up and sacrifice themselves so that men may eat them and die from heart disease.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  10. #950  
    Originally posted by ****-richardson
    I've tossed the idea around myself. I came to the conclusion that mankind needed to help killing itself. Just look at all the pain, death, wars, chaos, and/or suffering caused by nationalism, skin tone, abortion, sex, music, etc.
    Whose image were we made in again?
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  11. #951  
    Originally posted by NeilMcD
    [...] They were Hinduism, Buddishm, and Confucianism (prolly misspelled those). [...]
    Buddhism. Right letters... slightly mixed up.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  12.    #952  
    Originally posted by Toby
    Jesus didn't read his Old Testament, then... Look at Job 12:9-10 and Ecclesiastes 3:19-21. They state pretty clearly that animals are pretty much the same as man in that regard.
    Read down a bit in the Ecclesiastes (verse 20 to be exact) '...and to the dust they both return.' I don't think that verse is referring to a spiritual aspect of either man or animal. The only way I can resolve the incongruities is that it is referring merely to a respect of life for life's sake.
    I think you mean 'had they _a_ soul', but either the answer is he was ignorant of the Old Testament, or yes.
    Or we get into interpretation.
    No slippery slope at all. One could make the argument that man was given dominion over all other living things,
    Again, either animals have no soul, or their soul is inferior to ours. The slippery slope comes in when trying to identify when a soul is given to an 'animal.' Single celled? Viruses?
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  13.    #953  
    Originally posted by Toby
    Whose image were we made in again?
    That starts to lend credence to God's Debris (good book, you should read it). Anyway, let's append my comment to include the possibility that the devil can pervert any man-made institution.
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  14. #954  
    Originally posted by ****-richardson
    Read down a bit in the Ecclesiastes (verse 20 to be exact) '...and to the dust they both return.'
    Referring to their physical bodies, of course.
    I don't think that verse is referring to a spiritual aspect of either man or animal.
    It refers to both spirit and body.
    The only way I can resolve the incongruities is that it is referring merely to a respect of life for life's sake.
    What incongruities?
    Or we get into interpretation.
    What interpretation is required?
    Again, either animals have no soul,
    and the Bible is wrong.
    or their soul is inferior to ours.
    Or maybe their soul isn't inferior to ours and Jesus inflicted a cruel fate on them.
    The slippery slope comes in when trying to identify when a soul is given to an 'animal.' Single celled? Viruses?
    Again, there's no slippery slope. According to those passages (I'll let you find more yourself, but they exist), all living things have a 'spirit'. Viruses don't count then because they aren't alive (despite some views to the contrary).
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  15. #955  
    Originally posted by ****-richardson
    That starts to lend credence to God's Debris (good book, you should read it).
    I'll get to it eventually.
    Anyway, let's append my comment to include the possibility that the devil can pervert any man-made institution.
    That's not appending it. That's totally retracting it and substituting something else. Mankind either needs no help (which I can only assume is what you meant to say since "needed to help" doesn't make any sense there), or the devil did it.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  16. #956  
    Originally posted by Toby
    Perhaps in the Pig Bible, men are really tools of the Arch-Enemy Jesus who possessed their brethren long ago, hence they must pork up and sacrifice themselves so that men may eat them and die from heart disease.
    That's pretty crazy, but creative. Good for a laugh.
    <a href="http://coffeedudeff7.barnt.us/surv.htm">My Improved Survey</a>
  17.    #957  
    Originally posted by Toby
    [B]Referring to their physical bodies, of course.It refers to both spirit and body.
    According to your interpretation. I find it easier to believe that the entiretly of the passage is referring to one aspect, rather than tacitly switching gears at some point in the middle.
    What incongruities?
    The incongruities throughout the bible that arise when you take that passage to mean there is no spiritual existence, or rather a temporal one.
    What interpretation is required?
    The same interpretation that is required to decipher any form of communication.
    and the Bible is wrong.
    or isn't clear
    Or maybe their soul isn't inferior to ours and Jesus inflicted a cruel fate on them.
    The *******!
    Again, there's no slippery slope. According to those passages (I'll let you find more yourself, but they exist), all living things have a 'spirit'.
    I wasn't necessarily arguing that the Bible doesn't say that animals have no spirit, just the passages you quote don't necessarily say they do. The only_concrete_verse (to the affirmative) I've found is in Psalms. Can't seem to find it right now, though.
    Viruses don't count then because they aren't alive (despite some views to the contrary).
    Viruses aren't addressed. Why aren't they alive?
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  18.    #958  
    Originally posted by Toby
    Mankind either needs no help (which I can only assume is what you meant to say since "needed to help" doesn't make any sense there)
    That is as I meant.
    or the devil did it.
    I'm not on board with this idea, but the possibility exists.

    Regarding your 'image' comment, do you take it to be an all-or-nothing designation? If not, do you feel it possible that the 'image' chosen to shape us may have been simply free-will and not necessarily goodness? If so, are we not all God?
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  19. #959  
    Originally posted by ****-richardson
    If so, are we not all God?
    no
    <a href="http://coffeedudeff7.barnt.us/surv.htm">My Improved Survey</a>
  20. #960  
    Originally posted by Schrader
    no
    "no," what? support your statement. Why no?
    The light at the end of your tunnel has been disconnected due to non-payment. Please remit funds immediately for restoration of hope.

Posting Permissions