|
Post by Julius CMXCIX on Dec 22, 2007 19:51:56 GMT
I'm not sure that all of those even do express that view. But never mind, we're getting close to going in circles, so I'll post a new question. One more point only. Why can't you rank the different sins - is it forbidden in the Bible? I thought it was well known that Hell was divided into different levels, although that might not be from a Christian text so it might be irrelevant. 4. What, according to you, are the main differences between the major faiths? Oh and on a completely unrelated note Basse, it's says not sais. That will make your English look a lot more natural.
|
|
|
Post by Basse on Dec 22, 2007 22:16:52 GMT
I dont think it's forbidden, but it wouldn't be logic. To God, all sins are equally bad. The rank of sins is just something invented by man, God sees them as equal. One can be forgiven just as easily for any of them, as long as you want forgiveness and admit your crime.
|
|
|
Post by Julius CMXCIX on Jan 3, 2008 23:06:04 GMT
To get discussion going again after the holidays I'm going to ask whether you agree or disagree with the following statement, and why.
The main faiths (Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism and Sikhism) are all fundamentally the same - they are all paths to happiness and mostly share the same values in their attempt to achieve contentment. They also all share a certain amount of ritualism, tradition and, for want of a better word, competetiveness, which were necessary for them to survive and flourish.
This doesn't particularly reflect my opinion by the way, although I agree with it to an extent.
|
|
|
Post by Mashek on Jan 7, 2008 22:19:00 GMT
When you put it that way, probably - but people fail to see that it's more than any of that. Whether I'm a Christian or not, the only time I find happiness, or true happiness, is when I'm literally with God. That is happiness in all its perfection, (I feel that I'm perfect) that no one can achieve without God. Still, you need to know God to understand faith, otherwise it just becomes something that people will see as being conformed with religion/ every other religion in the world. IMVHO there is more to religion than just achieving happiness, contentment and all that other nonsense, but on the outside that's all it seems to be.
|
|
|
Post by Julius CMXCIX on Feb 26, 2008 21:56:17 GMT
|
|
Jatayu
Stormwind Member
Jatayu
Posts: 1,064
|
Post by Jatayu on Feb 27, 2008 16:13:55 GMT
Hmm.. Didn't notice this thread before. It seems Basse is quite a fundie Christian Anyway, to the topic that concerns 'reforming Islam', First of all there's a real danger that these theologians may not be concerned with reforming Islam at all, but are just trying to fool non muslims and press the commie agenda 'Islam is peace'. There are dozens of organizations which do that. Their target audiences are not muslims at all, but non muslims whom they want to convince that 'Islam is peace' ( and other such things ). Their religion of course, permits them to tell lies in order to spread Islam, at least enough of them believe that. ( It's called taqiyya ) The 'Islam is peace' campaign in Britain of course, is a prime example. Robert Spencer calls their bluff here. Nevertheless real reform movements have existed and still exist in the Muslim world. The problem is that they are not widely recognized in the Islamic world, indeed, they are often threatened with death. Two historical movements you could speak of are the Ahmadiyyah and Ba'hai sects. The Ahmediyyah movement was founded in Lahore by Mirza Ghulam Ahmed, who also claimed to be the Mahdi and the second coming of Christ. The Ahmadi's reject that Mohammed is the last prophet and insist on a more open interpretation of ideologies like jihad. Just for this, they are severely prosecuted- in Pakistan, Ahmediyyahs are LEGALLY recognized as NON MUSLIM. Their population is only about 10 million. The Ba'hai movement was founded by Bahá'u'lláh and rose directly from Shi'ite Islam in Iran. It incorporated several various bits and pieces from nearly all religions. Today the Bahai's form the largest minority in many Islamic countries, however they are much persecuted. In Iran, the Bahai faith is not legally recognized as a religion ( in comparison, even Judaism is actually recognized, nothwithstanding the fiery speeches ). In the modern world, there are a few reform movements. Examples: Muslims against ShariaIrshad ManjiThese two, and a few others recognize that there is violence in Islamic teachings and are basically trying to reform them. So far, they haven't been very successful either. So forgive my cynicism if I think that this movement isn't going anywhere either. In fact the reason that Turkish scholars are able to debate this at all is because Turkey is still mostly a secularist country, despite the rapid islamization of Ataturk's legacy. If they had tried to do this in Saudi, for example, they'd have got beheaded pretty quickly. Islamic reformers tend to meet that distressing end quite often- take Dara Shikoh for example. They realize very well that they're playing with fire. I don't really believe they can convince the wahabbis of Saudi, the moribund Deobandis of India, the Taliban of Afghanistan, the rabid shiites of Iran or any one of the 72 sects of islam ( which consider each other as apostates and often blow each other up ) that they can just get rid of half their scriptures and live happily ever after. At the moment, it doesn't look like it at all. And of course, it might be just a taqiyya movement to fool non muslims.
|
|
|
Post by Julius CMXCIX on Feb 27, 2008 16:24:22 GMT
I personally see this as a sensisble attempt by Turkey to modernise the teachings, while retaining their core values. Probably so their bid for EU membership can progress. After all, the Bible has many statements from the context of the ancient Middle East that just don't fit in with our society.
Do not forget of course that there are extreme Christians who have killed each other and those of other faiths. But that doesn't mean the core religion itself sanctions violence in general. I find the comparison between this modernisation and the Reformation interesting also.
|
|
Jatayu
Stormwind Member
Jatayu
Posts: 1,064
|
Post by Jatayu on Mar 1, 2008 5:07:57 GMT
|
|
Matt
Stormwind Member
The Come And Go Man
Monsieur Mercredi
Posts: 1,811
|
Post by Matt on Mar 10, 2008 2:22:16 GMT
Oh boy, an intelligent discusion on religion that lasted 3 pages? I like this forum Oh yah my first post
|
|
Von
Stormwind Member
VonCorgev
Vene, Vidi, Verse.
Posts: 818
|
Post by Von on Mar 10, 2008 8:48:02 GMT
Hey Matty. Good to see you here. This might seem a little naive, but I've been thinking, would it not be fair to say that just about everybody is a 'fundie' about something or other? Fundie Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Bhuddists, Atheists? Surely we're all fundamentalist about a particular belief or idea, no?
|
|
|
Post by Basse on Mar 10, 2008 15:04:30 GMT
I guess I am, I try to follow the Bible as it was written, not changing the messages themselves to fit the modern days. By this I mean one could retranslate the text so that it makes sense to situation not occuring in the days of the Bible, and not changing the actual message to fit with modern day values.
In fact, yesterday I found a place in the New Testament strengthening some of my arguments about not changing the messages of the Bible. This is from the Beatitudes, Matthew 5:18-20;
I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.
|
|
Jatayu
Stormwind Member
Jatayu
Posts: 1,064
|
Post by Jatayu on Mar 10, 2008 15:32:29 GMT
Basse, Have you checked out The skeptics annotated bible ? Hey Matty. Good to see you here. This might seem a little naive, but I've been thinking, would it not be fair to say that just about everybody is a 'fundie' about something or other? Fundie Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Bhuddists, Atheists? Surely we're all fundamentalist about a particular belief or idea, no? Yeah, I'm fundamentalist about hm, Aok . In fact let me share a secret with you - I've joined the church of Aok. The religion of Aok believes in the Huskarl god ( his actual name is secret only known to members) and has 3 commandments: 1. Design scenarios for Aok. 2. In each scenario a huskarl should be the main character. Also the huskarl soldiers should be elites eg. imperial guard. 3. After death, all people shall be sent to Aok heaven where they will be put into custom scenarios. The Believers shall be the players and the unbelievers shall be condemned to play particular units in the game ( except huskarls of course ). Additionally the Believers will also be entertained with wine and virgins while playing the games. I love my religion ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by Mashek on Mar 14, 2008 23:09:59 GMT
It seems, Jatayu, that we all follow that religion to some point or another.
|
|
Jatayu
Stormwind Member
Jatayu
Posts: 1,064
|
Post by Jatayu on Apr 23, 2008 4:56:04 GMT
Fascinating question for all, why does the pope travel in a bulletproof car?
Doesn't he trust God to protect him?
|
|
|
Post by Basse on Apr 23, 2008 13:07:42 GMT
Probably because of a reason like this;
Matthew 4:5-7 (Jesus in the desert, tempted by the Devil)
Then the devil took Him into the holy city and placed Him on a turret of the temple. And he said to Him, If You are the Son of God, throw Yourself down; for it is written, He will give His angels charge over you, and they will bear you up on their hands, lest you strike your foot against a stone. Jesus said to him, On the other hand, it is written also, You shall not tempt, test thoroughly, or try exceedingly the Lord your God.
|
|
|
Post by Julius CMXCIX on Apr 23, 2008 14:59:46 GMT
God has never said he'd protect anyone. He let his own son get nailed to a cross for starters.
|
|
|
Post by Mashek on Apr 26, 2008 12:34:56 GMT
Basse, a true believer knows deep down that he is protected by God. God protects those who love him. Obviously, the Pope lacks a bit in faith.
|
|
Jatayu
Stormwind Member
Jatayu
Posts: 1,064
|
Post by Jatayu on Apr 28, 2008 18:36:24 GMT
www.jihadwatch.org/archives/020822.phpAh, doesn't it feel nice when members of the religion of peace kill each other and brand them as heretics. Of course I suppose it can be explained by a small minority of extremists misunderstanding their religion and attacking another small minority of moderates who have also misunderstood their religion.
|
|
Matt
Stormwind Member
The Come And Go Man
Monsieur Mercredi
Posts: 1,811
|
Post by Matt on Apr 29, 2008 3:54:24 GMT
www.jihadwatch.org/archives/020822.phpAh, doesn't it feel nice when members of the religion of peace kill each other and brand them as heretics. Of course I suppose it can be explained by a small minority of extremists misunderstanding their religion and attacking another small minority of moderates who have also misunderstood their religion. You seem to be awfully interested in religion, or at least it is a topic you like to bring up. I noticed you made a thread on creation versus evolution that got closed before anyone responded. If you are interested, I wouldn't mind discussing/debating it with you here, as long as we keep it civil and no one else minds it. I like a good intelligent discussion once and a while.
|
|
|
Post by Julius CMXCIX on Apr 29, 2008 14:53:20 GMT
I too wouldn't mind, actually I had civil discussions on difficult topics in mind when I created this thread.
|
|
Jatayu
Stormwind Member
Jatayu
Posts: 1,064
|
Post by Jatayu on Apr 29, 2008 14:59:12 GMT
I don't suppose I would mind, as long as you keep ridiculous stuff like ice shells falling on the earth and causing a flood and suchlike out.
|
|
|
Post by Julius CMXCIX on Apr 29, 2008 15:09:38 GMT
Right, if we're all agreed.
This House proposes that the world was created in seven days by God, as detailed in the book of Genesis.
|
|
Jatayu
Stormwind Member
Jatayu
Posts: 1,064
|
Post by Jatayu on Apr 29, 2008 17:36:47 GMT
Mmmm...
So you want to discuss geology and radio carbon dating?
Let's start with something better than that.
Here's my idea of a reasonable creationist theory.
In the beginning, God ( or alternatively aliens ) created the primitive life on Earth, such as bacteria, from where it evolved into it's current form.
Mind you, I don't like this theory either, for a variety of reasons.
|
|
|
Post by Julius CMXCIX on Apr 29, 2008 17:43:49 GMT
I don't know, I think I heard matty say he believed in the Genesis story, so why not go from there?
|
|
Matt
Stormwind Member
The Come And Go Man
Monsieur Mercredi
Posts: 1,811
|
Post by Matt on Apr 29, 2008 23:00:19 GMT
Alright I will start there. I think the biggest mistake most creationist wackos (I know there are some dumb statements out there) make is they attempt to defend creation from one of two flawed positions:
1. They attempt to defend creation from the bible. This is absurd, for two reasons, a) Many people believe in creation but not the bible (usually other religions), but far more importantly, if I already thought the bible was true, wouldn't I believe in creation? So the first rule in this discussion is to throw out the Bible and any similar religious works (Koran, etc).
2. They attempt to "prove" creation as if it is scientific fact. Now unless there is someone who was around to watch it, I don't exactly see how you can literally prove such a thing. Along the same line of thinking, you can't really prove a claim that something miraculous happened, as a miracle is by definition something without explanation.
So, it may in fact appear that I am starting myself from an incredibly weak position,, throwing out the bible and admitting I can't scientifically prove Creationism. So I had better define what I do want to prove, and how I defend my belief in a 6 day creation.
I believe I can reasonably argue these points:
1. A six day creation reasonably and completely accounts for every single aspect of of our universe. In other words, Creation does not conflict with science in any single area which I cannot provide a proper solution for.
2. Evolution does conflict with observed evidence and scientific knowledge in multiple areas.
From these two things, if I can get someone to agree with them, I can draw a powerful ending conclusion that STRONGLY supports a Genesis account of the origin of life.
But before I go on rambling, I better make sure any of you participating consider my starting position fair. Also, feel free to throw some objections against my first point, that creation does not conflict with science.
Edit: I accidentally modified the post by mistake instead of posting a reply. There was a quote by Julius earlier but nothing else is changed - Jatayu
|
|
Jatayu
Stormwind Member
Jatayu
Posts: 1,064
|
Post by Jatayu on Apr 30, 2008 3:15:47 GMT
Really?
What about..
1. Radio isotope dating 2. Big bang theory 3. etc. etc.
In what areas?
Evolution is one of the most complete theories to be tested, over and over and over again. A lot of modern biology and medicine is based upon the same areas evolution is based on, such as DNA, meosis etc.
Darwin was wrong about a couple of things in his original theory, but then he was writing at a time when DNA was unknown, atomic structures were unknown, cell biology was unknown. But the theory of evolution has been verified and improved for about 150 years now and it is the best theory to explain the diversity of species.
|
|
|
Post by Mashek on Apr 30, 2008 8:04:43 GMT
Regarding the world, why do some people bother to even attempt to defend creationism? One cannot defend what he was never there to witness in the first place. If you believe, have faith, in creationism or whatever side, leave it at that and be content. It's hard to argue any point regarding things beyond our world to anyone, since everyone comes from their own point and belief.
My theory is, if a man wants truth, he should disregard all established dogma, all beliefs, and go searching for the answer himself. Better things come out of that than the confusion and muddle that is the religious world.
|
|
|
Post by Julius CMXCIX on Apr 30, 2008 14:55:51 GMT
Yeah, but people want the discussion, so let's not stifle it.
Matty, I consider your position fair. You are just choosing not to use a particular source, and you are also not trying to unanswerably prove something, but maintain that it cannot be reasonably disproved.
I contend that any of the conflicts in evolutionary theory can be just as easily explained (theoretically) as you can explain any conflicts in the Genesis story. I think that anyone can come up with an explanation for any conflict or contradiction, usually by introducing some new idea. For this reason I think I could come up with a theory that the universe was created by an alien race of giant tomatoes and still manage to iron out any conflicts with scientific evidence.
|
|
Jatayu
Stormwind Member
Jatayu
Posts: 1,064
|
Post by Jatayu on Apr 30, 2008 15:19:42 GMT
I contend that any of the conflicts in evolutionary theory can be just as easily explained (theoretically) as you can explain any conflicts in the Genesis story. I think that anyone can come up with an explanation for any conflict or contradiction, usually by introducing some new idea. For this reason I think I could come up with a theory that the universe was created by an alien race of giant tomatoes and still manage to iron out any conflicts with scientific evidence. Flying Spaghetti monsterInvisible Pink Unicorn
|
|
|
Post by Julius CMXCIX on Apr 30, 2008 15:26:38 GMT
Yeah, them. That more or less backs up my point.
|
|