Carried over from
Here, on ES.
========Edit: Insert discussion history==========
Atzel wrote:
... I'm not really sure it's even really religous.. it sounds more like a gimmick of some sort. And it's too clever to be done by really acctual Christian christians.. I mean, c'mon, taking a verse out of the bible and making a breakfast cereal of it? A real christian would just yell at people who would not eat cereals of said ingrediants.
But that could just be my prejudice that religion erodes the mind and reduces the deductive skills and ability to argument anything into "I'M RIGHT, YOU'RE WRONG! GOD WILLS IT!"
Yorik wrote:
BandMan2K wrote:
tacticslion wrote:
Actually, Atzel, you'd be surprised. I'd guess that most people here in the forums either don't know many Christians, or don't know many good ones. At one point I was going to make a nifty long thing about what we DO believe and what some people SAY we believe, but I figure it wouldn't go to well over the forums. So, if you WANT I could tell you what Christian Christians believe, as opposed to, say, legalistic hyper-fundamentalist extremists SAY that Christian Christians believe. Or the libralistic hyper-revisionist extremists. Or any extremists for that matter. Anyway, if you're actually curious, feel free to ask me. If not, don't worry about it.
And Yorik... I know, man. I know. (With me, it's Neverwinter Nights: "THE LIGHT SHALL NEVER FADE!")
I don't think the problem is us not being exposed to Christians. In fact I'd say it's been pretty much due to our own "problematic" experiences with those of the Faith. We could honestly care less if you're a Fundie or actually one of the ones that follow the idea within that Book, as long as you don't go around condemning us to Hell or trying to convert us. That's pretty much all we ask...
...oh and if you decide to get into some form of a debate, don't use the Bible as your Sole piece of proof. If you can show why your positions are good with reputable and diverse evidence, you might actually persuade some of us towards your view on that topic.
Just watch out for those Commie Crazies and you'll do just fine.
Actually, according to the Christian faith, those who aren't Christians do indeed go to Hell. My problem with this (and the reason why I'm a backslid Christian) is that anyone who seeks redemption and all that shit goes on the 'up' elevator, no matter what they did in life. Meaning, say, Hitler could wind up in Heaven if he repented before his death. Now, most Christians are pretty forgiving, but I myself know quite a few people I'd rather see go to Hell in the first place, and I'm pretty much willing to drag them kicking and screaming down there myself to do it.
So when a Christian comes up trying to preach, usually it's because he/she is genuinely worried about your well being, though sometimes you get the annoying extremists and fanatics who gloat about where you're supposedly going (which btw that's where they're headed themselves for doing so). It's kinda like being out in the middle of a foreign country, and just as you're preparing to walk through a field two native men stop you and start speaking to you in their language, which you can't understand. One says "Stop, don't go into that field without a guide! There's a mine field there!" The other says "Stupid idiot, why don't you go walking straight into that field over there and get your ignorant self killed?"
Then I come up from behind and yell at the second dude "I FIND YOUR LACK OF FAITH DISTURBING." and give them a push.
Imp-Chan wrote:
I used to be Christian. In my personal search for answers, however, I gradually lost my respect for Christianity as a religion. I do still believe in Christ as a teacher, a healer, and overall cool dude... just like Buddha, and Mohammed, and Confucious, and many others, some of them even modern. And I still find the Bible to be occasionally a useful tool for sorting my head out... if nothing else, it provides a story of a bunch of people who tried really really hard to be who they thought they should be. I'm one of the few people I know, Christian or otherwise, who has actually read the ENTIRE thing more than once. Like most religious texts that I've read, the value is in what you take from it, rather than being inherent to the text.
However, what I found myself unable to handle with indoctrinated Christianity had little to do with the text or teachings of Christ, but instead was precisely that absolutist concept that if you repent and believe in Christ, you will be assured of an easy afterlife. I believe that this is a gross misinterpretation of the text, inconsistent with the concept of Christ's teachings that is clearly present if you read the entire thing as stories or accounts, rather than picking through it and citing only specific chapters and verses as though they were spiritual legal code. To me, the indoctrinated interpretation, and the subsequent assumptions that go with it, are unnecessarily literal.
Most specifically, the belief in Christ as a savior and the One True Son of God is something that I find to be an abdication of responsibility, not at all in keeping with the rest of the values as they are presented in the New Testament. It was this sticking point which, ultimately, led to my abandoning Christianity as my religious truth. For me, the problem turned out to be the Christians, and the centuries of selective interpretation that they had practiced, far more than what they were supposed to be all about in a historical sense.
It should be noted that this is not in any way an attempt to dictate or persuade others to my point of view, more a sharing of what I personally have found. Other stories of other people's experiences would be more than welcome... but if folks would rather debate the specific points, that probably should happen in the debate board.
^-^'
Edit: Changed one word and much meaning. Points to whoever figures out which.
tacticslion wrote:
Oh, sweet! This turned out oh so very much nicer than I expected.
Impy, I'm quite glad you've read the entire thing! And, yes, I'd agree that far, far too few have, they just accept what they've been taught at face value, instead of actually SEARCHING and THINKING. While I whole-heartedly disagree with your conclusions, I'm very glad you actually thought about it, searching for truth, instead of just going without ever truly believing on your own.
And Yorik, thanks. I really appreciate the words because, coming from someone like me (self-proclaimed hyper-Christian) I couldn't actually make it sound non-preachy. But, yes, you are indeed very correct about what 'Christian' views should be, and how they sometimes are. The more friends I make in life (especially with groups such as role-players and forumers) the harder it becomes to find anyone who actually understands the nature of what Christian views are, much less who don't find themselves often walking on eggshells for no reason, generally either fearing my unending wrath for someone saying 'crap' or hating me for my endless judgementalism, before ever knowing me. So, it's cool to be able to have people say, "Yeah, I've been there, I know what he's talkin' about." regardless of where they're coming from.
And strangely enough, it seems even harder to find anyone with any kind of religious opinion (outside of 'all religion is stupid') in my chosen field: science (espeically physics).
So anyway, it seems that there are beings here that are even cooler than I thought after a couple of years of browsing the forums. Both Christian and non! :D
And now, to completely de-rail the topic, hopefully avoiding debates on it (at least in this particular forum, for, as Ms. Impy said, it belongs in a debate forum), does anyone have the stats for a half-drow? I mean officially. Drow, yes. Humans, elves, half-elves, of course. But half-drow? I mean, they've GOTTA exist. In fiction. Not in real life. I mean, really, I may be an independant fundamental Baptist (which I am), but I'm not THAT crazy... yet.
Also, does anyone have any kind of official looking stats for a quarter-orc, quater-human, half-gnome. The guy is pretty significantly far from being a mongrelfolk, but he's DEFINATELY got a mixed racial heritage. And finally, does anyone know any rules involving elven (human) pregnancy?
Thanks,
~me
Edit: did I just seriously sign this as a letter? I mean, what the heck?
TB wrote:
Yorik wrote:
Actually, according to the Christian faith, those who aren't Christians do indeed go to Hell.
I thought it was that they got sorted by whether they were "just" or "unjust". (In particular from, "when you give a feast, call people who can't pay you back", since you then get that at the "resurrection of the just", which sounds very much like not going to hell. With no mention of being a Christian or not.)
Quote:
My problem with this (and the reason why I'm a backslid Christian) is that anyone who seeks redemption and all that shit goes on the 'up' elevator, no matter what they did in life.
Ah, but "redemption" has to include true repentance, meaning you wouldn't do that again. Meaning who you are now isn't quite the same as who you were then. And I'd think that what happens to you should depend on who you are, not who you were.
tacticslion wrote:
Can't... resist... talking... hrk!
TB, it depends on how you read "just". Generally Christianity today holds the veiw that "the just shall live by faith", and, in fact, that they are justified BY faith (see James' schpeil on Abraham for more). So, often it's viewed as those who are 'just' are made just, NOT by themselves nor who or what they are or have done or can do (because in Isiah, our righteous works are as filthy rags to the Lord), but are justified by the Lord Himself through our faith. Essentially: we got nothin', He got it all, and if we say "True", He says "Good, come on", and that's justification. Some denominational groups add more, some have less to it, some LOOK like they have more or less around it, but that's the essential belief, even in Catholocism, which is one of the most ritual-centered denominations we got.
Oh, and Saturnella: I've never known a religion whose worst part WASN'T it's followers (even if all they did was follow the religion in the first place!). And yes, the elf is definately pregnant. With triplets.
Wrin wrote:
Actually, my main problem with Christianity is that most of the followers seem to be betraying their very faith every damn day. If you ignore the whole crusades thing and the underlying historical mudflinging that can be said of basically any well-established religion, they still worship Jesus more than they do God. What do I think of Jesus? I don't care if he was the son of God, crazy or both: his followers should not be using his message to tell me I'm going to hell whether or not I'm a great person if I don't think their two-thousand year old story is true. Then there's the whole thing about them saying the Bible was written by God (extreme case, but I've heard it often) or contains the words of God. Even if it did at one point, it's been how long? Translated how many times by people who may or may not have understood or cared for the true meanings? How many books are named after the people who wrote them, not the God that some ignorant folks say did it? Grr! Figure out your own religion before you tell me I'm going to hell for not understanding it I say!! < /angry voice >
Code:
if(thread!=NULL)
thread->derail++;
Sorry for continuing the derail, Impy...
Vass wrote:
Wrin wrote:
If you ignore the whole crusades thing and the underlying historical mudflinging that can be said of basically any well-established religion, they still worship Jesus more than they do God.
But they are three-in-one: god the father, jesus the son, and the holy spirit the weird ephemeral thing that should include more alcohol. How can they worship Jesus more than God if he is one and the same?
You're thinking of Christianity more akin to that of
Arianism. Orthodox view, from what I recall, is that all three beings are equal and part of eachother, as described in the
Nicene Creed. I have no idea how much it relates to the crazy subsets of christianity that exist in the US.
Kaz*CheesyDoritoBomb* wrote:
Imp-Chan wrote:
However, I'm also aware that the people I grew up with can't really be considered a fair representative sample. Merely because they preferred to harass and abuse me for my beliefs doesn't mean that every Christian would... really, I'd say the people I met were nothing like real Christians anyways.
Actually thats a pretty close description of all the churchs I've seen in Indiana and heard of from my step mom, from when she was trying out churchs.
Basically here in indiana it breaks down to: those that arn't sure about their spirituality so they mask it behind false zeal, those who are secure and only get affended if you affend them first, and those who don't care and don't want to be preached to.
Yorik wrote:
Imp-Chan wrote:
snipKKK/snip
Those motherfuckers are the reason I'd like to see Stalin elected President, so he can send the whole lot to Siberia.
I adhere to the belief of not discriminating, but rather hating anyone and everyone. Equally. My run-ins with the KKK haven't been pleasant (one incident almost degenerated into a shootout, only they realized that
I have the bigger gun), though thankfully they have been infrequent.
What really gets me riled up is that they use Christianity as an excuse for their actions. Right. Hitler tried that too. Dispite the popular belief, Jesus was Jewish, born in the Middle East, raised in a modern day Islamic country, and so forth.
He did not have blond hair, blue eyes, and white skin. Using a peaceful religion as an excuse for violence is the same thing Bin Ladin and his cronies are doing, and we're shooting at those types right now. What I don't understand is why we don't deal with the current crop of extremists and terrorists being home-grown right now. Hell, they even wear white sheets to better stand out for nighttime snipers.
Christianity states that there is a time for everything, including war and violence - but those two subjects are to be avoided if at all possible, and should be relegated to a last resort measure. I myself am more the type of shoot first, shoot second, shoot some more, and then when everyone's stopped moving open negotiations. I believe that there are many people that urgently need to meet God (and then get on the express Going Down elevator), and that simply locking these types away for life in the hope that they will "repent and be saved" is being far too lenient. I am not a forgiving man, thus I am not as devout a Christian as I should be.
tacticslion wrote:
Well... this is interesting!
I'm surprised by what I started. Sigh... such is the nature of religious discussion I suppose.
Hey, Yorik? Paul wanted some people to go to hell forever too. You know, the Apostle? The guy that wrote half the Bible? Yeah. He stated that he'd willing trade his soul to hell for eternity if only everyone could be saved in the process, but he also felt that certain ones truly deserved the punishment. Specifically he stated that it was those who abused the religion and used it to further their own ends, taking it away from the Christ-message he gave. KKK would fit into that nicely. Thank God that He's a Jew. It shuts so many people up, or shows that they're fools who desire nothing outside of their own brand of hatred, and aren't actually Christian (which is translated to mean "Christ-like") at all. And then there was Jesus. Who pretty much condemned most every single Pharisee He saw. Repeatedly. With a WHIP. Check out Matthew, if you want that story. (Ok, technically it was the money-changers he hit with the whip, but he yelled for quite some time at the pharisees).
Wrin:
Well, it's pretty much like he said, the Three are One... there is no difference between Jesus and God the Father (Who the Isrealites called/call Yaweh, transliterated of course), and the Holy Spirit (who is considered the comforter). The most direct statement of this belief is the Nicean Creed, which is not, ironically, part of the Bible, and therefore cannot be accepted by many non-Catholic denominations (including Baptists of which I am one).
Instead, the belief in the Trinity that became expressly stated in the Nicean Creed was founded in views of prophetic vision (prophecy was not future-telling) of Isaiah when he saw the Messaiah (the Chosen and Annointed One, Who would come to rule Israel, and, ultimately, the whole Earth) in heaven, with God the Father, whom all the Jews knew, and the Spirit of God, which I believe at that point was seen as a dove, though I could be mistaken (it's been a while). Also, Jesus Himself constantly referenced 'The Father' (meaning God the Father) and called Himself the Son, stating at one point 'I and My Father are One'. The Father, you see, wasn't flesh, but was spirit, so could never be seen in the flesh ('spirit' literally means 'the invisible'). Finally, Jesus refered to One who would come AFTER Him, after He was raised from the dead and ascended into heaven. This, the disciples stated, was the Holy Spirit, Who came to help spread the message and actually is the one who 'seals' the believers for eternity by dwelling inside of them, becoming - after a fashion - one with them. It's all much deeper than this, including marraige symbolism and a lot more, but I'm writing WAY too much now anyway. Sorry... it's a passion of mine. And worse because we know? I'm not a priest or anything, but I'm curious what you meant by the statement. I seriously hate to offend people (though it happens), and I hope I did not do so now by explaining some of the source of the belief.
whitaker:
Hey, sounds good to me! "Spare the rod, spoil the child" so the Proverb goes. A large rubber-band-like device that whacks REALLY hard SHOULD get the point across to an adult, in theory, but, then again, there are some REALLY stupid people out there. It may take a while. But I'm sure that makes it even sweeter to you, right?
Impy:
I cannot apologize enough for the treatment of you and all of those in Quaker religion, by those who should have welcomed you as a sister. They are wrong, and highly perverse (not the definition that most use it, but an accurate statement nonetheless). I am sick to my stomach whenever I hear of anything that claims Christianity only to use it as a tool for hatred. It's wrong, and Jesus taught us against it. You, having read the Bible in full, know what it contains, and, yes, there is violence, and a time for it, but hatred of another is NEVER taught. It's foul, it's wrong, and it's shameful that Christianity is used as a shield for evil. Quakers are indeed deeply rooted in Christianity. I personally disagree with the Quaker's philosophy of experiencialism, and their modern leanings toward universalism (I am a fundamentalist), but I understand their origins and roots, and they sure as all get-out are NOT witches, regardless of what they believe. At 'worst', Quakers are extreme spiritualists, which isn't really a bad thing. Technically all Christians are called to a deep level of spiritualism. I think Quakers take it to an extreme, but such is life.
Um... once again, I wrote too much. Please forgive my arrogance in assuming I could answer all your questions and/or statements. I'm just hoping to shed some light and understanding... because as common and prevailant as Christianity is, it doesn't seem to be very well understood... and unfortunately, there seems to be a large number of people who have been hurt or abused by those who masquerade as a Christian (which is supposed to mean 'little Christ'!) or as a Christian group, and I'm just hoping to set the record maybe a little more straight. Yeah, there are a TON of sick people out there, and many of them think they're religious. Many of them ARE religious, but just wrongly so.
And... to make matters JUST that much more confusing: I'm a scientist. A scientist defending a religion often bastardized, abused, and crushed, on a forum board dedicated to a comic whose author freely admits to having tried many major religions and leaving all of them (committing 'mortal sins', as he puts it), because I'm a fan of his work. How wierd. But then again, so is the modern world. Cool. :D
TB wrote:
"I'm my own grandpa."
tacticslion wrote:
Well, it's pretty much like he said, the Three are One... there is no difference between Jesus and God the Father (Who the Isrealites called/call Yaweh, transliterated of course), and the Holy Spirit (who is considered the comforter).
So how does this fit with "I do not my own will, but His that sent me."?
Quote:
Also, Jesus Himself constantly referenced 'The Father' (meaning God the Father) and called Himself the Son, stating at one point 'I and My Father are One'.
It's also recorded that he prayed for all who would beleive on him to be one "even as we are one", and there's a place that says "he that plants and he that waters are one". So since we can be "one" in the same sense that Jesus and God are "one", it can't mean "no difference" or "the same entity". (There are also *no* places where it says "God the Son", to go with your "God the Father".)
IIRC, the "trinity" is a church tradition dating from slightly after the last of the books in the Bible was written.
Tossrock wrote:
Karl Marx wrote:
Religion is the opiate of the masses.
In specific regard to Christianity, I've yet to see a single good response to the Epicurean paradox that isn't a dressed up form of "God works in mysterious ways." What a fat load of shit.
KirimaNagi wrote:
I object to the need for a blood sacrifice for salvation.
I also object to the notions that sprinkling/dipping in water can forgive sins, or that special words/prayers and rituals (= secret words and handshakes) are needed for admission through the Pearly Gates. I mean, come on now -- this is Heaven we are talking about, not a frat house.
But most of all I object to the idea that you can get someone else to do your dirty work. Although I am not Buddhist either, I do like that in most forms of Buddhism, the Bodhisattva (= Enlightened One) can show you the way and even give some pointers, but you have to do the work yourself, which come to think of it, is about the only time the results are worth having.
Destroyer_of_ants wrote:
being babtised does not instantaneoulsy absolve your sins. It is a public showing of your rebirth as a christian. and it does not give you a clean slate if you don't truly believe in your heart that you are forgiven and that you are ready to start living a life with minimal sin.
You can't get babtised and then act like it's a blank check to do whatever you want.
=========End insert history edit======
tacticslion wrote:
Thanks, Wrin. Good advice, and sensible. I will use it in the future!
Ok... short version.
TB:
God=Jesus=Holy Spirit. Read John. (Jesus=Human=mortal)=different from (God=immortal=spirit) because of humaney-mortal type things that God don't need. Plus a lot of explanation and scientific fact. Nifty! And no, no 'God the Son', but rather, in Hebrew, several of the statements Jesus made meant "I = God". Plus a lot of useful and insightful, explanitory words and information to back up said points from scripture and (nominally) science.
Tossrock:
Epicurian Paradox? Easy: God works in mysterious ways. No, seriously, tell me what the problem is and I may be just unstupid enough to explain it, or I might not. Plus a lot of other useless words.
KirimaNagi:
God agrees sometimes. He likes living stuff. He likes holiness better.
I don't have all the answers. I do have educated guesses, but I will not state that these are irrefutable proof. Yada-yada, a great deal about blood, pictures, prophecy, and the like, detailing these educated guesses plus some interesting asides that I eventually removed to the bottom of the post 'cause it was too long and distracting. Neat. Plus more useless words.
Wrin:
"quote" Wrin Wrote:
"No, you're quite long winded and strange.
"endquote"
Me: thanks!
my notes that I took out of KirimaNagi's reply.
The end... again.
(
Interesting tidbit I found:
John 5:31 If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.
John 8:14 Jesus answered and said unto them, Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true: for I know whence I came, and whither I go; but ye cannot tell whence I come, and whither I go.
)
I just read the first half of John (will continue later), and found very many places where Jesus makes a clear distinction between himself and God. (Where would I find the "I = God" statements you mentioned? I don't recall hearing of them before.) I also saw the "I and my father are one", which as I mentioned has to be some sort of "one" that all of us can also be.
Then there's the first chapter, which talks about a "word" and a "light" which was in the word. There is both "the word became flesh" and that it's pretty clear that the "light" is Jesus. The "word" is:
Quote:
3056 logos log'-os from 3004; something said (including the thought); by implication, a topic (subject of discourse), also reasoning (the mental faculty) or motive; by extension, a computation; specially, (with the article in John) the Divine Expression (i.e. Christ):--account, cause, communication, X concerning, doctrine, fame, X have to do, intent, matter, mouth, preaching, question, reason, + reckon, remove, say(-ing), shew, X speaker, speech, talk, thing, + none of these things move me, tidings, treatise, utterance, word, work. see GREEK for 3004
I'm going to claim that the "Divine Expression" part of that definition comes from how whoever wrote that understood this section, and not from anything to do with what this word means everywhere else it's used. So, in other places this same word that's translated as "word" here means a thought, reasoning, motive, intent.
So (assuming this word means the same thing here as it does elsewhere) this could also be read as, roughly "In the beginning were both God and God's intent. All things were made through it, and without it nothing was made. It [God's intent] included life, and this life was the light of men.". I think this version is easier to make sense of, but don't really know how it compares in accuracy to King James (I'd need to actually know ancient Greek to know that.). I do, however, suspect that it's at least not any worse (if only because the other way is so confusing).
"the word was made flesh". I'd read this in much the same sense as calling someone a "walking encyclopedia". Jesus studied the word, lived it, taught it to such an extent (ie, perfectly) that he essentially was it. Which was only possible because of who he is.