35 replies to this topic

[amazin]

first off i will clarify that i do believe in God.

its not like God struck your friend down with a bolt of lighting for no reason, God left people responsible for themselves to an extent. as i understand it, he does deal with the individual through prayer and such, but people on their own still live their lives.

regarding accounts in the bible, the old testament in a way portrays God as violent and such, but that is because whenever ANYTHING happened (specifically natural disasters and such) they attributed it to God. But then in the new testament, God sent Jesus as atonement for all of our sins, so old testament scale displays of power are no longer necessary.

[BeefJeRKy]

Alias is certainly right about one thing. The Bible has changed over time due to errors in translation most likely. The Bible wasn't written down until at least 70AD according to what I learned in Christian Education back in school. It was also written in Aramaic (an ancient form of spoken hebrew) and first translated to Syriac and subsequently Arabic. Eventually there followed the Greek, Latin and other translations. Having both Arabic and English versions of the bible, I can confirm that the Bible in English sounds so much more literal than the Arabic version. The Old Testament is all imagery. It isn't an absolute truth. Even the new testament had a quite a bit of imagery though it is less obvious. All I can say is that it's a Holy book because it contains the "word of God" because it recounts the sayings of the various prophets that existed before Jesus Christ. Just because it says He walked on water, doesn't mean he actually did. It goes more along the implied meaning of Jesus braving the stormy lake all on his own.

[Zero]

umm not dachamp, on 12 Nov 2008, 3:30, said:

first off i will clarify that i do believe in God.

its not like God struck your friend down with a bolt of lighting for no reason, God left people responsible for themselves to an extent. as i understand it, he does deal with the individual through prayer and such, but people on their own still live their lives.

regarding accounts in the bible, the old testament in a way portrays God as violent and such, but that is because whenever ANYTHING happened (specifically natural disasters and such) they attributed it to God. But then in the new testament, God sent Jesus as atonement for all of our sins, so old testament scale displays of power are no longer necessary.

Yeah, considering "god" didn't speak or act at ALL in the New Testament... so leave it out of this. So, where were we? Oh yes, our sins! Original sin.... so let me get this straight...

"god" says that WE are all individuals. That we are ALL DIFFERENT from everyone else and that what someone else does is COMPLETELY irrelevant to our own soul, even if it is our parents. However, we are ALL born with original sin which we can only get out of by being baptized. If you don't see the contradiction here.... well, okay, let's get cracking. I, supposedly, wouldn't get sent to hell for something my father (of whom I am a direct descendant) but because the first of man decided to go against one of "gods'" rules then I am doomed to go to hell if I don't get baptized? What happens to babies who die before they're born or shortly after?

And for the last time, I am not blaming God for my friend, I just had a revalation then and there and noticed something new.

And now for you Scope, as a former-Catholic, I can say I once believed that. Hell, I've written the bible three times (in seventh grade at Catholic School) and although I can't quote it, I CAN say that I could probably tell you most of the hidden messages in the bible, or at least give a pretty good interpretation. Now, I'm not saying that JUST BECAUSE the bible said Jesus walked on water its true. I'm talking about its main message. Also, when I DO point out an exact example from the bible, it is usually documented in history AND the bible (such as Moses, and if the bible IS the "word of "god,"" then by logic, he didn't get to the land of Cannan because "god" said that he wouldn't)

And yes, I DO understand about the language transcriptions (not sure if its the right word, but oh well), however, I'm saying not that the bible DIDN'T change, but that there is NO WAY that there is a good, loving, caring, merciful "god" if what is in the bible is true as that is WAY too radical a change for ANY transcription. And then there's prayer....

I go with Alucard on that one (read the manga Hellsing to see what I mean now and am about to say), if you want to be noticed by a god, if there is one, prayer is not the way. If prayers DID come true then the world would be happy, too happy and that sadistic man upstairs wouldn't like that, at least not from my own experience and knowledge. If man truly wants to stand out to a god then it must be through action. Through action he will stand out and force his way into the eyes of "god" and he will either be dealt with, be granted his prayer, or more likely than the two of the above, nothing will happen (see examples of Hitler and Stalin on previous posts).

[Aces Andre]

It is one thing what people claim god has said or done, it is entirely another what god actually has said or done. Religions create their gods, not the other way round. If there is a god (there might be), I'm sure he/she would wonder what the hell everyone was doing.

Anyhow, my point is simply this, saying god is cruel/hypocritical/evil is pointless, you do not know god, you only know what you've been told about god. You could however hate the image of god as it is presented by various religions.

[Zero]

Aces Andre, on 13 Nov 2008, 0:31, said:

It is one thing what people claim god has said or done, it is entirely another what god actually has said or done. Religions create their gods, not the other way round. If there is a god (there might be), I'm sure he/she would wonder what the hell everyone was doing.

Anyhow, my point is simply this, saying god is cruel/hypocritical/evil is pointless, you do not know god, you only know what you've been told about god. You could however hate the image of god as it is presented by various religions.

I'm, sorry to say I can't agree with you there. First of all, the bible, in it "god" says it his word and messages. And yes, I can see what you mean, but still.... ALL religions say THEIR book is the word of "god" and they ARE pretty similar. In the end, however, I CAN say this, God allowed Hitler+ Stalin to live but allowed Kennedy to die. Although you could say that that seems petty, the point I'm trying to make is that god, even in the bible, only protects the people who do good until they outlive their usefulness, and if you look at history, the evil people who are oh so infamous either die WAY too late into their rule/live until they die a natural death while the more... good people who actually SERVE THE PEOPLE AND DO GOOD, end up dying very young.

Examples of Dead Good who died too young: Kennedy, Alexander the Great (you can say this is bias but he DID unite half of Asia+ most of Europe single handedly), Abraham Lincoln, and so on and so on. I mean, I can understand if there have been tyrants but the number of genocidal tyrants who almost came within reach of annihilating an entire race/culture... well, there are WAY too many.

[BeefJeRKy]

That is why I subscribe to Deism and believe that God did not create everything. I like to believe he is that spark that set the universe going into an automated process. Basically all of these "supernatural events" we hear of are simply embellishments by the religions. Humans have to appreciate the gift of reason they've been given. On Earth at least, there are no other creatures that actually reason as humans do. You have to realize that you have very limited control over what you can do with your existence. You have to know that things happen not because of some master plan but because the laws of probability happened to work in favor of a certain event at a certain time. In other words, there is no such thing as predetermined fate or luck...

[Aces Andre]

Zero, on 13 Nov 2008, 2:53, said:

Aces Andre, on 13 Nov 2008, 0:31, said:

It is one thing what people claim god has said or done, it is entirely another what god actually has said or done. Religions create their gods, not the other way round. If there is a god (there might be), I'm sure he/she would wonder what the hell everyone was doing.

Anyhow, my point is simply this, saying god is cruel/hypocritical/evil is pointless, you do not know god, you only know what you've been told about god. You could however hate the image of god as it is presented by various religions.

I'm, sorry to say I can't agree with you there. First of all, the bible, in it "god" says it his word and messages. And yes, I can see what you mean, but still.... ALL religions say THEIR book is the word of "god" and they ARE pretty similar. In the end, however, I CAN say this, God allowed Hitler+ Stalin to live but allowed Kennedy to die. Although you could say that that seems petty, the point I'm trying to make is that god, even in the bible, only protects the people who do good until they outlive their usefulness, and if you look at history, the evil people who are oh so infamous either die WAY too late into their rule/live until they die a natural death while the more... good people who actually SERVE THE PEOPLE AND DO GOOD, end up dying very young.

Examples of Dead Good who died too young: Kennedy, Alexander the Great (you can say this is bias but he DID unite half of Asia+ most of Europe single handedly), Abraham Lincoln, and so on and so on. I mean, I can understand if there have been tyrants but the number of genocidal tyrants who almost came within reach of annihilating an entire race/culture... well, there are WAY too many.

Again, that bible was not written by god. All of it was in some shape or form written down by human hand (and previous to that I believe it was told from person to person to keep the stories alive). If they claim god has said that "this is my holy text", then where is the proof of this (yes asking for proof when talking about god is not smart but it makes the point here)? Has anyone heard god say "you have my approval", does the book carry a stamp of approval by god? They can claim that god has created their text, but again, it is just the image of god that they present that has created that text, not the real thing if god exists (although, you never know, god might approve),

Now I can understand the approach that god should have interfered with this world many a time, and that therefore, since he doesn't interfere he is a cruel being. I ask myself that often enough, why does god not simply sweep away all that is wrong (and half the time I don't believe in god)? Maybe god can't. Thus far I have yet to see something that could be godly intervention. This just leaves me with the conclusion that either god does not exist, or god does not interfere for various reasons that are indeterminable (it could be as you say that god is cruel).

[CodeCat]

Scope, on 12 Nov 2008, 4:11, said:

Alias is certainly right about one thing. The Bible has changed over time due to errors in translation most likely. The Bible wasn't written down until at least 70AD according to what I learned in Christian Education back in school. It was also written in Aramaic (an ancient form of spoken hebrew) and first translated to Syriac and subsequently Arabic. Eventually there followed the Greek, Latin and other translations.

Arabic wasn't the big language it is now back then. It was the language of a small group of nomads, most likely. I doubt they'd have provided a specific Arabic translation. And not to sound picky, but Aramaic isn't ancient Hebrew. It's a language that existed alongside Hebrew and was related to it, but it didn't develop from Hebrew. Both Aramaic developed from a common source, just like French and Spanish did (from Latin).

[Zero]

About the language translation:

CodeCat, on 13 Nov 2008, 11:52, said:

Scope, on 12 Nov 2008, 4:11, said:

Alias is certainly right about one thing. The Bible has changed over time due to errors in translation most likely. The Bible wasn't written down until at least 70AD according to what I learned in Christian Education back in school. It was also written in Aramaic (an ancient form of spoken hebrew) and first translated to Syriac and subsequently Arabic. Eventually there followed the Greek, Latin and other translations.

Arabic wasn't the big language it is now back then. It was the language of a small group of nomads, most likely. I doubt they'd have provided a specific Arabic translation. And not to sound picky, but Aramaic isn't ancient Hebrew. It's a language that existed alongside Hebrew and was related to it, but it didn't develop from Hebrew. Both Aramaic developed from a common source, just like French and Spanish did (from Latin).

Need I say more? (Thank again CC, owe you another one)

[BeefJeRKy]

It was only translated to Arabic around 600 AD but it was first translated to Syriac around the 3rd century. In fact, back when I used to go to Church, most of our sermons were held in Syriac (I'm a Maronite by familial association).

Edited by Scope, 14 November 2008 - 07:02.

[General]

CodeCat, on 11 Nov 2008, 1:28, said:

There's more to it than that. Initially, there were animist religions. They were formed at a time when people didn't understand the world they lived in, and they were not exactly capable of shaping the world like they are now. Most people lived in small tribes, and were still pretty much a part of the cycle of nature: vulnerable and unsure of their own fate. It was natural for them to see spirits and other kinds of supernatural beings within many phenomena. Predators, trees, rain, thunder, sun, seasons, etc weren't just things, they were part of a larger whole formed from these spirits to watch over the earth and its enhabitants. Humans, too, were part of this larger whole, since they also had the ability to watch over and take care of nature. This stage is where many natives of colonies were, including those of north America for the most part. Prehistoric Europe likely also had a belief system similar to this.

However as their cultures expanded, they began to live more and more not within nature but on top of it. They went from being part of it to controlling it. And in that came a shift in mentality: the spirits were no longer in everything, because mankind was now capable of grasping and moulding things to fit its own needs, and they even built towns to live in. They hadn't of course forgotten their old beliefs, but the idea that nature wasn't a force in its own right grew stronger. So it was concluded that nature was not made of spirits, but that these spirits ruled nature, much like mankind at the time was capable of, except a lot more powerful. This is where the concept of 'gods' comes around, and it is the stage found in Germanic culture, the Roman and Greek gods, and the gods of ancient Egypt.

As mankind progressed however, it learned more about its surroundings, and became more proficient in understanding the world. The realisation dawned that things might not be ruled by many gods at all, but that there was a single truth that could be found in all things. The embodiment of this truth was thought to be a single god, perhaps in several forms, which was in all things much like the spirits had been, but also had a feeling of wholeness, singleness and rationality which appealed to the people of the time. In particular, there was a feeling that one god was in many things in many forms, but that they ultimately led to a single universal truth about the world. More and more there became a search for this truth, and many who claimed to have found the truth for themselves wished to share it with others. They also asked others who believed them to do the same. And that's where single-god religions such as Christianity and Islam come from, but also the five forms of god in Hinduism.

I wish that last part be simple like that but it sadly isn't, these peoples you talk about insist they take their messages directly from that single God