- Forum
- Lounge
- Debate answers
- Page 2
Debate answers
Pages: 12
2: in length or books?
3&4: Your right if one culture says,"Cut my heart out and give it to a big statue " I should be able to accept that since I'm so tolerant
6: I don't think extinction is going to happen considering there are approx. 6 billion people on the earth, also I do not believe in macro-evolution (though having like 4 arms would be pretty cool(as long as you had the ability to use them correctly))
7: 2 of them were assumptions
I get my information from the Bible
?? confusion are you flaming or having a debate?
8: sorry, all questions are not in the bible because: a: faith is a requirement b:after all that answering of all possible questions that could ever be asked, the Bible would be considerably larger
9: real morality is ... basicaly having a set definition of laws; How do you define a christian someone who says,"I am a Christian" or someone who acts like one?
really then what are you?
3&4: Your right if one culture says,"Cut my heart out and give it to a big statue " I should be able to accept that since I'm so tolerant
6: I don't think extinction is going to happen considering there are approx. 6 billion people on the earth, also I do not believe in macro-evolution (though having like 4 arms would be pretty cool(as long as you had the ability to use them correctly))
7: 2 of them were assumptions
I get my information from the Bible
?? confusion are you flaming or having a debate?
8: sorry, all questions are not in the bible because: a: faith is a requirement b:after all that answering of all possible questions that could ever be asked, the Bible would be considerably larger
9: real morality is ... basicaly having a set definition of laws; How do you define a christian someone who says,"I am a Christian" or someone who acts like one?
really then what are you?
1. I don't know. The Pentateuch is the most important part, in any case.
2 & 3. No, but if it was your culture that said it's acceptable, you would be able to accept it. I assure you.
Let me give you one example:
You eat meat, right? Suppose in the future, western civilization evolves in the direction of the belief that eating meat is immoral. Does that make you an amoral savage? No. You have morals. They just differ from those of the future.
Your mistake is in assuming that there's only one morality (yours, obviously) and that it will not change.
6. Yes. Now. Overpopulation is detrimental for a species, and at this rate, that's where we're headed. However, we're almost as likely to annihilate ourselves in a global nuclear war, or doing something just as stupid and self-destructive. Remember that dinosaurs were also millions, and were wiped out by a single heavenly object. Oh, right. You're a creationist who doesn't believe in dinosaurs. Never mind.
As for "macro-evolution", I'm afraid you've swallowed creationist/intelligent design bullshit. Macro- and micro-evolution are just two aspects of the same thing: evolution. You can't pick and choose. The mutations that lead to dogs having different breeds but still being dogs are the same mutations that lead to dogs evolving from wolves, only not enough time has passed for the breeds to mutate further into different species. Not to mention that there's no room for belief. Evolution has been observed in microscopic organisms many times, such as the common cold virus mutating resistance to vaccines.
8. a. Faith in what? The ten commandments are supposed to be a code of conduct. What do I need to have faith in?
b. Well, if you're going to write a code of conduct, it should be as detailed as possible. Have you seen your country's legislation? I'm pretty sure it wouldn't fit in two stone tablets. Furthermore, these are rules that, supposedly, you need to follow if you don't want to go to Hell. How exactly is someone supposed to go through life without lying once? Without being envious? It's not like I can control how I feel.
9. Okay, so how is an atheist's morality "fake"?
I mentioned it in my previous post.
7.
Both. But mostly flaming, to be honest.
2 & 3. No, but if it was your culture that said it's acceptable, you would be able to accept it. I assure you.
Let me give you one example:
You eat meat, right? Suppose in the future, western civilization evolves in the direction of the belief that eating meat is immoral. Does that make you an amoral savage? No. You have morals. They just differ from those of the future.
Your mistake is in assuming that there's only one morality (yours, obviously) and that it will not change.
6. Yes. Now. Overpopulation is detrimental for a species, and at this rate, that's where we're headed. However, we're almost as likely to annihilate ourselves in a global nuclear war, or doing something just as stupid and self-destructive. Remember that dinosaurs were also millions, and were wiped out by a single heavenly object. Oh, right. You're a creationist who doesn't believe in dinosaurs. Never mind.
As for "macro-evolution", I'm afraid you've swallowed creationist/intelligent design bullshit. Macro- and micro-evolution are just two aspects of the same thing: evolution. You can't pick and choose. The mutations that lead to dogs having different breeds but still being dogs are the same mutations that lead to dogs evolving from wolves, only not enough time has passed for the breeds to mutate further into different species. Not to mention that there's no room for belief. Evolution has been observed in microscopic organisms many times, such as the common cold virus mutating resistance to vaccines.
8. a. Faith in what? The ten commandments are supposed to be a code of conduct. What do I need to have faith in?
b. Well, if you're going to write a code of conduct, it should be as detailed as possible. Have you seen your country's legislation? I'm pretty sure it wouldn't fit in two stone tablets. Furthermore, these are rules that, supposedly, you need to follow if you don't want to go to Hell. How exactly is someone supposed to go through life without lying once? Without being envious? It's not like I can control how I feel.
9. Okay, so how is an atheist's morality "fake"?
| really then what are you? |
7.
| are you flaming or having a debate? |
Last edited on
Look... this argument is going no where. Quite a few things are being said about Christianity that are completely innacurate that are just making matters worse. To clarify a few things:
Seven deadly sins are Catholic garbage. There is no such thing and the Bible does not outline all of the EXACT sins that you can commit. In Christianity all sins are equal. If I murder 1,000,000 people or lie to save another's life. The Bible states that all sins are the same in the eyes of God.
That's not the case at all. There is only one requirement to avoid hell. Believe Jesus Christ is your savior, is the Son of God, and was born to die on the cross to provide forgiveness of all sins and ask for his forgivness and change in your life. That's it. It is impossible to not sin. Every man, woman, and child that has ever lived has sinned. We will fail daily, I'm sure I have about 25 times today. The true goal is to strive to be more like Christ... sinless. That means loving others regardless of their beliefs, forgiving others that have wronged you, meditating on God's word and seeking his forgivness daily.
I also think there is too much focus on the old Testament in the discussion. I don't want to say it's irrelavent, because its not, but Christianity mainly revolves around the New Testament. There are MANY old testament laws, principles, doctrine, etc... that became invalid with Jesus' arrival. See Leviticus and Dueteronomy to start with. For example not eating certain foods, requiring a priest to read scripture, etc...
So many people get caught up in religious doctrine that they fail to see the entire purpose of Christianity and that's why the debates rage on and there is division in the Christian body. I don't deny that Dinosaurs walked the Earth, that ancient civilations existed longer than we can explain, and that we have absolutely no clue about how we got here and where we're going in the future.
Let me ask you this, if Christians are wrong, and there is no heaven and hell, and all of this incredible world and universe is just a complete chance happening and in the end we return to dust, what is lost by trying to live a Christian life? For those that strive to be better, to be sinless, to be forgiving, to love others unconditionally, things that no one can deny are what the world needs, they have simply lived a full life and died, never knowing that they were wrong. BUT, what if Christians are right? Unfortunately most Christians don't even under stand what I'm saying...
| Here's an inconsistency in the Bible: One of the seven sins is Envy. "“Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me” |
Seven deadly sins are Catholic garbage. There is no such thing and the Bible does not outline all of the EXACT sins that you can commit. In Christianity all sins are equal. If I murder 1,000,000 people or lie to save another's life. The Bible states that all sins are the same in the eyes of God.
| Furthermore, these are rules that, supposedly, you need to follow if you don't want to go to Hell. How exactly is someone supposed to go through life without lying once? Without being envious? It's not like I can control how I feel. |
That's not the case at all. There is only one requirement to avoid hell. Believe Jesus Christ is your savior, is the Son of God, and was born to die on the cross to provide forgiveness of all sins and ask for his forgivness and change in your life. That's it. It is impossible to not sin. Every man, woman, and child that has ever lived has sinned. We will fail daily, I'm sure I have about 25 times today. The true goal is to strive to be more like Christ... sinless. That means loving others regardless of their beliefs, forgiving others that have wronged you, meditating on God's word and seeking his forgivness daily.
I also think there is too much focus on the old Testament in the discussion. I don't want to say it's irrelavent, because its not, but Christianity mainly revolves around the New Testament. There are MANY old testament laws, principles, doctrine, etc... that became invalid with Jesus' arrival. See Leviticus and Dueteronomy to start with. For example not eating certain foods, requiring a priest to read scripture, etc...
So many people get caught up in religious doctrine that they fail to see the entire purpose of Christianity and that's why the debates rage on and there is division in the Christian body. I don't deny that Dinosaurs walked the Earth, that ancient civilations existed longer than we can explain, and that we have absolutely no clue about how we got here and where we're going in the future.
Let me ask you this, if Christians are wrong, and there is no heaven and hell, and all of this incredible world and universe is just a complete chance happening and in the end we return to dust, what is lost by trying to live a Christian life? For those that strive to be better, to be sinless, to be forgiving, to love others unconditionally, things that no one can deny are what the world needs, they have simply lived a full life and died, never knowing that they were wrong. BUT, what if Christians are right? Unfortunately most Christians don't even under stand what I'm saying...
You got it all wrong. The seven deadly sins are not seven sins that are particularly heinous. They're thought to be the source of all other sins.
How gluttony and pride got there is beyond me, though.
But the rest is more or less correct. Christianity originally got rid of a lot of extra baggage from Judaism (mostly rituals) and could be summarized to "don't be a jerk". As time went on, more and more ancillary bullshit was tacked on.
How gluttony and pride got there is beyond me, though.
But the rest is more or less correct. Christianity originally got rid of a lot of extra baggage from Judaism (mostly rituals) and could be summarized to "don't be a jerk". As time went on, more and more ancillary bullshit was tacked on.
| You got it all wrong. The seven deadly sins are not seven sins that are particularly heinous. They're thought to be the source of all other sins. How gluttony and pride got there is beyond me, though. |
You're correct on that. I know some Catholics that believe that certain categories of sins are worse than others. That's what I was referring to. I don't get how gluttony got in there either. If I gorge myself on chocolate chocolate chip ice cream... which I just did.... how will that lead me down the sinful path lol.
closed account (z05DSL3A)
Return 0 wrote:
This kind of reads as somehow the Catholic Church is outside of Christianity. This is another thing that I don't get about Religion, how you can read basically the same book and yet not agree on so many things. Why are there so many versions of the bible? What makes the version you follow any better than that of another 'branch' of your religion?
-----
Who wrote the religious texts? Man not God.
Who chose which writings to follow? Man not God.
Who decide who should be the 'head' of the particular religion on earth? Man not God.
-----
A little thought experiment
You are transported back in time. You are now with Adolf when he was a young boy. You know what he will do in later life. What do you Do?
-----
edit:
When I talk have talked about Religion and religious I am talk about theistic religion.
| Quite a few things are being said about Christianity that are completely innacurate that are just making matters worse...Seven deadly sins are Catholic garbage. There is no such thing and the Bible does not outline all of the EXACT sins that you can commit. In Christianity all sins are equal. |
This kind of reads as somehow the Catholic Church is outside of Christianity. This is another thing that I don't get about Religion, how you can read basically the same book and yet not agree on so many things. Why are there so many versions of the bible? What makes the version you follow any better than that of another 'branch' of your religion?
-----
Who wrote the religious texts? Man not God.
Who chose which writings to follow? Man not God.
Who decide who should be the 'head' of the particular religion on earth? Man not God.
-----
A little thought experiment
You are transported back in time. You are now with Adolf when he was a young boy. You know what he will do in later life. What do you Do?
-----
edit:
When I talk have talked about Religion and religious I am talk about theistic religion.
Last edited on
| how you can read basically the same book and yet not agree on so many things. |
| Why are there so many versions of the bible? |
| What makes the version you follow any better than that of another 'branch' of your religion? |
| Who wrote the religious texts? Man not God. |
Ah, we've finally reached Godwin's Law. Alright, everybody, let's go. There's nothing else to say here.
| This kind of reads as somehow the Catholic Church is outside of Christianity. This is another thing that I don't get about Religion, how you can read basically the same book and yet not agree on so many things. Why are there so many versions of the bible? What makes the version you follow any better than that of another 'branch' of your religion? |
Interpretation is the problem. Everyone has their own opinion and attempts to change doctrine to suit their needs. The Catholic church is the worst offendor... not to say that Protestant denominations don't do the same... after all there are denominations so that people can choose their interpretation which is a problem. Much of the Catholic churches beliefs and traditions are not Biblical. There are many Christians that feel the Catholic church now resides outside of the Christian faith... I'm one of them. Now that doesn't mean the entire church. But you'll find that a huge majority of the churches teach a lot of things that are flat out wrong. For example, praying to Mary and the Saints is a huge problem and a sin. Thou shalt have no other gods before me. The Bible also says that no one comes to the Father except through Jesus.
The Catholic church controls its members through traditions and guilt. You are NOT supposed to confess your sins to anyone but Jesus, not a priest, not a nun, no one. It's between you and God. A priest cannot forgive you of your sins and a last rite will not cleanse you before death, even if that's not always the priests intent. They operate as if Jesus never existed and miss the entire point of Christianity. Christ is not the focal point in many of the churches and they cling to the old testament laws and throw in a few of their own. The moment Christ is not the center, the church falls from Christianity. The problem is they keep their congregation dumbed down so that they really don't know what they should be doing. Prayer beads are another one of those things that baffle me. Where the heck did they come up with that?
If I sat down and listed out every clear cut law in the Bible, you can be assurred that they right out openly break a lot of them. As far as interrpretation and whose Bible is correct. The current Bible that all Christians use is very incomplete, for many reasons. The version that Catholics use with the Apocrypha isn't necessarily wrong. They may be contraversal in Academia, but there is something of value in most books that are out there. Take for example the Book of Enoch (One of my favorites). You will NEVER here that spoke of in any church EVER. Even though it is one of the oldest books and contains exact copies of the book of Isaiah. It's simply that the contents of the book stir up too many questions that the modern church cannot answer, so they banned it.... with other books.
What do you think a congregation would say if a Pastor preached that all modern man are half breed demons lol and that the different races of the world are a result of fallen angels sleeping with men and woman. You won't hear it. Every once in a while you'll hear about the Phillistine giants, the land of cannon, maybe the word Niphilim, but you won't hear what it is.
Christians are not being taught the "whole" truth, just enough to get by... or maybe get to Heaven. A good example is the ever famous great flood and Noah's ark. Most everyone has heard it. God could not find one righteous man alive aside from Noah and decided to start over. That doesn't even scratch the surface on why it occurred. I'm rambling... let me get back on track.
What I'm saying is that the Bible is simply a collection of church approved documents. If anyone argues which version is better it would have to do with the accuracy of the text, how closesly the translation ties to the original greek or sumarian. The fanatical church would have you believe that the Bible that is sold in book stores is all there is and it's open to interpretation. I honesty don't care how anyone interprets the Bible, it can be argued endlessly and its pointless, because in the end what makes you a Christian is not how many laws you followed or understood, it's that Jesus was your focus. If he's not, then there's a problem
| Who wrote the religious texts? Man not God. Who chose which writings to follow? Man not God. Who decide who should be the 'head' of the particular religion on earth? Man not God. |
1. The idea is Man inspired by God. But translations may have altered some of the text.
2. Organized religion chose them, which is my point. Dig deep, ask questions, but remain focused on Christ. In my opinion, it doesn't matter if you believe once saved always saved or not, it just matters that you believe in the plan of salvation.
3. There isn't supposed to be a head of Christianity. Jesus is the head, that's it. No pope. Priests are old testament, even the church isn't technically biblical. There is no ordination process in the bible to be qualified to preach. That's all man made in an attempt to control things. Priesthood is old testament (Aaron, Mckelzedeck.. can't remember the spelling) In the new testament, people were called by God and inspired by God. Go forth and make disciples, baptising them in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. It was a body of believers not bound by anything. The only purpose was to spread the news of hope and Jesus and to free others... somewhere along the line that focus became corrupted.
My comments may seem like I believe all is lost for Christians, but there are many churches and Christians out there that are doing what their supposed to and know their place. You just have to find them.
| A little thought experiment You are transported back in time. You are now with Adolf when he was a young boy. You know what he will do in later life. What do you Do? |
Leave him be. Killing him won't stop it from happening. Plenty of nuts out there would step up to the plate and replace him... might even be worse. Can you imagine if Himmler was running the entire show? Israel has been out of God's favor for a LONG time according to the Bible. They've been wandering the Earth for centuries. Something good did come out of that mess... Israel was finally a nation again. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to justify anything that happened... just answering the question. I would probably beat the living hell out of him prior to transporting back to modern time... or do something that would prevent him from growing his ever famous mustache.
Last edited on
| A little thought experiment You are transported back in time. You are now with Adolf when he was a young boy. You know what he will do in later life. What do you Do? |
Nothing. I have no idea what other consequences my actions could have; if I killed him, someone worse might come along. His atrocities might happen anyway, maybe even worse.
And, to be honest, most of the deaths of both wars and more (break up of Yugoslavia) can be traced to one Serbian man: Gavrilo Princip. He shot the Archduke of Austria-Hungary and essentially caused WWI; which WWII was a direct consequence of, which the break up of Yugoslavia was an indirect consequence.
And for the record, I hadn't read return 0's post before posting mine. In fact I've been talking to my sister for the last hour and a half.
Last edited on
closed account (z05DSL3A)
| Sorry about my long winded post... |
It is a good post.
I'll come back to later...
PS. Helios, it not quite Godwin's Law.
Last edited on
| Bad translations. The KJV is particularly bad. |
Why?
| Suppose in the future, western civilization evolves in the direction of the belief that eating meat is immoral. Does that make you an amoral savage? |
But .... but ... no hamburgers?
| Oh, right. You're a creationist who doesn't believe in dinosaurs. Never mind. |
Wrong I do(how else would you explain the fossils?)
Genesis 1:
24And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
25And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
Last edited on
| Why? |
If I translate "the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak" to "the vodka is good, but the meat is rotten", that's a terrible translation.
| While the Authorized Version remains among the most widely sold, modern critical New Testament translations differ substantially from the Authorized Version in a number of passages, primarily because they rely on source manuscripts not then accessible to (or not then highly regarded by) early 17th Century Biblical Scholarship. In the Old Testament, there are also many differences from modern translations that are based not on manuscript differences, but on a different understanding of Ancient Hebrew vocabulary or grammar by the translators. For example, in modern translations it is clear that Job 28: 1-11 is referring throughout to mining operations, which is not at all apparent from the text of the Authorized Version. |
Topic archived. No new replies allowed.
Pages: 12