From an email I sent to a friend on religion. Any opinions?

Cosmo

To MikesGuitar:
I read your responses to my questions... and your answers come from a text I do not recognize as being the (absolute) Truth. It isn't because I reject God... it's because I think that Man is not one to be trusted... especially men who hold a seat of power over the populous. The Bible and Truth depends upon the reader... that is a relative or subjective truth.
The Bible was in the hands of the Church of Rome for Centuries. I do not believe that just because you are high up in the chain of command in the Church, that you lose your negative human traits (greed, lust for power, etc...). I don't know how they edited the final version of the book.
and it wasn't until after Guttenberg's printing press in the mid 1500, that Bible reproduction was available to the masses. and the only ones who could afford their own Bible were rich people. It would take another century or so for the Bible to reach the hands of everyday people.
I am glad that millions of people find peace and inspiration in their Holy texts. I just happen to be one who does not. I like the stories... and the messages... and the history in and of the Bible... As literature.
...
I don't need to be saved from anything... I don't need to be forgiven for anything because I have done nothing wrong. If I ever do... then yes... I will ask forgiveness... but, more than likely I will ask for forgiveness from the person whom I have harmed.
...
ADD:
I found your reponse here... a bit disturbing... or at least, creepy:
Cosmo: "It's like the guy who murders a prostitute gets a free 'Get out of Hell' card if he finds Jesus during his stay in prison. The 23 year old prostitute that was murdered before she was given the chance to confess her sins... not so lucky."
MikesGuitar: "God draws people and knows the end of each person's days. He has good timing. People have plenty of oppurtunities. And remember, today there's a church on about every street corner, Bibles on many store shelves, the internet, sermons on radio and t.v., Christians who witness, etc."

Vedd Hedd

Cosmo wrote:

To MikesGuitar:

The Bible was in the hands of the Church of Rome for Centuries. I do not believe that just because you are high up in the chain of command in the Church, that you lose your negative human traits (greed, lust for power, etc...). I don't know how they edited the final version of the book.
and it wasn't until after Guttenberg's printing press in the mid 1500, that Bible reproduction was available to the masses. and the only ones who could afford their own Bible were rich people. It would take another century or so for the Bible to reach the hands of everyday people.
I am glad that millions of people find peace and inspiration in their Holy texts. I just happen to be one who does not. I like the stories... and the messages... and the history in and of the Bible... As literature.
...

not to mention, it wasnt just written....it was pieced together over centuries upon centuries..


Imagine, taking the magna carta, the declaration of independence, Anne Frank's Diary, A sports Illustrated Swimsuit issue from 1985, a journal from the middle ages, Pearl Jam's Vitalogy liner notes, The People's History of the United States by Zinn, "Rare Air" (Michael Jordan biography) and "Parenthood" by Paul Reiser, and putting them together.


Ohh, and they are all written in ancient languages, and have been translated from one language, then to another, then another......then lost.....then revised....edited.....translated again......revised again.....edited again.....and put into one collective "Book".

Theres your bible.
Honestly, they were written, by

mikesguitar

Cosmo
Gone Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Behind The Orange Curtain
Posts: 13,021

I don't know how they edited the final version of the book.
and it wasn't until after Guttenberg's printing press in the mid 1500, that Bible reproduction was available to the masses. and the only ones who could afford their own Bible were rich people. It would take another century or so for the Bible to reach the hands of everyday people.

---

Throughout time there were various agendas to eliminate the Bible. So finally the Bible landed in the hands of the Catholic religion, which was far different from early christianity and christianity in general. God preserved His Word and later raised up Martin Luther to free it from Catholicism. The orgins of the practice of these books are much earlier. The following info should help put your concerns to rest. From wikipedia:

The writings attributed to the apostles circulated amongst the earliest Christian communities. The Pauline epistles were circulating in collected form by the end of the first century AD.[2] Justin Martyr, in the early second century, mentions the "memoirs of the apostles," which Christians called "gospels" and which were regarded as on par with the Old Testament.[3][4] A four gospel canon (the Tetramorph) was asserted by Irenaeus, c. 160, who refers to it directly.[5][6]

By the early 200's, Origen may have been using the same 27 books as in the Catholic NT canon, though there were still disputes over the canonicity of Hebrews, James, II Peter, II and III John, and Revelation[7], see also Antilegomena. Likewise the Muratorian fragment is evidence that perhaps as early as 200 there existed a set of Christian writings somewhat similar to the 27-book NT canon, which included four gospels and argued against objections to them.[8] Thus, while there was a good measure of debate in the Early Church over the New Testament canon, the major writings are claimed to have been accepted by almost all Christians by the middle of the second century.[9]

---

Vedd Hedd wrote:

not to mention, it wasnt just written....it was pieced together over centuries upon centuries..

---

Again, consider the following info taken from a secular source:

The writings attributed to the apostles circulated amongst the earliest Christian communities. The Pauline epistles were circulating in collected form by the end of the first century AD.[2] Justin Martyr, in the early second century, mentions the "memoirs of the apostles," which Christians called "gospels" and which were regarded as on par with the Old Testament.[

---

Imagine, taking the magna carta, the declaration of independence, Anne Frank's Diary, A sports Illustrated Swimsuit issue from 1985, a journal from the middle ages, Pearl Jam's Vitalogy liner notes, The People's History of the United States by Zinn, "Rare Air" (Michael Jordan biography) and "Parenthood" by Paul Reiser, and putting them together.

---

The New Testament contains the core of Christianity, the gospel of Jesus, which was foretold in the Old Testament. The NT had few authors who were from the same time period and wrote about the same subject, unlike your example.

---

Ohh, and they are all written in ancient languages, and have been translated from one language, then to another, then another......then lost.....then revised....edited.....translated again......revised again.....edited again.....and put into one collective "Book".

---

Please take time to read the two links below for an answer to that common misconception.

---

Really, these questions can be answered with one statement if you all would realize that the scriptures we have today hold true to every extant copy of the original manuscripts . No single doctrine from the New King James translation (for one example) will be unlike that of the original manuscripts. I'll post a couple of very short links to further explain this.


http://www.carm.org/questions/rewritten.htm


http://www.carm.org/bible/textualexample.htm

---

To MikesGuitar:
I read your responses to my questions... and your answers come from a text I do not recognize as being the (absolute) Truth. It isn't because I reject God... it's because I think that Man is not one to be trusted... especially men who hold a seat of power over the populous. The Bible and Truth depends upon the reader... that is a relative or subjective truth.

---

Cosmo, there is an established set of Christian doctrines agreed upon by orthodox Christianity worldwide. One of these core doctrines is the doctrine of soteriology (salvation). That is the most important of the core doctrines and can be summed up with one word- Faith. There's no need for you to get hung up on believing there is a subjectivity problem within Christianity in regards to faith in Christ.

mikesguitar

I found your reponse here... a bit disturbing... or at least, creepy:
Cosmo: "It's like the guy who murders a prostitute gets a free 'Get out of Hell' card if he finds Jesus during his stay in prison. The 23 year old prostitute that was murdered before she was given the chance to confess her sins... not so lucky."
MikesGuitar: "God draws people and knows the end of each person's days. He has good timing. People have plenty of oppurtunities. And remember, today there's a church on about every street corner, Bibles on many store shelves, the internet, sermons on radio and t.v., Christians who witness, etc."

---

No need to read too much into that. I realized I was commenting on a hypothetical situation.

I'm going to call it a night. Cya.

mikesguitar

Collin wrote:

That is a condition. God's love is not unconditional.

Salvation is conditional, but I haven't read that God's love is conditional. That scripture was an example of God's love, not a limitation of it.

mikesguitar

sponger wrote:

I think I speak on behalf of many people who have participated in this thread, mikesguitar, when I say that I just feel really sorry for you for being so terrified of having your own opinion that you've gotten to the point where you really think that posting a bunch of someone else's rhetoric is the same thing as having a point of view.

---

Atheists and agnostics also borrow opinions about the subjects we've been discussing. Anyway, Cosmo seemed to be looking for an answer to a question about a Bible passage. I was just trying to point out a thorough answer for him.

sponger

mikesguitar wrote:

---

Atheists and agnostics also borrow opinions about the subjects we've been discussing.

Classic two "two wrongs make a right" reasoning here. Sure, there are atheists who rely on written text to speak for them, but it's not the norm, and it does not garner any kind of respect from anyone but themselves.

If you would learn to put your beliefs into your own words, you might be forced into a position where you would have to see things for what they are, not what for what you'd like to believe them to be.

Anyway, Cosmo seemed to be looking for an answer to a question about a Bible passage. I was just trying to point out a thorough answer for him.

I don't think Cosmo was learning for a rehash. I think he was looking for the underlying meaning of it all.

mikesguitar

sponger wrote:

Classic two "two wrongs make a right" reasoning here. Sure, there are atheists who rely on written text to speak for them, but it's not the norm, and it does not garner any kind of respect from anyone but themselves.

If you would learn to put your beliefs into your own words, you might be forced into a position where you would have to see things for what they are, not what for what you'd like to believe them to be.



I don't think Cosmo was learning for a rehash. I think he was looking for the underlying meaning of it all.

Actually, if you read this thread from the begining, you'd notice that a lot of what I've posted have been my own words.

Collin

mikesguitar wrote:

Salvation is conditional, but I haven't read that God's love is conditional. That scripture was an example of God's love, not a limitation of it.

So god also loves all the people he sends into enternal suffering and pain?

If that's an example of god's love, I'm glad I don't believe in the dude. He doesn't sound kind at all and he has one twisted idea of love.

Can you imagine a father torturing and inflicting pain on one of his kids, because the kid didn't listen. But he treats his other kid like a king, and gives him everything he needs, because he did listen. Would you believe the father when he claims he loves them both equally and unconditionally.

Jeremy1012

Collin wrote:

So god also loves all the people he sends into enternal suffering and pain?

If that's an example of god's love, I'm glad I don't believe in the dude. He doesn't sound kind at all and he has one twisted idea of love.

Can you imagine a father torturing and inflicting pain on one of his kids, because the kid didn't listen. But he treats his other kid like a king, and gives him everything he needs, because he did listen. Would you believe the father when he claims he loves them both equally and unconditionally.

I agree with all of this. I always say, if you show me irrefutable evidence of the existence of God, I will show you a person who doesn't give a shit. I don't see why belief in him = worship. I have no interest in petty or cruel gods. I sincerely don't believe in a biblical God but if it exists, I'm not going to praise it.

Collin

Jeremy1012 wrote:

I agree with all of this. I always say, if you show me irrefutable evidence of the existence of God, I will show you a person who doesn't give a shit. I don't see why belief in him = worship. I have no interest in petty or cruel gods. I sincerely don't believe in a biblical God but if it exists, I'm not going to praise it.

Religion has actually convinced people that there's an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever 'til the end of time!

But he loves you.

--George Carlin

mikesguitar

I believe the torture in hell will be fully or mostly mental. The regret, shame, lonliness, etc. will be the torture IMO. The Bible is vague on the subject of torture in hell, but from what I've read this is what I believe. I don't think a possible lack of physical torture should be taken lightly though. Imagine even a slight discomfort, like having a fly on the nose, but for eternity wouldn't be slight.

If God dragged someone kicking and screaming to spend eternity with HIm, wouldn't that be torture? God doesn't force anyone to reject Him and his offer of salvation throughout life.

Danimal

mikesguitar wrote:

I believe the torture in hell will be fully or mostly mental. The regret, shame, lonliness, etc. will be the torture IMO. The Bible is vague on the subject of torture in hell, but from what I've read this is what I believe. I don't think a possible lack of physical torture should be taken lightly though. Imagine even a slight discomfort, like having a fly on the nose, but for eternity wouldn't be slight.

If God dragged someone kicking and screaming to spend eternity with HIm, wouldn't that be torture? God doesn't force anyone to reject Him and his offer of salvation throughout life.

How could it be physical torture? You're dead.

My guess would be lonliness. Cold lonliness. Like someone living in Alaska. Hahah.

Jeremy1012

mikesguitar wrote:

I believe the torture in hell will be fully or mostly mental. The regret, shame, lonliness, etc. will be the torture IMO. The Bible is vague on the subject of torture in hell, but from what I've read this is what I believe. I don't think a possible lack of physical torture should be taken lightly though. Imagine even a slight discomfort, like having a fly on the nose, but for eternity wouldn't be slight.

If God dragged someone kicking and screaming to spend eternity with HIm, wouldn't that be torture? God doesn't force anyone to reject Him and his offer of salvation throughout life.

If God exists, his singular lack of support for me at times when I needed someone and his shitty job on the world would be reason enough for me to reject him.

Danimal

Jeremy1012 wrote:

If God exists, his singular lack of support for me at times when I needed someone and his shitty job on the world would be reason enough for me to reject him.

It does seem like that at times huh? I agree.

Collin

mikesguitar wrote:

I believe the torture in hell will be fully or mostly mental. The regret, shame, lonliness, etc. will be the torture IMO. The Bible is vague on the subject of torture in hell, but from what I've read this is what I believe. I don't think a possible lack of physical torture should be taken lightly though. Imagine even a slight discomfort, like having a fly on the nose, but for eternity wouldn't be slight.

If God dragged someone kicking and screaming to spend eternity with HIm, wouldn't that be torture? God doesn't force anyone to reject Him and his offer of salvation throughout life.

Whether it is physical or mental torture doesn't really make a difference. Again I ask what kind of "loving father" tortures his children? How can horrible pain and suffering for eternity constitute as love?

It seems rather silly to say that if he doesn't send you to hell, he'll have to drag you to hell kicking and screaming. Firstly, plenty of atheists, muslims, buddhists... would willing choose heaven over hell. I think they'd rather spend eternity in a heavenly paradise than in hell, no matter how much they dislike god. They'd also see god really exists, this would convince most people god is real and would lead to a lot of conversions.

Then there are the people who wouldn't want to be with god because they think he's a major sadistic jerk. God doesn't have to send them to hell, where they will be in pain and suffering forever and ever... He made the rules. He can change them too, I would assume. But he doesn't. He sends his children whom he loves unconditionally into eternal pain. Maybe he should take a few lessons from his son.

Indeed, god doesn't force anyone to believe in him. But let's make the comparison with the "loving father" again. The father that left you the day you were born and hasn't been in your life since. Or you could have a stepfather, which you love (when you grow up in a family of muslims, chances are you'll believe in allah not god). Then the "real" father comes back and he says, "I'll have to put you in my torture room, because you don't love me. I know it sounds a bit harsh, torturing you for not loving me even though I was never ever involved in your life, but just know my love for you is unconditional and limitless."

Boom The Cat

One thing that does annoy me a little about Atheists is the way they treat themselves like Renegades or like they're special or something because they don't believe in god. I'm sure every kid has said 'Well who created god then?' when they were told that god created everything. In this day and age with our technology, athiests aren't exactly rare and it's not like they're burned at the stake or anything.

I don't believe in god, maybe I believe there is something though. However, I think religion is just the manipulation of faith in order to gain control.

Anyway, this is all I'm going to say on the subject, I don't want this to turn into A Moving Trainwreck

mikesguitar

Whether it is physical or mental torture doesn't really make a difference. Again I ask what kind of "loving father" tortures his children? How can horrible pain and suffering for eternity constitute as love?

---

The thought of the supreme creator of the universe being on trial seems odd to me. Hell wasn't created for man. It was created for Satan and fallen angels. People can 'choose' hell as their destination despite God's warnings to avoid it and despite His offer of salvation. We're talking about responsible adults who constantly reject every attempt God makes to reach them.

---

It seems rather silly to say that if he doesn't send you to hell, he'll have to drag you to hell kicking and screaming. Firstly, plenty of atheists, muslims, buddhists... would willing choose heaven over hell. I think they'd rather spend eternity in a heavenly paradise than in hell, no matter how much they dislike god.

---

Ok, so even though in this life people actualize themselves as God haters to the end of their days, they should be free to hate God in heaven? So maybe each day when a grand feast is held in honor of Christ the God haters should be free to mock Him like other haters did while He was on the cross? Maybe instead of being worshipped in heaven Christ should re-
experience the cross each day? Would heaven (the recreated earth where heaven will be) be much different than the current earth if it was filled with God haters? The Bible, in Luke for one instance, claims that unbelievers would remain unbelievers even if someone previously dead descended from heaven and pleaded with them.

27 “Then he said, ‘I beg you therefore, father, that you would send him to my father’s house, 28 for I have five brothers, that he may testify to them, lest they also come to this place of torment.’ 29 Abraham said to him, ‘They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.’ 30 And he said, ‘No, father Abraham; but if one goes to them from the dead, they will repent.’ 31 But he said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead.’”

---

They'd also see god really exists, this would convince most people god is real and would lead to a lot of conversions.

---

God claims that everyone already sees that He exists.

Romans 1:

16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ,[a] for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek. 17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “The just shall live by faith. 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.
24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

---

Then there are the people who wouldn't want to be with god because they think he's a major sadistic jerk.

---

Then those people haven't taken the opportunity to get to know God the Father through trusting God the Son as their Savior. If they would seek God as He draws them they would have faith. Unbelievers sometimes get caught up in misunderstanding the purposes of certain events in the Old Testament. The Bible needs to be understood in it's entirety, the Old Testament in light of the New Testament.

---

Indeed, god doesn't force anyone to believe in him. But let's make the comparison with the "loving father" again. The father that left you the day you were born and hasn't been in your life since.

---

God draws someone to Him at the age he/she is capable of being drawn.

---

Or you could have a stepfather, which you love (when you grow up in a family of muslims, chances are you'll believe in allah not god). Then the "real" father comes back and he says, "I'll have to put you in my torture room, because you don't love me. I know it sounds a bit harsh, torturing you for not loving me

even though I was never ever involved in your life, but just know my love for you is unconditional and limitless.

---

The problem is some people don't allow God to 'ever be involved in their lives'.

mikesguitar

Jeremy1012 wrote:

If God exists, his singular lack of support for me at times when I needed someone and his shitty job on the world would be reason enough for me to reject him.

Were/are you a Christian at the time you felt like God lacked support on your behalf? If so, God has promised not to lose anyone who belongs to Christ. That doesn't always mean Christians won't go through tough times though.

Jeremy1012 wrote:

and his shitty job on the world would be reason enough for me to reject him.

All that can be known for sure about the condition of the world is that God is in control of the end despite consequences that have taken place as a result of man's sin entering the world. God's mind is infinite and the human mind is finite. We're not capable of understanding everything.

Heineken Helen

Hmm... I'm only NOW realising that I went to a convent school... where they taught us evolution