United Nations to ban religion?

[Deeje]

I guess this has been asked many times before and I admit that I haven’t done a search, but there are many here that are convinced of the existence of God so do those same people believe in the existence of the Devil.

Can you have one without the other?

Not really. The whole purpose of the Biblical narrative is to inform earth's residents about a dispute over God's rightful Sovereignty. Humans know about such disputes because most of their wars have been fought over the same issue. (before we discovered a lucrative use for oil that is.) A bit like fleas fighting over which parts of the dog they own.

The whole of mankind were taken hostage over this issue. The Creator is the only bona fide Universal Sovereign in existence, but a 'wannabe' challenged his right, and called into question his motives in setting a restriction for his human creation.
He did not challenge God's power, only his right to withhold certain knowledge from his children. This knowledge was not beneficial and would have served no good purpose. Under influence from satan, humans basically took this knowledge without God's permission....with disastrous consequences.

Without satan, the Bible makes no sense at all. Its all about God proving his case and settling the issue once and for all time, setting precedents so that God's sovereignty can never be challenged by another 'satan' ever again. We then have the rest of eternity to enjoy the results.

 

[Notanumber]

Not really. The whole purpose of the Biblical narrative is to inform earth's residents about a dispute over God's rightful Sovereignty. Humans know about such disputes because most of their wars have been fought over the same issue. (before we discovered a lucrative use for oil that is.) A bit like fleas fighting over which parts of the dog they own.

The whole of mankind were taken hostage over this issue. The Creator is the only bona fide Universal Sovereign in existence, but a 'wannabe' challenged his right, and called into question his motives, in setting a restriction for his human creation.
He did not challenge God's power, only his right to withhold certain knowledge from his children. This knowledge was not beneficial and would have served no good purpose. Under influence from satan, humans basically took this knowledge without God's permission....with disastrous consequences.

Without satan, the Bible makes no sense at all. Its all about God proving his case and settling the issue once and for all time, setting precedents so that God's sovereignty can never be challenged by another 'satan' ever again. We then have the rest of eternity to enjoy the results.

Just more mumbo jumbo is it not, if God or this Allah is so almighty why does he need us mere mortals fighting his battles for him.

 

[Deeje]

Just more mumbo jumbo is it not, if God or this Allah is so almighty why does he need us mere mortals fighting his battles for him.

Ah, what makes you think he does?

We are not fighting his battles.....we are fighting our own. God could have put down the rebellion with a wave of his hand. He could have snuffed out those rebels in a heartbeat....but he didn't. All that would have proven is that God us more powerful, not that he is the superior ruler. So allowing the pretender to take his best shot at being the better god and ruler, he gives us an object lesson that is so much better than just forcing everyone to do what he tells them. He gave us free will to use as we saw fit and it came with a warning..."Handle With Care"....."Fragile"....."Misuse results in voiding your warranty".

We are all proving whether we are worthy to become citizens in a world where God will again be the absolute Sovereign. He is using this situation to test us out to see if we have it in us to stand up as his worshippers when all around us, most people have given up. This is not a sprint to a finish line a few meters away....this is a lifelong marathon and all we need to do is finish the race to win the prize....
Everyone who crosses the line gets the same reward.....

....unending life in the paradise conditions we started out in. Once the issue is settled, then everything will go back to the way it was supposed to be in the beginning.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Yes, I know there are people who also don't accept Josephus writings.
Before the name of Pontius Pilate was discovered in the 60's people said there was No such person as Pilate.
^('~')^
None of which, to me, will change that ' they ' (powers that be) will be saying, "Peace and Security" as the precursor to the coming great tribulation of Revelation 7:14 before Jesus' ushers in global Peace on Earth among men of goodwill - 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3

Sure. On Josephus we know for a fact it was polarized. This was revelaed by a study done by Catholics. The real issue is if there really was a man who was preforming miracles in front of thousands of people then why in the hell isn't there any records anywhere else? Its not that there were not people writing about the history of the time. Several where and didn't mention him. You have to admit that is a bit fishy.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

You know, I really don't care what you think is valid. I care what I think is valid. And there are valid reasons to believe in God and read your Bible. And there are valid reasons to prevent people from urinating on the floor. So lets continue indoctrinating the people who don't understand, so that they do what we know they ought to do.

Like stone our wives if they are not virgins when we marry? Cut of wives's hands when they get involved in an argument and misrepresent you? Stone your son for working on the sabbath? Have your daughter marry her rapist to keep her honor? Sacrifice our children at the altar if we hear a voice in our head telling us to do so? Kill homosexuals? Or does the old test not count?

The purpose of the Bible is to make believers. I'm quite sure you are incapable of doing that. Atheists can't disciple anyone to faith in God.

Oh I agree. the purpose of the bible and pretty much any other religion is to propagate itself. That much we agree. Atheists also much this process up. Religion has always has this incredible fear of atheist. Its why the only unforgivable sin is blasphemy. They fear other religions but above all they fear atheism. And really for good reason. They believed that atheists will destroy the Christian religion and take down the church. And really for good reason. Atheist don't take to the church with torches and pitchforks. Atheists don't generally attack christians. No. Atheism destroys religions by simply existing. Only one or two that are socially pressured into keeping quiet isn't a problem. But when you get larger and larger groups of people who are openly and admittedly atheist or non-believers it encourages others to question their beliefs. From there it snowballs. Highly religious countries like the United States is seeing a huge growth in non-affiliated and non-religious people. In England and France its nearly 50/50 and then further down the line you have places like Norway and Sweeden where 90% of the country or more is non-believers. There is really no chance of religion taking hold in Norway or Sweeden. Very little chance in France and England. And each passing year it has less and less of a chance in America.

Do you believe in God?

No. No I do not.

 

[Sonofason]

Sure. On Josephus we know for a fact it was polarized. This was revelaed by a study done by Catholics. The real issue is if there really was a man who was preforming miracles in front of thousands of people then why in the hell isn't there any records anywhere else? Its not that there were not people writing about the history of the time. Several where and didn't mention him. You have to admit that is a bit fishy.

So we have 9 authors of those days who wrote 27 separate documents recording the miracles that Jesus performed. Do you not think that these might be the records that you are asking for? What more evidence do you need?

 

[Monk Of Reason]

So we have 9 authors of those days who wrote 27 separate documents recording the miracles that Jesus performed. Do you not think that these might be the records that you are asking for? What more evidence do you need?

Currently by my count we have zero leading into zero documents recording the micracles he preformed. What non biblical records are you talking about?

 

[Sonofason]

Like stone our wives if they are not virgins when we marry? Cut of wives's hands when they get involved in an argument and misrepresent you? Stone your son for working on the sabbath? Have your daughter marry her rapist to keep her honor? Sacrifice our children at the altar if we hear a voice in our head telling us to do so? Kill homosexuals? Or does the old test not count?

I believe that the Old Testament documents have great historical value and give us tremendous insight into the relationships that God had with the Jews. I believe from it we get a pretty good glimpse of what God expected of them, and insight with regard to what God expects of us. This knowledge should guide us in our understanding of the New Covenant that God made with the entire world, which includes the gentiles, who are in Christ. God never commanded you and I to stone adulterers to death. But we can see from the Law's of Moses and all of the other commandments that God gave to Moses and his descendants up until the point of the coming of the Messiah, what God thinks of adultery. Adulterers can see very well what they deserve. But Jesus did not stone the adulterer when he had the chance. He certainly had the authority to do so. It was what the woman deserved, yet Jesus forgave her; and he told her to "go and sin no more". We can see from Jesus' statement and actions that he regarded what she did as sin, and that there is something we can do that is far greater than giving people what they deserve. We can forgive. Does this mean that we ought not recognize our sins, or to not recognize actions of others that are sins? Should we lie and tell everyone it's okay to sin? No, we must recognize sin for what it is, and turn from it, and knowing our frailties, we ought to forgive the sins of others.

Oh I agree. the purpose of the bible and pretty much any other religion is to propagate itself. That much we agree. Atheists also much this process up. Religion has always has this incredible fear of atheist. Its why the only unforgivable sin is blasphemy. They fear other religions but above all they fear atheism. And really for good reason. They believed that atheists will destroy the Christian religion and take down the church. And really for good reason. Atheist don't take to the church with torches and pitchforks. Atheists don't generally attack christians. No. Atheism destroys religions by simply existing. Only one or two that are socially pressured into keeping quiet isn't a problem. But when you get larger and larger groups of people who are openly and admittedly atheist or non-believers it encourages others to question their beliefs. From there it snowballs. Highly religious countries like the United States is seeing a huge growth in non-affiliated and non-religious people. In England and France its nearly 50/50 and then further down the line you have places like Norway and Sweeden where 90% of the country or more is non-believers. There is really no chance of religion taking hold in Norway or Sweeden. Very little chance in France and England. And each passing year it has less and less of a chance in America.

It is well documented that there would come a turning away from faith. It is something I expect. It is something that confirms that we are nearing the Second Coming of our Lord and Savior, the day when Christ establishes His Kingdom on this earth.

No. No I do not.

Of course you don't.

 

[Sonofason]

Currently by my count we have zero leading into zero documents recording the micracles he preformed. What non biblical records are you talking about?

Those documents were not a part of any Bible when they were written. And so they are the non-biblical records that you are talking about.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Those documents were not a part of any Bible when they were written. And so they are the non-biblical records that you are talking about.

None of which were historical in nature. None of which were written during the time of Jesus. All of which were written from theological standpionts of believers in said religion. Most of which contradicted in some way shape or form. None of which we have originals for.

 

[Sonofason]

None of which were historical in nature. None of which were written during the time of Jesus. All of which were written from theological standpionts of believers in said religion. Most of which contradicted in some way shape or form. None of which we have originals for.

I assure you, for the most part, those who witnessed what Jesus did became believers as a result of what they saw. If there were anyone who denied the teachings of Christ, it is highly unlikely that they would undermine their agenda by attributing miracles to Jesus...you know, people like you.

 

[columbus]

I assure you, for the most part, those who witnessed what Jesus did became believers as a result of what they saw.

How will you assure me of that?
What I see reflected in the record is just the opposite.
Tom

 

[Sonofason]

None of which were historical in nature. None of which were written during the time of Jesus. All of which were written from theological standpionts of believers in said religion. Most of which contradicted in some way shape or form. None of which we have originals for.

Can you tell me please where the original manuscript of the Iliad and the Odyssey is today? By the way...there are no significant legitimate contradictions between any of the 66 books of the Bible.

 

[Sonofason]

How will you assure me of that?
What I see reflected in the record is just the opposite.
Tom

Show your evidence that those who witnessed the miracles of Jesus did not for the most part become believers as a result of what they saw.

 

[columbus]

Show your evidence that those who witnessed the miracles of Jesus did not for the most part become believers as a result of what they saw.

It is the lack of evidence that it happened.
Had the story, as told, been true I would expect a huge outburst of Christianity and fervor. One that would rock Judea.
Instead almost nobody noticed anything. If it hadn't been for Paul I doubt that Christianity would have survived the diaspora. And Paul never met Jesus.
Tom

 

[Sonofason]

It is the lack of evidence that it happened.
Had the story, as told, been true I would expect a huge outburst of Christianity and fervor. One that would rock Judea.
Instead almost nobody noticed anything. If it hadn't been for Paul I doubt that Christianity would have survived the diaspora. And Paul never met Jesus.
Tom

Alrighty, I will accept this as a refusal and inability to show clear evidence that your false claim was justifiable.

 

[columbus]

Alrighty, I will accept this as a refusal and inability to show clear evidence that your false claim was justifiable.

Have you already forgotten

I assure you, for the most part, those who witnessed what Jesus did became believers as a result of what they saw.

You are the one who assured me of something. And you are not able to produce much of anything but your own opinions.
Tom

 

[Monk Of Reason]

I assure you, for the most part, those who witnessed what Jesus did became believers as a result of what they saw. If there were anyone who denied the teachings of Christ, it is highly unlikely that they would undermine their agenda by attributing miracles to Jesus...you know, people like you.

You assure me? You where there?

Can you tell me please where the original manuscript of the Iliad and the Odyssey is today? By the way...there are no significant legitimate contradictions between any of the 66 books of the Bible.

The illiad and oddesy are not historical documents. We don't care what they said. But when you tell me you have the undeniable fricking word of god you damn well better be able to deliver!

And there are minor but no major contradictions in the cannonized bible? Do you know why? Because it was designed that way by the people who put the bible together 200 years after Jesus. They took the hundreds of different religious passages and narrowed it down to their own version.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Show your evidence that those who witnessed the miracles of Jesus did not for the most part become believers as a result of what they saw.

There is no evidence they did. There is zero evidence any of it even happened. We don't have a written account of who any of these nameless people were. Its like I asked you to prove that the beaver citizens of Narnia thought the human children were bad rulers.

 

[Sonofason]

Have you already forgotten

You are the one who assured me of something. And you are not able to produce much of anything but your own opinions.
Tom

Back in 2014 I believe, "An Italian expert studying a first century document written by the Roman historian Marcus Velleius Paterculus that was recently discovered in the archives of the Vatican, found what is presumed to be the first eyewitness account ever recorded of a miracle of Jesus Christ. The author describes a scene that he allegedly witnessed, in which a prophet and teacher that he names Iēsous de Nazarenus, resuscitated a stillborn boy and handed him back to his mother."
Newly-Found Document Holds Eyewitness Account of Jesus Performing Miracle

Do you even look for further evidence, or do you just look for it with your eyes closed?