Official Religion Discussion Thread

[Felix Culpa]

I feel like rewriting the Bible, but then I'd have to claim myself as a prophet and literally add new stuff, that contradicts the rest. But I'd like to rewrite it, so it makes sense.

[Mehmani]

Err... how many people' date=' total, wrote the Bible? Because that kind of shows they were all idiots, because the contradictions that occur within the Bible, iirc, were between books.

[/quote']

 

The Bible does not contradict itself, it harmonizes. Everything that was contradicting was pulled out; the Apocrypha and such.

 

So the Bible had contradictions but the men who compiled it hid them?

 

Sounds like it.

 

No. Those books that contradicted what the real Bible taught were taken out and seen as non-canonical. Like oral tradition: if it contradicted what the Bible taught, then it is to be seen as not authoritative. Some of these books were seen as Biblical, but after examination it was seen that they could not be a part of the Bible because they contradicted what the rest of it taught.

Well, even so, the core ideas of the New Testament are contradicted by, say, the Book of Revelation. To say nothing of the drastic differences between the Old and New Testaments.

 

Not really, the book of Revelation is actually repeating what the rest of the epistles were saying: the wicked will be judged on earth and on that Day, the righteous will be blessed forever and ever, and that Jesus Christ is Lord and God of all. Also, there's going to be drastic differences between the OT and NT, that's what God promised =/ He says in the OT that He was going to make a new covenant that will be different than the first. And although the promises are different, the purpose is the same, the religion is the same, and the God is the same.

 

Yes, but are dragons with multiple heads going to eat prostitutes?

[Silas Angel]

Err... how many people' date=' total, wrote the Bible? Because that kind of shows they were all idiots, because the contradictions that occur within the Bible, iirc, were between books.

[/quote']

 

The Bible does not contradict itself, it harmonizes. Everything that was contradicting was pulled out; the Apocrypha and such.

 

So the Bible had contradictions but the men who compiled it hid them?

 

Sounds like it.

 

No. Those books that contradicted what the real Bible taught were taken out and seen as non-canonical. Like oral tradition: if it contradicted what the Bible taught, then it is to be seen as not authoritative. Some of these books were seen as Biblical, but after examination it was seen that they could not be a part of the Bible because they contradicted what the rest of it taught.

Well, even so, the core ideas of the New Testament are contradicted by, say, the Book of Revelation. To say nothing of the drastic differences between the Old and New Testaments.

 

Not really, the book of Revelation is actually repeating what the rest of the epistles were saying: the wicked will be judged on earth and on that Day, the righteous will be blessed forever and ever, and that Jesus Christ is Lord and God of all. Also, there's going to be drastic differences between the OT and NT, that's what God promised =/ He says in the OT that He was going to make a new covenant that will be different than the first. And although the promises are different, the purpose is the same, the religion is the same, and the God is the same.

 

Yes, but are dragons with multiple heads going to eat prostitutes?

 

=/ If you're talking about Revelation, it's symbolic. If you're referring to something else, I have no clue what you mean.

[Mehmani]

Err... how many people' date=' total, wrote the Bible? Because that kind of shows they were all idiots, because the contradictions that occur within the Bible, iirc, were between books.

[/quote']

 

The Bible does not contradict itself, it harmonizes. Everything that was contradicting was pulled out; the Apocrypha and such.

 

So the Bible had contradictions but the men who compiled it hid them?

 

Sounds like it.

 

No. Those books that contradicted what the real Bible taught were taken out and seen as non-canonical. Like oral tradition: if it contradicted what the Bible taught, then it is to be seen as not authoritative. Some of these books were seen as Biblical, but after examination it was seen that they could not be a part of the Bible because they contradicted what the rest of it taught.

Well, even so, the core ideas of the New Testament are contradicted by, say, the Book of Revelation. To say nothing of the drastic differences between the Old and New Testaments.

 

Not really, the book of Revelation is actually repeating what the rest of the epistles were saying: the wicked will be judged on earth and on that Day, the righteous will be blessed forever and ever, and that Jesus Christ is Lord and God of all. Also, there's going to be drastic differences between the OT and NT, that's what God promised =/ He says in the OT that He was going to make a new covenant that will be different than the first. And although the promises are different, the purpose is the same, the religion is the same, and the God is the same.

 

Yes, but are dragons with multiple heads going to eat prostitutes?

 

=/ If you're talking about Revelation, it's symbolic. If you're referring to something else, I have no clue what you mean.

 

Christians cherry-pick the Bible. They say that Adam & Eve are theologically true but other parts are completely real. It's a big joke.

[Guest Supreme Gamesmaster]

Well' date=' for me, any valid religion needs three important points:

>)It doesn't charge money for salvation, like Scientology and the pre-Reformation Catholic Church.

>)Besides discussion groups centered around the religion, there is no "faith leader." This "faith leader" inevitably becomes a "king" or "CEO."

>)It doesn't use "being part of the faith" as a prerequisite for salvation. Buddhism and Taoism qualify here; Christianity and especially Calvinism do not.

 

If any of the above conditions are met, a "religion" instead becomes a "political entity" and winds up causing more harm than good.

 

Discuss and contribute?

[/quote']

 

It needs to prove this "salvation" actually exists?

 

No, I'm just looking at your post from the wrong standpoint, I apologize.

 

Err... yeah, those all seem like valid points. But what religion(s) fall(s) under those points?

Buddhism, Wicca, Taoism, Shinto, Red-Letter Christianity, the Religious Society of Friends, Unitarian Universalism, and a ton of others I can't be bothered to look up.

 

Mind you, I won't follow any of those religions (except UUism, which doesn't actually have any creed beyond seven principles that are mostly things like "the right to the responsible search for truth and meaning" and "respect for the interdependent web of all existence"), I just won't bother attacking them, since they're philosophies rather than political entities and need to be given due weight.

 

Err... how many people' date=' total, wrote the Bible? Because that kind of shows they were all idiots, because the contradictions that occur within the Bible, iirc, were between books.

[/quote']

 

The Bible does not contradict itself, it harmonizes. Everything that was contradicting was pulled out; the Apocrypha and such.

 

So the Bible had contradictions but the men who compiled it hid them?

 

Sounds like it.

 

No. Those books that contradicted what the real Bible taught were taken out and seen as non-canonical. Like oral tradition: if it contradicted what the Bible taught, then it is to be seen as not authoritative. Some of these books were seen as Biblical, but after examination it was seen that they could not be a part of the Bible because they contradicted what the rest of it taught.

Well, even so, the core ideas of the New Testament are contradicted by, say, the Book of Revelation. To say nothing of the drastic differences between the Old and New Testaments.

 

Not really, the book of Revelation is actually repeating what the rest of the epistles were saying: the wicked will be judged on earth and on that Day, the righteous will be blessed forever and ever, and that Jesus Christ is Lord and God of all. Also, there's going to be drastic differences between the OT and NT, that's what God promised =/ He says in the OT that He was going to make a new covenant that will be different than the first. And although the promises are different, the purpose is the same, the religion is the same, and the God is the same.

 

Also, Calvinists aren't Christian? =P

I was putting the spotlight on the Calvinists.

 

But Jesus spends most of the New Testament saying things about how we should all be merciful and not judge others. Then God comes along and starts judging, making Himself like a hypocrite and a moron.

[MarbleZone]

But Jesus spends most of the New Testament saying things about how we should all be merciful and not judge others. Then God comes along and starts judging' date=' making Himself like a hypocrite and a moron.

[/quote']

 

Or a God. I think it makes sense, trying to look at it from an outside perspective (which, admittedly, isn't easy), both that a preacher would say that and his god would do that. From the preacher's perspective, everyone sins, everyone performs "evil" actions, so nobody is truly apt to play judge. Similarly, a perceived flawless god would be in a position to do so, because He transcends human condition and supposedly does not sin. I think it was a logical trail of thought to be had 2000 years ago, nothing moronic about it and certainly not an exclusive property of the Christian God. Gods has been given the role of judges in many religions.

[Silas Angel]

Err... how many people' date=' total, wrote the Bible? Because that kind of shows they were all idiots, because the contradictions that occur within the Bible, iirc, were between books.

[/quote']

 

The Bible does not contradict itself, it harmonizes. Everything that was contradicting was pulled out; the Apocrypha and such.

 

So the Bible had contradictions but the men who compiled it hid them?

 

Sounds like it.

 

No. Those books that contradicted what the real Bible taught were taken out and seen as non-canonical. Like oral tradition: if it contradicted what the Bible taught, then it is to be seen as not authoritative. Some of these books were seen as Biblical, but after examination it was seen that they could not be a part of the Bible because they contradicted what the rest of it taught.

Well, even so, the core ideas of the New Testament are contradicted by, say, the Book of Revelation. To say nothing of the drastic differences between the Old and New Testaments.

 

Not really, the book of Revelation is actually repeating what the rest of the epistles were saying: the wicked will be judged on earth and on that Day, the righteous will be blessed forever and ever, and that Jesus Christ is Lord and God of all. Also, there's going to be drastic differences between the OT and NT, that's what God promised =/ He says in the OT that He was going to make a new covenant that will be different than the first. And although the promises are different, the purpose is the same, the religion is the same, and the God is the same.

 

Yes, but are dragons with multiple heads going to eat prostitutes?

 

=/ If you're talking about Revelation, it's symbolic. If you're referring to something else, I have no clue what you mean.

 

Christians cherry-pick the Bible. They say that Adam & Eve are theologically true but other parts are completely real. It's a big joke.

 

You're right. Most "Christians" will pick and choose what they like best or what they think about this or that. But really, Revelation wasn't ever meant to be taken literal... =/ It's written the way it is to remind the Jewish audiences of instances in the Old Testament, and therefore give them a much better understanding of what he was trying to write.

 

 

Err... how many people' date=' total, wrote the Bible? Because that kind of shows they were all idiots, because the contradictions that occur within the Bible, iirc, were between books.

[/quote']

 

The Bible does not contradict itself, it harmonizes. Everything that was contradicting was pulled out; the Apocrypha and such.

 

So the Bible had contradictions but the men who compiled it hid them?

 

Sounds like it.

 

No. Those books that contradicted what the real Bible taught were taken out and seen as non-canonical. Like oral tradition: if it contradicted what the Bible taught, then it is to be seen as not authoritative. Some of these books were seen as Biblical, but after examination it was seen that they could not be a part of the Bible because they contradicted what the rest of it taught.

Well, even so, the core ideas of the New Testament are contradicted by, say, the Book of Revelation. To say nothing of the drastic differences between the Old and New Testaments.

 

Not really, the book of Revelation is actually repeating what the rest of the epistles were saying: the wicked will be judged on earth and on that Day, the righteous will be blessed forever and ever, and that Jesus Christ is Lord and God of all. Also, there's going to be drastic differences between the OT and NT, that's what God promised =/ He says in the OT that He was going to make a new covenant that will be different than the first. And although the promises are different, the purpose is the same, the religion is the same, and the God is the same.

 

Also, Calvinists aren't Christian? =P

I was putting the spotlight on the Calvinists.

 

But Jesus spends most of the New Testament saying things about how we should all be merciful and not judge others. Then God comes along and starts judging, making Himself like a hypocrite and a moron.

 

Yay! ^_^ Spotlight! I'm surprised anyone here knows about Calvinism, honestly. =) You're more informed than most churchgoers =P

 

And not really, Jesus actually tells us to judge, just not to judge hypocritically.

 

"Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment." -John 7:24

 

Any time Christ or Paul said not to judge, they were saying in the context, "Who are you to judge them when you are equally as wrong?" So they were speaking against hypocrites in Matthew 7:1-3 and Romans 2. But Christians are to judge and expose wicked acts and lies.

 

And Marble has got a point. Because God has a right to judge, He will judge.

[Dark]

>)It doesn't charge money for salvation, like Scientology and the pre-Reformation Catholic Church.

>)Besides discussion groups centered around the religion, there is no "faith leader." This "faith leader" inevitably becomes a "king" or "CEO."

>)It doesn't use "being part of the faith" as a prerequisite for salvation. Buddhism and Taoism qualify here; Christianity and especially Calvinism do not.

 

Pastafarianism.

 

1.) You don't need money to enter the religion. It's free of charge, and you get a free bowl of ramen noodles upon entry. But I chose baked ziti instead.

2.) Faith leader? No, we only have faith in the FSM. No one tells us how to pray or how to follow the religion, so long as we believe in the FSM.

3.) No one is being salvated. So, I'm pretty sure you don't need faith to be salvated.

 

So I guess Pastafarianism is a valid religion, hmm?

[Junk Raver]

Athiest, i dont have time for religion, im out working, drinking myself stupid, raving & having fun timez with men, good times!!!

 

I dont have anything against religious folk either, even said homophobes, i just get on with my day to day life ^_^

[Dark]

i dont have time for religion

 

You don't need time to follow a religion, unless said religion requires you to pray.

[Junk Raver]

And its boring as crap, cannot be bothered with church, praying an all that jazz, would rather party down with vodka an absinthe :P

[DARKPLANT RISING]

I'm Atheist. For me, the belief of evolution makes more sense. But the golden rule, and all those, I respect.

 

Just my opinion.

[wero-vasto]

And its boring as crap' date=' cannot be bothered with church, praying an all that jazz, would rather party down with vodka an absinthe :P

[/quote']

 

The same here xD

Still I love to discuss about it XD

[Silas Angel]

Prayer is actually the best part of my day. =) God is nowhere near boring.

 

I'm just curious, I've been around the forums for some time now and I've only noticed Christians, Agnostics, and Atheists, and maybe one Buddhist I knew from a long time ago. Are there any other beliefs here?

[Dark]

Prayer is actually the best part of my day. =) God is nowhere near boring.

 

I'm just curious, I've been around the forums for some time now and I've only noticed Christians, Agnostics, and Atheists, and maybe one Buddhist I knew from a long time ago. Are there any other beliefs here?

 

Neither "agnostics" nor "atheists" should be capitalized. I do apologize, but it annoys me way too much.

 

I've never met a single person on the internet who has openly said they were Jewish. :/

[Silas Angel]

Prayer is actually the best part of my day. =) God is nowhere near boring.

 

I'm just curious' date=' I've been around the forums for some time now and I've only noticed Christians, Agnostics, and Atheists, and maybe one Buddhist I knew from a long time ago. Are there any other beliefs here?[/i']

 

Neither "agnostics" nor "atheists" should be capitalized. I do apologize, but it annoys me way too much.

 

I've never met a single person on the internet who has openly said they were Jewish. :/

 

You're right =/ I didn't even think of that... I've met only one Jew online and that was on Omegle, but that was it =/

 

Also, why don't you ever quote? You just put what they said in italics =/

[Dark]

Omegle, I remember those days. But yeah, I've never met any declared Muslim outside of like two or three. I think internet racism is getting a lot out of hand, but whatever.

 

When I am quoting more than one post, I use multiquotes. When I am only quoting a portion of a post (my previous post was a bad example, but I was only referring to your second paragraph), I use italics. And generally, when I quote an entire post, I either break it up into sections of italics or quote and do bold edits.

[Eury]

I'm just curious' date=' I've been around the forums for some time now and I've only noticed Christians, Agnostics, and Atheists, and maybe one Buddhist I knew from a long time ago. Are there any other beliefs here?

[/quote']

 

I'm a Luciferian and Marisa Kirisame-ze, iirc, is Jewish.

[Darth Duelist]

Religion is what guides people' date=' half of you are stuck on here with no life because you've had nothing to guide you. Although I'm not a religious fanatic I do believe that religion can truly help people in many different ways, regardless of whether there truly is a god or religious figurehead of some sort. KI'MOUT. BYE.

[/quote']

That is the TRUE meaning of religon.... :)

 

It doesnt matter what you are: christian, muslim, jewish, etc....

Its stupid people like Hitler and his German Nazis that want supremacy of one religon.

Who cares wat religon you are, as long as you arent forced to practice that religon!

 

HEIL HITLER or HAIL HITLER!!! no just kidding screw hitler!

[Darth Duelist]

Religion is what guides people' date=' half of you are stuck on here with no life because you've had nothing to guide you. Although I'm not a religious fanatic I do believe that religion can truly help people in many different ways, regardless of whether there truly is a god or religious figurehead of some sort. KI'MOUT. BYE.

[/quote']

That is the TRUE meaning of religon.... :)

 

It doesnt matter what you are: christian, muslim, jewish, etc....

Its stupid people like Hitler and his German Nazis that want supremacy of one religon.

Who cares wat religon you are, as long as you arent forced to practice that religon!

 

HEIL HITLER or HAIL HITLER!!! no just kidding screw hitler!

[Darth Duelist]

Religion is what guides people' date=' half of you are stuck on here with no life because you've had nothing to guide you. Although I'm not a religious fanatic I do believe that religion can truly help people in many different ways, regardless of whether there truly is a god or religious figurehead of some sort. KI'MOUT. BYE.

[/quote']

That is the TRUE meaning of religon.... :)

 

It doesnt matter what you are: christian, muslim, jewish, etc....

Its stupid people like Hitler and his German Nazis that want supremacy of one religon.

Who cares wat religon you are, as long as you arent forced to practice that religon!

 

HEIL HITLER or HAIL HITLER!!! no just kidding screw hitler!

[Eury]

Religion is what guides people' date=' half of you are stuck on here with no life because you've had nothing to guide you. Although I'm not a religious fanatic I do believe that religion can truly help people in many different ways, regardless of whether there truly is a god or religious figurehead of some sort. KI'MOUT. BYE.

[/quote']

That is the TRUE meaning of religon.... :)

 

It doesnt matter what you are: christian, muslim, jewish, etc....

Its stupid people like Hitler and his German Nazis that want supremacy of one religon.

Who cares wat religon you are, as long as you arent forced to practice that religon!

 

HEIL HITLER or HAIL HITLER!!! no just kidding screw hitler!

 

...you're an idiot. Hitler never wanted supremacy of a religion. He wanted an extermination of a race.

[Eury]

Religion is what guides people' date=' half of you are stuck on here with no life because you've had nothing to guide you. Although I'm not a religious fanatic I do believe that religion can truly help people in many different ways, regardless of whether there truly is a god or religious figurehead of some sort. KI'MOUT. BYE.

[/quote']

That is the TRUE meaning of religon.... :)

 

It doesnt matter what you are: christian, muslim, jewish, etc....

Its stupid people like Hitler and his German Nazis that want supremacy of one religon.

Who cares wat religon you are, as long as you arent forced to practice that religon!

 

HEIL HITLER or HAIL HITLER!!! no just kidding screw hitler!

 

...you're an idiot. Hitler never wanted supremacy of a religion. He wanted an extermination of a race.

[Eury]

Religion is what guides people' date=' half of you are stuck on here with no life because you've had nothing to guide you. Although I'm not a religious fanatic I do believe that religion can truly help people in many different ways, regardless of whether there truly is a god or religious figurehead of some sort. KI'MOUT. BYE.

[/quote']

That is the TRUE meaning of religon.... :)

 

It doesnt matter what you are: christian, muslim, jewish, etc....

Its stupid people like Hitler and his German Nazis that want supremacy of one religon.

Who cares wat religon you are, as long as you arent forced to practice that religon!

 

HEIL HITLER or HAIL HITLER!!! no just kidding screw hitler!

 

...you're an idiot. Hitler never wanted supremacy of a religion. He wanted an extermination of a race.

[Dark]

...you're an idiot. Hitler never wanted supremacy of a religion. He wanted an extermination of a race.

 

He did want a mass extermination of Jewish people, but I don't believe he wanted a Christian world. Then again, I'm not Hitler.