the right religion

[AmbiguousGuy]

:no: If it was something I felt was wrong I could not do it. And if it was really Jesus he would already know that , wouldn't he.

It's just a little hypothetical, crafted to help us think hard about morality.

Imagine that you and Jesus disagree about what's right. Do you obey him, or do you obey your own conscience?

Maybe the 911 attackers thought it was wrong to kill thousand of innocent civilians. Who knows. But they probably felt they were doing Allah's will. They were obeying God.

 

[rusra02]

I looked them up:


How are these proofs or even evidence of god?

Am i supposed to believe them just because they are in a holy book.

If that is the case then i'll have to believe everything in the Jewish, Muslim, Ancient Egyptian, Ancient Greco/Roman, Hindu, Buddhist scriptures as well. As they are all holy texts.

You've been on this forum for a while now. You should know that quoting passages from your holy book is a really incompetent argument.

-Q

The texts cited were not to provide evidence for God. Rather, they reveal 2 things. First, the Bible claims to be inspired by God, and second, that not all people have faith. The reasons people lack faith vary, but in most cases, such ones have never really examined the evidence for themselves. It would be difficult to discuss the basis for one's belief without referring to the source of those beliefs.

 

[The Neo Nerd]

First, the Bible claims to be inspired by God

Do you believe everything you read?

No you wouldn't. You believe that passage because it backs up your pre existing beliefs.

and second, that not all people have faith

That's not exactly insightful

The reasons people lack faith vary, but in most cases, such ones have never really examined the evidence for themselves.

What evidence would this be?

Because I went to church when when i was in primary school. Received religious education in primary school as well. Went to a christian high school. Have been on this forum for nearly three years.

And I've examined all the evidence I've been handed and found it ALL lacking.

You will of course accuse me of being closed minded or some such thing. But it's not closed minded to be skeptical about fantastical claims.

Perhaps you could start with the evidence that first convinced you, then we can go from there.

 

[Muffled]

that's because they don't offer the condemnation, either. that's hardly a plus for christianity, just a bigger envelope for blackmail.

It makes the choices clear. Not that the other scriptures lack it but perhaps it is soft pedaled a bit.

Perhaps my understanding of blackmail differs. In blackmail, your sin is an object for exploitation but in Christianity your sin is forgiven, provided that salvation has been received. The blackmailer prevents the person from having to pay for his sins for a price. Christianity prevents the person from having to pay for sins for free (except for the loss of sin which is no loss at all).

 

[Muffled]

How can you be sure that God is helping you rather than your brain just convincing you that good things happen because of God?

If a man gives you fifty dollars, do you think you have just convinced yourself that he gave you fifty dollars or do you recognize the reality?

The answer is simple, I know the difference between reality and fantasy. For instance I can win at the casino without God (just not in amazing ways) but I don't attribute those wins to Him because He had nothing to do with it. Of course there may be many things that God does in my life without my knowing it.

 

[Muffled]

He was pointing out that you can't expect the other religions to fix a concept only put forward by the abrahamic religions.

It's just as arrogant as Tolkien demanding Rowling get Harry Potter to destroy the one ring. It's not a problem in the HP universe.

This argument only works if the scriptures are proven to be non-fiction.

Look up "burden of proof"

-Q

However that is the point. Only christianity provides salvation. Who cares that the other scriptures see things differently? However if you wish to put it in terms of LOTR, only a comittment to not use power saved the day. In Potter the comittment is to use power. The two books are directly antithetical and Harry Potter will never be able to provide the salvation that LOTR provides. However the other scriptures are not antithetical to Christian scriptures since they also attempt to provide salvation though a persons actions.

There is no way to prove that any work is non-fiction. If I pick up a book written by Darwin it may very well be fiction for all I know and who could prove otherwise?

For me the proof is in the pudding. If I pick up a cookbook and can make a cake from a recipe then the book is non-fiction. If I pick up a Bible and can be saved from my sin then the book is non-fiction.

 

[9Westy9]

If a man gives you fifty dollars, do you think you have just convinced yourself that he gave you fifty dollars or do you recognize the reality?

The answer is simple, I know the difference between reality and fantasy. For instance I can win at the casino without God (just not in amazing ways) but I don't attribute those wins to Him because He had nothing to do with it. Of course there may be many things that God does in my life without my knowing it.

Clearly if a man gives me 50 dollars I'll recognise that he gave me 50 dollars. If good things happen in my life, however, I don't attribute them to God.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

which is a morality that essentially says 'I can do whatever I want and God will still save me'

I don't know about God saving anyone, but the guy who's on God's side can do whatever he wants with the certain knowledge that he is doing right.

 

[9Westy9]

I don't know about God saving anyone, but the guy who's on God's side can do whatever he wants with the certain knowledge that he is doing right.

exactly my point it makes murder, adultery, rape etc. moral

 

[riley2112]

exactly my point it makes murder, adultery, rape etc. moral

He said , the guy on gods side. Nothing about god makes murder, adultery , rape etc. moral. Of course I guess it would depend on which god you are talking about.

 

[9Westy9]

He said , the guy on gods side. Nothing about god makes murder, adultery , rape etc. moral. Of course I guess it would depend on which god you are talking about.

he said

I don't know about God saving anyone, but the guy who's on God's side can do whatever he wants with the certain knowledge that he is doing right.

Meaning that if a guy with 'God on his side' knows that what he does is moral. So if this guy commits murder, rape, adultery etc. it is moral by definition. Unless God decides to leave his side beforehand, but considering we can't see who has God on his/ her side at any one time we can't say for sure. I find a x says it's moral therefore it's moral to be the worse definition/ form of morality. Whether this x is God or anyone else.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

exactly my point it makes murder, adultery, rape etc. moral

Well, OK. That's been my own point since my first posting, so I'm not sure why you continue to reassert it.

But maybe some horses deserve to be beaten relentlessly.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

Meaning that if a guy with 'God on his side' knows that what he does is moral. So if this guy commits murder, rape, adultery etc. it is moral by definition.

Yep. No doubt. It has always been so.

It's why morality should be done through hard and direct debate rather than through divine revelation.

 

[The Neo Nerd]

However that is the point. Only christianity provides salvation.

Salvation from what?

Who cares that the other scriptures see things differently?

Those who follow them.

For me the proof is in the pudding. If I pick up a cookbook and can make a cake from a recipe then the book is non-fiction. If I pick up a Bible and can be saved from my sin then the book is non-fiction.

How do you know you are saved from sin when it only happens when you die.

You are still taking it on faith. Just like every other religion.

 

[9Westy9]

Well, OK. That's been my own point since my first posting, so I'm not sure why you continue to reassert it.

But maybe some horses deserve to be beaten relentlessly.

I like beating dead horses . I kept re-asserting it because I assumed that you didn't realise it; my bad

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

He said , the guy on gods side. Nothing about god makes murder, adultery , rape etc. moral. Of course I guess it would depend on which god you are talking about.

As someone who believes that God is a creation of the human mind, I agree with you. There are as many gods as there are people, and some folks own some pretty nasty ones.

Have you thought about my question? If you and Jesus disagree about some moral act, would you obey Him or would you follow your conscience? I think it's an important question. I'm only pressing it a bit because you said earlier that you are determined to face the questions.

 

[riley2112]

he said



Meaning that if a guy with 'God on his side' knows that what he does is moral. So if this guy commits murder, rape, adultery etc. it is moral by definition. Unless God decides to leave his side beforehand, but considering we can't see who has God on his/ her side at any one time we can't say for sure. I find a x says it's moral therefore it's moral to be the worse definition/ form of morality. Whether this x is God or anyone else.

I see your point. That in it self is a scary thought.

 

[rusra02]

Do you believe everything you read?

No you wouldn't. You believe that passage because it backs up your pre existing beliefs.

That's not exactly insightful

What evidence would this be?

Because I went to church when when i was in primary school. Received religious education in primary school as well. Went to a christian high school. Have been on this forum for nearly three years.

And I've examined all the evidence I've been handed and found it ALL lacking.

You will of course accuse me of being closed minded or some such thing. But it's not closed minded to be skeptical about fantastical claims.

Perhaps you could start with the evidence that first convinced you, then we can go from there.

"Religious education" is not at all the same as Bible knowledge. Most religiouls schools teaching bear little to no resemblance to Bible teachings. So I am not surprised you found such unconvincing. Question: have you read the Bible to the point that you understand at least it's theme and historical timeline?

 

[Robert007]

Islam wrote:
there r many religion in the world, but surly there r only one right religion, but how could we reach the right believe, the right path?
There is no right religion. If you want to be religious, then visit widows and orphans. The established religions are all based on the traditions of men. Rightousness involves doing what is right, not believing in the traditions of men. If you want a path, then do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

 

[riley2112]

Islam wrote:
there r many religion in the world, but surly there r only one right religion, but how could we reach the right believe, the right path?
There is no right religion. If you want to be religious, then visit widows and orphans. The established religions are all based on the traditions of men. Rightousness involves doing what is right, not believing in the traditions of men. If you want a path, then do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

That makes no sense. You may want to reread that. However as for the true path being do unto others. I agree with you.