the right religion

[bigjimslade1000]

The point here is if a person doesn't know how to decipher the language to get the real meanings that would enable someone to understand things in plain and literal terms sufficient to allow them to be acted upon, they would be inclined to not take it seriously.

An alchemist would say these are clear and simple instructions for things that I understand.

A non-alchemist would say they were an obscure tangled up mess of non-sense not to be taken seriously.

It's all nonsense, if you study the nature of words. Words are nothing more than sounds we use to define an experience and or idea.

 

[kylixguru]

It's all nonsense, if you study the nature of words. Words are nothing more than sounds we use to define an experience and or idea.

Well, I suppose you would say rocket science is all non-sense too, but it still has enabled us to make some incredibly awesome discoveries.

To an alchemist all that cryptic language is not nonsense.

To me the Bible makes perfect sense and is far from being nonsense.

Call me a BibleAlchemist if you like.

 

[bigjimslade1000]

Well, I suppose you would say rocket science is all non-sense too, but it still has enabled us to make some incredibly awesome discoveries.

To an alchemist all that cryptic language is not nonsense.

To me the Bible makes perfect sense and is far from being nonsense.

Call me a BibleAlchemist if you like.

I don't think you grasp the meaning of what I'm alluding to. Check out Alan Watts on the meaning of words. I understand that without them, sciences and what not would be useless, that's a given.

 

[kylixguru]

I don't think you grasp the meaning of what I'm alluding to. Check out Alan Watts on the meaning of words. I understand that without them, sciences and what not would be useless, that's a given.

What's happening here is you don't know how to read the Bible such that you can see it as an experienced alchemist can read one of their coded documents.

But, rather than say you lack the ability to decipher that document, you dismiss the document and anyone else claiming to have the ability to decipher it.

 

[1robin]

I didn't bring potter into it, you did. I just said that if one fantastic idea could be seen as true, so then all must be considered equally, in not so many words.

If I said Harry Potter before you did then it was a pre-emptive strike that apparently didn't function correctly. The point is the comparison is meaningless. Your last statement is not an accurate way to do textual research. Methods involved in witness testimony and the historical method are what is needed. For example let's consider what the Bible and the Quran say concerning the central aspect of Christianity. The bible says he died and was resurrected. The Quran says he did not die and was taken to heaven without death among many other Islamic theories on teh subject. Keep in mind here I am comparing the no 1 and the number 2 religion in the world. I am not comparing it to something obsurd so as to lead the reader down a false trail.

So which one is right. By the historical method the bible is a relatively contemporary account of the event. The Quran came over 500 years later. By the methods involved in testimony valuation the Bible has 4 eye witnesses to different events surrounding the issue and proved their sincerety by risking and or suffering death for their testimony (principle of emberassment). The Quran has one highly suspicious claiment who was born 500 years later and never sat eyes on Christ. As can be easily seen there are ways to evaluate historical and testimonial claims that do not involve appeals to the obsurd.

 

[kylixguru]

If I said Harry Potter before you did then it was a pre-emptive strike that apparently didn't function correctly. The point is the comparison is meaningless. Your last statement is not an accurate way to do textual research. Methods involved in witness testimony and the historical method are what is needed. For example let's consider what the Bible and the Quran say concerning the central aspect of Christianity. The bible says he died and was resurrected. The Quran says he did not die and was taken to heaven without death among many other Islamic theories on teh subject. Keep in mind here I am comparing the no 1 and the number 2 religion in the world. I am not comparing it to something obsurd so as to lead the reader down a false trail.

So which one is right. By the historical method the bible is a relatively contemporary account of the event. The Quran came over 500 years later. By the methods involved in testimony valuation the Bible has 4 eye witnesses to different events surrounding the issue and proved their sincerety by risking and or suffering death for their testimony (principle of emberassment). The Quran has one highly suspicious claiment who was born 500 years later and never sat eyes on Christ. As can be easily seen there are ways to evaluate historical and testimonial claims that do not involve appeals to the obsurd.

The books as originally intended to be understood are both right.

Also, how can you distill it down to saying which one is right when on both sides the sects are totally divided on what both of their own texts, as well as the texts of the others, are really trying to say.

The problem here is the hubris of humans.

 

[bigjimslade1000]

Here-say is not admissible in court or in any truly scholastic community outside of any theistic genre.

 

[kylixguru]

Here-say is not admissible in court or in any truly scholastic community outside of any theistic genre.

While hearsay is not admissible, sworn testimony and affidavits are admissible.

That is why we have what is called the Old Testament and the New Testament.

 

[1robin]

The books as originally intended to be understood are both right.

I hope you are not referring to Harry Potter again. In fact two contradictory claims to truth can not possibly both be right. I think you need to read a book on philosophy and or textual criticism. The quran is deficient in every category compared to the bible.

Also, how can you distill it down to saying which one is right when on both sides the sects are totally divided on what both of their own texts, as well as the texts of the others, are really trying to say.

The differences in Christian denominations is far les than critics love to claim. 95% of them agree on 95% of the issues. 95% of the 5% left are usually not core issues and are second and third tier non doctinal issues involving ceremony or obscure rules. The only meaningfull split is over the Catholic false belief in grace plus works verses the protestants grace alone salvation model. That one is significant but contains 50% agreement and leaves the other 95% of the text untouched. No doctrinal matters are considered part of what I say is used to evaluate the bible. Only after the bible has been found reliable are doctrinal matters relevant.




The problem here is the hubris of humans.[/quote]

 

[1robin]

Here-say is not admissible in court or in any truly scholastic community outside of any theistic genre.

Tell that to Simon Greenleaf the greatest expert on evidence and testimony in human history who said that the testimony in the bible meets every standard of modern law.

 

[kylixguru]

I hope you are not referring to Harry Potter again.

Nope. But you already knew that.

In fact two contradictory claims to truth can not possibly both be right.

Nor does that make one right and one wrong. They can both be wrong.

I think you need to read a book on philosophy and or textual criticism. The quran is deficient in every category compared to the bible.

I see how people can conjure up contradiction, but I also see deeper truths both would do well to pay closer attention to that shows how there is no contradiction.

The differences in Christian denominations is far les than critics love to claim. 95% of them agree on 95% of the issues. 95% of the 5% left are usually not core issues and are second and third tier non doctinal issues involving ceremony or obscure rules. The only meaningfull split is over the Catholic false belief in grace plus works verses the protestants grace alone salvation model. That one is significant but contains 50% agreement and leaves the other 95% of the text untouched. No doctrinal matters are considered part of what I say is used to evaluate the bible. Only after the bible has been found reliable are doctrinal matters relevant.

Well, just take the aspect of what the reality of the resurrection of Jesus was. If you talk to 100 Christians you are going to get all kinds of explanations where none of them entirely agree. What this actually means is Christians really don't know what actually happened with Jesus. As I see it, the Quran adds complimentary "brush strokes" to the picture that enables Christians to rule out a bunch of their nonsensical interpretations.

For example, you cannot say Jesus is or was the Savior of mankind until Jesus actually saves mankind. It doesn't take away from what Jesus did to say that Jesus isn't finished with everything yet. It isn't a coincidence that Jews, Christians, Muslims and Mormons are all looking for a Messiah. What's odd is none of them are expecting the Father.

I see no contradiction between the two because I understand them both.

 

[1robin]

Nope. But you already knew that.

I never know with you critic guys.

Nor does that make one right and one wrong. They can both be wrong.

That is actually correct. So you have admitted that your previous statement was wrong. Being that the truth of the bible can be very nearly proven and the evidence is more than suffecient for faith then this second conclusion is no barrier either.

I see how people can conjure up contradiction, but I also see deeper truths both would do well to pay closer attention to that shows how there is no contradiction

There are methods by which to resolve these issues. Christianity meets them all and the others fail miserably. That is why the number two religion is greatly spread and maintained by coercian and force. For example they have state run religion that labels and counts every birth as a Muslim and has a birth rate 9 times that of Christianity. They have not had to withstand religous persecution by the greatest powers of the day and after all this they still don't compare with Christianity. In fact we as the great power have bent over backwards to help them maintain their religion by spending hundreds of millions in Iraq building facilities.

Well, just take the aspect of what the reality of the resurrection of Jesus was. If you talk to 100 Christians you are going to get all kinds of explanations where none of them entirely agree.

This is false as it concerns core doctrine. Some may like music in Church and some may not but they all profess Jesus is Lord. That is what matters.

What this actually means is Christians really don't know what actually happened with Jesus.

This is certainly false. What makes someone a Christian is faith in the death and resurrection that leads to a supernatural salvation experience. That precludes anyone actually being a Christian and denying what Jesus did.

As I see it, the Quran adds complimentary "brush strokes" to the picture that enables Christians to rule out a bunch of their nonsensical interpretations.

The Quran adds what Muhammad heard from Jewish heretics in Arabia and could not tell the difference. In fact most of his terrible understanding of the bible can be found in Gnostic texts that existed in Atrabia during his time. He also added "brush strokes" to the trinity by claiming it was Mary, God, and Jesus a claim no major denomination has ever had. It is just wrong. You can't make them both true no more than you can make them both false.

For example, you cannot say Jesus is or was the Savior of mankind until Jesus actually saves mankind

He is done with what is required to save mankind. It will not be added to or done again. The only thing left it's application or rejection by us.

It doesn't take away from what Jesus did to say that Jesus isn't finished with everything yet.

There is no additional work necessary to allow man to be reunited with God.

It isn't a coincidence that Jews, Christians, Muslims and Mormons are all looking for a Messiah. What's odd is none of them are expecting the Father.

This is theologically incoherent. It does you no service to lump everything together and try to sink them all together. The bible can no more be condemned by a false association than a false religion can gain creadability by the same thing.

I see no contradiction between the two because I understand them both.

Then you dissagree with their exclusive claims , your earlier statement above, logic, reason, philosophy, and theologic philosophy. I don't see much hope in reconciling the unreconcilable. Oriental philosophy attempts this and they have created 330 million Gods in the process. Madness.

 

[bigjimslade1000]

I never know with you critic guys.

That is actually correct. So you have admitted that your previous statement was wrong. Being that the truth of the bible can be very nearly proven and the evidence is more than suffecient for faith then this second conclusion is no barrier either.

There are methods by which to resolve these issues. Christianity meets them all and the others fail miserably. That is why the number two religion is greatly spread and maintained by coercian and force. For example they have state run religion that labels and counts every birth as a Muslim and has a birth rate 9 times that of Christianity. They have not had to withstand religous persecution by the greatest powers of the day and after all this they still don't compare with Christianity. In fact we as the great power have bent over backwards to help them maintain their religion by spending hundreds of millions in Iraq building facilities.

This is false as it concerns core doctrine. Some may like music in Church and some may not but they all profess Jesus is Lord. That is what matters.

This is certainly false. What makes someone a Christian is faith in the death and resurrection that leads to a supernatural salvation experience. That precludes anyone actually being a Christian and denying what Jesus did.

The Quran adds what Muhammad heard from Jewish heretics in Arabia and could not tell the difference. In fact most of his terrible understanding of the bible can be found in Gnostic texts that existed in Atrabia during his time. He also added "brush strokes" to the trinity by claiming it was Mary, God, and Jesus a claim no major denomination has ever had. It is just wrong. You can't make them both true no more than you can make them both false.

He is done with what is required to save mankind. It will not be added to or done again. The only thing left it's application or rejection by us.

There is no additional work necessary to allow man to be reunited with God.

This is theologically incoherent. It does you no service to lump everything together and try to sink them all together. The bible can no more be condemned by a false association than a false religion can gain creadability by the same thing.



Then you dissagree with their exclusive claims , your earlier statement above, logic, reason, philosophy, and theologic philosophy. I don't see much hope in reconciling the unreconcilable. Oriental philosophy attempts this and they have created 330 million Gods in the process. Madness.

The buddhists really don't have gods so much as interpretations of human attributes. The belief entails that all gods are extensions of one's own mind or, what you perceive as a god is nothing more than a person with a buddha nature. The christian dogma seems more sinister... Comparing the christian god to a buddhist patriarch, is like comparing Sodom Hussein to mother Theresa. The christian god, as described in the bible (old testament), is a toddler, going on a tirade when his toys don't work right.

 

[1robin]

The buddhists really don't have gods so much as interpretations of human attributes. The belief entails that all gods are extensions of one's own mind or, what you perceive as a god is nothing more than a person with a buddha nature. The christian dogma seems more sinister... Comparing the christian god to a buddhist patriarch, is like comparing Sodom Hussein to mother Theresa. The christian god, as described in the bible (old testament), is a toddler, going on a tirade when his toys don't work right.

I can't meaningfully debate a thousand issues. Every time resolution is close on one you seem to morph into a different one. I got a suggestion give me the number one greatest most fantastical specific reason that can be resolved one way or another as to why you doubt Christianity to be true and we can stick to that or you can tell me which other religion you want to claim is true and we will stick there? Deal?

 

[kylixguru]

That is actually correct. So you have admitted that your previous statement was wrong.

Why are you exhibiting a propensity to put words in my mouth?

I said I can see how both records as they were intended to be understood can agree.

Of course I could be wrong just as well as anyone, but I do see a possible way.

There are methods by which to resolve these issues.

Yes, there are. First of all, look for how they both could be right.

Christianity meets them all and the others fail miserably. That is why the number two religion is greatly spread and maintained by coercian and force. For example they have state run religion that labels and counts every birth as a Muslim and has a birth rate 9 times that of Christianity. They have not had to withstand religous persecution by the greatest powers of the day and after all this they still don't compare with Christianity. In fact we as the great power have bent over backwards to help them maintain their religion by spending hundreds of millions in Iraq building facilities.

This is irrelevant if both of their sacred texts can agree.

This is false as it concerns core doctrine. Some may like music in Church and some may not but they all profess Jesus is Lord. That is what matters.

What matters is that Christian people take the warnings they were given seriously. If when the Father comes to establish His Kingdom the people of Christianity reject and persecute them, then all of their faith in Jesus was vain.

What makes someone a Christian is faith in the death and resurrection that leads to a supernatural salvation experience. That precludes anyone actually being a Christian and denying what Jesus did.

Being a Christian isn't what saves you. Having a proper understanding of what Jesus accomplished and what Jesus shall accomplish in the future and participating in building that up is what saves you. Lip service to misguided understandings will not bring a person to Eternal Life. Even the demons called Jesus Lord, but they still went into the herd of swine (Gentiles) and rushed headlong over a cliff. That's what I see mainstream Christianity doing because they have become infidels to the "good news" they were supposed to bring the world tidings of. The Father's worst enemies to the establishment of His Kingdom came from Christians. Thus, according to Luke 12:37-48, there are many stripes coming in the direction of Christianity for their infidelity and for beating the Father's servants.

The Quran adds what Muhammad heard from Jewish heretics in Arabia and could not tell the difference. In fact most of his terrible understanding of the bible can be found in Gnostic texts that existed in Atrabia during his time. He also added "brush strokes" to the trinity by claiming it was Mary, God, and Jesus a claim no major denomination has ever had. It is just wrong. You can't make them both true no more than you can make them both false.

Please provide references in the Quran to back up these claims.

He is done with what is required to save mankind. It will not be added to or done again. The only thing left it's application or rejection by us.

Well, I suppose then you have forgotten what the whole point of it was then. Weren't you supposed to be heralding in the time when the Father's Kingdom would come? Now you are going to assume anyone who steps forward as a servant of the Father who has additional "meat" to offer is somehow in opposition to Jesus? The whole point of Jesus' life and ministry was to create a culture that would be ready for the coming of the Groom and you are going to ignore and beat if necessary those trying to organize and conduct the wedding.

There is no additional work necessary to allow man to be reunited with God.

Therefore, you are willfully blinding yourself from being able to apply what the whole Gospel was about. You think you believe in Jesus but what you have actually done is bought into a false spirit offering a false salvation that shall immediately put you at odds with the Father's servants when they come. You will think to listen to them somehow means you hold Jesus' offering as insufficient.

This is theologically incoherent. It does you no service to lump everything together and try to sink them all together. The bible can no more be condemned by a false association than a false religion can gain creadability by the same thing.

Jesus warned that Christians could become infidels. Islam claims they did become infidels. I evaluated those claims and find them to be correct. This especially became clear to me when I studied the history of how they treated the Father when the Kingdom was being offered to them. It is now case closed and only a matter of time before the stripes get into full motion, unless of course a Christian is willing to humble themselves and come to understand where they got off track and repent of such. By so doing, they then would be able to have the realization of what Jesus most hoped they would prepare themselves for.

Then you dissagree with their exclusive claims , your earlier statement above, logic, reason, philosophy, and theologic philosophy. I don't see much hope in reconciling the unreconcilable. Oriental philosophy attempts this and they have created 330 million Gods in the process. Madness.

I disagree with those of Islam who see Jews and Christians in and of themselves as their enemy. It is only those of the Jews and Christians who are infidels to the God of Abraham that are to be considered the enemy of Islam.

To the best of my understanding, what I observe happening between Christians and Muslims is what I personally experience with Christians. When I speak to a Christian in terms of how I see that they are not having fidelity to God, for some reason the Christian automatically assumes I'm some kind of an anti-Christ or that I'm trying to dissuade them from having faith in Christ. They shift the context for the discussion into an impossible conflict because they refuse to address the possibility that they have become a corrupted and misguided religion in ways that are critical in God's eyes.

 

[bigjimslade1000]

I can't meaningfully debate a thousand issues. Every time resolution is close on one you seem to morph into a different one. I got a suggestion give me the number one greatest most fantastical specific reason that can be resolved one way or another as to why you doubt Christianity to be true and we can stick to that or you can tell me which other religion you want to claim is true and we will stick there? Deal?

And when you speak of eastern philosophies, yes, the Hindus have many gods and they predate christianity and judaism by 1000 years or more... So by this statement alone, who is right and who is wrong? It's all here-say on any level...

 

[kylixguru]

The christian god, as described in the bible (old testament), is a toddler, going on a tirade when his toys don't work right.

Oh my, let's hope Jehovah has a good sense of humor.

Seemed to me He was pretty patient and long suffering with what would have been more like a long and protracted dysfunctional marriage where His wife just wouldn't stop cheating on Him.

 

[bigjimslade1000]

Oh my, let's hope Jehovah has a good sense of humor.

Seemed to me He was pretty patient and long suffering with what would have been more like a long and protracted dysfunctional marriage where His wife just wouldn't stop cheating on Him.

Sicking bears on children is patient?

 

[1robin]

Why are you exhibiting a propensity to put words in my mouth?

You said they were noth true, then I said two competeing claims can't possibly both be true, you said that was right which I foolishly thought you countered your first claim.

I said I can see how both records as they were intended to be understood can agree.

There is no way he died and he didn't die can be seen in any non contradictory way. If there is some other way to look at these two religions how is it that you know it and the scholars do not in general I mean. Most doctrine in Christianity has been settled for a thousand years.

Of course I could be wrong just as well as anyone, but I do see a possible way.

I do not see the possability of the opposite. Maybe give me two contradictory verses that are consistent looked at another way.

Yes, there are. First of all, look for how they both could be right.

It makes far more sence that a benevolent God would give one pure form of truth instead of hiding bits of truth in contradictory religous systems mostly composed of self contradictory garbage. Hinduism says there are millions of God's the bible and Islam say only one. How can they both be true?

This is irrelevant if both of their sacred texts can agree.

It is exteremly relevant and since both do not agree, necessary.

What matters is that Christian people take the warnings they were given seriously. If when the Father comes to establish His Kingdom the people of Christianity reject and persecute them, then all of their faith in Jesus was vain.

THis doesn't make any sence?

Being a Christian isn't what saves you. Having a proper understanding of what Jesus accomplished and what Jesus shall accomplish in the future and participating in building that up is what saves you. Lip service to misguided understandings will not bring a person to Eternal Life. Even the demons called Jesus Lord, but they still went into the herd of swine (Gentiles) and rushed headlong over a cliff. That's what I see mainstream Christianity doing because they have become infidels to the "good news" they were supposed to bring the world tidings of. The Father's worst enemies to the establishment of His Kingdom came from Christians. Thus, according to Luke 12:37-48, there are many stripes coming in the direction of Christianity for their infidelity and for beating the Father's servants.

Nicodemus a great leader, a high priest, good man, and obedient to the law came to ask Jesus how to enter the kingdom of God. Jesus did not say any of the stuff you did. In fact he said how can a man who is a priest and uderstood the law very well be leading others when he is lost himself. He said you must be born again of the spirit. I have been, I know what it takes. I have been to the top of the mountain and know what is there. That trumps someone standing at the bottom guessing at what's up there. I am not insisting I am better than you just more experienced in this issue.

Please provide references in the Quran to back up these claims.

I missed this remind me tomorrow. Sorry.

Well, I suppose then you have forgotten what the whole point of it was then. Weren't you supposed to be heralding in the time when the Father's Kingdom would come? Now you are going to assume anyone who steps forward as a servant of the Father who has additional "meat" to offer is somehow in opposition to Jesus? The whole point of Jesus' life and ministry was to create a culture that would be ready for the coming of the Groom and you are going to ignore and beat if necessary those trying to organize and conduct the wedding.

That is the same actions described as to false prophets ibn the bible. The bible says that many wolves will dress as sheep saying they have new information and new ways. Jesus said they are thieves and robbers that no one enters but through him. The bible says the plagues of revelation will be added to them. Until you part the red sea, heal the sick, raise the dead, or live a sinless life I doubt your profithood.

Therefore, you are willfully blinding yourself from being able to apply what the whole Gospel was about. You think you believe in Jesus but what you have actually done is bought into a false spirit offering a false salvation that shall immediately put you at odds with the Father's servants when they come. You will think to listen to them somehow means you hold Jesus' offering as insufficient.

I am willingly rejecting what is inconsistent with the bible, philosophy, history, and reason. I am told how to identify it and am instructed to reject it which I would have by historical or philisophic reasons even if the bible didn't instruct me to. False prophets are predicted and condemned in the bible as signs of the last days.

Jesus warned that Christians could become infidels. Islam claims they did become infidels. I evaluated those claims and find them to be correct. This especially became clear to me when I studied the history of how they treated the Father when the Kingdom was being offered to them. It is now case closed and only a matter of time before the stripes get into full motion, unless of course a Christian is willing to humble themselves and come to understand where they got off track and repent of such. By so doing, they then would be able to have the realization of what Jesus most hoped they would prepare themselves for.

No he did not. The word infidel is not even in the bible in the Greek language. What he did say is that whom ever the father gives him he will not lose one but raise him up on the last day. He also said the he would never leave nor forsake us. As well as saying that when we believe we are given the Holy Spirit as the down payment of our salvation which is the gurantor of heaven.

I disagree with those of Islam who see Jews and Christians in and of themselves as their enemy. It is only those of the Jews and Christians who are infidels to the God of Abraham that are to be considered the enemy of Islam.

What makes them enemies is their allegance to different lords. It all stareted back with a sinful act of Abraham. They have hated each other before Islam ever existed and it is very complecated.

To the best of my understanding, what I observe happening between Christians and Muslims is what I personally experience with Christians. When I speak to a Christian in terms of how I see that they are not having fidelity to God, for some reason the Christian automatically assumes I'm some kind of an anti-Christ or that I'm trying to dissuade them from having faith in Christ. They shift the context for the discussion into an impossible conflict because they refuse to address the possibility that they have become a corrupted and misguided religion in ways that are critical in God's eyes.

That is because Islam fits the very description of the anti-christ system laid out and described in the bible. It is a virtual perfect fit. This is very complicated and takes for ever to get through and I do not think you are up for that kind of a discussion. You are drastically over simplifying the issue as well as under estimating what is at stake. However if you want an exhaustive debate od this issue let me know tomorrow.

 

[Renji]

In order to show some sort of respect with other belief system (and the way my faith has taught it), I'll just say that I believe I follow the right one, but with regards to other people's faith, I'll leave the judgment to God alone.