Elton Says Religion Needs To GO!

[VeeJay]

Lemmings! All O' You's (http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/15998500.htm)

''I think religion has always tried to turn hatred toward gay people,'' John said in the Observer newspaper's Music Monthly Magazine in an interview published Saturday. ``Religion promotes the hatred and spite against gays.

``From my point of view, I would ban religion completely. Organized religion doesn't seem to work.

What to do with all those church buildings? They could become naked-boys-slapping-each-other-on-the-***-with-towels gay bath houses, I reckon. NTTAWWT

[Tear Down This Wall]

Pathetic.

[85Sooner]

Isn't he part of that crowd that preaches tolerance?

[Hatfield]

to a certain extent i agree with him as it relates to when you add "organized" to "religion" that is where the problem arises.

[jk the sooner fan]

organized religion works fine for millions and millions of people

and it has for centuries

[Tear Down This Wall]

Isn't he part of that crowd that preaches tolerance?

To him, only when tolerance if defined as agreeing with men jabbing each other in the part of the body where sh*t comes out, ignoring the fact that it is the cause of AIDS, and wasting billions of dollars that could be going to cancer research to cure the disease that you won't get if you don't jam you penis into the butts of other men.

Yeah, he's part of that crowd.

[IronSooner]

Most religions preach that homosexuality is wrong. They don't necessarily condone hatred for it. It's up to the people following those religions to choose how to react.

[yermom]

organized religion works fine to control millions and millions of people

and it has for centuries

yep

and TDTW, i think you may be on to something there :rolleyes:

[BigRedJed]

To him, only when tolerance if defined as agreeing with men jabbing each other in the part of the body where sh*t comes out, ignoring the fact that it is the cause of AIDS, and wasting billions of dollars that could be going to cancer research to cure the disease that you won't get if you don't jam you penis into the butts of other men.

Yeah, he's part of that crowd.
You don't seriously believe that's "the cause of AIDS," do you? There's no question that unsafe sex among the gay population introduced and heightened the HIV problem in the U.S. during the '80s, but do you really believe that if everyone turned straight tomorrow the AIDS problem would somehow vanish?

[crawfish]

You don't seriously believe that's "the cause of AIDS," do you? There's no question that unsafe sex among the gay population introduced and heightened the HIV problem in the '80s, but do you really believe that if everyone turned straight tomorrow the AIDS problem would somehow vanish?

Well, not anymore, it won't. ;)

[jk the sooner fan]

control......wow, well you can choose to look at it however you wish

[Veritas]

Well, I kinda gotta agree with him about "organized religion" AKA Corporate Christianity. Christ didn't talk much about building big ****in' churches and rec centers. He did mention loving enemies and stuff once or twice, but that's just not sexy in the face of a building fund drive.

[picasso]

you'll find homophobes who ain't Jesus lovers out there too. lots of 'em.

[VeeJay]

Hate the sin, but love the sinner.

I don't have a problem with that, if it's followed.

What's appalling to me is when I read tales of committed gay couples, one HIV-positive, passing on HIV to their patner so they can go through the experience together. Apparently this is a sign of a commitment among some in the gay community. In Miami's South Beach, a gay haven, this happens quite frequently, complete with celebrations and dinner parties on the night of the transfer of HIV. When these infected take to the streets demanding federal funding and shouting "HATE" is where I shake my head in disgust.

But that's just the bigot that I am.

[BigRedJed]

...I read tales of committed gay couples, one HIV-positive, passing on HIV to their patner so they can go through the experience together. Apparently this is a sign of a commitment among some in the gay community. In Miami's South Beach, a gay haven, this happens quite frequently, complete with celebrations and dinner parties on the night of the transfer of HIV...
Link?

[VeeJay]

I'll need some time on the link. I read this a couple of years ago in a local alternative mag called either "New Times" or "City Link."

[yermom]

sadly, i've heard dumber things than that...


Norquay, who manages a gay bathhouse in Vancouver, says he's been approached by men who don't have the virus that causes AIDS but who tell him they want to be infected by him.

http://www.cbc.ca/cp/health/060923/x092306.html

[Jimminy Crimson]

I say Elton needs to go. :texan:

[yermom]

I say Elton needs to go. :texan:

this i can agree with :D

[booomer]

Wow, isn't Elton's view of organized religion just as narrow minded as those he accuses of the same? :rolleyes:

[Tulsa_Fireman]

You know what the very first symptom of AIDS is?






A firm, pounding sensation in your ***.

[/rimshot]

[BigRedJed]

I'm not saying it would shock me if someone has done that (purposeful HIV transmission). But I have a real, real hard time believing that it's widespread. And you know, it's not like straight couples never do stupid ****. Suicide pacts. Spousal abuse. Abnormal, destructive sexual practices. It's just that nobody blames it on their heterosexuality.

[mdklatt]

It's simply outrageous what those Hollywood liberals say. It's so outrageous that I'm going to disseminate it far and wide, so that everybody can see that we shouldn't pay attention to any of it.

Heh, "disseminate".

[yermom]

I'm not saying it would shock me if someone has done that (purposeful HIV transmission). But I have a real, real hard time believing that it's widespread. And you know, it's not like straight couples never do stupid ****. Suicide pacts. Spousal abuse. Abnormal, destructive sexual practices. It's just that nobody blames it on their heterosexuality.


i edited my post to add a link... there is a whole "bug chaser" fetish

i agree with you though, it's like grouping all heteros with the serial rapist with the dead hooker blender

[BigRedJed]

i edited my post to add a link... there is a whole "bug chaser" fetish

i agree with you though, it's like grouping all heteros with the serial rapist with the dead hooker blender
Interesting article.

Banks called the notion of HIV as fetish "fascinating yet scandalous," but he noted if it exists, bug chasing is something practised by a very small minority who are not representative of the homosexual community.
Listen, there are all sorts of suicidal people, gay, straight and otherwise. Gays have a higher incidence of suicide, anyway, due to the societal stigma of being gay. I think the story itself casts doubt on whether the phenomenon is widespread, and doesn't address the "comittment ceremonies" Veejay was discussing.

But I would liken these "bug chasers," if they exist, to women who write to and fall in love with imprisoned serial killers. They're outside the norm, have some sort of death wish/fantasy, and they need help. They're ill.

[VeeJay]

Jed - when I referred to the practice as "quite frequently," that could have a different meaning for a place like South Beach, San Francisco, or Fire Island, than it would for a place where the gay population as a percntage is much less.

I have no idea how widespread the practice is, only that it happens.

[TUSooner]

I stopped caring about Elton John's opinion when . . .

Oh wait, I NEVER cared about his opinion.

[KABOOKIE]

Man. Forgetting to wipe the **** from your dick must make one pretty mad.

[crawfish]

Elton put out some REALLY great stuff in the 70's.

And that's about it. :)

[yermom]

Elton REALLY put out in the 70's.



i'm not going to ask how you know that

[crawfish]

i'm not going to ask how you know that

It was just because all the young girls love Alice... :O

[soonerhubs]

To be fair. First of all, studies show that the majority of homosexual activity doesnt involve anal sex. Secondly the majority of HIV transmitted in the US is through heterosexual contact.

Elton John doesn't find religion to serve his life so it "must" be wrong. That's pretty messed up. That's like saying just because you don't agree with a religion it should be eliminated.

He should focus more on addressing how to help curb the natural inclination of humans to be prejudice, resistant to change, and have a tendency for group think in general.

[BillyBall]

the most surprising thing about this thread is that handcrafted hasn't posted yet, something must be wrong...

[OklahomaTuba]

What an intelligent and tolerant guy he is.

Speaking of HIV, I better be careful while I am here in San Fran ;)

[JohnnyMack]

Well, I kinda gotta agree with him about "organized religion" AKA Corporate Christianity. Christ didn't talk much about building big ****in' churches and rec centers. He did mention loving enemies and stuff once or twice, but that's just not sexy in the face of a building fund drive.

:les:JESUS WANTS YOU TO HAVE A 4 COURT BASKETBALL CENTER!!! WITH A JOGGING TRACK!!!!!

[OklahomaTuba]

Jesus didn't say anything about building churches???

I think somone needs to dust off the Bible and have a look inside at what it says.

[mdklatt]

Jesus didn't say anything about building churches???



If he did, I'm pretty sure he didn't mention stadium seating, Starbucks, and credit card readers at the seats.

[JohnnyMack]

Jesus didn't say anything about building churches???

I think somone needs to dust off the Bible and have a look inside at what it says.

I think the concept of "building churches" that Jesus had in mind is a tad different than this:

http://centripetalnotion.com/images/megachurch.jpg

[Tulsa_Fireman]

Pffft. Did too.

In I Cashmoneyus, 1:69, it clearly says...

"Thou shalt build a big a** building, tax free, and establish your services as a concert so thine shalt rock out hard. Thou shalt also use thine holy church to establish a social structure so that thine best looking, best dressed shall verily have a better shot at heaven where thou shalt continue to rock out hard."

Amen.

[Ike]

If he did, I'm pretty sure he didn't mention stadium seating, Starbucks, and credit card readers at the seats.

yeah, but you need the credit card readers at churches like that. have you any idea how long it takes to pass the hat at a church like that? for. ev. er.

[mdklatt]

yeah, but you need the credit card readers at churches like that. have you any idea how long it takes to pass the hat at a church like that? for. ev. er.

They should just make you sign an electronic payment agreement when you join.

(You can actually do that on the Prestonwood Baptist Church web site.)

[BlondeSoonerGirl]

Pffft. Did too.

In I Cashmoneyus, 1:69, it clearly says...

"Thou shalt build a big a** building, tax free, and establish your services as a concert so thine shalt rock out hard. Thou shalt also use thine holy church to establish a social structure so that thine best looking, best dressed shall verily have a better shot at heaven where thou shalt continue to rock out hard."

Amen.

How come it doesn't say anthing about the 'and thou shalt wear brightly-colored, huge hats on thine heads and then go to Golden Corral' part?

:norm:

[MamaMia]

Elton has taken to airing his religious views in a public fashion? He must be running out of ways to entertain.

[Ike]

They should just make you sign an electronic payment agreement when you join.

(You can actually do that on the Prestonwood Baptist Church web site.)


heh.


Is it a sin to electronically tithe using stolen credit card numbers? ;)

[crawfish]

While funny, there are very good reasons for adding all that stuff that have nothing to do with salvation.

Except for credit card readers. Thou shalt not give of what thou doth not yet have. :mad:

[Tulsa_Fireman]

How come it doesn't say anthing about the 'and thou shalt wear brightly-colored, huge hats on thine heads and then go to Golden Corral' part?

How DARE you question the scripture! :D

[mdklatt]

http://www.prestonwood.org/give.php



The benefits of online giving

You can increase your faithfulness.
Have you ever forgotten your gift, left it at home, or pledged to double it in the future? Had times where you have fallen behind because of travel or other schedule interruptions? Online giving provides a way to strengthen your faithfulness.


And Jesus said, "Give me thine routing number..."

[crawfish]

How come it doesn't say anthing about the 'and thou shalt wear brightly-colored, huge hats on thine heads and then go to Golden Corral' part?

:norm:

Funny...I always figured him as more of a "Red Lobster" kind of guy...

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41145000/jpg/_41145432_donald_rex_elton2.jpg

[OklahomaTuba]

I think the concept of "building churches" that Jesus had in mind is a tad different than this:

http://centripetalnotion.com/images/megachurch.jpg

I doubt Jesus really cares what a Church looks like. A Church is much more than a building or whatever.

[crawfish]

http://www.prestonwood.org/give.php



And Jesus said, "Give me thine routing number..."

My church has online bank debit giving set up as well. God asks for our firstfruits...this allows me to set up a budget and include our contributions first.

I don't think there's any problems with that.

[Ike]

http://www.prestonwood.org/give.php



And Jesus said, "Give me thine routing number..."

heh.

and please includeth thine three digit security code from the back of thine card

[mdklatt]

How come it doesn't say anthing about the 'and thou shalt wear brightly-colored, huge hats on thine heads and then go to Godfather's Sunday lunch buffet and trash the place' part?


Fixed. :mad:

[OklahomaTuba]

http://www.prestonwood.org/give.php



And Jesus said, "Give me thine routing number..."

So I guess Christians shouldn't be using modern technology now to give???

[OklahomaRed]

Truth. Actually the Bible does talk about money more than anything else. Why? Because money is the root of all evil. Think about it. Let me see where you spend your money and I bet I can tell you what is important to you. Before you get wound up, I also agree with you on big organized religion that sits around with it's hand out all the time, and then they take that money that could have been spent feeding the poor, providing healthcare for the sick, or trying to find a cure for AIDS, or better yet, Cancer; yet they would rather sit in their padded pews and ride their crystal elevators to the sky. When Jesus does come back, He's not going to have much sympathy for those sitting on either side of the fence. :(

[yermom]

So I guess Christians shouldn't be using modern technology now to give???

i think you mean "increase your faithfulness"

[mdklatt]

and please includeth thine three digit security code from the back of thine card

They don't fool around, man. No credit cards, just bank account info. Click the link at the bottom of that page.

[OklahomaTuba]

My church has online bank debit giving set up as well. God asks for our firstfruits...this allows me to set up a budget and include our contributions first.

I don't think there's any problems with that.

Of course there is craw.

Well, actually, the problem is our existence in the first place if you want to get down to it, according to Elton and the other bigots that think like him.

[OklahomaTuba]

The Beatitudes:

Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. (Verse 3)
Blessed are the meek: for they shall posses the land. (Verse 4)
Blessed are they who mourn: for they shall be comforted. (Verse 5)
Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after justice: for they shall have their fill. (Verse 6)
Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy. (Verse 7)
Blessed are the clean of heart: for they shall see God. (Verse 8)
Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God. (Verse 9)
Blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. (Verse

[yermom]

poor persecuted Christians :rolleyes:

[crawfish]

Truth. Actually the Bible does talk about money more than anything else. Why? Because money is the root of all evil. Think about it. Let me see where you spend your money and I bet I can tell you what is important to you. Before you get wound up, I also agree with you on big organized religion that sits around with it's hand out all the time, and then they take that money that could have been spent feeding the poor, providing healthcare for the sick, or trying to find a cure for AIDS, or better yet, Cancer; yet they would rather sit in their padded pews and ride their crystal elevators to the sky. When Jesus does come back, He's not going to have much sympathy for those sitting on either side of the fence. :(


For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.

Money is just a thing, dude. Don't get the quote wrong. It's one of my pet peeves. :mad:

[crawfish]

They don't fool around, man. No credit cards, just bank account info. Click the link at the bottom of that page.

Bank account = money you have
Credit card = money you DON'T have

Again, I use auto-debit to pay at least a half-dozen bills. It helps me budget. As long as it's a choice and you're not compelled, I see nothing wrong with it.

[OklahomaTuba]

Churchs do so many good things for the poor, hungry, missions, etc. More than any other type of organization in the world actually.

I think its interesting that that certain people seem to have a problem with that and how its funded.

[mdklatt]

My church has online bank debit giving set up as well. God asks for our firstfruits...this allows me to set up a budget and include our contributions first.


How much of that goes to God and how much goes to build the new Starbucks inside the church? Say what you will about the corruption of the Catholic Church, but you won't find any Catholic clergy with condos in Aspen. Martin Luther must be rolling over in his grave.

[Tulsa_Fireman]

And not to offend, but one of my pet peeves is writing off the tithe as a donation to the church when the titheis, and can be, a dang sight more than a salary for the secretary and a new steeple on the roof.

It's food in the bellies of the poor. It's shelter to those without.

Not church camp in Daytona, not a mission trip on the beaches of Mexico, not 3 new cameras for our Sunday broadcast, and it dang sure ain't a new cadillac and a swank three piece suit for Pastor Bob.

[OklahomaRed]

Of course there is craw.

Well, actually, the problem is our existence in the first place if you want to get down to it, according to Elton and the other bigots that think like him.


As a Christian, we are asked to tithe, but it does not stop there. We are also asked to be good stewards of God's money, and that means we should hold Christian leadership accountable to what they are doing with the money that is given. Remember, a big piece of that money is coming from little old ladies who can't really afford to have their money mis-spent by religious leaders who have allowed the power and money to go to their head, and think that the way to heaven is to build a bigger building. It's important to make sure that money is spent towards things such as feeding the poor, taking care of the widows and orphans, and healing the sick. Until you can do the basics, you are wasting your time trying to get people there to do the backstroke in your swimming pool, and bowling a few lanes on your bowling alley. It's easy to see where non-christians are going to see nothing but a bunch of hypocrits. With that being said, I'm okay with making it easier to pay your tithe, but lets not put the cart in front of the horse like many pastors have allowed themselves to do.

:pop:

[mdklatt]

Churchs do so many good things for the poor, hungry, missions, etc. More than any other type of organization in the world actually.

I think its interesting that that certain people seem to have a problem with that and how its funded.

I bet the money being spent on the new First Megachurch of God, Inc.'s "athletic complex" could fund a lot of charity work.

[OklahomaTuba]

How much of that goes to God and how much goes to build the new Starbucks inside the church? Say what you will about the corruption of the Catholic Church, but you won't find any Catholic clergy with condos in Aspen. Martin Luther must be rolling over in his grave.

Sterotyping is fun!

[royalfan5]

I remember when our pastor bought a new cross and our Lutheran congregation was upset because they thought it frivolous and a waste of money. Same thing happened when they wanted to pad the pews. I don't understand why people think flash brings them closer to God.

[mdklatt]

Sterotyping is fun!

You would know!

[OklahomaTuba]

I bet the money being spent on the new First Megachurch of God, Inc.'s "athletic complex" could fund a lot of charity work.

How do you know the Church doesn't use it as a shelter for the poor, after school programs for disadvantage children, youth programs, and building relationships within and outside the church, etc?

Your black and white hatred of Christians is really coming through today MDK. :rolleyes:

[OklahomaTuba]

You would know!
Sure, but you are an example to us all.

[yermom]

is that what they use the private jets for too? ;)

[OklahomaTuba]

is that what they use the private jets for too? ;)
No, thats to get the poor kids to Aspen in time to help clean up the slopes.

Or to get Dr's to places like Darfur to help treat people there.

Either way, its all the same greed by God, Inc.

[picasso]

How much of that goes to God and how much goes to build the new Starbucks inside the church? Say what you will about the corruption of the Catholic Church, but you won't find any Catholic clergy with condos in Aspen. Martin Luther must be rolling over in his grave.
unless you're a member of said church then it really shouldn't concern you should it?

[mdklatt]

How do you know the Church doesn't use it as a shelter for the poor, after school programs for disadvantage children, youth programs, and building relationships within and outside the church, etc?

If they do, it would probably be more efficient to give that money directly to existing charities. In the case of Prestonwood, I bet the Dallas parks and recreation department could use that money to build and maintain parks in poor neighborhoods so those disadvantaged children didn't have to go to Plano to play basketball.




Your black and white hatred of Christians is really coming through today MDK. :rolleyes:

Not Christians, just the whole idea of God Incorporated. That's not exactly true, either. I don't care what people do with their money, just don't pretend that religion isn't as much a business (big business, at that) as anything else.

[mdklatt]

unless you're a member of said church then it really shouldn't concern you should it?

It doesn't, I just thought it was amusing.

[crawfish]

How much of that goes to God and how much goes to build the new Starbucks inside the church? Say what you will about the corruption of the Catholic Church, but you won't find any Catholic clergy with condos in Aspen. Martin Luther must be rolling over in his grave.

Personally, I would not attend a church that didn't disclose its expenses. There are certainly expenses that are incurred by some churches that disturb me, but SOME are necessary or by their nature increase the effectiveness of the church to reach the community (youth centers, basketball courts, etc). For the record, my church (5K members) does NOT have a Starbucks although they are considering a free coffee bar. I do not like the idea of a church running or allowing a business inside for a profit.

You seem to be confusing the delivery of money with the spending of money. It can be spent unwisely no matter how it's collected.

[picasso]

you guys do realize churches and ministries rely on donations to stay afloat don't you? I'm just asking here because some of you may not. that's why they pass the hat around at church and put phone #'s up on those silly televangelist things.

is there a little greed and cheating sometimes? I'd guess yes. same as any other charity.
you could probably say the same thing about our elected officials.

[Veritas]

Churchs do so many good things for the poor, missions, etc. More than any other type of organization in the world actually.

I think its interesting that that certain people seem to have a problem with that.
I think it's interesting that like many ministers whom I've had the misfortune of hearing you tend to only reference the most convenient portion of what was said, context be damned.

Huge churches waste a ridiculous ****loads of money. My former church spent over $12 million on an expansion project. What the hell? I don't remember reading Christ's mandate to build an ostentatioius temple. I do remember lots being said about spreading the Gospel, a few things about how to deal with the poor, etc etc.

Nobody is attacking all churches. I am, however, attacking churches whose true purpose is to assuage the feelings and egos of those who attend by building ridiculously huge structures crammed with state of the art electronics and oh, by the way, if you look on the lower right hand corner of our professionally produced bulletin you can see how much money we've given to missions this year.

What a crock of ****.

There is a homeless shelter here in town that scrapes by on what little donations it gets. I'm thinking that if my former church could have found a way to get by with a couple less uber-fancy projectors or stage lights, some of the money that was poured into this new monument to self could have been sent to help out some folks that actually NEED it.

[royalfan5]

That'll teach you to go Berean.

[JohnnyMack]

Churchs do so many good things for the poor, hungry, missions, etc. More than any other type of organization in the world actually.

I think its interesting that that certain people seem to have a problem with that and how its funded.

I see the angle you're trying to work here, I do. Don't know if you know this or not but I was a member at FUMC in Tulsa for a long time. Spent a lot of time there. Did a lot of the missions work you alluded to in your post. I got to the point where the mission trips where a microcosm of what is wrong with organized religion in my opinion. We were getting ready to head down to Matamoras for a weeks worth of work in an orphanage followed up by 3 days at South Padre Island. The only thing I heard about was talk about how great it was going to be once we got to Padre. The only thing that was capturing the attention of the kids going (myself included) was the carrot at the end of the stick. The work had itself had become a means to an end, not the focus it was initially intended to be. The notion of virtue being its own reward is totally lost on today's Christians. It's all about an investment made now (done primarily with ones wallet) that will allow for a better future. I see the evangelical church as one that is suffering from some of the same structural integrity issues that have plagued the Catholic church for hundreds of years. It's becoming less about one's relationship with God and more about making sure you attend the right church from a socio-economic standpoint.

Once again I defer to the Wisdom of :dean: on this issue. For me spirituality isn't found on the pew of some 18,000 seat church or by entering my PIN number on some churches website. I find it on the window seat of another long flight, descending through the clouds as the sun sets and I'm almost home. Taking in the majesty of this rock we're spinning on sounds trite, but it is awe-inspiring. Spirituality for me is found in my son's newly found voice, in making sure I have lunch with my Dad as often I as I can. Spirituality is for me anyways is about finding peace within ones self more than it is about making sure my butt is in a pew.

I'm sure Jesus was a great guy. But I firmly believe he'd be more inclinded to take the time to watch the sun set out on the old :dean:arosa than he would ever step foot in a megachurch.

[Jerk]

I say that socialism needs to go.

[picasso]

I say that warshed up piano musicians that dress like bell hop/shriners need to go.

[mdklatt]

For the record, my church (5K members) does NOT have a Starbucks although they are considering a free coffee bar. I do not like the idea of a church running or allowing a business inside for a profit.

It's not really free coffee, is it? That money comes from somewhere. Is providing free coffee a core mission of a church, or could that money be better spent elsewhere? If it puts extra butts in the seats, it's a worthwhile investment. On the other hand, you have to wonder about the religious convictions of somebody for whom free coffee makes the difference. Is running a church more about creating a smaller but dedicated congregation, or filling up the church every Sunday but with a lot of people who are just going through the motions (and drinking all your free coffee)? That's a rhetorical question.

BTW, I was aggerating about Starbucks; I don't know of any churches that have for-profit businesses on the premises.



You seem to be confusing the delivery of money with the spending of money. It can be spent unwisely no matter how it's collected.

I was just pointing the electronic payment for amusement, although I am suspicious of any organization that makes such a priority out of getting my money.

[MamaMia]

I say that socialism needs to go.England has socialized medical care, which is why I don't understand why so many people from England have bad teeth. :confused:

[crawfish]

There is a homeless shelter here in town that scrapes by on what little donations it gets. I'm thinking that if my former church could have found a way to get by with a couple less uber-fancy projectors or stage lights, some of the money that was poured into this new monument to self could have been sent to help out some folks that actually NEED it.

My church provides food, clothing and general supplies to thousands of the needy in our area each year.

My church opened up a medical clinic next to a poor school in our area and offers medical treatment and pharmaceuticals for 5 bucks a pop for the kids that attend that school.

My church was the first one in New Orleans after Katrina, and are still donating time and funds to aid people hit by that tragedy.

That's only a few of the good works they're doing. I think I can grudge them a 5 million dollar youth center (which provides a place to go for area kids that is safe and alcohol/drug free), a coffee bar and new A/V equipment. When they prove they can spend the money wisely, I have no problem donating my time and money.

[crawfish]

It's not really free coffee, is it? That money comes from somewhere. Is providing free coffee a core mission of a church, or could that money be better spent elsewhere? If it puts extra butts in the seats, it's a worthwhile investment. On the other hand, you have to wonder about the religious convictions of somebody for whom free coffee makes the difference. Is running a church more about creating a smaller but dedicated congregation, or filling up the church every Sunday but with a lot of people who are just going through the motions (and drinking all your free coffee)? That's a rhetorical question.

BTW, I was aggerating about Starbucks; I don't know of any churches that have for-profit businesses on the premises.

I was just pointing the electronic payment for amusement, although I am suspicious of any organization that makes such a priority out of getting my money.

"Free" is pointed towards visitors. The idea is to attract people in by providing a safe, friendly and welcoming atmosphere. In our opinion, people who are attending church, even for the wrong reasons, are more likely to change for the right reasons than people who don't go at all. I DO NOT support, in any way, fashion, or form, the watering down of God's word to attract or not offend people - but we can certainly give them a pleasant experience and make them want to learn more.

Churches, as mentioned before in this thread, should be (and usually are) wholly funded by the members that go there. While the love of money is the root of all evil, the wise use of money will go far in aiding in God's purpose on earth. Money is as much of an idol as anything else; by dedicating a good portion of it to the church we are declaring our allegiance to God over earth in the most real, tangible form possible. If that money is handled badly or dishonestly, it is an indictment over the church's leadership; however, a church needs money to survive, thrive and spread God's word.

[Sooner98]

poor persecuted Christians :rolleyes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians

Happy reading!

[mdklatt]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians

Happy reading!


Many Christians have experienced persecution from both non-Christians and from other Christians during the history of Christianity. Persecution may refer to unwarranted arrest, imprisonment, beating, torture, or execution. It also may refer to the confiscation or destruction of property, or the incitement of hatred toward Christians.


I don't see being wished "Happy Holidays" in that list. Maybe somebody with a Wikipedia login should edit that.

The pagan holiday is six weeks from today! And it's on a Monday, so there's no excuse to not go to church this year. :pop:

[olevetonahill]

On the subject of money
Ive spent the majority of all Ive ever made on , Booze , women , (some good smoke on occasion ) The rest I just pizzed away :eek:

[Kels]

The average size of a church in the U.S. is 200 in attendance. Internationally, it's much smaller than that. No coffee bars, no light shows, nuthin'. Just keepin' it in the proper perspective.

Also, there was no concept in the New Testament of living the Christian experience apart from Christian community. Again, just sayin'.

I think selfishness and greed is despicable -- inside the church or out.

[VeeJay]

England has socialized medical care, which is why I don't understand why so many people from England have bad teeth. :confused:

Mom - that must be some good boozin' you got going there. :)

[mdklatt]

Internationally, it's much smaller than that. No coffee bars, no light shows, nuthin'. Just keepin' it in the proper perspective.


Yeah, but they're all heathens.

[olevetonahill]

Yeah, but they're all heathens.
Leave me out of this :D

[yermom]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians

Happy reading!


so you are going to compare getting fed to lions, etc... with having to endure not seeing a cross on state property or seeing two fags kissing or something?

[usmc-sooner]

so which one of you fags would hit Elton and which one of you queers would let let Elton hit you?

Rocket man indeed

[olevetonahill]

so which one of you fags would hit Elton and which one of you queers would let let Elton hit you?

Rocket man indeed
He aint gettin any of my money either .
I said WOMEN and booze ;)

[sanantoniosooner]

I don't have time to read all this. Let's see if I have it down.

Elton the homo hates organized religion and churches that serve coffee don't know Jesus or care about society.

Is that it?

[olevetonahill]

I don't have time to read all this. Let's see if I have it down.

Elton the homo hates organized religion and churches that serve coffee don't know Jesus or care about society.

Is that it?
No . Pay attention .
You forgot Money , Booze ( me ) women ( me ) and then wasting whats left over ( me )
;)

[olevetonahill]

;) Oh and a lil Good smoke on occasion ;)

[Okieflyer]

I'm sure Jesus was a great guy. But I firmly believe he'd be more inclinded to take the time to watch the sun set out on the old :dean:arosa than he would ever step foot in a megachurch.

I'm sure Jesus was a great guy?:confused: Well he was either a lying lunatic or what he claimed to be...the way, the truth and the life. Anyone who made the claims he did has to be a lyer, lunatic or God. But a "great guy". Quit ridin' the fence.:rolleyes:

I hate to tell you but he spent most of his time with sinners, so why wouldn't he be in any church? Yes that's right, true christians know they are sinners and are not perfect.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians

Happy reading!

Nice to see after 1500 the persecution slowed down for the Christians

[Jerk]

Olev, you are the real-life living spirit of Charlie Daniels "Long Haired Country Boy" song:


People say I'm no-good,
And crazy as a loon.
I get stoned in the morning,
I get drunk in the afternoon.
Kinda like my old blue tick hound,
I like to lay around in the shade,
An', I ain't got no money,
But I damn sure got it made.

'Cos I ain't askin' nobody for nothin',
If I can't get it on my own.
If you don't like the way I'm livin',
You just leave this long-haired country boy alone.

Preacher man talkin' on the TV,
He's a-puttin' down the rock 'n' roll.
He wants me to send a donation,'Cos he's worried about my soul.
He said: "Jesus walked on the water,"And I know that is true,
But sometimes I think that preacher man,
Would like to do a little walkin', too.

But I ain't askin' nobody for nothin',
If I can't get it on my own.
You don't like the way I'm livin',
You just leave this long-haired country boy alone.

Instrumental Break.

A poor girl wants to marry, And a rich girl wants to flirt.
A rich man goes to college,And a poor man goes to work.
A drunkard wants another drink of wine,And a politician wants a vote.
I don't want much of nothin' at all,But I will take another toke.

'Cos I ain't askin' nobody for nothin',If I can't get it on my own.
If you don't like the way I'm livin',
You just leave this long-haired country boy alone.

[sanantoniosooner]

Who's responsible for desserts at Thursdays Christianity bashing thread?

I'm bringing paper products.

[Jerk]

Who's responsible for desserts at Thursdays Christianity bashing thread?

I'm bringing paper products.

I don't think you want none of the stuff that Elton John is giving away.

[sanantoniosooner]

I don't think you want none of the stuff that Elton John is giving away.
Sausage bites are out.

[olevetonahill]

Olev, you are the real-life living spirit of Charlie Daniels "Long Haired Country Boy" song:


People say I'm no-good,
And crazy as a loon.
I get stoned in the morning,
I get drunk in the afternoon.
Kinda like my old blue tick hound,
I like to lay around in the shade,
An', I ain't got no money,
But I damn sure got it made.

'Cos I ain't askin' nobody for nothin',
If I can't get it on my own.
If you don't like the way I'm livin',
You just leave this long-haired country boy alone.

Preacher man talkin' on the TV,
He's a-puttin' down the rock 'n' roll.
He wants me to send a donation,'Cos he's worried about my soul.
He said: "Jesus walked on the water,"And I know that is true,
But sometimes I think that preacher man,
Would like to do a little walkin', too.

But I ain't askin' nobody for nothin',
If I can't get it on my own.
You don't like the way I'm livin',
You just leave this long-haired country boy alone.

Instrumental Break.

A poor girl wants to marry, And a rich girl wants to flirt.
A rich man goes to college,And a poor man goes to work.
A drunkard wants another drink of wine,And a politician wants a vote.
I don't want much of nothin' at all,But I will take another toke.

'Cos I ain't askin' nobody for nothin',If I can't get it on my own.
If you don't like the way I'm livin',
You just leave this long-haired country boy alone.
When that song came out I thot he had been watching me ;)
The other 1 I identify with is Old Hippie :cool:

[olevetonahill]

Who's responsible for desserts at Thursdays Christianity bashing thread?

I'm bringing paper products.
terlit Paper and baby wipes ?:eek:

[sanantoniosooner]

Cups, napkins and plates.

[olevetonahill]

Cups, napkins and plates.
You have to get some Bounty . " The quicker picker upper "

[JohnnyMack]

I'm sure Jesus was a great guy?:confused: Well he was either a lying lunatic or what he claimed to be...the way, the truth and the life. Anyone who made the claims he did has to be a lyer, lunatic or God. But a "great guy". Quit ridin' the fence.:rolleyes:


I'm not riding any fence. I don't doubt that a man named Jesus lived. I don't doubt he was a very wise and insightful teacher. That's not what's in question, what's in question is WWJD if he saw the state of the evangelical church today?

[crawfish]

Funny...I always figured him as more of a "Red Lobster" kind of guy...

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41145000/jpg/_41145432_donald_rex_elton2.jpg

There wasn't nearly enough making fun of Elton John in this thread. I'm gonna have to throw a flag.

[MamaMia]

Mom - that must be some good boozin' you got going there. :)
But that country does have a wide spread dental care problem. No pun intended. :P

Either that or the people just don't floss.

[mdklatt]

I'm sure Jesus was a great guy?:confused: Well he was either a lying lunatic or what he claimed to be...the way, the truth and the life. Anyone who made the claims he did has to be a lyer, lunatic or God. But a "great guy". Quit ridin' the fence.:rolleyes:


Option 3: He didn't claim to be the son of God at all because not everything in the Bible is strictly factual.

[Tear Down This Wall]

You guys have forgotten the most important scriptures of all...there are alot of supposed followers of Christ, leading huge churches, supposedly in God's name, but for whom money and assets have become more important. They prostitute God's word. Turning a place of worship into a market place is something Christ abhors.

Matthew 7:15-23
15"Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

21"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' 23Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'

Mark 10:17-31
17As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him. "Good teacher," he asked, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?"
18"Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good—except God alone. 19You know the commandments: 'Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, do not defraud, honor your father and mother.'[d]"

20"Teacher," he declared, "all these I have kept since I was a boy."

21Jesus looked at him and loved him. "One thing you lack," he said. "Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."

22At this the man's face fell. He went away sad, because he had great wealth.

23Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, "How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God!"

24The disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said again, "Children, how hard it is[e] to enter the kingdom of God! 25It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."

26The disciples were even more amazed, and said to each other, "Who then can be saved?"

27Jesus looked at them and said, "With man this is impossible, but not with God; all things are possible with God."

28Peter said to him, "We have left everything to follow you!"

29"I tell you the truth," Jesus replied, "no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel 30will fail to receive a hundred times as much in this present age (homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and fields—and with them, persecutions) and in the age to come, eternal life. 31But many who are first will be last, and the last first."

Matthew 8:18-22
18When Jesus saw the crowd around him, he gave orders to cross to the other side of the lake. 19Then a teacher of the law came to him and said, "Teacher, I will follow you wherever you go."

20Jesus replied, "Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head."

21Another disciple said to him, "Lord, first let me go and bury my father."

22But Jesus told him, "Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead."

John 2:12-22
12After this he went down to Capernaum with his mother and brothers and his disciples. There they stayed for a few days.

13When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 14In the temple courts he found men selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money. 15So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. 16To those who sold doves he said, "Get these out of here! How dare you turn my Father's house into a market!"

17His disciples remembered that it is written: "Zeal for your house will consume me."[b]

18Then the Jews demanded of him, "What miraculous sign can you show us to prove your authority to do all this?"

19Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days."

20The Jews replied, "It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?" 21But the temple he had spoken of was his body. 22After he was raised from the dead, his disciples recalled what he had said. Then they believed the Scripture and the words that Jesus had spoken.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

OK, TDTW, it must be that the US govt. should do God's work by making sure the people of the USA have prescious little to hoard, thereby making it easier for the citizenry to receive a joyous eternal life?

[OklahomaRed]

So, when you die, you're dead? If not, then where do you go when you die? What if you are wrong about this Jesus dude? Just asking?

[william_brasky]

EJ needs to stick to his expertise: sangin' songs and guzzlin' throat yogurt.

[yermom]

EJ needs to stick to his expertise: sangin' songs and guzzlin' throat yogurt.

dude, you are so baned ;)

[VeeJay]

Throat yogurt.

Heh.

[Pepe Frias' Batting Glove]

¡Repent y da su vida a Jesús Cristo hoy! ¡No hay otra manera!

[Sooner98]

There wasn't nearly enough making fun of Elton John in this thread. I'm gonna have to throw a flag.

I agree.

http://www.ticketspecialists.com/concert/concerts_img/elton-john.jpg

http://www.cathedralstone.net/Pics/EltonJohn2.jpg

http://www.hyenaproductions.com/images/elton13.jpg

[Okieflyer]

Option 3: He didn't claim to be the son of God at all because not everything in the Bible is strictly factual.

Really? I guess you know what and what is not strictly factual.

Yes he did claim to be. Matthew 16:13-19
and John 20:27-29
You may read anyway you may, but that's pretty clear who he claimed to be. But I suppose you are like a lot of people who take what you want from the bible and leave the stuff you don't agree with.

[VeeJay]

There's something about male performers dressing up as birds...

http://www.hyenaproductions.com/images/elton13.jpg

http://media.npr.org/news/images/2006/feb/15/getty/oly_johnny_weir450.jpg

[olevetonahill]

I agree.

http://www.ticketspecialists.com/concert/concerts_img/elton-john.jpg

http://www.cathedralstone.net/Pics/EltonJohn2.jpg

http://www.hyenaproductions.com/images/elton13.jpg

He looks like a fag
Oh wait

[mdklatt]

Really? I guess you know what and what is not strictly factual.

No more than you.



But I suppose you are like a lot of people who take what you want from the bible and leave the stuff you don't agree with.

No, I pretty much disregard it altogether.

[Okieflyer]

No more than you.

Great comeback! How long did you have to think of that one? :rolleyes:


No, I pretty much disregard it altogether.

This one was a given.

[Sooner_Bob]

Tune in tomorrow for the next episode of Religious Discussions of Our Lives . . .

[OklahomaRed]

EJ needs to stick to his expertise: sangin' songs and guzzlin' throat yogurt.


Heh ! Throat yogurt!? That's frickin' disgusting ! :eek:

True, but disgusting.

[OklahomaRed]

Tune in tomorrow as many in America continue to grow in their belief that it's okay to bash Christians, just don't bash any other form of religion or you will be taken to court. That's cool, because it's not about mdklatt, okieflyer, or myself.

"I know how to get along with humble means, and I also know how to live in prosperity; in any and every circumstance I have learned the secret of being filled and going hungry, both of having abundance and suffering need. I can do all things through Him who strengthens me."

[sanantoniosooner]

Why doesn't anyone ever find a tortilla with Anton LaVey on it?

[Chuck Bao]

Oh, go ahead and play the victim card.

For what its worth, I agree with Sir Elton that organized religion does tend to foster hatred, wars and the detestable "I know God and I know that you don't!" SO, YOU GOING DOWN!

[Okieflyer]

That's cool, because it's not about mdklatt, okieflyer, or myself.

Yup, that's true. mdklatt, I think, enjoys the back and forth as much as I do. It would be a duller world without him.;)

[Sooner98]

For what its worth, I agree with Sir Elton that organized religion does tend to foster hatred, wars....."

So does atheism. Much moreso, and it's probably not even close:

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE4.HTM

"In the process of that research, I discovered that governments have murdered millions of their own citizens, and that in some cases, the death toll may have actually exceeded that of World War II. To get some idea of the numbers involved, I surveyed the extent of genocide and mass killing by governments since 1900. The results were shocking: according to these first figures, independent of war and other kinds of conflict, governments probably have murdered 119,400,000 people, Marxist governments about 95,200,000 of them. By comparison, the battle-killed in all foreign and domestic wars in this century total 35,700,000."

[mdklatt]

Great comeback! How long did you have to think of that one? :rolleyes:


The false choice that you presented--that Jesus is either the son of God or he's a liar--is only true if you really think he claimed to be the son of God in the first place. And the only evidence of that is the Bible. Can we prove that everything in the Bible is true? No we cannot. In fact, there are things in there that we know aren't true, or at least exaggerated: the age of the earth, the earth as the center of the universe, the story of Noah.... If we can't trust everything the Bible says, how can we trust any of it without corroborating evidence? That's where faith comes in. You either believe the Bible because you believe the Bible, or you don't. Even people who do believe the Bible pick and choose what they're going believe. I don't think there are any churches that advocated the stoning of disobedient children. The admonition against sex outside of marriage isn't very popular on an individual basis, either.

[Stoop Dawg]

organized religion works fine for millions and millions of people

and it has for centuries

The same can be said for homosexuality.

[Okieflyer]

The false choice that you presented--that Jesus is either the son of God or he's a liar--is only true if you really think he claimed to be the son of God in the first place. And the only evidence of that is the Bible. Can we prove that everything in the Bible is true? No we cannot. In fact, there are things in there that we know aren't true, or at least exaggerated: the age of the earth, the earth as the center of the universe, the story of Noah.... If we can't trust everything the Bible says, how can we trust any of it without corroborating evidence? That's where faith comes in. You either believe the Bible because you believe the Bible, or you don't. Even people who do believe the Bible pick and choose what they're going believe. I don't think there are any churches that advocated the stoning of disobedient children. The admonition against sex outside of marriage isn't very popular on an individual basis, either.

Actually your wrong again. There is nothing in the bible that has been proved wrong by the way.
1) The age of the earth is moot point. I argue this with a lot of my Christian brethern. If God were as almightly as I think he is. He could make a million year old rock if wanted to. Besides, what is time? Time is something we're bound to, not God.
2) No where in the bible does it say the earth is the center of the universe. 3) There's enough evidence to show a world wide flood.
4) Yes in the end it is faith.
5) Just because something is or isn't popular doesn't make it O.K. I think Hilter's final solution was very popular in Germany.
But you make a lot of assumptions from things you know nothing about. If you want to argue about things in the bible, learn it first and quit giving bad information you got from listening to the news or other uninformed people.


The same can be said for homosexuality.

Actually it doesn't work at all, at least without recruits. ;)

[mdklatt]

Tune in tomorrow as many in America continue to grow in their belief that it's okay to bash Christians

Do you really think Christians have it so bad in this country? When you make up 80% of the population and the worst form of persecution you can come up with is being unable to pray over a loudspeaker or seeing "Happy Holidays" signs at Target, then I'd say you've got it pretty good.

[sanantoniosooner]

YAWN.....

[Mongo]

YAWN.....
You are bored, you need some other male performer to entertain you.

http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/2848/boygeorgetc3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[Ike]

So does atheism. Much moreso, and it's probably not even close:

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE4.HTM

"In the process of that research, I discovered that governments have murdered millions of their own citizens, and that in some cases, the death toll may have actually exceeded that of World War II. To get some idea of the numbers involved, I surveyed the extent of genocide and mass killing by governments since 1900. The results were shocking: according to these first figures, independent of war and other kinds of conflict, governments probably have murdered 119,400,000 people, Marxist governments about 95,200,000 of them. By comparison, the battle-killed in all foreign and domestic wars in this century total 35,700,000."

Belief in anything can foster hatred, war, and other acts of violence. It generally happens when someone in power thinks that it is imperative that everyone else believe as they do. Sadly, there is no belief system that is immune from this.

[mdklatt]

If God were as almightly as I think he is. He could make a million year old rock if wanted to.

So how old is the universe, then? Does the Bible just not specify? Are you saying the universe is only a few thousand years old, but that God threw in some million-year-old rocks to keep us guessing?



Besides, what is time? Time is something we're bound to, not God.


Since the Bible is written for our benefit and not God's, it should be in terms we can understand. If it's filled with ambiguities and inconsistencies and open to the whims of interpretation it's pretty useless as an instruction manual. Surely a supreme being could have done better.

The Bible may not say that the earth is the center of the universe, but that's how it was being interpreted back in Galileo's day. "Oh, but they were just reading it wrong back then!" say defenders of the Bible. Various Biblical interpretations have been used to justify all kinds of crap that we now know is wrong. Or at least we think we know because that's how we interpret the Bible today. People using the Bible to defend slavery 150 years ago were just as certain of their righteousness as people using it today to say homosexuality is a sin. Why stop at the Bible? Muslims are just as sure they're right as Christians are, if not more so. Why should we take the Bible at face value but not the Koran? Maybe God really did speak to Muhammed because Christians weren't doing it right.



3) There's enough evidence to show a world wide flood.

Link? There's evidence to show that much of the earth was covered by water at some time, but not during the time of Noah. If we are to take the story of the Ark at face value, why do we have polar bears? Did Noah get them from the Jerusalem zoo? Some Biblical geologists think the great flood story was a description of a large earthquake near Istanbul that cause the Sea of Marmara to rise out of it's basin. Similarly, the parting of the Red Sea may also be a description of an earthquake.





5) Just because something is or isn't popular doesn't make it O.K.

Where did I say premarital sex was okay? I didn't say one way or another. It's the Bible that says it's not okay, but that doesn't stop any number of self-proclaimed Christians from going home to screw their girlfriends after a day of condeming the sin of homosexuality. Why is homosexuality worse than plain old fornication?

[mdklatt]

Belief in anything can foster hatred, war, and other acts of violence. It generally happens when someone in power thinks that it is imperative that everyone else believe as they do. Sadly, there is no belief system that is immune from this.

No doubt. Don't you people watch South Park??

[Okieflyer]

So how old is the universe, then? Does the Bible just not specify? Are you saying the universe is only a few thousand years old, but that God threw in some million-year-old rocks to keep us guessing?

Come on, do I have to spell everything out? Who cares how old we something is? I don't know that day one was a 24 hour period of time. Because that would depend on one revolution of the earth. Once again it doesn't matter anyway. Time is something we keep.


Since the Bible is written for our benefit and not God's, it should be in terms we can understand. If it's filled with ambiguities and inconsistencies and open to the whims of interpretation it's pretty useless as an instruction manual. Surely a supreme being could have done better.

We read translations of the bible. To understand it, you must study it. It's not left up to the "whims of interpretation". i.e. the King James version says "Thou shall not Kill", but if you go look it up in the original Hebrew it actually means "Do not commit murder". There is a difference.


The Bible may not say that the earth is the center of the universe, but that's how it was being interpreted back in Galileo's day. "Oh, but they were just reading it wrong back then!" say defenders of the Bible. Various Biblical interpretations have been used to justify all kinds of crap that we now know is wrong. Or at least we think we know because that's how we interpret the Bible today. People using the Bible to defend slavery 150 years ago were just as certain of their righteousness as people using it today to say homosexuality is a sin. Why stop at the Bible? Muslims are just as sure they're right as Christians are, if not more so. Why should we take the Bible at face value but not the Koran? Maybe God really did speak to Muhammed because Christians weren't doing it right.

It doesn't matter what "some christians" translated it as. In any time period there were just as many Christian's saying the opposite. Why do we always seem to forget that fact? If you look at the bible and just read it, you couldn't justify slavery. Just because people fail, doesn't mean the bible did.





Link? There's evidence to show that much of the earth was covered by water at some time, but not during the time of Noah. If we are to take the story of the Ark at face value, why do we have polar bears? Did Noah get them from the Jerusalem zoo? Some Biblical geologists think the great flood story was a description of a large earthquake near Istanbul that cause the Sea of Marmara to rise out of it's basin. Similarly, the parting of the Red Sea may also be a description of an earthquake.

It doesn't matter how God decided to do things. Maybe he did use an earthquake. So?




Where did I say premarital sex was okay? I didn't say one way or another. It's the Bible that says it's not okay, but that doesn't stop any number of self-proclaimed Christians from going home to screw their girlfriends after a day of condeming the sin of homosexuality. Why is homosexuality worse than plain old fornication?

I didn't say you did say it was o.k. But once again your trying to judge God but looking at failed human beings. Just because someone says they are a Christian doesn't mean they are somehow perfect. People justify all kinds of sin. Even "christians". Christians aren't better, just better off.

[Sooner_Bob]

Some of you people appear to have a huge chip on your shoulders when it comes to your beliefs (or lack thereof) regarding religion (of any kind).

Can I ask a couple of serious questions?

Why are some of you so danged against believing in God or in His word?

I understand that many people see christians as hypocrites, but the word hyprocrite could be used to describe everyone over the age of about 8. So that's really a copout IMO. We're all hypocrites in one way or another about something.

I understand it's very easy to point out the flaws of the Tom Haggards, the Jimmy Swaggarts, the Jim Bakers . . . lesser know preachers have also committed similar sins. They're human. There was only one perfect man who ever walked the earth and his name wasn't Benny Hinn (or Benny Hill for that matter).

Humans make mistakes, we all make mistakes. Even those of us who believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God and have admitted that we have sinned. We also believe that Christ's death upon the cross gives us the opportunity for redemption and allows us to live in God's grace as we struggle to not give in to those temptations and sin less and less each day. But when we do, we know we are forgiven.

Nothing we will ever do can make God love us any less.


To the contrary, why are some of you so danged belligerent when it comes to believing in God or His word?

What good does it do to continually harp on someone who's heart is not open to hearing about God's blessings?

I'm not saying you should ignore discussions or stand by while things you don't agree with are being said, all I (a fellow christian) can ask is that you pray about how you should respond before you actually do so. As silly as this may sound, I believe that discussions such as this may actually open up some lines of communication and quite possibly be read by someone who might not be quite sure about religion. This would maybe give them a chance to take that next step and visit a local church or meet up with a group of neighbors who study the word.

We've all had discussions with people where we knew going in that nobody was changing their mind regardless of what was said. Don't compromise your beliefs, but please don't do stuff to feed the image that some folks seem to have of us.

If you really feel the need to (heatedly) discuss something with someone pray that God will open their heart, and that they will see that you're not talking down to them.


We're here to spread the good news, not shove it down their throats.






Stay tuned, a Cliff's Notes version will be available soon. :D

[Okieflyer]

We're here to spread the good news, not shove it down their throats.

Well said! I hope that mdklatt or anyone else doesn't think that I have been trying to "shove it down their throats". I enjoy the discussion. mdklatt hasn't been rude or out of line. I hope he doesn't think I have. We've been on this board way too long to badger each other to that point.:O

However, good point Sooner Bob!:)

[usmc-sooner]

all I can say is the word of God has comforted me in my times of need.


Elton Jon is just a faggot and hasn't done jack crap for me.

[Tulsa_Fireman]

Elton Jon is just a faggot and hasn't done jack crap for me.

But I'd be willin' to bet he'd 'jack' your crap should you ever feel the need. :D

[Stoop Dawg]

Come on, do I have to spell everything out? Who cares how old we something is? I don't know that day one was a 24 hour period of time. Because that would depend on one revolution of the earth. Once again it doesn't matter anyway. Time is something we keep.

I didn't read this whole thread or even all of your post, but it is unfair to say "the Bible has never been disproved" then summarily dismiss the data that does, in fact, disprove the creation story (or at least its timeline) by calling it irrelevant.

If time were irrelevant to the creation story then why did the writer mention it?

[sanantoniosooner]

interestingly, I always see the same stuff posted by the same people over and over again.

It's sad that poo threads contribute more to this forum than religious and political threads.

[Stoop Dawg]

Can I ask a couple of serious questions?

Why are some of you so danged against believing in God or in His word?


You said it was a serious question, so I'll bite.

For me, there are two reasons:

1. It's an interesting - and important - debate.

2. In general religion is harmless. However, there are those that take it to an extreme and end up killing people - or themselves - over it.

Throughout history the various religions of the world have been responsible for not only wars, but the destruction of technology, burning of books, oppression of people, and general opposition to advancement of science. Before the resident "Christian persecution alarmists" get their panties in a wad, I realize that there is a difference between Christianity and what some evil people do in the name of Christianity. And, I'm not just talking Christianity. I'm talking about all of the world's religions.

Take a look at the Middle East. They have vast natural resources and yet many of them live in poverty and perpetual war. Why? Why haven't the people of those countries overthrown their oppressors? Who, in fact, are the oppressors? Is it really the government? Or is it their religious leaders?

I've got no problem with people who weigh their options and choose Christianity or any other religion. But religion needs to be watched closely because it is easily abused.

[LoyalFan]

Well, I believe in God, though not the ragheads' perverted incarnation thereof, and I also believe that whomever shoots, stabs, runs over that d---licking faggot (See:SIR Elton John) deserves a medal.
I was willing to tolerate the C-sucker up 'til now but he's crossed the boundary of my patience.
ME? Conservative? Ummmm....yeah.

LF

[william_brasky]

It's sad that poo threads contribute more to this forum than religious and political threads.

Why is that sad? Poo threads are your forte.

[Okieflyer]

I didn't read this whole thread or even all of your post, but it is unfair to say "the Bible has never been disproved" then summarily dismiss the data that does, in fact, disprove the creation story (or at least its timeline) by calling it irrelevant.

If time were irrelevant to the creation story then why did the writer mention it?

OK go back and read the thread. If you have an example of where the bible has been disproved, then post it. The creation story has already been hit on. Bottom line...there was no 24 hour period until the earth turned one time and there was someone there to measure it. If God could create the universe then he could have made a "Grand canyon" in a day if he wanted too. I will agree with mdklatt that faith does play a big roll.

[Ike]

Some of you people appear to have a huge chip on your shoulders when it comes to your beliefs (or lack thereof) regarding religion (of any kind).

Can I ask a couple of serious questions?

Why are some of you so danged against believing in God or in His word?

I understand that many people see christians as hypocrites, but the word hyprocrite could be used to describe everyone over the age of about 8. So that's really a copout IMO. We're all hypocrites in one way or another about something.

I understand it's very easy to point out the flaws of the Tom Haggards, the Jimmy Swaggarts, the Jim Bakers . . . lesser know preachers have also committed similar sins. They're human. There was only one perfect man who ever walked the earth and his name wasn't Benny Hinn (or Benny Hill for that matter).

Humans make mistakes, we all make mistakes. Even those of us who believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God and have admitted that we have sinned. We also believe that Christ's death upon the cross gives us the opportunity for redemption and allows us to live in God's grace as we struggle to not give in to those temptations and sin less and less each day. But when we do, we know we are forgiven.

Nothing we will ever do can make God love us any less.




I am assuming you want serious answers?

If so, I'll try to fit it in one post. If I can't, or my answer is somehow unsatisfactory to you, peem me and we can talk about it in more detail there.

First off, I hope I don't come across as having too huge of chip on my shoulder. As far as I'm concerned, people can believe whatever they want to believe, and it's really no skin off my back. As far as I can tell, religious beliefs have done a lot of good for some people. It's unfortunate that they have also caused a lot of pain for some people as well, but in reality I find that part of it to be more part of the human condition than the reliance on any specific belief system.

As to the question of why I resist belief in God, the short version is that I see no evidence to convince me that God, or any supernatural being for that matter is real. In fairness, I also see no evidence to convince me that there is no supreme being either. In other words, when it comes to the God question, I know nothing. This know-nothingness is compounded by the fact that I call into question the divine inspiration of the Bible and other holy texts. What evidence do I have that the bible or any other holy text is actually the real word of God? none. Thats not to say that I completely disregard the bible. It is a fairly good historical document in parts, and in my opinion, a nice chronicle of an ancient peoples belief system and moral codes. I do not however believe that any of it was divinely inspired. I simply have no evidence to convince me that this is fact. I also have no evidence to convince me that this is not fact, but, in my opinion, great claims, such as the divine inspiration of the bible, require great evidence.


There may in fact be a god, and he may well send me to the depths of hell for not professing my undying love to him. And I'm OK with that. The reason I'm OK with that is that I cannot and will not profess my undying love for someone or something of which I know nothing. Even if one assumes that the bible is divinely inspired, I think it provides a woefully incomplete at best description of God. In the first part God is portrayed as this tyrannical drunken-father type who demands who seems drunk with power. He seems to get off on making his creation go to elaborate lengths to proove their love and loyalty to him. In the second half, its as though he has reached the "I love you" stage of drunkness and tells us that all is forgiven if we just accept him through his son. Yes, I know this is a grand oversimplification of the bible and it's messages, but this is the kind of feeling I got from reading the bible. If I am going to profess my undying love for some supreme being, I want to really know that supreme being, and it will take far more than a 2000+ year old text which may or may not have been divinely inspired for me to find that knowledge.

For the record too, its not that I am not looking for that knowledge either.

[Sooner_Bob]

You said it was a serious question, so I'll bite.

For me, there are two reasons:

1. It's an interesting - and important - debate.

2. In general religion is harmless. However, there are those that take it to an extreme and end up killing people - or themselves - over it.

Throughout history the various religions of the world have been responsible for not only wars, but the destruction of technology, burning of books, oppression of people, and general opposition to advancement of science. Before the resident "Christian persecution alarmists" get their panties in a wad, I realize that there is a difference between Christianity and what some evil people do in the name of Christianity. And, I'm not just talking Christianity. I'm talking about all of the world's religions.

Take a look at the Middle East. They have vast natural resources and yet many of them live in poverty and perpetual war. Why? Why haven't the people of those countries overthrown their oppressors? Who, in fact, are the oppressors? Is it really the government? Or is it their religious leaders?

I've got no problem with people who weigh their options and choose Christianity or any other religion. But religion needs to be watched closely because it is easily abused.


Thanks for your comments. I was hoping to get some decent discussion going.

I agree that some folks have taken religion to the extreme and use it as a reason to fullfil their own selfish wants and desires.

[Sooner_Bob]

I am assuming you want serious answers?

If so, I'll try to fit it in one post. If I can't, or my answer is somehow unsatisfactory to you, peem me and we can talk about it in more detail there.

First off, I hope I don't come across as having too huge of chip on my shoulder. As far as I'm concerned, people can believe whatever they want to believe, and it's really no skin off my back. As far as I can tell, religious beliefs have done a lot of good for some people. It's unfortunate that they have also caused a lot of pain for some people as well, but in reality I find that part of it to be more part of the human condition than the reliance on any specific belief system.

As to the question of why I resist belief in God, the short version is that I see no evidence to convince me that God, or any supernatural being for that matter is real. In fairness, I also see no evidence to convince me that there is no supreme being either. In other words, when it comes to the God question, I know nothing. This know-nothingness is compounded by the fact that I call into question the divine inspiration of the Bible and other holy texts. What evidence do I have that the bible or any other holy text is actually the real word of God? none. Thats not to say that I completely disregard the bible. It is a fairly good historical document in parts, and in my opinion, a nice chronicle of an ancient peoples belief system and moral codes. I do not however believe that any of it was divinely inspired. I simply have no evidence to convince me that this is fact. I also have no evidence to convince me that this is not fact, but, in my opinion, great claims, such as the divine inspiration of the bible, require great evidence.


There may in fact be a god, and he may well send me to the depths of hell for not professing my undying love to him. And I'm OK with that. The reason I'm OK with that is that I cannot and will not profess my undying love for someone or something of which I know nothing. Even if one assumes that the bible is divinely inspired, I think it provides a woefully incomplete at best description of God. In the first part God is portrayed as this tyrannical drunken-father type who demands who seems drunk with power. He seems to get off on making his creation go to elaborate lengths to proove their love and loyalty to him. In the second half, its as though he has reached the "I love you" stage of drunkness and tells us that all is forgiven if we just accept him through his son. Yes, I know this is a grand oversimplification of the bible and it's messages, but this is the kind of feeling I got from reading the bible. If I am going to profess my undying love for some supreme being, I want to really know that supreme being, and it will take far more than a 2000+ year old text which may or may not have been divinely inspired for me to find that knowledge.

For the record too, its not that I am not looking for that knowledge either.


Yep, I was completely serious. I really want to understand where folks are coming from.

I've gotta hit the road here in a bit, but hopefully this thread will still be around later today so I can respond a little better.

Thanks.

:D

[crawfish]

Wow...this definitely went in an interesting direction.

As far as the bible goes...it's important for non-Christians (and Christians) to realize that it was written from the viewpoint of the person at the time it was written. Thus, it does not use scientific terms or ideas we recognize today - it uses what passed for science and knowledge back then. Looking at it that way, we can discard the notion that it has to be 100% true to be factual.

Reading the creation story, the ark story and Genesis from this perspective, and having knowledge of the belief systems of the day, we realize that those stories are a response to the mythology of the day. The gods of the time were gods of the sun, the sky, weather, nature, etc., and the biblical creation story puts God as the creator of them all. It also twists them, from making man an accidental creation to being the point of all creation. God is telling the story for a purpose, in a way the people of the time can understand; and brilliantly, in a way that stays valid to this day (albeit in a completely different way).

I have been studying the bible in a top-down, holistic way for years, also focusing on the culture and mythology of bible times - and it makes more sense to me than it ever has. Taking the bible a story at a time, God can seem at times cruel, hateful, vengeful, and it's difficult to mesh that with a God of love and forgiveness. Taken as a whole, it can be seen as an amazing progression of a God seeking to take the world from evil and making the ultimate sacrifice for all of mankind.

I guess that's enough of my incoherent rant. I'll have to write all this down in a clearer fashion someday. :O

[Chuck Bao]

Right you are. We need to try to put our selves back in the ancient world, if we are to understand the scripture.

There is mounting archaeological evidence that some of the Torah, The Prophets and The Writings of the Old Testament were fabricated in about 700 BCE in an attempt to unify the people of the Judah Kingdom and build a theology around Jerusalem, a relatively small and backwards provincial capital at that time with a population of just about 15,000. Of all of humanity, God chose this small kingdom for his earthly home in his temple and his chosen people?

I suggest that you read “The Bible Unearthed – Archaeology’s new vision of ancient Israel and the origin of its sacred texts.

http://www.amazon.com/Bible-Unearthed-Archaeologys-Vision-Ancient/dp/B00009NDAK/sr=8-1/qid=1163601391/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-8417569-2803913?ie=UTF8&s=books

[crawfish]

Right you are. We need to try to put our selves back in the ancient world, if we are to understand the scripture.

There is mounting archaeological evidence that some of the Torah, The Prophets and The Writings of the Old Testament were fabricated in about 700 BCE in an attempt to unify the people of the Judah Kingdom and build a theology around Jerusalem, a relatively small and backwards provincial capital at that time with a population of just about 15,000. Of all of humanity, God chose this small kingdom for his earthly home in his temple and his chosen people?

I suggest that you read “The Bible Unearthed – Archaeology’s new vision of ancient Israel and the origin of its sacred texts.

http://www.amazon.com/Bible-Unearthed-Archaeologys-Vision-Ancient/dp/B00009NDAK/sr=8-1/qid=1163601391/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-8417569-2803913?ie=UTF8&s=books


Errr...if by "mounting evidence" you mean "hypothesis based on circumstantial evidence" then I agree.

Far more likely is that it is a compilation of older stories passed down through oral and written traditions. There is much evidence through style analysis and such that the Torah stories were likely written from 1200-1000 BC.

I have theories as to why God chose a small community like Israel, and it makes quite a bit of sense. Perhaps I'll share someday. :)

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

In 4 pages no has said where Elton wants Religion to Go? Like Cambodia? Is he saying more Missionaries need to be sent out?

[crawfish]

In 4 pages no has said where Elton wants Religion to Go? Like Cambodia? Is he saying more Missionaries need to be sent out?

I'm fairly certain Elton isn't a fan of the Missionary position.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Actually I hear a rumor that the season finale of Lost will reveal that Elton John actually loves sex with women!! And was faking it!!

[mdklatt]

Who cares how old we something is? I don't know that day one was a 24 hour period of time. Because that would depend on one revolution of the earth. Once again it doesn't matter anyway. Time is something we keep.

There are fundamentalist Christians who think the earth is only a few thousand years old (http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/05agee1.htm) based on what it says in the Bible. If the Bible is wrong about that, what else is it wrong about?




We read translations of the bible. To understand it, you must study it. It's not left up to the "whims of interpretation". i.e. the King James version says "Thou shall not Kill", but if you go look it up in the original Hebrew it actually means "Do not commit murder". There is a difference.


Why is divorce a sin to Catholics but not (all?) Protestants? Why do some denominations disallow female clergy? It doesn't matter what the Bible actually says, it matters what we think it says. And we can't even agree on that.



It doesn't matter what "some christians" translated it as. In any time period there were just as many Christian's saying the opposite. Why do we always seem to forget that fact? If you look at the bible and just read it, you couldn't justify slavery. Just because people fail, doesn't mean the bible did.


Yes it does matter, because these are usually the people trying to force their beliefs on everyone else. It's one thing for people to go door to door trying to convert everyone, but it's something else altogether when people try to get their particular interpretation of the Bible enacted into law. Creation is not science, no matter what some fundies on the Kansas Board of Education think. If marriage is the religious institution that Christians claim it is, than the government has no business endorsing or forbidding it at all (straight, gay, or other).






It doesn't matter how God decided to do things. Maybe he did use an earthquake. So?


But that's not what the Bible says. It rained for 40 days and 40 nights--no mention of an earthquake (that's just conjecture, by the way, but I'm using it make a point.) If the Bible is wrong about basic facts like that, what else is it wrong about? It seems to me that the Bible isn't the inerrant word of God after all, as some denominations claim.





I didn't say you did say it was o.k. But once again your trying to judge God but looking at failed human beings. Just because someone says they are a Christian doesn't mean they are somehow perfect. People justify all kinds of sin. Even "christians". Christians aren't better, just better off.

It's those failed human beings I'm judging, not God. As a contemporary example, I wouldn't oridnarily care that Mary Fallin cheated on her husband and got divorced; it's none of my business and has no bearing on her qualifications for office. But when she starts standing up and saying that she's going to protect the "sanctity of marriage" as part of her political agenda, I call bull****. How dare she try to enact her version of morality into law when she can't even abide by that standard herself?

Look, I don't have a problem with God, or Christianity, or 99.99% of all Christians. I fully respect and support anybody's desire to live a Christian lifestyle as long as they return favor in regards to whatever lifestyle I choose.

Here's an honest question: Do the rules and requirements in the New Testament apply to everyone or just Christians?

[OklahomaRed]

Here's an honest question: Do the rules and requirements in the New Testament apply to everyone or just Christians?
__________________


My opinion? The rules of the New Testament apply to Christians today; everyone else today are governed by whatever laws their governments adopt. However, (you knew there would be a however) the Bible does say that some day every knee shall bow to Jesus. With that being said, then from my Christian point of view, then yes, the New Testament will "eventually" apply to everyone, whether they like it or not. :rolleyes:

[mdklatt]

My opinion? The rules of the New Testament apply to Christians today; everyone else today are governed by whatever laws their governments adopt. However, (you knew there would be a however) the Bible does say that some day every knee shall bow to Jesus. With that being said, then from my Christian point of view, then yes, the New Testament will "eventually" apply to everyone, whether they like it or not. :rolleyes:

In the meantime, do you think that laws should be passed based solely on Biblical arguments?

[OklahomaRed]

Give to Ceasar what is Ceasar's.

Laws should be passed along the lines of how society votes. The only thing I expect, if the voters vote in some Christian value law (i.e. ban on gay marriages, or no partial birth abortions), then the same rights to vote in laws should be respected, regardless of where they came from. Example, you could consider do not murder a "Christian" value law. Is it a bad law, or is it a good law? That's for the voters to decide regardless of the intent of the law. It's for the rest of us to obey that law until it's changed. The point here is that most of the laws we live by are mostly "Christian" value laws anyway. Why all of the sudden are Christian values such a bad thing? :confused:

[mdklatt]

Example, you could consider do not murder a "Christian" value law. It's a bad law, or is it a good law? That's for the voters to decide regardless of the intent of the law.

Prohibition against murder is not exclusive to Christianity, nor religion in general. It's just a good idea from a practical point of view, and that should be the only justification for any law. We cannot legislate morality, nor should we try to.

[Okieflyer]

There are fundamentalist Christians who think the earth is only a few thousand years old (http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/05agee1.htm) based on what it says in the Bible. If the Bible is wrong about that, what else is it wrong about?

You missed my point. If God could make a universe out of nothing. Why would you think he would be constrained to make it the way scientist think it should have been. If he could make the universe, he could make an old universe. But once again it really is a moot point.


Why is divorce a sin to Catholics but not (all?) Protestants? Why do some denominations disallow female clergy? It doesn't matter what the Bible actually says, it matters what we think it says. And we can't even agree on that.

These are internal arguments that have nothing to do with salvation. Even those Protestants believe divorce is caused by sin.


Yes it does matter, because these are usually the people trying to force their beliefs on everyone else. It's one thing for people to go door to door trying to convert everyone, but it's something else altogether when people try to get their particular interpretation of the Bible enacted into law. Creation is not science, no matter what some fundies on the Kansas Board of Education think. If marriage is the religious institution that Christians claim it is, than the government has no business endorsing or forbidding it at all (straight, gay, or other).

I totally agree forcing your beliefs on someone is wrong. Jesus even told the disciples if you are not welcome in a town. Shake the dust off of your feet and go on. Trying to enact laws is just a act of democracy no matter where your view point comes from. If the majority want it and it is constitutional then it's fair. By the way the Kansas Board didn't say creation was science. More bad press. It had a statement saying Evolution was a theory, Not Fact! That is a true statement. Your statement on marriage I don't discount totally. But societies make laws, sometimes not always, for the good of the society.


But that's not what the Bible says. It rained for 40 days and 40 nights--no mention of an earthquake (that's just conjecture, by the way, but I'm using it make a point.) If the Bible is wrong about basic facts like that, what else is it wrong about? It seems to me that the Bible isn't the inerrant word of God after all, as some denominations claim.

We don't know that wasn't true. There's arguments on both sides about this.


It's those failed human beings I'm judging, not God. As a contemporary example, I wouldn't oridnarily care that Mary Fallin cheated on her husband and got divorced; it's none of my business and has no bearing on her qualifications for office. But when she starts standing up and saying that she's going to protect the "sanctity of marriage" as part of her political agenda, I call bull****. How dare she try to enact her version of morality into law when she can't even abide by that standard herself?

People do fail and need to be repentant. I don't know if she admitted that or not. You ask for forgiveness, then it should be given. But that doesn't let you off of a crime. You still have to pay for that crime. A Pastor, like the one up in Colorado, should be forgiven, but should not hold a position of authority in the church again. But under your example if I ever smoked pot, then I shouldn't be able to ever say anything about pot legislation again.


Look, I don't have a problem with God, or Christianity, or 99.99% of all Christians. I fully respect and support anybody's desire to live a Christian lifestyle as long as they return favor in regards to whatever lifestyle I choose.

Here's an honest question: Do the rules and requirements in the New Testament apply to everyone or just Christians?

To everyone, but I think you'll find there is not that many rules and requirements in the New Testament.
Love the LORD your GOD!
Love your neighbor as yourself!
We enact civil Laws to make a society better because people don't obey those first two.
We're pretty tolerant in this country. Athieist countries have always been less tolerant. The USSR, China, etc. God played no roll in their governments. But find out what happens to a person caught with drugs over there.

[JohnnyMack]

IMHO,

Religion/spirituality is an intensely personal thing to me. I feel certain sects of certain religions have bastardized the true intentions of some pretty influential teachers. They've done so not for the altruistic means they purport, but for power and for wealth.

[Sooner_Bob]

IMHO,

Religion/spirituality is an intensely personal thing to me. I feel certain sects of certain religions have bastardized the true intentions of some pretty influential teachers. They've done so not for the altruistic means they purport, but for power and for wealth.


Which unfortunately has made things rather tough on the rest of us who strive to do things in the right and honest manner.

[Stoop Dawg]

You missed my point. If God could make a universe out of nothing. Why would you think he would be constrained to make it the way scientist think it should have been. If he could make the universe, he could make an old universe. But once again it really is a moot point.

Sorry, but this is exactly the kind of argument that I despise. You can't just toss out science and say "God did whatever God did, just believe it". Believing in something despite evidence to the contrary is insanity. At least try to explain it away without using "fantasy theory" or just dismissing the point altogether.

Why does the Bible use the term "days" if the creation of the Earth was not, in fact, measured in "days"? Why didn't the Bible use the term "years"? Or, better yet, simply remain silent on the amount of time required? After all, you claim that it doesn't matter how long it took, so why comment on it?

Why would God create the Earth only a few thousand years ago yet make it look like it happened millions of years ago? Why would He do that? Surely He knew humans would eventually be able to measure such things. Was He just trying to confuse us? That seems like it would be in rather poor taste if you ask me.

Did the flood really happen? Is there even enough water on this planet to completely cover the surface? I would think the polar ice caps would have to melt, but then the froze back up real quick? And we're supposed to believe that two of EVERY LIVING CREATURE ON THE ENITRE EARTH was on board that ark? Along with enough food to feed them all? And Noah's small family was able to shovel all that poop and keep all those animals fed? And none of them ate each other? Better yet, we're supposed to believe that God simply made them not be hungry. That's a very complicated way to go about destroying the Earth. Why not just explode the whole thing and start over? I mean, it only takes 7 days to create a new one. Right? Why spend 40 days flooding this one when He could have just created a new one in a fraction of the time?

First one to say "Humans can't know the will of God" gets a lollipop.

[mdklatt]

And none of them ate each other?

A Far Side cartoon comes to mind. Noah is standing over a unicorn carcass on the ark and proclaims, "From now on all carnivores will be confined to C Deck!"

:D

[olevetonahill]

Humans cant know the will of God
Wheres My lolipop ?

[yermom]

Sorry, but this is exactly the kind of argument that I despise. You can't just toss out science and say "God did whatever God did, just believe it". Believing in something despite evidence to the contrary is insanity. At least try to explain it away without using "fantasy theory" or just dismissing the point altogether.

Why does the Bible use the term "days" if the creation of the Earth was not, in fact, measured in "days"? Why didn't the Bible use the term "years"? Or, better yet, simply remain silent on the amount of time required? After all, you claim that it doesn't matter how long it took, so why comment on it?

Why would God create the Earth only a few thousand years ago yet make it look like it happened millions of years ago? Why would He do that? Surely He knew humans would eventually be able to measure such things. Was He just trying to confuse us? That seems like it would be in rather poor taste if you ask me.

Did the flood really happen? Is there even enough water on this planet to completely cover the surface? I would think the polar ice caps would have to melt, but then the froze back up real quick? And we're supposed to believe that two of EVERY LIVING CREATURE ON THE ENITRE EARTH was on board that ark? Along with enough food to feed them all? And Noah's small family was able to shovel all that poop and keep all those animals fed? And none of them ate each other? Better yet, we're supposed to believe that God simply made them not be hungry. That's a very complicated way to go about destroying the Earth. Why not just explode the whole thing and start over? I mean, it only takes 7 days to create a new one. Right? Why spend 40 days flooding this one when He could have just created a new one in a fraction of the time?

First one to say "Humans can't know the will of God" gets a lollipop.

the "day" argument is weak, "day" can be taken multiple ways, you know like "back in my day..." if you take it to mean like "era" then it kinda makes sense. we are talking about a translation of some old dead language here. who knows how old the science of the time thought the planet was

you've got me on the rest though. i'm not too keen on the "God can do whatever he wants" defense

[Stoop Dawg]

we are talking about a translation of some old dead language here.

Good point. Translation is supremely important.

[Chuck Bao]

This is an interesting discussion.

Let's see the universe is 14-16 billion years old. The earth is 4-5 billion years old. Modern man developed about a million years ago and started recording history only about 4-6,000 years ago.

Now that there are 6.66 billion of us, we need God more than ever.

[JohnnyMack]

Sorry, but this is exactly the kind of argument that I despise. You can't just toss out science and say "God did whatever God did, just believe it". Believing in something despite evidence to the contrary is insanity. At least try to explain it away without using "fantasy theory" or just dismissing the point altogether.

Why does the Bible use the term "days" if the creation of the Earth was not, in fact, measured in "days"? Why didn't the Bible use the term "years"? Or, better yet, simply remain silent on the amount of time required? After all, you claim that it doesn't matter how long it took, so why comment on it?

Why would God create the Earth only a few thousand years ago yet make it look like it happened millions of years ago? Why would He do that? Surely He knew humans would eventually be able to measure such things. Was He just trying to confuse us? That seems like it would be in rather poor taste if you ask me.

Did the flood really happen? Is there even enough water on this planet to completely cover the surface? I would think the polar ice caps would have to melt, but then the froze back up real quick? And we're supposed to believe that two of EVERY LIVING CREATURE ON THE ENITRE EARTH was on board that ark? Along with enough food to feed them all? And Noah's small family was able to shovel all that poop and keep all those animals fed? And none of them ate each other? Better yet, we're supposed to believe that God simply made them not be hungry. That's a very complicated way to go about destroying the Earth. Why not just explode the whole thing and start over? I mean, it only takes 7 days to create a new one. Right? Why spend 40 days flooding this one when He could have just created a new one in a fraction of the time?

First one to say "Humans can't know the will of God" gets a lollipop.

Do you understand the concept of a metaphor?

[sitzpinkler]

Do you understand the concept of a metaphor?

I think a little bit of his point is that it doesn't make sense to use them.

[JohnnyMack]

I think a little bit of his point is that it doesn't make sense to use them.

Why not?

The uneducated masses eat that stuff up.

[OklahomaRed]

To each his own. What's harder to believe? That the universe started from a big bang? Where did the big bang come from? Or, that there actually is a supreme being and that the universe has some intelligent design to it, and that we were created for a purpose? I choose to believe the later because one day each of us will die. I choose to put my faith in that supreme being that created the universe and the fact that if HE did create the universe, then HE surely was intelligent enough to create a way to draw closer to Him. After all we all are going to die? Right?

You choose your beliefs, and I'll choose mine. Only time will tell? :D

Rev 20:11-15 Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. Earth and sky fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what he had done. 14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. 15 If anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire. (NIV)


With all due apologies to Ian Fleming... tomorrow will die one day.

The constant reminder of mortality over my lifetime has caused me to look for answers.

There are many who do not believe that this life will continue. They live as they please and think that death will be the end, and there is no accountability for their actions. I fear that they will be terribly disappointed in the moment that is meant to be their greatest victory. That victory would be given to them by their Lord that cared enough to die for them and rise to make a way for them to live with Him forever.

For those who do believe in Christ and wait for His return or their homecoming through death, that day will be the end of one journey and the beginning of a new eternal one. We will rejoin our family and friends who have passed from this life before us. We will be recognized by them and know them as well. We will make new friends. We will sit with Mary and Martha at the feet of Jesus and listen and learn.

There will be tears and sadness for those who refused the gift of eternity so freely offered. Finally, death and Hades will be consigned to the lake of fire and sealed away for all eternity. All our tears will be wiped away and our hearts finally healed of all hurts. The Lion will lay down with the Lamb, and other animals will be there too I hope - wild animals and former pets all at peace. Imagine a lion eating grass. Time itself will cease to be needed, and everything we know and see now will be replaced with the perfection that God has wanted to share with us since the days of Adam and Eve.

Death is not a popular topic, but now and then we are compelled to consider it. I ask you to be open to it when those times come for you. They don't have to be morbid or woeful. There are many facets, and they are all part of the road we must walk.

[OklahomaRed]

Pretty good book. I've actually only read sections of it, but this guy does a better job of explaining creationism versus evolution than I do. He's actually agreed to debate any scientist who will debate him, but they all have refused because he actually want to leave "religion" out of the debate. Just do a google search on "creation science". Speaking of "theories", why can our school systems so openly teach evolution, but equal time, or at least just time be given to teach "intelligent design" theories? :D



Figure 40: Fountains of the Great Deep. Notice the bulge of western Africa beginning to form.


Part II: Fountains of the Great Deep
If a culture ignored, for any reason, an event as cataclysmic as a global flood, major errors or misunderstandings would creep into science and society. One of the first would be the explanation for fossils. Typically, Fossil A lies below Fossil B, which lies below Fossil C, etc. If flood explanations were weak or disallowed, then evolution would provide an answer: Organism A turned into B which later turned into C. Fossil layers would represent vast amounts of time. Other geologic features could then be easily fit into that time frame. With so much time available, possible explanations multiply—explanations not easily tested in less than a million years. A century after Darwin, evolutionary explanations would be given for the universe, chemical elements, heavenly bodies, earth, and life. Part I of this book shows that these ideas are false.

Part II will show, in ways an interested layman can understand, the flaws in these geologic explanations and that a global flood, with vast and unique consequences, did occur. For example, coal, oil, and methane did not form over hundreds of millions of years; they formed in months. Fossils and layered strata did not form over a billion years; they formed in months. The Grand Canyon did not form in millions of years; it formed in weeks. Earth’s major mountains did not form over hundreds of millions of years; each formed in hours. These statements may appear shocking, until one has examined the evidence in Part II. If you feel there must be experts who can refute this scientific evidence, then see pages 376–378. You will be hard-pressed to find anyone willing to accept that sincere and fair debate offer—a standing offer since 1980.

Ironically, some leading creationists who believe in a global flood have contributed to its frequent rejection by advocating unsound mechanisms for the flood. They have failed to clearly answer people’s most basic questions: “Where did so much water come from, and where did it go?”

One such explanation is the canopy theory. (Pages 338–346 examine its many problems.) Others, who know these problems, have proposed an equally weak explanation called “catastrophic plate tectonics.” Basically, it is the flawed plate tectonic theory speeded up a millionfold by unworkable mechanisms and assumed miracles. Unfortunately, authors of these flood explanations have declined to compare and publish joint critiques of our respective theories.

Past failure to answer honest flood questions opened the door to evolution and old-earth beliefs. Answering those questions will begin to (1) reestablish the flood as earth’s defining geological event, and (2) reverse serious errors that have crept into science and society. Don’t be surprised at how catastrophic the flood was. Just follow the evidence.

[Ike]

To each his own. What's harder to believe? That the universe started from a big bang? Where did the big bang come from? Or, that there actually is a supreme being and that the universe has some intelligent design to it, and that we were created for a purpose? I choose to believe the later because one day each of us will die. I choose to put my faith in that supreme being that created the universe and the fact that if HE did create the universe, then HE surely was intelligent enough to create a way to draw closer to Him. After all we all are going to die? Right?


For me, it all comes down to evidence. The evidence exists that the universe came from a big bang. The evidence for this is very strong. Where did it come from? Who knows. people can theorize all they want, but there is really no way to know. But we are pretty damn sure it DID happen, and to me thats easier to believe than the notion that we were created by some supreme being simply because the evidence is there. To be fair, there is room for a supreme being to have kicked off the big bang. But since we can't know what came before the big bang (if anything at all), this is pure conjecture.


You choose your beliefs, and I'll choose mine. Only time will tell? :D

Will do.


Rev 20:11-15 Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. Earth and sky fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what he had done. 14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. 15 If anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire. (NIV)


With all due apologies to Ian Fleming... tomorrow will die one day.

The constant reminder of mortality over my lifetime has caused me to look for answers.

There are many who do not believe that this life will continue. They live as they please and think that death will be the end, and there is no accountability for their actions. I fear that they will be terribly disappointed in the moment that is meant to be their greatest victory. That victory would be given to them by their Lord that cared enough to die for them and rise to make a way for them to live with Him forever.

For those who do believe in Christ and wait for His return or their homecoming through death, that day will be the end of one journey and the beginning of a new eternal one. We will rejoin our family and friends who have passed from this life before us. We will be recognized by them and know them as well. We will make new friends. We will sit with Mary and Martha at the feet of Jesus and listen and learn.

There will be tears and sadness for those who refused the gift of eternity so freely offered. Finally, death and Hades will be consigned to the lake of fire and sealed away for all eternity. All our tears will be wiped away and our hearts finally healed of all hurts. The Lion will lay down with the Lamb, and other animals will be there too I hope - wild animals and former pets all at peace. Imagine a lion eating grass. Time itself will cease to be needed, and everything we know and see now will be replaced with the perfection that God has wanted to share with us since the days of Adam and Eve.
Death is not a popular topic, but now and then we are compelled to consider it. I ask you to be open to it when those times come for you. They don't have to be morbid or woeful. There are many facets, and they are all part of the road we must walk.
One quick question. you state that there will be tears and sadness for those who refused the gift of eternity. Suppose you are wrong? I'm not saying you are, but any reasonable person must take into account the chance that what they assume to be true may be wrong. Suppose that there is either no God, or that the true god is a different God or Gods who isn't so forgiving. Wouldn't you feel pretty jipped, assuming you could feel after death, to learn that everything you dedicated your life to turned out not to be true? would you be OK with that? Again, I'm just playing the what if game here because I can't say whether you are right or wrong (and I posit that with any degree of precision, you cannot either...thats the kicker about faith). But I'm just curious.

[Ike]

Pretty good book. I've actually only read sections of it, but this guy does a better job of explaining creationism versus evolution than I do. He's actually agreed to debate any scientist who will debate him, but they all have refused because he actually want to leave "religion" out of the debate. Just do a google search on "creation science". Speaking of "theories", why can our school systems so openly teach evolution, but equal time, or at least just time be given to teach "intelligent design" theories? :D

which book is this? I sincerely doubt this guy is thinking clearly about why people aren't debating him. Most scientists view debating kooks as a waste of their time. why? Because a) there are too many of them and b) you can never, even in the face of overwhelming evidence, convince them that they are wrong. This is the nature of the kook.



Figure 40: Fountains of the Great Deep. Notice the bulge of western Africa beginning to form.


Part II: Fountains of the Great Deep
If a culture ignored, for any reason, an event as cataclysmic as a global flood, major errors or misunderstandings would creep into science and society. One of the first would be the explanation for fossils. Typically, Fossil A lies below Fossil B, which lies below Fossil C, etc. If flood explanations were weak or disallowed, then evolution would provide an answer: Organism A turned into B which later turned into C. Fossil layers would represent vast amounts of time. Other geologic features could then be easily fit into that time frame. With so much time available, possible explanations multiply—explanations not easily tested in less than a million years. A century after Darwin, evolutionary explanations would be given for the universe, chemical elements, heavenly bodies, earth, and life. Part I of this book shows that these ideas are false.

Part II will show, in ways an interested layman can understand, the flaws in these geologic explanations and that a global flood, with vast and unique consequences, did occur. For example, coal, oil, and methane did not form over hundreds of millions of years; they formed in months. Fossils and layered strata did not form over a billion years; they formed in months. The Grand Canyon did not form in millions of years; it formed in weeks.


Earth’s major mountains did not form over hundreds of millions of years; each formed in hours. These statements may appear shocking, until one has examined the evidence in Part II. If you feel there must be experts who can refute this scientific evidence, then see pages 376–378. You will be hard-pressed to find anyone willing to accept that sincere and fair debate offer—a standing offer since 1980.



I'm gonna stop you right there. In science we have this mantra: "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." I can tell you already that the evidence simply is not there for this. Most historians I have heard agree that there was a flood, but that it was constrained to the areas around the Black Sea. But I'm sorry...water is a powerful thing, but there is no way in hell, without some very convincing repeatable experimentation, that anyone is going to believe it is THAT powerful. there is simply no evidence that this is the case. Not unless he is claiming that the earth was flooded with HCl. People probably won't debate him because nobody believes whatever evidence he is claiming there is. There simply is no evidence that water is that powerful, and the nature of this type of person is that you cannot convince them otherwise.

[Stoop Dawg]

To each his own. What's harder to believe? That the universe started from a big bang? Where did the big bang come from? Or, that there actually is a supreme being and that the universe has some intelligent design to it, and that we were created for a purpose?

How about admitting that you don't know and then looking for an answer instead of just taking for granted a fantastic story that has been passed down for generations?



There will be tears and sadness for those who refused the gift of eternity so freely offered. Finally, death and Hades will be consigned to the lake of fire and sealed away for all eternity.

The concept of Hell makes no sense in the overall "plan" laid out in the Bible. If the whole idea of mankind was to commune with God, why would God ever destroy mankind? God would then be right back where He started.

Let me ask a further question. You seem to be fairly certain that you will continue to exist after death, but do you believe that you existed before birth?

[Ike]

There are fundamentalist Christians who think the earth is only a few thousand years old (http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/05agee1.htm) based on what it says in the Bible. If the Bible is wrong about that, what else is it wrong about?



ho.
lee.
crap.

I just read through that link and that guy provides more misinterpretation and stupid assumptions drawn out of of scientific observation and theories than I have ever seen in my life. I'm halfway down his first page of evidence and can refute every single point he makes...easily.


but this one is my favorite:

2 - Solar neutrinos. The sun is emitting hardly any neutrinos. This, coupled with the fact that the sun is shrinking, points to a recently created sun.—p. 12.

IANAPP...OW...YIA (I am not a particle physicist...oh wait...yes I am). I can only assume that he jumps to the conclusion that the sun is not emmitting very many neutrinos from one or maybe two places. a) we don't observe many neutrinos. This is because neutrinos interact only via the weak force, which as its name indicates, is pretty damn weak. they can pass through the earth undetected with ease. Any neutrino detector can only detect a minute fraction of them. b) even taking this into account (which we can) we observe that the sun is only emitting 1/3 of the neutrinos we expect. BUT WAIT...this is the kicker. Now, we know that neutrinos come in 3 flavors. Early detectors could only detect one flavor. Based on knowledge of nuclear processes we only expected the sun to emit one flavor of neutrino. so what happened to the other 2/3s of the sample. Turns out, neutrinos are not massless as we thought, which means that they can spontaneously change flavors. This has been observed, published, and confirmed. This is now FACT. the solar neutrino 'problem' really isn't a problem at all...it just pointed to an error in our understanding of neutrinos. But I like how he completely ignores these facts because they don't support his theory.

[OhU1]

To each his own. What's harder to believe? That the universe started from a big bang? Where did the big bang come from? Or, that there actually is a supreme being and that the universe has some intelligent design to it, and that we were created for a purpose? I choose to believe the later because one day each of us will die.

You choose your beliefs, and I'll choose mine. Only time will tell? :D

I always wonder why it is required that a person believe anything. Why would a deity who knew everything possibility care, or be so insecure, as to care what anyone so humble a creature as man thought or believed?

I no longer believe in Santa Claus. Can I prove there is no Santa Claus? No. Same with God. But as western religion is based on faith then the proof is not what I'm supposed to look for anyway.

The part about having to explain where the big bang came from and not being able to explain it except attributing it to a God is the classic logical fallacy of an "argument from ignorance". I.E. the proof is because we can't explain it. Also, adding God to the equation does not get us any closer to an answer on the question of origins in a logical sense because then the natural question is "where did God come from?" An unanswerable question.

The other part of the post seems to me to be the standard "fire insurance" argument. Better to be safe and wrong than wrong and poked in the *** by the Devil's pitchfork for all eternity.

[OklahomaRed]

Actually the vast majority of the world's inhabitants believe in one form of religion or the other. Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Budhist, Hinduism, etc. Even the ancient civilizations believed in supreme beings. The Greeks & Romans had one supreme being that ruled over the other gods? O

Of course, the alternative is just living & dieing. If that's the case then lets drink, party, have as much sex, and party some more. Let's only answer to our own conscious and do our thing. No big deal. I'm not trying to convert you. I'm also not saying that parts of the Bible are not difficult to interpret; however, to date it has been a pretty accurate predictor of the future.

Second, you have to realize that the writers of the Bible were human, and the time period they wrote it, they did not have the same knowledge base we do. With that being said, the more knowledge we scientificially produce, the more we begin to realize that we are only beginning to scratch the surface of the amazing things such as DNA, biogenomics, etc. that you are asking me to believe happened by accident?

Which one of us is grasping? I don't have a crystal ball, but even if I did, that would only prove that you believe in spirituality, but then refuse to believe in a supreme being? :confused:

[mdklatt]

Actually the vast majority of the world's inhabitants believe in one form of religion or the other. Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Budhist, Hinduism, etc. Even the ancient civilizations believed in supreme beings.

So why do all these religions focus on the differences instead of the similarities? Doesn't it make sense that the truth is where they all converge?

[mdklatt]

Second, you have to realize that the writers of the Bible were human, and the time period they wrote it, they did not have the same knowledge base we do.

But I thought the Bible was handed down by God and not subject to human ingorance and fallibility?

[OklahomaRed]

So why do all these religions focus on the differences instead of the similarities? Doesn't it make sense that the truth is where they all converge?


I agree. The world would definitely be a much better place if we focused on our similiarities versus our differences. :)

[Jerk]

you guys are just wasting breath and getting no where. You'd be better of debating on what kind of peanut butter to spread on your waffles. At least you'd get somewhere. People either believe in God or they don't- no one is going to convince anyone on a message board.

[OklahomaRed]

But I thought the Bible was handed down by God and not subject to human ingorance and fallibility?

It is. The issues become in getting hung up on interpretation with such things as the one day versus a thousand years. When you are talking about the creator of the universe, trying to measure Him with time is just dumb.

What I try to focus on is the important stuff that effects me. I'm not going to argue with you about the stuff that you could argue for an eternity, and still not come to any agreement.

You ask me to prove that the world is only 7,000 years old versus millions, or even billions of years old? Prove to me that it's a billion years old? It's all subject to conjecture.

:pop:

[OklahomaRed]

you guys are just wasting breath and getting no where. You'd be better of debating on what kind of peanut butter to spread on your waffles. At least you'd get somewhere. People either believe in God or they don't- no one is going to convince anyone on a message board.


You put peanut butter on your waffles? :confused:

Crunchy or smooth? :D

[mdklatt]

You put peanut butter on your waffles? :confused:


That sounds pretty good.

[yermom]

Jerk, the problem isn't whether or not someone believes in god, it's how they deal with people that don't share the same beliefs

personally, i don't care what you do in your house or church, for the most part, but leave me out of it. don't push laws on everyone else based on your faith. this is what we gripe about the ROPers for

if you want rules based on your religion, then follow them in addition to the government's laws, make your kids follow them, leave me out of it

[OklahomaRed]

Jerk, the problem isn't whether or not someone believes in god, it's how they deal with people that don't share the same beliefs

personally, i don't care what you do in your house or church, for the most part, but leave me out of it. don't push laws on everyone else based on your faith. this is what we gripe about the ROPers for

if you want rules based on your religion, then follow them in addition to the government's laws, make your kids follow them, leave me out of it


Yup !! I agree totally. However, what scares me is the fact that the pendulum has swung 180 degrees and now the extremist on the left are trying to do the very same thing and force their "goofy" lifestyle on me. At a minimum, they are trying to legislate their legitimacy and ask me to support their lifestyle with higher taxes and the government looking over my shoulder.

:pop:

[crawfish]

Wow, this thing is still going? I'm not able to post much today, but I do want to add a little bit based on the last page.

In a nutshell - and I say this as a believer that the bible is God's inspired word - the fundamentalist view of the bible is completely unsupportable. There are just too many ways to rip that point of view to shreds. For example, on what day was Jesus crucified? Bible sources don't agree. And to be totally honest, they don't have to.

A lot of these arguments, from a Christian AND secular side, deal with the question, "what does it mean for a book to be God-inspired?" Does it mean that God guided the hand of the person writing the book, essentially using that person as a vessel to put God's own words into print? Or does it mean that God chose a person to be the writer of the words that He wanted put down? The differences are subtle but significant.

For the former, you'd assume that since God knew everything, the words that came out would explain things exactly as they were. All historical recounting would be 100% accurate. All natural occurrences would be 100% verifiable. All would be absolutely true because the writer would know it all. Alternatively, if all is NOT 100% accurate, that would mean either a) God wasn't perfect and did NOT know all, or b) God didn't write it. There is no middle ground here.

For the latter, however, we assume that the person writes what they know, heard through their own ears, in their own words. In this case, the person is NOT privy to unknown information; they simply write things down as they understand them to be. They are inspired to write the stories that God feels are representative of the message He wants to relate. I'm not really talking metaphor here - that takes us into an entirely new direction, IMO one that essentially removes any coherent message from the Bible. No, these are more morality tales, told to relate some story that demonstrates the nature of God, man, and the relationship between the two. Most times, an understanding of the culture of the author will make the message even more meaningful, and answer most of our questions about it. Debunking this method of interpretation is more difficult.

I'm not trying to downplay the accuracy of the Bible at all. I believe it is a remarkable book, written over 1000 years by multiple authors with a remarkable internal consistency. Conspicuously, it manages to avoid many of the "silly" errors of other writings of its time and later - including religious texts. It sends a message more inline with reality, as well.

Lastly, I want to say that belief (or disbelief) in any of the above is NOT a "salvation issue".

Thanks for all who've added to this thread. I've enjoyed reading it. Special thanks to those others who've made fun of Elton John. ;)

[mdklatt]

It is. The issues become in getting hung up on interpretation with such things as the one day versus a thousand years. When you are talking about the creator of the universe, trying to measure Him with time is just dumb.

What I try to focus on is the important stuff that effects me. I'm not going to argue with you about the stuff that you could argue for an eternity, and still not come to any agreement.

You ask me to prove that the world is only 7,000 years old versus millions, or even billions of years old? Prove to me that it's a billion years old? It's all subject to conjecture.


It's not just the age of the earth that's in question, but everything else in the Bible. If any of it is factually incorrect or subject to interpretation, then we have to be skeptical of all of it. I'm not saying everything in the Bible is wrong, but how can we be sure what's wrong and what's right? If the story of Creation is metaphorical or sujbect to the vagaries of translation, then maybe the story of Jesus is, too.

[Mjcpr]

I'm not able to post much today

That settles it, there is a god.

[crawfish]

You'd be better of debating on what kind of peanut butter to spread on your waffles.

You just can't help spreading the controversy, can you. :mad:

[crawfish]

That settles it, there is a god.

Dang negspek limits. :mad:

[mdklatt]

For the latter, however, we assume that the person writes what they know, heard through their own ears, in their own words. In this case, the person is NOT privy to unknown information; they simply write things down as they understand them to be. They are inspired to write the stories that God feels are representative of the message He wants to relate.

Were the people that decided which writings would make up the Bible also divinely inspired?

[mdklatt]

Yup !! I agree totally. However, what scares me is the fact that the pendulum has swung 180 degrees and now the extremist on the left are trying to do the very same thing and force their "goofy" lifestyle on me.

How?

[Jerk]

Jerk, the problem isn't whether or not someone believes in god, it's how they deal with people that don't share the same beliefs

personally, i don't care what you do in your house or church, for the most part, but leave me out of it. don't push laws on everyone else based on your faith. this is what we gripe about the ROPers for

if you want rules based on your religion, then follow them in addition to the government's laws, make your kids follow them, leave me out of it

That's the same way I feel about guns. I don't care if you own them or not, or how you shoot them- sideways gangsta style or like a Navy SEAL. Just so long as you don't force me to have them or not have them.

See! I'm more libertarian than you think I am.

[crawfish]

Were the people that decided which writings would make up the Bible also divinely inspired?

NOW you're asking the right questions. :)

I believe yes. I don't believe the authors themselves knew that that they were writing inspired material.

[mdklatt]

NOW you're asking the right questions. :)

I believe yes. I don't believe the authors themselves knew that that they were writing inspired material.

With all this divine inspiration going around, how do we know people like Muhammed or Joseph Smith weren't also divinely inspired?

[crawfish]

With all this divine inspiration going around, how do we know people like Muhammed or Joseph Smith weren't also divinely inspired?

To answer properly, THAT question is going to take more time than I have.

However, the gist is that I'm looking for a consistent message...and they manage to be inconsistent with those before them.

[olevetonahill]

Were the people that decided which writings would make up the Bible also divinely inspired?
If I remember correctly The bible was compiled in the 4th or 5th century , By the founders or whatever of the Catholic church , Some books were included some were not , See the Apocrapha (sp )
So im still waiting on My lolipop

[Scott D]

If I remember correctly The bible was compiled in the 4th or 5th century , By the founders or whatever of the Catholic church , Some books were included some were not , See the Apocrapha (sp )
So im still waiting on My lolipop

that's blasphemous, and you don't get it in addition to being wrong

[JohnnyMack]

Dang negspek limits. :mad:

I got him for you.

[Mixer!]

http://img370.imageshack.us/img370/8919/threadlockeryy9.jpg

[Okieflyer]

The concept of Hell makes no sense in the overall "plan" laid out in the Bible. If the whole idea of mankind was to commune with God, why would God ever destroy mankind? God would then be right back where He started.

Let me ask a further question. You seem to be fairly certain that you will continue to exist after death, but do you believe that you existed before birth?

God gives you the choice. He didn't want a bunch of Robots. You must choose him by your own free will. You make the choice, not God.

And to answer your last question...No.


One quick question. you state that there will be tears and sadness for those who refused the gift of eternity. Suppose you are wrong? I'm not saying you are, but any reasonable person must take into account the chance that what they assume to be true may be wrong. Suppose that there is either no God, or that the true god is a different God or Gods who isn't so forgiving. Wouldn't you feel pretty jipped, assuming you could feel after death, to learn that everything you dedicated your life to turned out not to be true? would you be OK with that? Again, I'm just playing the what if game here because I can't say whether you are right or wrong (and I posit that with any degree of precision, you cannot either...thats the kicker about faith). But I'm just curious.

Why would I feel jipped? How would you know you've been jipped? If you have no soul, then what difference would it possibly make? You or I wouldn't be around to say "I told you so, you should have fornicated a lot more my friend". I guess you think someone will be there to tell you "good job dude, for not falling for that crap?"


I can't believe we're hung up on time again. Go check out Einstein's "General Theory of Relativity" or Stephen Hawkins book " The Universe In A Nutshell". These will explain how time is meaningless except to the observer. If no one was here to observe the creation, then a day is irrelavent.


Re: I wish Dean would say this thread needs to GO!

Yeah I sure hate when theadist push their threads on other people! ;)

[Stoop Dawg]

I'm not trying to downplay the accuracy of the Bible at all. I believe it is a remarkable book, written over 1000 years by multiple authors with a remarkable internal consistency. Conspicuously, it manages to avoid many of the "silly" errors of other writings of its time and later - including religious texts. It sends a message more inline with reality, as well.

Excellent post as always, Craw.

You guys touched on this later in the thread, but I went back and quoted this part anyway. I don't find it all that remarkable that the Bible is relatively internally consistent given the fact that its contents were hand-picked specifically to convey a more consistent message. There were many other writings from the same time period that were not included precisely because they were not consistent with whatever selection criteria was being used.

[Stoop Dawg]

However, the gist is that I'm looking for a consistent message...and they manage to be inconsistent with those before them.

Don't the Jews dismiss the New Testament for this very reason?

[Stoop Dawg]

God gives you the choice. He didn't want a bunch of Robots. You must choose him by your own free will. You make the choice, not God.

I think I didn't phrase the question well.

As I understand it, the Bible lays out the following "grand plan":

1. God is alone in Heaven. Maybe there are some angels?
2. God isn't happy with the "robot" angels who have no free will (more questions here, but we'll skip it)
3. God creates Earth and mankind - primarily for companionship.
4. Earth exists for some undetermined period of time. Man chooses sides.
5. God destroys the Earth. Those who chose God go to heaven as angels. Those who did not go to Hell.

Now what? God is right back where He started.

[Stoop Dawg]

If no one was here to observe the creation, then a day is irrelavent.

Then why was time mentioned in the Bible? If it was meaningless - or worse, confusing - why wasn't it simply left it out?

[Stoop Dawg]

So im still waiting on My lolipop

I got yer lolipop right here.....

;)

[Stoop Dawg]

If I remember correctly The bible was compiled in the 4th or 5th century , By the founders or whatever of the Catholic church , Some books were included some were not , See the Apocrapha (sp )
So im still waiting on My lolipop

An interesting link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_canon

[olevetonahill]

I got yer lolipop right here.....

;)
There ya go perverting a perfectly worthless thread :eek:
Good jorb :D

[Chuck Bao]

you guys are just wasting breath and getting no where. You'd be better of debating on what kind of peanut butter to spread on your waffles. At least you'd get somewhere. People either believe in God or they don't- no one is going to convince anyone on a message board.

Heh! Well said.

This is just like all those political threads. ;)

[Ike]

God gives you the choice. He didn't want a bunch of Robots. You must choose him by your own free will. You make the choice, not God.

And to answer your last question...No.



Why would I feel jipped? How would you know you've been jipped? If you have no soul, then what difference would it possibly make? You or I wouldn't be around to say "I told you so, you should have fornicated a lot more my friend". I guess you think someone will be there to tell you "good job dude, for not falling for that crap?"


nope. I really don't care much what happens after I die...but way to not consider all the cases where you could be wrong. I meant for the excersise to go a little deeper. Suppose you die, you find your soul is eternal, but the supreme being is that of some other religon and you get cast down into hell anyway, despite your leading a good life. I don't know about you, but if I had devoted my life to some religon and this happened, I'd be pretty ****ed off.



I can't believe we're hung up on time again. Go check out Einstein's "General Theory of Relativity" or Stephen Hawkins book " The Universe In A Nutshell". These will explain how time is meaningless except to the observer. If no one was here to observe the creation, then a day is irrelavent.

umm, its the special theory of relativity. And its not quite that time is meaningless except to the observer. Its that there is no universal concept of time, and that time only has meaning once a frame of reference is chosen. The observer does not have to witness creation to have a reference point in relation to creation, since time is treated as a 4th dimension. It seems subtle, but it changes the meaning significantly.

[Okieflyer]

I think I didn't phrase the question well.

As I understand it, the Bible lays out the following "grand plan":

1. God is alone in Heaven. Maybe there are some angels?
2. God isn't happy with the "robot" angels who have no free will (more questions here, but we'll skip it)
3. God creates Earth and mankind - primarily for companionship.
4. Earth exists for some undetermined period of time. Man chooses sides.
5. God destroys the Earth. Those who chose God go to heaven as angels. Those who did not go to Hell.

Now what? God is right back where He started.

2. Angels do have free will. (See lucifer)
5. Those who choose God do not go to heaven as Angels.


Then why was time mentioned in the Bible? If it was meaningless - or worse, confusing - why wasn't it simply left it out?

I don't know, maybe it was just to confuse you. ;)


umm, its the special theory of relativity.

Sorry about that , you right!


And its not quite that time is meaningless except to the observer. Its that there is no universal concept of time, and that time only has meaning once a frame of reference is chosen. The observer does not have to witness creation to have a reference point in relation to creation, since time is treated as a 4th dimension. It seems subtle, but it changes the meaning significantly.

I'm not a creationist so to speak. I do believe in the Creation. But once again I don't know what that "one day" means. Was it exactly 24 hours? Or was it 23 hours and 32 minutes then god took a 28 minute rest? It's about ridulous an arguement as I've ever heard. It doesn't matter. You just said it too that "time only has meaning once a frame of reference is chosen". How do you know what reference was chosen? Was it one revolution of the Earth? Maybe it was just a day in one the other 11 dimensions (If you like string theory). Heck I don't know and it doesn't really matter to me.

[mdklatt]

God gives you the choice. He didn't want a bunch of Robots. You must choose him by your own free will. You make the choice, not God.


But if you make the wrong choice you get sent to Hell. That's not really much of a choice, is it? Why does God need to use coercion?

[OklahomaRed]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15750601/

How do you post a link? Anyway, this article talks about continuing scientific discovery, and that they think the universe is 13.7 billion years old. Wonderful. I think it's actually older than that. Right? You get into that chicken versus the egg thing. It's hard for us to put our minds around the idea that there is no beginning, and no end. The Bible states that God says He is the alpha and the omega (the beginning and the end). The more we learn, the more I believe in God. The more I believe in God, the more I believe that He created us for the very relationship (hard to understand a God that big being lonely), but the very relationship Genesis talks about.

JMO. Hope we have a great game down in Waco. Hope you guys have a great weekend. I'm going to get out of this thread since we're starting to get redundant. :)

[Jerk]

But if you make the wrong choice you get sent to Hell. That's not really much of a choice, is it? Why does God need to use coercion?


Not all Christians believe in the traditional view of Hell. Many believe it is a choice between eternal life or death (2nd death at Judgement). You can read all you want here....the proof is over-whelming

http://www.angelfire.com/ar/lovegod/

For any fellow Christians who would like to "straighten me out." Don't even try...just read the link. If you throw up some verse, and say "Hey Jerk, what about this?" I'm just going to refer you to the link because it all has been answered. This guy left nothing un-turned or over-looked.

[Okieflyer]

JMO. Hope we have a great game down in Waco. Hope you guys have a great weekend. I'm going to get out of this thread since we're starting to get redundant. :)

Yes it is, but good post!


Great link Jerk!
I do know other credable arguments on the other side. However, I thought this guy really did his home work here. I don't think it real critical to believe in a literal "Lake of fire". Because I think it is shameful to use that kind of Fear to try and bring someone to Christ.
That goes under the "Not fear filled, but tear filled" column.

[Stoop Dawg]

2. Angels do have free will. (See lucifer)


Okay, I'm with you. Then why did God create mankind?

[Okieflyer]

Okay, I'm with you. Then why did God create mankind?

Not a bad question. All can tell you is what I believe is based on what the bible says. I know that someone else may have a better answer.

God said he wanted to make someone like himself to fellowship with. Why he would want to do that, I don't know. What is the difference between Angels and Mankind? I would have to research that more.

[Scott D]

2. Angels do have free will. (See lucifer)

that seems to depend on what dogma you subscribe to. Another school of thought was that Lucifer had no choice in the matter, God wired him differently with the express intent of fulfilling the particular destiny that he took.

[OhU1]

How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

If this thread is any indication...maybe Elton John has a point ;)