So.. if the bible is wrong, God still exists, that doesn't make any sense, since the basis for God is the bible. It's all circular logic, God exists because God says he exists in ths book written by man. That makes no sense. Explain that logic.
at some point it requires faith to believe he exists or faith to believe He doesn't exist. That is my point. You get on here and say, matter of factly, that you know God doesn't exist and it's all stupid. When it's truly a matter of faith in either direction. You can say he doesn't fit into your world view or methods of thinking, but again...if you can't prove he exists or prove he doesn't exist you must take some sort of faith to have your position (faith in God or faith in nothing). And you really spend a lot of time on here trying to convince everyone that God doesn't exist and you have all the answers...why work so hard if He doesn't exist???
make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
nope but compassion could be letting someone ask for forgiveness which is a big difference than making someone ask for forgiveness. God hasn't made anyone ask for forgiveness but he allows everyone to.
why should anyone ask forgiveness for something like calling god allah or buddha or frank...instead of 'god'?
organized (note organized) religion is one big guilt trip and about control
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
So this is more interesting. You have an approach to life which is quite similar to mine, in that you fit into teh natural world around you and find enrichment and fulfillment in that. I have had similar experiences, and they are some of my most teasured memories.
You are right, when I say that I don't like anything about teh way religion, modern or otherwise makes God out to be some stern bloke in a roeb who will fry you in hell for breaking their rules etc etc etc.
What i don't get is how you get from your oneness with nature, which I do easily underssand and appreciate, to a concept of a monotheistic god.
I am contenet that teh world can exist,and that dolphins jumping out of a wave in front of me can put a grin you could lose a truck in on my face.
No god needed to explain or justify that for me.
BTW, did you see the pic of my colt sitting on a bean bag ???
Peace
we live a similar lifestyle which is why i use that analogy. you see things that show you there must be a power greater than you in the universe. and; you can have a telepathic relationship with animals. maybe you'll deny it but you've had animals do what you wanted by only thinking it. what i think is that someone tried to jam religion down your throat and you saw through the ancient "translation". that being that early man couldn't comprehend the spiritual concept so they translated it into something they understood. and that was making their impression of God as a powerful man. and that's the story that's been handed down. early man put a recognisable face on God. then man started writing things down. and each story teller wrote what they thought to be important; and added things to make the story something you would tell someone else. if you hear a good joke; you repeat it, right? so there were many offshoots of christianity with different stories being taught. they were the same story; only different versions. so the bishops decided to make one book; ie: the bible. these men decided what they wanted you to know and destroyed the other written stories. you see through that and denounce it. but what early man couldn't comprehend was that God is found within themselves. i've seen hundreds of people go out to feed their horses when they were sick. when you go out to feed your horses when your sick; they know your sick and try to comfort you. if you haven't noticed it; pay attention next time. they know. i can tell by looking at your horses and the way you care for them. now watch others and see that they don't have that type of relationship with their animals. what is this force that allows your horses to read your thoughts in english and understand them; yet others can't? it's within you and that's where you'll find God.
i'll leave you with that thought for a bit. i'm getting a bit winded and i need to tend my animals. you're sleeping anyway.
i know a lot about you by seeing the colt in the beanbag. all your horses are beautiful dude. we'll talk when you wake.
Interesting, I've never heard a polish joke before and probably wouldn't find it funny anyway. I know a polish guy that says there are a lot of polish jokes, but I'm thinking it's the pols that make up these jokes.
Kind of like newfies, the mass of newfie jokes came out of newfoundland. They did it to themselves in a way. But I can't post a joke about black people on her, firstly it's not even that funny. It's only funny from the perspective that people are stereotypical.
But none-the-less you do argue that homosexuality is immoral, which is discrimination in my opinion. But then again, religion claims a monopoly on morality, so that makes me immoral aswell.
i challenge you to find one post of mine; out of the 2900 posts i've made; where i said homosexuatity was immoral. i find it discusting and equate it with beastiality but i've never said immoral.
you've never heard a polish joke? do you live in a coccoon? you've never seen the countless books of only polish jokes? i can't believe that. a lot of the kids in school carried one around. a lot of them are pretty good. you should check it out.
why should anyone ask forgiveness for something like calling god allah or buddha or frank...instead of 'god'?
Old Testament:
Deuteronomy 32:39
New Testament:
1 Timothy 1:17
because if you're not serving Jesus Christ(John 14:6), who is the way to the Father, you're serving something else. you're a follower of whomever you serve.
organized (note organized) religion is one big guilt trip and about control
everyone is SO CAUGHT UP with organized religion. it's a personal relationship with God.
I died. I died and you just stood there. I died and you watched. I died and you walked by and said no. I'm dead.
If OLS would answer my "Why?" questions, we'd learn that his belief is speculative as well.
because everything in nature is balanced. you cannot have good without bad. you cannot have light without darkness. you cannot have beauty without ugliness.
man has free will. he has the power to choose. man has the choice to either steal the bread or go hungry. the animal will take the bread in response to hunger. man has the choice.
i've heard you say that what we do is predetermined; but you never say predetermined by whom. we know it's not DNA because clones don't act or think the same. DNA only determines physical attributes. identical twins with the same DNA don't act the same. why will one twin steal the bread and the other not? this is your question to answer for yourself. there's been many "scientific" studies done and each has found a different answer. yes; even the evil twin theory.
so pondering the mysteries of life is something you must do yourself. the answer lies within.
because if you're not serving Jesus Christ(John 14:6), who is the way to the Father, you're serving something else. you're a follower of whomever you serve.
God; knowing that man will never agree with eachother; has sent teachers to different people and brought them teachings those people will accept. so as all rivers lead to the sea; all religions lead to God. it's mans arrogance that makes him believe his religion is the only or "right" religion. christians will pray to a patron saint; are they not worshiping a man? a false God? christians do not believe in reincarnation; yet wouldn't a loving and forgiving God give someone a second chance to find enlightenment?
everyone is SO CAUGHT UP with organized religion. it's a personal relationship with God.
organized religion is for the sheep. and also to define the boundries of it's teachings. one learns the boundries then goes on to seek God in their own way. i've seen people that will wind-up their God on sunday and go to church. they pray and go through the motions but when the hour is up; they put God on the shelf until next sunday. then there are those that understand the teachings and live them each day. like that is the day they will see God.
so yes; it is a personal relationship. you find God within yourself. not in the sky or somewhere in space.
When did I mock god? But I see you didn't answer the question.
you don't even know what you say. you're mocking Him by challenging His Power to even transform people. you're no better than the ones testing Jesus to take Himself off of the cross. is ANYTHING too hard for the Lord(Genesis 18:14)? didn't YOU write this below. i believe you did. that, my friend, is challenging, defying, mocking, God. you're making fun of this and Him by even saying it's not possible for someone to change their life around.
Are you struggling with undesired same-sex attractions? Maybe you have been a Homosexual for a long time, but now are searching for a way out. You have come to the right place! Love God's Way is offering hope and help to people seeking freedom from being Gay. We believe and we have seen in thousands of lives that this freedom is possible through the power of our C.H.O.P.S program working in our hearts and minds.
The bottom line - you shouldn't be gay! You can lead a life of fulfillment and happiness as God intended, a life far better than what your Gay life has offered.
didn't YOU mock God by being sarcastic and trying to be funny by saying Mike is God. maybe Mike IS your God. i love Mike too, i've met him and he's an awesome guy, but i'm sure even HE wouldn't feel comfortable with that. he's a humble guy. you can mock God all you want about did HE write the Bible, or Jesus, or "some other" dude, but do not be deceived, God is not mocked, for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap.
because if you're not serving Jesus Christ(John 14:6), who is the way to the Father, you're serving something else. you're a follower of whomever you serve.
everyone is SO CAUGHT UP with organized religion. it's a personal relationship with God.
I think you're nuts. How can you just say "its a personal relationship with God" when you constantly quote and use the Bible as an argument on your behalf? The Bible IS the tool of organized religion. The Bible was put together by Bishops of the Catholic church as their tool to spread THEIR word... which they claim is the REAL word of God. (whether it is or not)
So if you truly believe that its a personal relationship then you dont need to quote the Bible...
I've read many other posts by many of the "believers" in here and respect about every one of their positions, mostly because I don't feel they contradict themselves. I could maybe find it believable if you were taught or have experience with the Bible and use that as a basis then start forming your own idea or beliefs... then the personal relationship statement could pass, but since you quote the Bible and essentially follow it word for word , that personal relationship idea goes out the window for me. Your religion is organized religion...
I have respect for people who believe something because they think about it and use their experiences to mold what they believe and how they think. (even though i may not agree with it) I have little to no respect for people who answer every question with the "God said it" answers... which is what you do. It doesn't seem like you have any opinion of your own.. you just regurgitate Bible quotes for everything. People who do that will have a very difficult time getting any kind of respect from me. (whether you care about getting respect from me or not) Thats just the way I feel. If you believe in something its better to speak about why YOU believe it, not copy/paste how someone else tells you to believe it.
sorry for the long post. might as well make my first one of the day worth it.
The Sentence Below Is True
The Sentence Above Is False
you don't even know what you say. you're mocking Him by challenging His Power to even transform people. you're no better than the ones testing Jesus to take Himself off of the cross. is ANYTHING too hard for the Lord(Genesis 18:14)? didn't YOU write this below. i believe you did. that, my friend, is challenging, defying, mocking, God. you're making fun of this and Him by even saying it's not possible for someone to change their life around.
didn't YOU mock God by being sarcastic and trying to be funny by saying Mike is God. maybe Mike IS your God. i love Mike too, i've met him and he's an awesome guy, but i'm sure even HE wouldn't feel comfortable with that. he's a humble guy. you can mock God all you want about did HE write the Bible, or Jesus, or "some other" dude, but do not be deceived, God is not mocked, for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap.
collin is really a good guy. misguided i believe; but he too was created by God and thus you must accept him for who he is. i'm in no way defending his offensive behavior. his comments were way out of line. if someone verbally attacked his wife; mother; father; etc; he'd be angry. he attacked your beliefs and it made you angry. but i believe it's best to forgive him because he doesn't have the knowledge and understanding you have.
God; knowing that man will never agree with eachother; has sent teachers to different people and brought them teachings those people will accept. so as all rivers lead to the sea; all religions lead to God. it's mans arrogance that makes him believe his religion is the only or "right" religion. christians will pray to a patron saint; are they not worshiping a man? a false God? christians do not believe in reincarnation; yet wouldn't a loving and forgiving God give someone a second chance to find enlightenment?
i'm sorry, but i have to politely disagree with you. i don't believe all religions lead to the same place. i personally believe there is one true way to God, and that is through His Son who died for everyone. people can disagree and that's fine, but i'm putting it out there just in case someone wants to seek Christ out. also, why would i pray to a saint when Jesus died for my sins. there is no need to pray to a saint. even when Jesus was transfigured on the mountain in front of Peter, James, and John, when Moses and Elijah appeared with Him, God said, "this is my Son, whom I love; with Him I am well pleased. listen to Him." and as far as giving us a second chance, Christ coming into the world is our second chance.
I died. I died and you just stood there. I died and you watched. I died and you walked by and said no. I'm dead.
collin is really a good guy. misguided i believe; but he too was created by God and thus you must accept him for who he is. i'm in no way defending his offensive behavior. his comments were way out of line. if someone verbally attacked his wife; mother; father; etc; he'd be angry. he attacked your beliefs and it made you angry. but i believe it's best to forgive him because he doesn't have the knowledge and understanding you have.
i don't doubt Collin is a good guy. i'm not angry at him at all. i just wanted to answer his question.
I died. I died and you just stood there. I died and you watched. I died and you walked by and said no. I'm dead.
I think you're nuts. How can you just say "its a personal relationship with God" when you constantly quote and use the Bible as an argument on your behalf? The Bible IS the tool of organized religion. The Bible was put together by Bishops of the Catholic church as their tool to spread THEIR word... which they claim is the REAL word of God. (whether it is or not)
i follow the Word of God. call it what you want. there are many forms of organized religion that have their own man-made laws. if you're calling the teachings of Christ an organized religion then so be it. speak clearly. each person DOES have a personal relationship with God.
So if you truly believe that its a personal relationship then you dont need to quote the Bible...
God is one...God's Word is the Bible...i quote it.
I've read many other posts by many of the "believers" in here and respect about every one of their positions, mostly because I don't feel they contradict themselves. I could maybe find it believable if you were taught or have experience with the Bible and use that as a basis then start forming your own idea or beliefs...
i don't need respect from you. my respect comes from God. furthermore, you don't know my background in my studies, so you're grasping for air, my friend.
I have respect for people who believe something because they think about it and use their experiences to mold what they believe and how they think. (even though i may not agree with it) I have little to no respect for people who answer every question with the "God said it" answers... which is what you do. It doesn't seem like you have any opinion of your own.. you just regurgitate Bible quotes for everything. People who do that will have a very difficult time getting any kind of respect from me. (whether you care about getting respect from me or not) Thats just the way I feel. If you believe in something its better to speak about why YOU believe it, not copy/paste how someone else tells you to believe it.
once again, i don't seek your respect so your words are like dust off of my shoes. i find it amusing that you have no respect for someone who is trying to honor God's word instead of himself. why would i want to put my own spin on His Word. isn't that what some religions do? yes.
I died. I died and you just stood there. I died and you watched. I died and you walked by and said no. I'm dead.
because everything in nature is balanced. you cannot have good without bad. you cannot have light without darkness. you cannot have beauty without ugliness.
man has free will. he has the power to choose. man has the choice to either steal the bread or go hungry. the animal will take the bread in response to hunger. man has the choice.
i've heard you say that what we do is predetermined; but you never say predetermined by whom. we know it's not DNA because clones don't act or think the same. DNA only determines physical attributes. identical twins with the same DNA don't act the same. why will one twin steal the bread and the other not? this is your question to answer for yourself. there's been many "scientific" studies done and each has found a different answer. yes; even the evil twin theory.
so pondering the mysteries of life is something you must do yourself. the answer lies within.
This so called balance is subjective and results from our perspective,
What you've described is Dan Dennett's version of Free-will, but what it is is synonymous with will alone, the word free describes a type of will independent of determinants. I have actually said what predetermines everything. Prior causes. Genetics as well as experience. Here is a good article I found last night
Imagine two scenarios. In the first, you are driving down the street and are suddenly overcome by a fit of sneezing. You veer off to the right, and by the time you come to a stop, you realize, to your horror, that you have hit a young woman walking on the sidewalk. She is pinned against a brick wall and, despite emergency treatment, will be paralyzed below the waist for life.
In the second scenario, you are driving a pickup truck on a fine summer morning when you suddenly notice a bee buzzing around inside. You are frightened because you think you might be allergic to bee stings, and while trying to kill the bee with a handy newspaper, you swerve into oncoming traffic, hitting a small car head-on. The driver, a young father of two, is killed.
Are you morally responsible in either of these cases (both of which actually occurred), and should you be held legally responsible? In each case, you can honestly say you didn’t mean to cause harm, and it makes a difference that there was neither conscious nor unconscious intent. Still, could you have foreseen the potential consequences of your distraction? We expect people to exercise self-control. We all know that it is difficult but not impossible to stifle a sneeze; you might do so in a classroom, for instance. We could argue that we have even more control over how we respond to our fears than we do to our impulses. Shouldn’t we be expected, then, to not allow ourselves to be distracted by fear of a bee sting when engaged in something as risky as driving?
We could imagine a spectrum of situations in which the degrees of self-control and personal responsibility would be up for debate. Consider one final scenario: In a fit of anger, a man hits his girlfriend’s young daughter for accidentally spilling a drink on him. He is arrested, but while in jail awaiting trial, doctors discover he has a tumor in a brain region linked to emotional behavior. The tumor is surgically removed, and the man’s angry outbursts diminish. At his trial, the judge declares that the insanity defense was created for this type of situation, and the man is released. Did the judge do the right thing? Should we make allowances when there is evidence that biological factors have led a person to act in a particular way?
The tension between the idea that a person can decide what to do and then be held responsible for that action and the idea that brain function or dysfunction has a direct and possibly uncontrollable influence on one’s behavior is a recent variation on the centuriesold philosophical discussion of free will versus determinism. The notion of free will assumes choices are made deliberately and intentionally, with the full agency of the individual. In ancient times, humans were seen as slaves of the gods or of their own passions—think of the story of Oedipus, the mythological king who fulfilled the prophecy that he would kill his father and marry his mother, despite his best efforts to avoid that fate. More recently, the argument has been grounded in the question of how we can freely choose one particular action over another, given that we all develop in and are subject to influences beyond our control. Today, we can pinpoint certain neurobiological factors that call into question whether a person is actually acting knowingly and intentionally. Doesn’t that also call into question whether one can truly be said to have free will?
As neuroscientists study the brain and nervous system from the level of molecules and genes to higher function and behavior, revealing more and more about what makes us tick, it is clear that the knowledge gained has broad and profound implications. Thinkers within the burgeoning field of neuroethics are focusing on concerns arising from this knowledge and its potential applications. In the volume Neuroethics: Defining the Issues in Theory, Practice, and Policy, edited by Judy Illes, director of the program in neuroethics and a senior research scholar at the Stanford Center for Biomedical Ethics, scientists and philosophers examine a wide range of issues within the current neuroethics debate, including how our brains’ workings intersect with moral and legal responsibility, and the ways in which findings from neuroscience might play out in our legal system.
Moral behavior is a conglomeration of a number of interacting and overlapping components: awareness of the situation at hand, perception of relevant circumstances, and analysis of the implications of possible courses of action, to name a few. Environmental factors, such as education, empathy, and peer groups, can influence and perhaps even determine the nature of the elements of ethical decision making; these factors exert their effects through complex, dynamic mechanisms. In a chapter called “Poverty, Privilege, and Brain Development,” Martha Farah, a senior fellow at the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania, and her colleagues highlight the role of physical and psychological factors associated with socioeconomic status in brain development and function. Iron deficiency anemia resulting from poor nutrition, for example, exacerbates the neurotoxic effects of lead often found in the peeling paint of old and poorly maintained housing. Neurotoxins affect a person’s overall neurobiological functioning, and studies have shown that even low levels of lead in the bloodstream are associated with impaired intellectual ability. The degree to which an impaired intellect limits a person’s capacity to fully comprehend a situation or the likely outcome of his actions is still an open question. In a chapter on the nature of moral judgment, meanwhile, Adina Roskies, an assistant professor of philosophy at Dartmouth College, examines the way in which patients with damage to the ventromedial prefrontal cortex approach some ethical dilemmas. Though these patients analyze situations in the same way that people without brain damage do, the decisions the patients make about preferable courses of action are different. For reasons that are not completely understood, they seem less likely to be influenced by emotional considerations when weighing the alternatives and more inclined to take a logical approach to decision making.
The point of these examples in Neuroethics is that the particulars of our moral calculations are subject to the particulars of our biology. And just as the decisionmaking process is multifaceted and complex, the progression from decision making to action is anything but simple and straightforward, with too many mediating factors to reduce it to a simple algorithm. We cannot draw simple conclusions about why we make the choices we do and act as we do. In his most recent book, The Ethical Brain, Dartmouth College cognitive neuroscientist Michael Gazzaniga points out that neuroscience “does not yet have incontrovertible evidence of how thoughts are represented … in the brain, and it may be that while all thought is generated in the brain, we may never be able to read those thoughts.” It is unwise—perhaps even dangerous—to extrapolate from scientific findings regarding brain function. As Gazzaniga also writes, “[W]e have no right to take information on brain waves and weave from it a story and theory about a person’s thoughts and intentions.”
Even so, neuroscientific evidence is likely to become an ever-increasing presence in the courtroom, and as a society, we need to consider what this sort of evidence means for the concept of legal responsibility. Stephen Morse, a lawyer and psychologist at the University of Pennsylvania, notes in Neuroethics that the basis for legal responsibility is the assumption that people are “conscious, intentional, and potentially rational agents.” University of California, San Diego philosopher Patricia Churchland adds that legal responsibility assumes individuals “are held responsible for [an] action unless exculpating considerations obtain.” In particular, legal culpability requires not only the criminal act itself, but also what is known as mens rea—a state of mind in which criminal acts are committed willfully, knowingly, and with reckless indifference or gross negligence.
Neurobiological findings may appear to offer hard evidence of impaired capacity for mens rea; evidence of brain tumors and scientific testimony regarding abnormal brain activity and function might well sway juries and judges, as they did the judge mentioned earlier. Science journalist Sandra Ackerman points out in Hard Science, Hard Choices: Facts, Ethics, and Policies Guiding Brain Science Today that an image of brain activity is “as persuasive as the sonogram of a thumb-sucking fetus, and just as unforgettable.” However, she continues, “many quirks of the brainimaging process are not apparent to the casual viewer. The images seem to be appearing more and more often these days, but with less and less explanation of their contents.” This worries some, like Morse, who believe that misplaced reliance on brain imaging might leave insufficient room for personal responsibility. In Neuroethics, Morse imagines a future in which “needless and expensive imaging studies will become routine, and judges and juries will be swayed by hard science which may be valid, but which will seldom be relevant for the purpose of evaluating responsibility.”
Others who have considered the role of neuroscience in the legal system, meanwhile, contend that the notion of personal responsibility is too deeply ingrained in our society to ever be completely ignored. Indeed, the legal and public status of the idea of “not guilty by reason of insanity” and of the related concept of “diminished capacity” are on shaky ground. In Hard Science, Hard Choices, Ackerman sums up the view of Stanford University law professor Hank Greely: “Even if a neuroscientist could prove ... there was no such thing as free will, we would ignore him in the criminal setting. We would continue to treat people as if they are responsible, whether we actually believe they are or not.” In assessing culpability, we are willing to allow that brain function may play a role in behavior, yet at the same time, we maintain that people ought to answer for their actions, whether or not they are blameworthy. In The Ethical Brain, Gazzaniga offers a distinction between the intricate neural processes going on in our brains and our actions, and he adamantly opposes the possibility that brain-related findings can or should be used to determine an individual’s culpability. “Neuroscience will offer us some new ways to understand behavior,” he writes, “but ultimately we must realize that even if the cause of an act (criminal or otherwise) is explainable in terms of brain function, this does not mean that the person who carries out the act is exculpable.”
Part of the challenge in deciding how neurobiology should interact with legal responsibility is the fact that research findings are based on large numbers of people, while single individuals are deemed responsible (or not) for a particular action. As neuroscience continues to advance and become more refined, we may well uncover further correlations between biology and individual behavior, but explaining the actions of a single person— actions that reflect the confluence of more factors than we can possibly hold in our heads, never mind properly weigh—may remain an impossible task.
If we recognize that the neurobiological events that lead to higher brain function and behavior result from complex interactions of genetic and environmental factors, it is unreasonable not to acknowledge the potential role of these factors when we assess responsibility. They ought to be considered. Among the challenges for neuroethicists will be to help us decide the degree to which various factors should be considered and to help us understand how we should conceive of personal autonomy. As a society, we must continue to discuss and debate the appropriate role for new neurobiological findings in determining culpability. With so much at stake, it is clear that we need to proceed with caution and with our best judgment when it comes to incorporating neuroscience into decisions regarding when individuals should be held accountable. http://www.science-spirit.org/newdirections.php?article_id=651
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
i'm sorry, but i have to politely disagree with you. i don't believe all religions lead to the same place. i personally believe there is one true way to God, and that is through His Son who died for everyone. people can disagree and that's fine, but i'm putting it out there just in case someone wants to seek Christ out. also, why would i pray to a saint when Jesus died for my sins. there is no need to pray to a saint. even when Jesus was transfigured on the mountain in front of Peter, James, and John, when Moses and Elijah appeared with Him, God said, "this is my Son, whom I love; with Him I am well pleased. listen to Him." and as far as giving us a second chance, Christ coming into the world is our second chance.
i'm with you pjammin. i think it's great you're following the scriptures so closely. i was raised roman catholic and attended a jesuit college prep with intentions of becoming a priest. we know that Jesus taught in parables so the listener can extract what they can. Jesus died for me too. but i follow his teaching; not the teachings of other men. the church was corrupt early on. in 1635 the pope ordered galleleo assassinated for teaching that the earth revolved around the sun. this does not follow the teachings of Jesus. the church destroyed hundreds of scriptures and archeology is now finding copies hidden in caves. would Jesus agree with destroying scriptures? or the crusades where people were killed for not believing exactly what some men decided was the proper beliefs? would Jesus agree with condemning a hindu who never heard about Jesus? would he condemn over half the world just because they weren't christian?
Christ is coming back. i say soon.
This so called balance is subjective and results from our perspective,
What you've described is Dan Dennett's version of Free-will, but what it is is synonymous with will alone, the word free describes a type of will independent of determinants. I have actually said what predetermines everything. Prior causes. Genetics as well as experience. Here is a good article I found last night
you wanted my answer and i gave it to you. i didn't expect you to accept it.
i'm with you pjammin. i think it's great you're following the scriptures so closely. i was raised roman catholic and attended a jesuit college prep with intentions of becoming a priest. we know that Jesus taught in parables so the listener can extract what they can. Jesus died for me too. but i follow his teaching; not the teachings of other men. the church was corrupt early on. in 1635 the pope ordered galleleo assassinated for teaching that the earth revolved around the sun. this does not follow the teachings of Jesus. the church destroyed hundreds of scriptures and archeology is now finding copies hidden in caves. would Jesus agree with destroying scriptures? or the crusades where people were killed for not believing exactly what some men decided was the proper beliefs? would Jesus agree with condemning a hindu who never heard about Jesus? would he condemn over half the world just because they weren't christian?
Christ is coming back. i say soon.
I thought you said your belief in god had nothing to do with the bible?
Where did your knowledge of and beliefs about Jesus come from, if not the bible?
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
i'm with you pjammin. i think it's great you're following the scriptures so closely. i was raised roman catholic and attended a jesuit college prep with intentions of becoming a priest. we know that Jesus taught in parables so the listener can extract what they can. Jesus died for me too. but i follow his teaching; not the teachings of other men. the church was corrupt early on. in 1635 the pope ordered galleleo assassinated for teaching that the earth revolved around the sun. this does not follow the teachings of Jesus. the church destroyed hundreds of scriptures and archeology is now finding copies hidden in caves. would Jesus agree with destroying scriptures? or the crusades where people were killed for not believing exactly what some men decided was the proper beliefs? would Jesus agree with condemning a hindu who never heard about Jesus? would he condemn over half the world just because they weren't christian?
Christ is coming back. i say soon.
thank you. it's nice to hear that you believe in Jesus too. i never really came over here to the moving train to talk about God, but when this thread was started i decided to post. i expected to be attacked and that is fine with me. i'm not ashamed of God and i'll tell it like it is. i grew up in the catholic church, but i realized certain things they were teaching(purgatory, catholic confession, etc.)didn't coincide with the teachings of Jesus; not to mention some priests acting like servants of God, then molesting children. i can see why people have a negative attitude towards religion. but if you seek God's Word in the proper way you'll realize that God is much different than what is portrayed. glad to meet ya, onelongsong.
I died. I died and you just stood there. I died and you watched. I died and you walked by and said no. I'm dead.
i don't need respect from you. my respect comes from God. furthermore, you don't know my background in my studies, so you're grasping for air, my friend.
clearly you arent understanding. I said i could find it believable that you state a personal relationship if you were say, raised a Catholic with the bible... then grew up and starting forming your own beliefs based on the experience you had from being taught from the Bible. In this case i DO know your background of study IS the Bible and the Bible strictly alone, since you quote it so much.
once again, i don't seek your respect so your words are like dust off of my shoes. i find it amusing that you have no respect for someone who is trying to honor God's word instead of himself. why would i want to put my own spin on His Word. isn't that what some religions do? yes.
Again, I made it clear i don't care if you seek my respect...
I find something wrong with this. You said some religions put their own spin on it... Thats exactly what Catholics did with the Bible... you think the Bible is literally words that fell from Gods mouth onto the pages of a book? No, HUMANS put those words in a book believing it was really what he said, and since humans aren't perfect, those words can be not EXACTLY what he said. So its strange that you honor Gods words as what he actually said yet in the same breath said you agree religions put their own spin on it... it cant be both.
Also, one last thing... in one of your posts far back in this thread you said "we're not robots"... well, i think you are the perfect definition of a robot. Your only programming is to vomit verses from the bible when discussions come up.
Why waste your time anymore... every single post you ever make from now on should be short and sweet...
"Bible"
thats it. in response to everything and anything just type that word and hit "submit" to post it.
The Sentence Below Is True
The Sentence Above Is False
you wanted my answer and i gave it to you. i didn't expect you to accept it.
Right.. and I've consistently shown ample evidence of determinism, meanwhile the evidence for free-will remains absent.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Are you really of the opinion that the bible is the exact word of god, and is infallible? Everything in there is the perfect truth revealed?
i'm putting my life on it.
but just for fun, lets say that most of the books are fantasy: noah's ark, david killing goliath, daniel and the lion's den, etc., etc. ok, lets throw those out and just focus on Christ and five books: matthew, mark, luke, john, and the book of acts. all FIVE books talk about this man Jesus and His Power to love, heal, and redeem His people. His message is consistent and the miracles performed are documented, and there were many more but they were too many to document. people need to stop doubting and trying disprove someone who is FOR YOU. they need to believe. nothing is going to happen if you don't believe. if you search those books out you will see that Jesus is the perfect truth, and He had such an impact on the world that it spread all over the globe. this about a man who wasn't even an actor or musician. HE deserves our attention, not some pop idol who goes in and out of rehab. once again, people can believe in what they want, i'm not trying to shove anything upon anyone. it's your life and how you live it is up to you. i'm just adding my thoughts in this thread.
I died. I died and you just stood there. I died and you watched. I died and you walked by and said no. I'm dead.
at some point it requires faith to believe he exists or faith to believe He doesn't exist. That is my point. You get on here and say, matter of factly, that you know God doesn't exist and it's all stupid. When it's truly a matter of faith in either direction. You can say he doesn't fit into your world view or methods of thinking, but again...if you can't prove he exists or prove he doesn't exist you must take some sort of faith to have your position (faith in God or faith in nothing). And you really spend a lot of time on here trying to convince everyone that God doesn't exist and you have all the answers...why work so hard if He doesn't exist???
No it doesn't require faith to disbelieve in God. That's not how belief works chopitdown. Disprove that I'm a millionaire, disprove that I am God, disprove Oden, disprove a teacup orbitting the sun, disprove the flying spaghetti monster. None of those things can be disproven and that how ridiculous that request is. By your logic, I might as well be God, for all you know, I don't have to prove it, you have to disprove it, or else your disbelief is only faith. And what about Scientology or Hinduism, you cannot disprove them, so they must also exist in the same realm of belief/disbelief as your God. How does that make you feel? You are no further ahead with that argument.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
clearly you arent understanding. I said i could find it believable that you state a personal relationship if you were say, raised a Catholic with the bible... then grew up and starting forming your own beliefs based on the experience you had from being taught from the Bible. In this case i DO know your background of study IS the Bible and the Bible strictly alone, since you quote it so much.
Again, I made it clear i don't care if you seek my respect...
I find something wrong with this. You said some religions put their own spin on it... Thats exactly what Catholics did with the Bible... you think the Bible is literally words that fell from Gods mouth onto the pages of a book? No, HUMANS put those words in a book believing it was really what he said, and since humans aren't perfect, those words can be not EXACTLY what he said. So its strange that you honor Gods words as what he actually said yet in the same breath said you agree religions put their own spin on it... it cant be both.
Also, one last thing... in one of your posts far back in this thread you said "we're not robots"... well, i think you are the perfect definition of a robot. Your only programming is to vomit verses from the bible when discussions come up.
Why waste your time anymore... every single post you ever make from now on should be short and sweet...
"Bible"
thats it. in response to everything and anything just type that word and hit "submit" to post it.
"Bible"
I died. I died and you just stood there. I died and you watched. I died and you walked by and said no. I'm dead.
but just for fun, lets say that most of the books are fantasy: noah's ark, david killing goliath, daniel and the lion's den, etc., etc. ok, lets throw those out and just focus on Christ and five books: matthew, mark, luke, john, and the book of acts. all FIVE books talk about this man Jesus and His Power to love, heal, and redeem His people. His message is consistent and the miracles performed are documented, and there were many more but they were too many to document. people need to stop doubting and trying disprove someone who is FOR YOU. they need to believe. nothing is going to happen if you don't believe. if you search those books out you will see that Jesus is the perfect truth, and He had such an impact on the world that it spread all over the globe. this about a man who wasn't even an actor or musician. HE deserves our attention, not some pop idol who goes in and out of rehab. once again, people can believe in what they want, i'm not trying to shove anything upon anyone. it's your life and how you live it is up to you. i'm just adding my thoughts in this thread.
There is a jolly old man who wears a big red coat, he knows when you are sleeping, he knows when your awake, he brings gifts for all the good little boys and girls. He rides around on his flying sleigh with his raindeer, including rudolph the red nosed one, he does it all in one night. He is FOR YOU, why don't you believe?
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I thought you said your belief in god had nothing to do with the bible?
Where did your knowledge of and beliefs about Jesus come from, if not the bible?
different teachings. things found by archeologists; but mostly my grandmother. i'm nostic. i need proof. i need conformation from different sources. i look to science for that. science confirmed the dead sea scrolls and the copper scroll was real. same with many other documents. i cross reference documents. the most enlightening is the scriptures of judas; and mary magdelin.
on the other hand; i'm not catholic by deffinition. i also studied hindu scriptures; and buddism and taoism. so i guess you can say i studied all religions and made my own decisions.
clearly you arent understanding. I said i could find it believable that you state a personal relationship if you were say, raised a Catholic with the bible... then grew up and starting forming your own beliefs based on the experience you had from being taught from the Bible. In this case i DO know your background of study IS the Bible and the Bible strictly alone, since you quote it so much.
see one of my earlier posts to onelongsong. i answered your question even before you said it in this post. my studies go beyond the Bible just so you know, even though you clearly assumed you knew all of my background. clearly you have a hard time with my beliefs of the Bible and that is fine with me. you don't believe me, so be it. why would i expect you to believe me when you don't believe Jesus.
Again, I made it clear i don't care if you seek my respect...
I find something wrong with this. You said some religions put their own spin on it... Thats exactly what Catholics did with the Bible... you think the Bible is literally words that fell from Gods mouth onto the pages of a book? No, HUMANS put those words in a book believing it was really what he said, and since humans aren't perfect, those words can be not EXACTLY what he said. So its strange that you honor Gods words as what he actually said yet in the same breath said you agree religions put their own spin on it... it cant be both.
God's way is perfect. i don't try to assume my knowledge is above God's. the Bible is the way it is for a reason. human beings have a relationship with God if they want one. if they don't want one, they won't have it. if you deny Him, He'll deny you. it's as easy as that. some religions do put their own spin on it. look up my post to onelongsong about the catholic church.
Also, one last thing... in one of your posts far back in this thread you said "we're not robots"... well, i think you are the perfect definition of a robot. Your only programming is to vomit verses from the bible when discussions come up.
i like you, you make me smile. why wouldn't i back my beliefs with God's Word. He created me so i look to Him.
I died. I died and you just stood there. I died and you watched. I died and you walked by and said no. I'm dead.
There is a jolly old man who wears a big red coat, he knows when you are sleeping, he knows when your awake, he brings gifts for all the good little boys and girls. He rides around on his flying sleigh with his raindeer, including rudolph the red nosed one, he does it all in one night. He is FOR YOU, why don't you believe?
because he didn't die on a cross for me.
mr ahnimus, do you even believe Jesus lived at all?
I died. I died and you just stood there. I died and you watched. I died and you walked by and said no. I'm dead.
mr ahnimus, do you even believe Jesus lived at all?
Yes, I believe Jesus was a great man for his time. Similar to other miracle-mongers with fancy doctrines and stories like Odysseus or Apollonius. It doesn't really matter though.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Comments
at some point it requires faith to believe he exists or faith to believe He doesn't exist. That is my point. You get on here and say, matter of factly, that you know God doesn't exist and it's all stupid. When it's truly a matter of faith in either direction. You can say he doesn't fit into your world view or methods of thinking, but again...if you can't prove he exists or prove he doesn't exist you must take some sort of faith to have your position (faith in God or faith in nothing). And you really spend a lot of time on here trying to convince everyone that God doesn't exist and you have all the answers...why work so hard if He doesn't exist???
Damn it Jeanie, yes, just plug that fucker !!!!
ROFL!!!!
ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! a bit more
LMFAO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Plug that fucker Jeanie, I can hear Tool pplaying, plug that fucker !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
why should anyone ask forgiveness for something like calling god allah or buddha or frank...instead of 'god'?
organized (note organized) religion is one big guilt trip and about control
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
we live a similar lifestyle which is why i use that analogy. you see things that show you there must be a power greater than you in the universe. and; you can have a telepathic relationship with animals. maybe you'll deny it but you've had animals do what you wanted by only thinking it. what i think is that someone tried to jam religion down your throat and you saw through the ancient "translation". that being that early man couldn't comprehend the spiritual concept so they translated it into something they understood. and that was making their impression of God as a powerful man. and that's the story that's been handed down. early man put a recognisable face on God. then man started writing things down. and each story teller wrote what they thought to be important; and added things to make the story something you would tell someone else. if you hear a good joke; you repeat it, right? so there were many offshoots of christianity with different stories being taught. they were the same story; only different versions. so the bishops decided to make one book; ie: the bible. these men decided what they wanted you to know and destroyed the other written stories. you see through that and denounce it. but what early man couldn't comprehend was that God is found within themselves. i've seen hundreds of people go out to feed their horses when they were sick. when you go out to feed your horses when your sick; they know your sick and try to comfort you. if you haven't noticed it; pay attention next time. they know. i can tell by looking at your horses and the way you care for them. now watch others and see that they don't have that type of relationship with their animals. what is this force that allows your horses to read your thoughts in english and understand them; yet others can't? it's within you and that's where you'll find God.
i'll leave you with that thought for a bit. i'm getting a bit winded and i need to tend my animals. you're sleeping anyway.
i know a lot about you by seeing the colt in the beanbag. all your horses are beautiful dude. we'll talk when you wake.
i challenge you to find one post of mine; out of the 2900 posts i've made; where i said homosexuatity was immoral. i find it discusting and equate it with beastiality but i've never said immoral.
you've never heard a polish joke? do you live in a coccoon? you've never seen the countless books of only polish jokes? i can't believe that. a lot of the kids in school carried one around. a lot of them are pretty good. you should check it out.
Old Testament:
Deuteronomy 32:39
New Testament:
1 Timothy 1:17
because if you're not serving Jesus Christ(John 14:6), who is the way to the Father, you're serving something else. you're a follower of whomever you serve.
everyone is SO CAUGHT UP with organized religion. it's a personal relationship with God.
because everything in nature is balanced. you cannot have good without bad. you cannot have light without darkness. you cannot have beauty without ugliness.
man has free will. he has the power to choose. man has the choice to either steal the bread or go hungry. the animal will take the bread in response to hunger. man has the choice.
i've heard you say that what we do is predetermined; but you never say predetermined by whom. we know it's not DNA because clones don't act or think the same. DNA only determines physical attributes. identical twins with the same DNA don't act the same. why will one twin steal the bread and the other not? this is your question to answer for yourself. there's been many "scientific" studies done and each has found a different answer. yes; even the evil twin theory.
so pondering the mysteries of life is something you must do yourself. the answer lies within.
God; knowing that man will never agree with eachother; has sent teachers to different people and brought them teachings those people will accept. so as all rivers lead to the sea; all religions lead to God. it's mans arrogance that makes him believe his religion is the only or "right" religion. christians will pray to a patron saint; are they not worshiping a man? a false God? christians do not believe in reincarnation; yet wouldn't a loving and forgiving God give someone a second chance to find enlightenment?
organized religion is for the sheep. and also to define the boundries of it's teachings. one learns the boundries then goes on to seek God in their own way. i've seen people that will wind-up their God on sunday and go to church. they pray and go through the motions but when the hour is up; they put God on the shelf until next sunday. then there are those that understand the teachings and live them each day. like that is the day they will see God.
so yes; it is a personal relationship. you find God within yourself. not in the sky or somewhere in space.
you don't even know what you say. you're mocking Him by challenging His Power to even transform people. you're no better than the ones testing Jesus to take Himself off of the cross. is ANYTHING too hard for the Lord(Genesis 18:14)? didn't YOU write this below. i believe you did. that, my friend, is challenging, defying, mocking, God. you're making fun of this and Him by even saying it's not possible for someone to change their life around.
didn't YOU mock God by being sarcastic and trying to be funny by saying Mike is God. maybe Mike IS your God. i love Mike too, i've met him and he's an awesome guy, but i'm sure even HE wouldn't feel comfortable with that. he's a humble guy. you can mock God all you want about did HE write the Bible, or Jesus, or "some other" dude, but do not be deceived, God is not mocked, for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap.
I think you're nuts. How can you just say "its a personal relationship with God" when you constantly quote and use the Bible as an argument on your behalf? The Bible IS the tool of organized religion. The Bible was put together by Bishops of the Catholic church as their tool to spread THEIR word... which they claim is the REAL word of God. (whether it is or not)
So if you truly believe that its a personal relationship then you dont need to quote the Bible...
I've read many other posts by many of the "believers" in here and respect about every one of their positions, mostly because I don't feel they contradict themselves. I could maybe find it believable if you were taught or have experience with the Bible and use that as a basis then start forming your own idea or beliefs... then the personal relationship statement could pass, but since you quote the Bible and essentially follow it word for word , that personal relationship idea goes out the window for me. Your religion is organized religion...
I have respect for people who believe something because they think about it and use their experiences to mold what they believe and how they think. (even though i may not agree with it) I have little to no respect for people who answer every question with the "God said it" answers... which is what you do. It doesn't seem like you have any opinion of your own.. you just regurgitate Bible quotes for everything. People who do that will have a very difficult time getting any kind of respect from me. (whether you care about getting respect from me or not) Thats just the way I feel. If you believe in something its better to speak about why YOU believe it, not copy/paste how someone else tells you to believe it.
sorry for the long post. might as well make my first one of the day worth it.
The Sentence Above Is False
collin is really a good guy. misguided i believe; but he too was created by God and thus you must accept him for who he is. i'm in no way defending his offensive behavior. his comments were way out of line. if someone verbally attacked his wife; mother; father; etc; he'd be angry. he attacked your beliefs and it made you angry. but i believe it's best to forgive him because he doesn't have the knowledge and understanding you have.
i'm sorry, but i have to politely disagree with you. i don't believe all religions lead to the same place. i personally believe there is one true way to God, and that is through His Son who died for everyone. people can disagree and that's fine, but i'm putting it out there just in case someone wants to seek Christ out. also, why would i pray to a saint when Jesus died for my sins. there is no need to pray to a saint. even when Jesus was transfigured on the mountain in front of Peter, James, and John, when Moses and Elijah appeared with Him, God said, "this is my Son, whom I love; with Him I am well pleased. listen to Him." and as far as giving us a second chance, Christ coming into the world is our second chance.
i don't doubt Collin is a good guy. i'm not angry at him at all. i just wanted to answer his question.
i follow the Word of God. call it what you want. there are many forms of organized religion that have their own man-made laws. if you're calling the teachings of Christ an organized religion then so be it. speak clearly. each person DOES have a personal relationship with God.
God is one...God's Word is the Bible...i quote it.
i don't need respect from you. my respect comes from God. furthermore, you don't know my background in my studies, so you're grasping for air, my friend.
once again, i don't seek your respect so your words are like dust off of my shoes. i find it amusing that you have no respect for someone who is trying to honor God's word instead of himself. why would i want to put my own spin on His Word. isn't that what some religions do? yes.
This so called balance is subjective and results from our perspective,
What you've described is Dan Dennett's version of Free-will, but what it is is synonymous with will alone, the word free describes a type of will independent of determinants. I have actually said what predetermines everything. Prior causes. Genetics as well as experience. Here is a good article I found last night
i'm with you pjammin. i think it's great you're following the scriptures so closely. i was raised roman catholic and attended a jesuit college prep with intentions of becoming a priest. we know that Jesus taught in parables so the listener can extract what they can. Jesus died for me too. but i follow his teaching; not the teachings of other men. the church was corrupt early on. in 1635 the pope ordered galleleo assassinated for teaching that the earth revolved around the sun. this does not follow the teachings of Jesus. the church destroyed hundreds of scriptures and archeology is now finding copies hidden in caves. would Jesus agree with destroying scriptures? or the crusades where people were killed for not believing exactly what some men decided was the proper beliefs? would Jesus agree with condemning a hindu who never heard about Jesus? would he condemn over half the world just because they weren't christian?
Christ is coming back. i say soon.
you wanted my answer and i gave it to you. i didn't expect you to accept it.
Where did your knowledge of and beliefs about Jesus come from, if not the bible?
thank you.
clearly you arent understanding. I said i could find it believable that you state a personal relationship if you were say, raised a Catholic with the bible... then grew up and starting forming your own beliefs based on the experience you had from being taught from the Bible. In this case i DO know your background of study IS the Bible and the Bible strictly alone, since you quote it so much.
Again, I made it clear i don't care if you seek my respect...
I find something wrong with this. You said some religions put their own spin on it... Thats exactly what Catholics did with the Bible... you think the Bible is literally words that fell from Gods mouth onto the pages of a book? No, HUMANS put those words in a book believing it was really what he said, and since humans aren't perfect, those words can be not EXACTLY what he said. So its strange that you honor Gods words as what he actually said yet in the same breath said you agree religions put their own spin on it... it cant be both.
Also, one last thing... in one of your posts far back in this thread you said "we're not robots"... well, i think you are the perfect definition of a robot. Your only programming is to vomit verses from the bible when discussions come up.
Why waste your time anymore... every single post you ever make from now on should be short and sweet...
"Bible"
thats it. in response to everything and anything just type that word and hit "submit" to post it.
The Sentence Above Is False
Right.. and I've consistently shown ample evidence of determinism, meanwhile the evidence for free-will remains absent.
i'm putting my life on it.
but just for fun, lets say that most of the books are fantasy: noah's ark, david killing goliath, daniel and the lion's den, etc., etc. ok, lets throw those out and just focus on Christ and five books: matthew, mark, luke, john, and the book of acts. all FIVE books talk about this man Jesus and His Power to love, heal, and redeem His people. His message is consistent and the miracles performed are documented, and there were many more but they were too many to document. people need to stop doubting and trying disprove someone who is FOR YOU. they need to believe. nothing is going to happen if you don't believe. if you search those books out you will see that Jesus is the perfect truth, and He had such an impact on the world that it spread all over the globe. this about a man who wasn't even an actor or musician. HE deserves our attention, not some pop idol who goes in and out of rehab. once again, people can believe in what they want, i'm not trying to shove anything upon anyone. it's your life and how you live it is up to you. i'm just adding my thoughts in this thread.
No it doesn't require faith to disbelieve in God. That's not how belief works chopitdown. Disprove that I'm a millionaire, disprove that I am God, disprove Oden, disprove a teacup orbitting the sun, disprove the flying spaghetti monster. None of those things can be disproven and that how ridiculous that request is. By your logic, I might as well be God, for all you know, I don't have to prove it, you have to disprove it, or else your disbelief is only faith. And what about Scientology or Hinduism, you cannot disprove them, so they must also exist in the same realm of belief/disbelief as your God. How does that make you feel? You are no further ahead with that argument.
"Bible"
There is a jolly old man who wears a big red coat, he knows when you are sleeping, he knows when your awake, he brings gifts for all the good little boys and girls. He rides around on his flying sleigh with his raindeer, including rudolph the red nosed one, he does it all in one night. He is FOR YOU, why don't you believe?
different teachings. things found by archeologists; but mostly my grandmother. i'm nostic. i need proof. i need conformation from different sources. i look to science for that. science confirmed the dead sea scrolls and the copper scroll was real. same with many other documents. i cross reference documents. the most enlightening is the scriptures of judas; and mary magdelin.
on the other hand; i'm not catholic by deffinition. i also studied hindu scriptures; and buddism and taoism. so i guess you can say i studied all religions and made my own decisions.
see one of my earlier posts to onelongsong. i answered your question even before you said it in this post. my studies go beyond the Bible just so you know, even though you clearly assumed you knew all of my background. clearly you have a hard time with my beliefs of the Bible and that is fine with me. you don't believe me, so be it. why would i expect you to believe me when you don't believe Jesus.
God's way is perfect. i don't try to assume my knowledge is above God's. the Bible is the way it is for a reason. human beings have a relationship with God if they want one. if they don't want one, they won't have it. if you deny Him, He'll deny you. it's as easy as that. some religions do put their own spin on it. look up my post to onelongsong about the catholic church.
i like you, you make me smile. why wouldn't i back my beliefs with God's Word. He created me so i look to Him.
because he didn't die on a cross for me.
mr ahnimus, do you even believe Jesus lived at all?
Yes, I believe Jesus was a great man for his time. Similar to other miracle-mongers with fancy doctrines and stories like Odysseus or Apollonius. It doesn't really matter though.