PDA

View Full Version : Why Don't Jehovah's Witnesses Vote?



BAMAPHIN 22
06-28-2008, 11:49 PM
Serena Williams told reporters (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/life/religion/5855824.html) at Wimbledon on Wednesday that she's excited about Barack Obama's candidacy but won't vote for him because Jehovah's Witnesses "don't get involved in politics." Her sister Venusówho is also a Jehovah's Witnessówouldn't even comment on the presidential election. Why don't Jehovah's Witnesses vote?

Because of John 17:14 (http://www.gnpcb.org/esv/search/?go=Go&q=John+17%3A14-19) and other passages in the Bible. In that verse, Jesus says of his followers: "They are not of the world, just as I am not of the world." Jehovah's Witnesses have interpreted that statement as a call to remain neutral in all political matters (http://www.jw-media.org/beliefs/society.htm). (In some of the sect's literature, members are described as "representatives of God's heavenly kingdom (http://www.jwfiles.com/scans/images/Wt11-1-1999p29.gif)"; they are thus obligated to stay out of local political affairs in keeping with the behavior of ambassadors.) Witnesses also refrain from serving in the military, running for public office, and pledging allegiance to the flag.


http://www.propeller.com/viewstory/2008/06/28/why-dont-jehovas-witnesses-vote/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slate.com%2Fid%2F2194321%2F%26GT1%3D39001&frame=true

Tetragrammaton
07-01-2008, 11:46 AM
Almost all of my mother's side are Jehovah's Witnesses. They aren't supposed to vote, but many of them do, and reliably Republican.

Dolphan7
07-01-2008, 12:54 PM
Well the reasons the Watchtower Society uses to not vote isn't based on sound biblical theology.

The bible doesn't really say specifically that we should vote, but it doesn't say specifically that we shouldn't either.

It is a matter of one own conscience. Some do, some don't, and both are ok.

fishfanfromjerz
07-01-2008, 10:36 PM
Why Don't Jehovah's Witnesses Vote?












Because they are too busy knocking on your door on Election Day!!! :d-day:

MDFINFAN
09-27-2008, 10:52 AM
What I've always thought the JW's miss is that Jesus said render what is ceaser to ceaser, render what God's to God. We are put here on earth to participate on earth, and as a Godly person we look to God for our salvation and sustainment...clearly His laws want us to be good citizens and perform our citizenship responsibilities. God allowed the Isrealites to pick leaders as they rejected Him...initially God picked who would lead them, and as time has gone on, He's allowed them to pick their leader. And yet, in all this, God is still in control..

Bumpus
10-13-2008, 02:18 PM
Really? Hmmm ... didn't know that. Interesting.

Tetragrammaton
10-13-2008, 04:02 PM
Really? Hmmm ... didn't know that. Interesting.

Its an official rule, but the Jehovah's Witnesses really don't all listen. My grandparents won't vote, but my aunts and uncles all do.

dolfan94
10-14-2008, 09:19 PM
A better question is Why Do They Stop By My house every single saturday?

emeraldfin
10-17-2008, 08:19 AM
Well the reasons the Watchtower Society uses to not vote isn't based on sound biblical theology.

The bible doesn't really say specifically that we should vote, but it doesn't say specifically that we shouldn't either.

It is a matter of one own conscience. Some do, some don't, and both are ok.

Pretty much spot on there D7.

All about interpretation and thats how they interpret that passage.

cwsox
10-22-2008, 11:23 PM
A better question is Why Do They Stop By My house every single saturday?

my saintly religiously conservative mother got rid of them by telling them she was a witch

that did violate the commandment about false witness but we lived 3 blocks from a kingdom hall and she had had enough - and it worked

Detonate
10-25-2008, 05:29 PM
Jehovah's Witnesses are not Christians. Just letting you know.

Tetragrammaton
10-26-2008, 12:43 AM
Jehovah's Witnesses are not Christians. Just letting you know.

Yes they are. They worship Jesus Christ and read the Bible. You can disagree with their interpretation, but there are hundreds of interpretations. None is more right than the other.

Dolphan7
10-26-2008, 11:26 AM
Yes they are. They worship Jesus Christ and read the Bible. You can disagree with their interpretation, but there are hundreds of interpretations. None is more right than the other.Actually they are considered a christian cult, thus not christian at all. They may worship Jesus, but it isn't the Jesus of the Holy Bible. To them he is not god but a perfect man. They deny his deity, physical resurrection and salvation through grace, among other things. They re-interpreted the bible in such a way as to support their beliefs, but not in a way that would pass any acceptable scholarly methods.

Tetragrammaton
10-26-2008, 11:48 AM
Actually they are considered a christian cult, thus not christian at all. They may worship Jesus, but it isn't the Jesus of the Holy Bible. To them he is not god but a perfect man. They deny his deity, physical resurrection and salvation through grace, among other things. They re-interpreted the bible in such a way as to support their beliefs, but not in a way that would pass any acceptable scholarly methods.

This argument gets really slippery, though. I hear the same train of thought in arguing that Catholics aren't Christians.

I just looked up "Christian cult", and they are not on there. There are three "reports" filed, and Jehovah's Witnesses have never been listed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_cult

Isn't "passing any acceptable scholarly methods" entirely dependent on who is doing it? It is a 2000 year old book, after all.

Dolphan7
10-26-2008, 01:10 PM
This argument gets really slippery, though. I hear the same train of thought in arguing that Catholics aren't Christians.

I just looked up "Christian cult", and they are not on there. There are three "reports" filed, and Jehovah's Witnesses have never been listed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_cult

Isn't "passing any acceptable scholarly methods" entirely dependent on who is doing it? It is a 2000 year old book, after all.It isn't slippery at all. While wikipedia is a good resource for the most part, isn't the final say and sometimes a little more research is warranted; for instance if you look at this line from the link you posted...


A body of doctrine that does not fully accept the Christian fundamental beliefs about the Bible, or deviates from them in unacceptable ways.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_cult#cite_note-Martin-0)


If you look at that footnote 1, you will see it refers to a book by Walter Martin and in that book he clearly identifies JW as a christian cult, and many others as well. I have read that book myself.


As far as their interpretation it has been determined that it was done by people who aren't familiar or educated in biblical exegesis. It would be like you and I get together and decide to change the bible to say what we want it to say regardless of the original authors intent. Makes no sense and cannot be considered a viable interpretation outside the JW organization.

ih8brady
10-26-2008, 05:47 PM
It's always great to see the loving way some Christians treat other Christians. I must ask then, what is a Christian? Why is the neo-evangelical definition different than the historical one? Why wait until now before mentioning how radical and dangerous the Jehovah's Witness are?

LouPhinFan
10-27-2008, 06:18 AM
It's always great to see the loving way some Christians treat other Christians. I must ask then, what is a Christian? Why is the neo-evangelical definition different than the historical one? Why wait until now before mentioning how radical and dangerous the Jehovah's Witness are?

Just because someone follows Jesus Christ, doesn't necessarily mean they're a Christian. JWs believe in Jesus, but they don't believe he was the son of God and that he died for our sins. That doesn't meet the definition of a Christian, historical or otherwise. Mormons fall into this same category as well. Their religion is based (mostly) on the book of Mormon, which isn't a book of the Bible and therefore isn't Christian.

I hate to say it because it might open a can of worms, but Catholism gets dangerously close to this as well. Through the centuries various things have been added to their religion that are not found anywhere in the Bible. They believe that Jesus is the sun of God and that he died for our sins, but things like coming very close to outright worship of Mary (the mother of Jesus), the notions of purgatory (meaning Jesus' death and resurrection weren't good enough to get you to heaven, so you have to wait in an abyss until you're "good enough" to enter heaven), asking a priest to forgive you of your sins (even if it is "on behalf of God"), and worship of one man (the pope) all skirt pretty close.

I'm not trying to bash, I'm just giving my opinions. JWs, Mormons, Catholics, Muslims, etc. have every right to worship how they choose and I respect that. But that also doesn't mean that I have to accept their religions as equally valid to my own.

emeraldfin
10-28-2008, 08:12 AM
Just because someone follows Jesus Christ, doesn't necessarily mean they're a Christian. JWs believe in Jesus, but they don't believe he was the son of God and that he died for our sins. That doesn't meet the definition of a Christian, historical or otherwise. Mormons fall into this same category as well. Their religion is based (mostly) on the book of Mormon, which isn't a book of the Bible and therefore isn't Christian.

I hate to say it because it might open a can of worms, but Catholism gets dangerously close to this as well. Through the centuries various things have been added to their religion that are not found anywhere in the Bible. They believe that Jesus is the sun of God and that he died for our sins, but things like coming very close to outright worship of Mary (the mother of Jesus), the notions of purgatory (meaning Jesus' death and resurrection weren't good enough to get you to heaven, so you have to wait in an abyss until you're "good enough" to enter heaven), asking a priest to forgive you of your sins (even if it is "on behalf of God"), and worship of one man (the pope) all skirt pretty close.

I'm not trying to bash, I'm just giving my opinions. JWs, Mormons, Catholics, Muslims, etc. have every right to worship how they choose and I respect that. But that also doesn't mean that I have to accept their religions as equally valid to my own.

What I will say is that not a single theistic religion on this planet is 100% sure that there religion is the right one or even if there is a god at all. It all comes down to pure blind faith in a higher being.

So in reality just because we pick a particular religion/faith does'nt mean that Islam, Judaism, etc is wrong. Sure you dont have to say other religions are right or valid, but when you have no more idea than they do of what or if anything lies ahead, so you cant really say they are wrong either.

Dolphan7
10-28-2008, 04:45 PM
What I will say is that not a single theistic religion on this planet is 100% sure that there religion is the right one or even if there is a god at all. It all comes down to pure blind faith in a higher being.

So in reality just because we pick a particular religion/faith does'nt mean that Islam, Judaism, etc is wrong. Sure you dont have to say other religions are right or valid, but when you have no more idea than they do of what or if anything lies ahead, so you cant really say they are wrong either.
I hope you realize that huge leap of faith you are making by simply making this statement.

While to the naked eye and to the individual who is biased against spiritual things this appears to make sense, but when you really look at it in depth intellectually and logically is it clear that one religion does have a little ( a lot actually) more to it than just blind faith.

There are Facts Behind the Faith of Christianity. There is little room on a football message board to go through that process, but just a for instance we have the person of Jesus Christ, and the Gospels that were written about him, to consider. Once you realize that He really did live and really did accomplish all the miraculous and supernatural things written about him, no other religion can make the same claim. The fact that he claimed and proved who he said he was speak volumes over any other creator of a religion, from Mohamed to Budha to L Ron Hubbard. Nothing even comes close.

There are really only two logical conclusions when it comes to the religions of the world.

1. They are all wrong.

2. Only one is right

But they can't all be equally right because they make completely differing and opposing conclusions.

If they are all wrong then none of them are right and there is no point in following any one of them.

Or there is one that is right and that one is the one to follow.

Christianity is that one.:up:

FinFrenzy
10-28-2008, 05:06 PM
Why Don't Jehovah's Witnesses Vote?












Because they are too busy knocking on your door on Election Day!!! :d-day:

:sidelol::sidelol: That's just wrong! Okay I'm over it!!! :lol::sidelol:

emeraldfin
10-29-2008, 07:07 AM
I hope you realize that huge leap of faith you are making by simply making this statement.

While to the naked eye and to the individual who is biased against spiritual things this appears to make sense, but when you really look at it in depth intellectually and logically is it clear that one religion does have a little ( a lot actually) more to it than just blind faith.

There are Facts Behind the Faith of Christianity. There is little room on a football message board to go through that process, but just a for instance we have the person of Jesus Christ, and the Gospels that were written about him, to consider. Once you realize that He really did live and really did accomplish all the miraculous and supernatural things written about him, no other religion can make the same claim. The fact that he claimed and proved who he said he was speak volumes over any other creator of a religion, from Mohamed to Budha to L Ron Hubbard. Nothing even comes close.

There are really only two logical conclusions when it comes to the religions of the world.

1. They are all wrong.

2. Only one is right

But they can't all be equally right because they make completely differing and opposing conclusions.

If they are all wrong then none of them are right and there is no point in following any one of them.

Or there is one that is right and that one is the one to follow.

Christianity is that one.:up:

Point is that as humans we cant make the assertion that one is right and the rest are wrong because as I said earlier not a single theistic religion can be 100% certain there faith is the right one.

So what I am saying is that how can you say one religion is wrong when you have no idea your one is right? What makes your religion any more wrong/right than any other religion?

So is a the Jewish faith wrong for saying that Jesus was a great man, but not the Messiah? If so explain to me why? Expalin how you know 100% that they are wrong and Christianity is right?

Marino613
10-31-2008, 12:29 AM
There are Facts Behind the Faith of Christianity. There is little room on a football message board to go through that process, but just a for instance we have the person of Jesus Christ, and the Gospels that were written about him, to consider. Once you realize that He really did live and really did accomplish all the miraculous and supernatural things written about him, no other religion can make the same claim. The fact that he claimed and proved who he said he was speak volumes over any other creator of a religion, from Mohamed to Budha to L Ron Hubbard. Nothing even comes close.


True. A football message board is not a good venue for exploring these issues. But I will say that I have heard the exact same claim from the faithful of the Jewish and Buddhist religions. I have not had this discussion in depth with Muslims, but from what I have read they repeat the same thing as well. And I haven't even mentioned other world religions either.

Both your claims of "Only we have facts behind our religion" and "other religions CAN'T/DON'T/WON'T claim they have facts to back them up" are found everywhere. I don't know you well enough, so I won't direct this towards you, but I often find it laughable the extent to which religious dogmatists will go to ignore that there are Billions of people in the world who practice totally different religious traditions. That doesn't make them right, but it does imply that some very intelligent and thoughtful people will be counted in amongst their faithful. These intellectuals are also educated, place a premium on reason, evidence and logic (how can you thrive as a society if you don't?), and would therefore require some adequate semblance of fact to back up their religious belief.

On a different note, what is an outsider to do? We have limited time in this life and a lot of choices including none of the above. I mean no disrespect to you or other Christians, but how much time should I spend on researching the validity of these facts and determining whether Christianity is the proper conclusion to come to? I have already spent some time on it and on a couple other religious traditions. As of now, I don't find any of the arguments compelling and I am loathe to go down a dead end, so IMHO, it is none of the above with Christianity being lower down on the list of likely candidates.

Marino613
10-31-2008, 12:50 AM
There are really only two logical conclusions when it comes to the religions of the world.

1. They are all wrong.

2. Only one is right

But they can't all be equally right because they make completely differing and opposing conclusions.

If they are all wrong then none of them are right and there is no point in following any one of them.

Or there is one that is right and that one is the one to follow.

Christianity is that one.:up:

I divided your post because I wanted to respond to this point separately. Your logic in the first portion is correct. All world religions in one way or another contradict each other, so they all can't be right. It's either one or none (unless there are world religions that compliment each other, in which case they can both be accepted. That is merely theoretical though.)

Still, your options coming out of this are very limited. There are plenty of thoughtful religious people who have much more nuanced and complex models of religious pluralism.

One example - some religions (many Buddhists and some Catholics make this argument) understand that all religions teach some transcendent truth from an enlightened/divine entity (God or otherwise), but that some messages are closer to the truth then others. Still, all the religions are valuable because different people are at different stages of spiritual development and therefore God/Enlightened beings/etc. prefer people practice a corrupted version then nothing at all. Diana Eck calls this the "Heliocentric" model of pluralism in which the correct religion is in the center and other religions rotate around it and benefit from it.

Another example is certainly more heretical, but also a logical possibility. Take the heliocentric model, but make all religions revolve around the Truth without any being able to claim it fully (maybe the full truth is "too hot" to belabor the analogy). In this model, the transcendent and divine is encountered by imperfect humans around the world and each does its best to transmit it. This truth may manifest differently both because of transmission errors, or because this truth is multifaceted and different people take different pieces of the puzzle, or perhaps it is simply too large for any one human to be able to capture and transmit it all. In this model, all religions are indeed, within a range of variables, equally correct and equally false.

Dolphan7
11-01-2008, 02:27 AM
Point is that as humans we cant make the assertion that one is right and the rest are wrong because as I said earlier not a single theistic religion can be 100% certain there faith is the right one.

And I am proposing to you that there is one religion that is 100% sure theirs is the right one. Christianity tells us that faith is to be confident knowing the things that are seen, so that we can be sure of the things that are unseen.


HEB 11:1 Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

The verses following describe how by this faith the great men of old were praised. They knew God existed because he spoke to them directly, yet they still didn't know or understand what God was telling them to do. By this faith Abraham raised a knife to his first born son Isaac, not understanding why but having faith in those unseen things, because he was confident and trusted God.


So what I am saying is that how can you say one religion is wrong when you have no idea your one is right? What makes your religion any more wrong/right than any other religion? Because of the person of Jesus Christ. As I said before. He really did live, and he really did do all those miracles and supernatural stuff. He really did prove who he said he was. He said "I am the way and the truth and the life, no one comes to the father but through me." No other religion can make the claims Jesus made with the proof that he provided. None. Period. So the question is what are you going to do with Jesus?




So is a the Jewish faith wrong for saying that Jesus was a great man, but not the Messiah? If so explain to me why? Expalin how you know 100% that they are wrong and Christianity is right?Yes. The religious rulers of Jesus time wanted Him dead. He was a threat to their power. Jesus taught some radical stuff, and backed it up with signs and wonders to an unbelieving generation. That was the point of the miracles, as a sign that he as who he said he was. The pharisees were forced to get rid of him, so they killed him, but he lived after three days and was seen by hundreds. The Christian church started soon after that and grew to an estimated 50,000. But the Pharisees accomplished their goal of retaining their power over the rest of the population. They maintianed that power in Israel, while Christianity spread throughout the Roman Empire and eventually the rest of the world, and is still spreading today - like in China.

Because of the Pharisees of Jesus time does Judaism live on today. But it is considered a dead religion because without the temple and the priests, it cannot legally or literally be practiced. That is why there is such effort into rebuilding the temple and creating the presithood with all the special red cows and purple robes and all that stuff. Only problem is there is a Muslim mosque on the temple mount. Try getting rid of that. Ain't happening anytime soon. Besides that they would just go back to sacrificing animals, after Jesus made the ultimate sacrifice for all mankind, makes no sense.

I am sorry I wish I could spend time with you in person and talk with you, but there is only so much I can do on a message board. Besides it's limited capabilities there are lurkers on here who constantly distract good debate with rhetorical questions never rally seeking an answer. Kinda clouds the issue.

Dolphan7
11-01-2008, 02:55 AM
True. A football message board is not a good venue for exploring these issues. But I will say that I have heard the exact same claim from the faithful of the Jewish and Buddhist religions. I have not had this discussion in depth with Muslims, but from what I have read they repeat the same thing as well. And I haven't even mentioned other world religions either.
Of course religious followers will say and think that their faith is the true one, or at the very least they will say that it is true for them (existentialism). But they all can't be right. All are false, or one is right. Only one can make that claim. Which one makes the claim? Which one can claim Jesus?




Both your claims of "Only we have facts behind our religion" and "other religions CAN'T/DON'T/WON'T claim they have facts to back them up" are found everywhere. I don't know you well enough, so I won't direct this towards you, but I often find it laughable the extent to which religious dogmatists will go to ignore that there are Billions of people in the world who practice totally different religious traditions. That doesn't make them right, but it does imply that some very intelligent and thoughtful people will be counted in amongst their faithful. These intellectuals are also educated, place a premium on reason, evidence and logic (how can you thrive as a society if you don't?), and would therefore require some adequate semblance of fact to back up their religious belief. I understand there are lot's of smart and intelligent people in this world. It still gets back to this - either they are all wrong, or only one is right, but they can't all be right because they same different things about God and his nature and his attributes and the path to salvation. I will offer to you that although intelligent people either grow up into a religion or they choose one, most if not all really haven't put it though the paces of intellectual and logical scrutiny - especially those who are raised in a religion. They don't question it, and don't therefore run it through that intellectual test so to speak. Those who choose a religion tend to choose one that reflects "their" personal view of the world, or it is a economic decision, or a host of harmless reasons - point is they really haven't given it a lot of intellectual thought. And I think that religion in general takes on this connotation that it is a matter of faith not intellect so why give it much thought. So it is quite possible that although there are very smart people who believe in various religions, they really haven't vetted them out intellectually or logically. Hey I know some very smart college professors and scientists who believe that we all evolved from a chance random spark of life in pond scum. Go figure! Now that makes me laugh my socks off right there!


On a different note, what is an outsider to do? We have limited time in this life and a lot of choices including none of the above. I mean no disrespect to you or other Christians, but how much time should I spend on researching the validity of these facts and determining whether Christianity is the proper conclusion to come to? I have already spent some time on it and on a couple other religious traditions. As of now, I don't find any of the arguments compelling and I am loathe to go down a dead end, so IMHO, it is none of the above with Christianity being lower down on the list of likely candidates.Well if you are of the mindset that all religions are wrong and none of the above is correct, then spend no more time convincing yourself otherwise. If you are not 100% sure God doesn't exist....keep looking.

But if you believe that there is some intelligent creator behind our purpose and existence on this lone unique planet, then there really is only one true religion that explains it all - and there is no time limit on that my friend. God will wait. I was an atheist for the first 32 years of my life. I found the truth of Jesus and have been a believer ever since, that was 15 years ago and my faith has not waivered once.

Dolphan7
11-01-2008, 03:11 AM
I divided your post because I wanted to respond to this point separately. Your logic in the first portion is correct. All world religions in one way or another contradict each other, so they all can't be right. It's either one or none (unless there are world religions that compliment each other, in which case they can both be accepted. That is merely theoretical though.)

Still, your options coming out of this are very limited. There are plenty of thoughtful religious people who have much more nuanced and complex models of religious pluralism.

One example - some religions (many Buddhists and some Catholics make this argument) understand that all religions teach some transcendent truth from an enlightened/divine entity (God or otherwise), but that some messages are closer to the truth then others. Still, all the religions are valuable because different people are at different stages of spiritual development and therefore God/Enlightened beings/etc. prefer people practice a corrupted version then nothing at all. Diana Eck calls this the "Heliocentric" model of pluralism in which the correct religion is in the center and other religions rotate around it and benefit from it.

Another example is certainly more heretical, but also a logical possibility. Take the heliocentric model, but make all religions revolve around the Truth without any being able to claim it fully (maybe the full truth is "too hot" to belabor the analogy). In this model, the transcendent and divine is encountered by imperfect humans around the world and each does its best to transmit it. This truth may manifest differently both because of transmission errors, or because this truth is multifaceted and different people take different pieces of the puzzle, or perhaps it is simply too large for any one human to be able to capture and transmit it all. In this model, all religions are indeed, within a range of variables, equally correct and equally false.Sounds like a fancy way of describing universalism.

All paths eventually lead to the same thing - some sort of enlightened state of being or discovery.

Does that sound more logical than the God of the Bible?, of which we had in our midst his human son who lived with us and died for our sins?

You make the call. Remember even with your example above you have only just created a new religion, but it is still considered one religion, although I see the attempt to blend it all together, and it gets back to - they are either all wrong, or one is right.

emeraldfin
11-01-2008, 07:09 AM
And I am proposing to you that there is one religion that is 100% sure theirs is the right one. Christianity tells us that faith is to be confident knowing the things that are seen, so that we can be sure of the things that are unseen.


HEB 11:1 Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

The verses following describe how by this faith the great men of old were praised. They knew God existed because he spoke to them directly, yet they still didn't know or understand what God was telling them to do. By this faith Abraham raised a knife to his first born son Isaac, not understanding why but having faith in those unseen things, because he was confident and trusted God.

Because of the person of Jesus Christ. As I said before. He really did live, and he really did do all those miracles and supernatural stuff. He really did prove who he said he was. He said "I am the way and the truth and the life, no one comes to the father but through me." No other religion can make the claims Jesus made with the proof that he provided. None. Period. So the question is what are you going to do with Jesus?



Yes. The religious rulers of Jesus time wanted Him dead. He was a threat to their power. Jesus taught some radical stuff, and backed it up with signs and wonders to an unbelieving generation. That was the point of the miracles, as a sign that he as who he said he was. The pharisees were forced to get rid of him, so they killed him, but he lived after three days and was seen by hundreds. The Christian church started soon after that and grew to an estimated 50,000. But the Pharisees accomplished their goal of retaining their power over the rest of the population. They maintianed that power in Israel, while Christianity spread throughout the Roman Empire and eventually the rest of the world, and is still spreading today - like in China.

Because of the Pharisees of Jesus time does Judaism live on today. But it is considered a dead religion because without the temple and the priests, it cannot legally or literally be practiced. That is why there is such effort into rebuilding the temple and creating the presithood with all the special red cows and purple robes and all that stuff. Only problem is there is a Muslim mosque on the temple mount. Try getting rid of that. Ain't happening anytime soon. Besides that they would just go back to sacrificing animals, after Jesus made the ultimate sacrifice for all mankind, makes no sense.

I am sorry I wish I could spend time with you in person and talk with you, but there is only so much I can do on a message board. Besides it's limited capabilities there are lurkers on here who constantly distract good debate with rhetorical questions never rally seeking an answer. Kinda clouds the issue.

I dont think anyone actually debates whether Jesus lived, however there is a huge question of who Jesus was. As I assume you already know D7 the eternally ongoing argument of Christology from above and below. Was he just simply Jesus of Nazareth or Jesus Christ the Messiah. Of course as you mentioned this is something that cant be discussed here, but I find it a difficult issue for Chrstians in their worship of JC. Do they look upon him as a man just like they are, filled with the Holy Spirit, a role model in some way. Or do you look at him as some divine being, sent from Heaven and is impeccable to all sin.

The Trinity is another extremely complicated issue that I'm not even going to get into here, but what I'm trying to point out is that there is also many complicated and un-resolved issues within Christianity.

emeraldfin
11-01-2008, 07:14 AM
And I am proposing to you that there is one religion that is 100% sure theirs is the right one. Christianity tells us that faith is to be confident knowing the things that are seen, so that we can be sure of the things that are unseen.


HEB 11:1 Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

The verses following describe how by this faith the great men of old were praised. They knew God existed because he spoke to them directly, yet they still didn't know or understand what God was telling them to do. By this faith Abraham raised a knife to his first born son Isaac, not understanding why but having faith in those unseen things, because he was confident and trusted God.

Because of the person of Jesus Christ. As I said before. He really did live, and he really did do all those miracles and supernatural stuff. He really did prove who he said he was. He said "I am the way and the truth and the life, no one comes to the father but through me." No other religion can make the claims Jesus made with the proof that he provided. None. Period. So the question is what are you going to do with Jesus?



Yes. The religious rulers of Jesus time wanted Him dead. He was a threat to their power. Jesus taught some radical stuff, and backed it up with signs and wonders to an unbelieving generation. That was the point of the miracles, as a sign that he as who he said he was. The pharisees were forced to get rid of him, so they killed him, but he lived after three days and was seen by hundreds. The Christian church started soon after that and grew to an estimated 50,000. But the Pharisees accomplished their goal of retaining their power over the rest of the population. They maintianed that power in Israel, while Christianity spread throughout the Roman Empire and eventually the rest of the world, and is still spreading today - like in China.

Because of the Pharisees of Jesus time does Judaism live on today. But it is considered a dead religion because without the temple and the priests, it cannot legally or literally be practiced. That is why there is such effort into rebuilding the temple and creating the presithood with all the special red cows and purple robes and all that stuff. Only problem is there is a Muslim mosque on the temple mount. Try getting rid of that. Ain't happening anytime soon. Besides that they would just go back to sacrificing animals, after Jesus made the ultimate sacrifice for all mankind, makes no sense.

I am sorry I wish I could spend time with you in person and talk with you, but there is only so much I can do on a message board. Besides it's limited capabilities there are lurkers on here who constantly distract good debate with rhetorical questions never rally seeking an answer. Kinda clouds the issue.

Likewise D7, I do agree that we are limited on an internet forum. I know that we have a few arguments/discussions but I do enjoy hearing opinons of those dedicated to their religion, not in the sense to attack their believes, but to understand thier believes.

Marino613
11-01-2008, 03:11 PM
Well if you are of the mindset that all religions are wrong and none of the above is correct, then spend no more time convincing yourself otherwise. If you are not 100% sure God doesn't exist....keep looking.

But if you believe that there is some intelligent creator behind our purpose and existence on this lone unique planet, then there really is only one true religion that explains it all - and there is no time limit on that my friend. God will wait. I was an atheist for the first 32 years of my life. I found the truth of Jesus and have been a believer ever since, that was 15 years ago and my faith has not waivered once.

I actually do keep looking. I have been looking as an adult for about 15 years. I think my original post was in response to your very straightforward claim that Christianity is the "true religion that explains it all". Personally, I don't see it that way, as much as I respect your right to your opinion. I find the factual and logical claims of some other religions more convincing, and some others less but weighing them all, I find none of them fully convincing. I am happy for you though that you have found something that allows you to keep unwavering faith for 15 years, just as I am happy for the Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Taoists, Muslims, and Atheists who have the same unwavering faith.



Sounds like a fancy way of describing universalism.

All paths eventually lead to the same thing - some sort of enlightened state of being or discovery.

Does that sound more logical than the God of the Bible?, of which we had in our midst his human son who lived with us and died for our sins?

You make the call. Remember even with your example above you have only just created a new religion, but it is still considered one religion, although I see the attempt to blend it all together, and it gets back to - they are either all wrong, or one is right.Ok. I only would add that the model I presented claimed that all religions contain truth AND falsehood (at least in my experience of very serious study of a handful of them), so it is more "fancy" than a simple universalism in which all are fundamentally right or lead to the same place. IMO, there is a lot that is wrong in all institutional religions that can easily undermine a lot their spiritual aims.

But, more or less I would have to answer yes. Spiritual and religious experiences of a transcendent God (or whatever term makes most sense) taking on different and more or less equally reasonable and unreasonable forms in different places, cultures and times is more reasonable to me than the God of the Christian Bible sending his only human son to live with us and die for our sins. I don't begrudge you thinking otherwise.

Marino613
11-01-2008, 03:29 PM
And I am proposing to you that there is one religion that is 100% sure theirs is the right one.

Christianity is not the only religion that is 100% sure theirs is the right one. It is the only religion you are convinced is the right one. That is a different story. But this conversation could easily be happening with a Jew , muslim or buddhist.

Edit: Although I enjoy these conversations, don't get me wrong. I am sorry if I am one of the lurkers you are talking about.

Dolphan7
11-01-2008, 03:33 PM
I dont think anyone actually debates whether Jesus lived, however there is a huge question of who Jesus was. As I assume you already know D7 the eternally ongoing argument of Christology from above and below. Was he just simply Jesus of Nazareth or Jesus Christ the Messiah. Of course as you mentioned this is something that cant be discussed here, but I find it a difficult issue for Chrstians in their worship of JC. Do they look upon him as a man just like they are, filled with the Holy Spirit, a role model in some way. Or do you look at him as some divine being, sent from Heaven and is impeccable to all sin.

The Trinity is another extremely complicated issue that I'm not even going to get into here, but what I'm trying to point out is that there is also many complicated and un-resolved issues within Christianity.Well we have a very good record of Jesus's ministry, wherein he claimed he was the son of God, and proved it with miracles. I suggest a more in depth look at the gospels and their authority and their authenticity.

Jesus was both man and God at the same time. His deity was with him while he was in human form, only until the very last hours if not minutes before he died. He gave it up to die as a human for our sins, it wouldn't work otherwise. He was the perfect example, doing God's will, not his own. It wouldn't have worked any other way.

I know it sounds a little weird at times but that is what the bible says.

Dolphan7
11-01-2008, 03:52 PM
Christianity is not the only religion that is 100% sure theirs is the right one. It is the only religion you are convinced is the right one. That is a different story. But this conversation could easily be happening with a Jew , muslim or buddhist.

Edit: Although I enjoy these conversations, don't get me wrong. I am sorry if I am one of the lurkers you are talking about.No you are not one of the lurkers I was referring to. Good debate is welcome and you bring good thought and ideas to this forum. Thank you.

I would re-phrase my post to say that of all the religions, Christianity is the only one who can prove intellectually and logically that it is indeed the real truth, simply through the person of Jesus Christ. No other religion can make that claim. None. Mohamed died. Sidhartha died. They stayed dead.

Show me the bones I ask people. Show me where Jesus bones are. He died (on the cross). He was confirmed dead (spear in side). He was place in a tomb, sealed, and surrounded by Roman Guards. Where is the body? Where did he go? We have eyewitness accounts that show that he rose on the third day, just like he said he would and was seen by hundreds of people for the next 40 days are so.

The written record of his deity is over-powering to the intellect. I really do encourage more in depth study of the gospels and the ministry of Jesus.

ih8brady
11-01-2008, 06:29 PM
Just because someone follows Jesus Christ, doesn't necessarily mean they're a Christian. JWs believe in Jesus, but they don't believe he was the son of God and that he died for our sins. That doesn't meet the definition of a Christian, historical or otherwise. Mormons fall into this same category as well. Their religion is based (mostly) on the book of Mormon, which isn't a book of the Bible and therefore isn't Christian.

I hate to say it because it might open a can of worms, but Catholism gets dangerously close to this as well. Through the centuries various things have been added to their religion that are not found anywhere in the Bible. They believe that Jesus is the sun of God and that he died for our sins, but things like coming very close to outright worship of Mary (the mother of Jesus), the notions of purgatory (meaning Jesus' death and resurrection weren't good enough to get you to heaven, so you have to wait in an abyss until you're "good enough" to enter heaven), asking a priest to forgive you of your sins (even if it is "on behalf of God"), and worship of one man (the pope) all skirt pretty close.

I'm not trying to bash, I'm just giving my opinions. JWs, Mormons, Catholics, Muslims, etc. have every right to worship how they choose and I respect that. But that also doesn't mean that I have to accept their religions as equally valid to my own.

There is such a thing as a sect though. They exist within many religions throughout history, among those that are defunct and that still exist, and Christianity has them as well. A Christian is someone who follows the philosophy and/or spiritual claims by Jesus. Just because JW don't believe exactly what your sect does, doesn't make them non-Christians. You could say they are flawed because of X, Y and Z but they are still Christians. If you follow a strict enough definition, then it is possible nobody outside Jesus is truly Christian.

And I don't know the anti-Catholic marks are coming from. Are these millions of people just pretending to believe in Jesus? Is this just sour grapes that they have a larger following?



And it would be foolish to think you should believe what JW, Catholics, etc. believe. If you did, you wouldn't be your current affiliation BUT like them or not they are still followers of Jesus regardless if they aren't doing it the right way.

ABrownLamp
11-03-2008, 11:00 AM
No you are not one of the lurkers I was referring to. Good debate is welcome and you bring good thought and ideas to this forum. Thank you.

I would re-phrase my post to say that of all the religions, Christianity is the only one who can prove intellectually and logically that it is indeed the real truth, simply through the person of Jesus Christ. No other religion can make that claim. None. Mohamed died. Sidhartha died. They stayed dead.

Show me the bones I ask people. Show me where Jesus bones are. He died (on the cross). He was confirmed dead (spear in side). He was place in a tomb, sealed, and surrounded by Roman Guards. Where is the body? Where did he go? We have eyewitness accounts that show that he rose on the third day, just like he said he would and was seen by hundreds of people for the next 40 days are so.

The written record of his deity is over-powering to the intellect. I really do encourage more in depth study of the gospels and the ministry of Jesus.

Well that seems like some rock solid evidence youve got there. Eyewitness testimony from people thousands of years ago. You know there are still people who claim to see Elvis.

LouPhinFan
11-03-2008, 12:28 PM
There is such a thing as a sect though. They exist within many religions throughout history, among those that are defunct and that still exist, and Christianity has them as well. A Christian is someone who follows the philosophy and/or spiritual claims by Jesus. Just because JW don't believe exactly what your sect does, doesn't make them non-Christians. You could say they are flawed because of X, Y and Z but they are still Christians. If you follow a strict enough definition, then it is possible nobody outside Jesus is truly Christian.

And I don't know the anti-Catholic marks are coming from. Are these millions of people just pretending to believe in Jesus? Is this just sour grapes that they have a larger following?



And it would be foolish to think you should believe what JW, Catholics, etc. believe. If you did, you wouldn't be your current affiliation BUT like them or not they are still followers of Jesus regardless if they aren't doing it the right way.

Now are you thinking about sects or denominations? There are different denominations within the protestant Christian religion. They have slightly different ways of doing things, worshipping, etc, but they all believe the same basic tenet of the Christian religion. Jesus is the son of God and died for our sins and was resurrected on the 3rd day. The only way to afterlife salvation is through him. That is, at its core, the definition of a Christian.

As far as Catholism goes, I said they got close to being non-Christian with some of the things they practice that are not found anywhere in the Bible, but the core of their sect of the Christian religion is the same as the core Christian definition.

Dolphan7
11-03-2008, 12:42 PM
Well that seems like some rock solid evidence youve got there. Eyewitness testimony from people thousands of years ago. You know there are still people who claim to see Elvis.Right. And in 1000 years the eyewitnesses to the Holocaust will have been thoroughly debunked as well. The Diary of Ann Frank will be considered pure fiction by then. Got it!

ABrownLamp
11-03-2008, 03:47 PM
Right. And in 1000 years the eyewitnesses to the Holocaust will have been thoroughly debunked as well. The Diary of Ann Frank will be considered pure fiction by then. Got it!

Theres more than simple eyewitness testimony to verify those events. Videos, photographs, one can visit the locations etc. There is no argument against those events which cant be disspelled.

Conversely, there are many things in the Bible which common sense alone tells you that it cant be literal

Show me the bones? What is that supposed to mean? Did Jesus rise up to heaven with his bones?

Dolphan7
11-03-2008, 05:01 PM
Theres more than simple eyewitness testimony to verify those events. Videos, photographs, one can visit the locations etc. There is no argument against those events which cant be disspelled.

Conversely, there are many things in the Bible which common sense alone tells you that it cant be literal

Show me the bones? What is that supposed to mean? Did Jesus rise up to heaven with his bones?Are you suggesting that we throw out everything written from the first century then because they didn't have a Nikon camera? Or any other event in history that only has eyewitness accounts and written records?

We have much better ways of recording and "preserving" history today then we did then no doubt, but the first century Jews had the best form of recording and preserving history available to them at the time, themselves and what they wrote. And they did a very good job of it. And we can visit many of the places mentioned in the Gospels. There is archeological digs of many of the places mentioned in the bible.

The only reason I bring up the holocaust is because there are people in this world who swear it never happened. Heck there are people who swear we never went to the moon. There are people who think 911 was planned by Bush. Much controversy around issues that photographs and video evidence may still cause one to wonder.

So fast forward 1000 years and the holocaust may be doubted just like Jesus is doubted today.

The fact remains that we have the Gospels of Jesus Christ from the first century, based on eyewitness testimony, and verified by hundreds if not thousands who witnessed his ministry over a 3 year period. There is no indication that the writers lied about what they wrote, because if they did they would soon have been corrected by the hundreds of thousands of

ABrownLamp
11-03-2008, 05:45 PM
Are you suggesting that we throw out everything written from the first century then because they didn't have a Nikon camera? Or any other event in history that only has eyewitness accounts and written records?

We have much better ways of recording and "preserving" history today then we did then no doubt, but the first century Jews had the best form of recording and preserving history available to them at the time, themselves and what they wrote. And they did a very good job of it. And we can visit many of the places mentioned in the Gospels. There is archeological digs of many of the places mentioned in the bible.

The only reason I bring up the holocaust is because there are people in this world who swear it never happened. Heck there are people who swear we never went to the moon. There are people who think 911 was planned by Bush. Much controversy around issues that photographs and video evidence may still cause one to wonder.

So fast forward 1000 years and the holocaust may be doubted just like Jesus is doubted today.

The fact remains that we have the Gospels of Jesus Christ from the first century, based on eyewitness testimony, and verified by hundreds if not thousands who witnessed his ministry over a 3 year period. There is no indication that the writers lied about what they wrote, because if they did they would soon have been corrected by the hundreds of thousands of

Ok. Heres the difference.

Theres not one piece of physical evidence that supports the idea that Jesus was who you think he was (and really, that he ever even existed). For as apparently important as Jesus was, he left no self-written manuscripts, no works of carpentry, no artifacts- all written "evidence" of Jesus existence derives from other people (none of whom met Jesus in his earthly life) many years after Jesus was already dead. There are no Roman records showing Pontius killing Jesus.

The whole premise of Jesus as the son of God rests on hearsay. Hearsay thousands of years ago. When people were even dumber than we are today. Hearsay isnt even allowed in court for the very reason that it is unreliable.

Look I don't care what you believe in. It doesnt matter to me. If this is the type of thing that convinces you, you are welcome to it. I just wish religious people would stop pretending like there are no holes in the story here. And act shocked that I dont accept it 100%. It's like the Palin supporters. If you like her ideas and beliefs, thats up to you. But dont try to tell me you dont see problems with her possibly being President of the US. Youre just being ridiculous.

FinFatale
11-03-2008, 10:07 PM
Ok. Heres the difference.

Theres not one piece of physical evidence that supports the idea that Jesus was who you think he was (and really, that he ever even existed). For as apparently important as Jesus was, he left no self-written manuscripts, no works of carpentry, no artifacts- all written "evidence" of Jesus existence derives from other people (none of whom met Jesus in his earthly life) many years after Jesus was already dead. There are no Roman records showing Pontius killing Jesus.

The whole premise of Jesus as the son of God rests on hearsay. Hearsay thousands of years ago. When people were even dumber than we are today. Hearsay isnt even allowed in court for the very reason that it is unreliable.

Look I don't care what you believe in. It doesnt matter to me. If this is the type of thing that convinces you, you are welcome to it. I just wish religious people would stop pretending like there are no holes in the story here. And act shocked that I dont accept it 100%. It's like the Palin supporters. If you like her ideas and beliefs, thats up to you. But dont try to tell me you dont see problems with her possibly being President of the US. Youre just being ridiculous.


If it doesn't matter to you, why did you just waste your time attempting to debunk what another believes? We will have to disagree on the obvious fact that YOU feel you are always correct.

ABrownLamp
11-04-2008, 01:40 AM
If it doesn't matter to you, why did you just waste your time attempting to debunk what another believes? We will have to disagree on the obvious fact that YOU feel you are always correct.

Out of that entire post thats what you decided to comment on?

We're having a discussion here. What happens is I ask questions and make comments and then D7 replies with answers. Thats how these things work. Emotion and the significance of a persons personal life and beliefs are insignificant to me during this process. Why would I care about what an anonymous person on a message board thinks? That comment of mine that you emboldened was just a rhetorical segue into the next part of my statement.

And as far as feeling like I'm correct- ya, of course, why would I post things that I thought were incorrect? Does that make any sense to you? You're just typing the first thing that pops in your head without thinking about them first.

FinFatale
11-04-2008, 01:51 AM
Out of that entire post thats what you decided to comment on?

We're having a discussion here. What happens is I ask questions and make comments and then D7 replies with answers. Thats how these things work. Emotion and the significance of a persons personal life and beliefs are insignificant to me during this process. Why would I care about what an anonymous person on a message board thinks? That comment of mine that you emboldened was just a rhetorical segue into the next part of my statement.

And as far as feeling like I'm correct- ya, of course, why would I post things that I thought were incorrect? Does that make any sense to you? You're just typing the first thing that pops in your head without thinking about them first.


well you are always correct right? so you tell me.........you seem to like to waste your time discussing things you don't care about with people whose emotions and personal values mean nothing to you....psst.......and as far as " no writings " around the time of JESUS.....look up Jocephus he was certainly in the same century and wrote of the history not that many years after Jesus ....oh, but you knew that didn't you!

FinFatale
11-04-2008, 02:04 AM
WWZ have you made it your personal venture to go around and thank every poster that posts something ignorant to me?? Just curious because of late it's become quite obvious.

Dolphan7
11-04-2008, 02:42 AM
Ok. Heres the difference.

Theres not one piece of physical evidence that supports the idea that Jesus was who you think he was (and really, that he ever even existed). For as apparently important as Jesus was, he left no self-written manuscripts, no works of carpentry, no artifacts- all written "evidence" of Jesus existence derives from other people (none of whom met Jesus in his earthly life) many years after Jesus was already dead. There are no Roman records showing Pontius killing Jesus.

The whole premise of Jesus as the son of God rests on hearsay. Hearsay thousands of years ago. When people were even dumber than we are today. Hearsay isnt even allowed in court for the very reason that it is unreliable.

Look I don't care what you believe in. It doesnt matter to me. If this is the type of thing that convinces you, you are welcome to it. I just wish religious people would stop pretending like there are no holes in the story here. And act shocked that I dont accept it 100%. It's like the Palin supporters. If you like her ideas and beliefs, thats up to you. But dont try to tell me you dont see problems with her possibly being President of the US. Youre just being ridiculous.

The Gospels were written by men who were with Jesus (Matthew and John) or were with men who were with Jesus (Luke and Mark), they both knew and traveled with Paul, who wrote most of the NT. The NT was completed before AD 70 when the City of Jerusalem was sacked by the Romans, with the exception of John and Revelations. These two were completed around AD 95.



The whole premise of Jesus saying and being who he said he was is based on eyewitness accounts, not hearsay. You so easily discount the bible, yet there are other first century historical records that are accepted as valid. Why?

I will tell you why. It isn't the book itself, but the meaning and content that people have a problem with. So they attempt to discredit it. Why? Because if the bible is true and Jesus really is who he said he is, then that poses a problem for those who are on the outside looking in doesn't it?

I wouldn't so easily discard the bible. People have taken to task that which you so vehemenently believe to be true, and failed. The bible lives on after many repeated attempts to discredit it. Now you can certainly believe in your own mind that it isn't true, but that doesn't make it so. The bible stands on it's own as an historical document, and this has been confirmed by hundreds if not thousands of scholars. But you go ahead and believe what you want.

ABrownLamp
11-04-2008, 09:49 AM
well you are always correct right? so you tell me.........you seem to like to waste your time discussing things you don't care about with people whose emotions and personal values mean nothing to you....psst.......and as far as " no writings " around the time of JESUS.....look up Jocephus he was certainly in the same century and wrote of the history not that many years after Jesus ....oh, but you knew that didn't you!

I post on message boards because at times they are fun and at times I learn something. Not with you, but at times. I like writing and its how I spend most of my day at work. It has nothing to do with a personal connection to you of D7, believe me.

I had no idea who Josephus was. Turns out he lived within a century of Jesus. Never met him. There are two artifacts of his- one of which is generally considered a forgery. And the other simply has the word Jesus, brother of James on it. Rock solid evidence youve got there.

ABrownLamp
11-04-2008, 10:08 AM
The Gospels were written by men who were with Jesus (Matthew and John) or were with men who were with Jesus (Luke and Mark), they both knew and traveled with Paul, who wrote most of the NT. The NT was completed before AD 70 when the City of Jerusalem was sacked by the Romans, with the exception of John and Revelations. These two were completed around AD 95.



The whole premise of Jesus saying and being who he said he was is based on eyewitness accounts, not hearsay. You so easily discount the bible, yet there are other first century historical records that are accepted as valid. Why?

I will tell you why. It isn't the book itself, but the meaning and content that people have a problem with. So they attempt to discredit it. Why? Because if the bible is true and Jesus really is who he said he is, then that poses a problem for those who are on the outside looking in doesn't it?

I wouldn't so easily discard the bible. People have taken to task that which you so vehemenently believe to be true, and failed. The bible lives on after many repeated attempts to discredit it. Now you can certainly believe in your own mind that it isn't true, but that doesn't make it so. The bible stands on it's own as an historical document, and this has been confirmed by hundreds if not thousands of scholars. But you go ahead and believe what you want.


I think you need to refresh yourself on the meaning of hearsay.

I easily discount the Bible because the stories contained within it are absurd- written in a time when we didnt know anything from anything. When I think of times 1000s of years ago- i think its much more likely that this book was written by people who used metaphors and fables to teach lessons than it is that the world was filled with magic. Of course, if Jesus comes back to Earth (pffffffttttt) then wont I have egg on my face- but I am confident this wont happen.

I discard the Bibles word just like I do with any other religion. Theres nothing meaningful or useful in it to me. And with the life Ive lived, I dont see or feel the need to start believing in a higher power. What am I supposed to do, force myself to believe in God? I always find it amusing that people with brains no bigger than mine are going to tell me about the afterlife, like theyve got special powers. Its absurd. No one knows. We're all just living organizms like anything else.

LouPhinFan
11-04-2008, 10:23 AM
I think you need to refresh yourself on the meaning of hearsay.

I easily discount the Bible because the stories contained within it are absurd- written in a time when we didnt know anything from anything. When I think of times 1000s of years ago- i think its much more likely that this book was written by people who used metaphors and fables to teach lessons than it is that the world was filled with magic. Of course, if Jesus comes back to Earth (pffffffttttt) then wont I have egg on my face- but I am confident this wont happen.

I discard the Bibles word just like I do with any other religion. Theres nothing meaningful or useful in it to me. And with the life Ive lived, I dont see or feel the need to start believing in a higher power. What am I supposed to do, force myself to believe in God? I always find it amusing that people with brains no bigger than mine are going to tell me about the afterlife, like theyve got special powers. Its absurd. No one knows. We're all just living organizms like anything else.

This is all fine and good. Believe how you want to believe, no one is going to stop you. But why are you posting in the Religion Forum? Wouldn't your time be better served in the POFO or another part of the board, rather than coming here and more or less poking fun at people who believe in a religion? I'm just wondering...

ABrownLamp
11-04-2008, 11:16 AM
This is all fine and good. Believe how you want to believe, no one is going to stop you. But why are you posting in the Religion Forum? Wouldn't your time be better served in the POFO or another part of the board, rather than coming here and more or less poking fun at people who believe in a religion? I'm just wondering...

It's hard to explain. But this topic is fascinating to me. It's like a study in human behavior.
Speaking truthfully, I find most (but probably all) religions to be absolutely ridiculous. I mostly associate with like minded people, all of whom are either agnostic, atheist or religious in name only (never go to church) so message boards like these are really the only avenues I have to understand where the religious are coming from.

To me, the stories in the Bible are obviously simple metaphors. And its not like theyre even good stories. The thing that fascinates me is how educated people who make rational decisions in their life everyday can simply set aside science, facts and what they know about how the world works for this one particular thing. And what bothers me is that they are 100% sure they are right. As in, no question about it whatsoever. Nevermind the other religions or countries or time that they were born- they definitely chose the right one.

It's unreal to me. I need to know more about these people to understand them. Thats why I poke and prod and many times make fun of them. I'm not trolling here either. These are my true feelings and intentions

Dolphan7
11-04-2008, 12:05 PM
It's hard to explain. But this topic is fascinating to me. It's like a study in human behavior.
Speaking truthfully, I find most (but probably all) religions to be absolutely ridiculous. I mostly associate with like minded people, all of whom are either agnostic, atheist or religious in name only (never go to church) so message boards like these are really the only avenues I have to understand where the religious are coming from.

To me, the stories in the Bible are obviously simple metaphors. And its not like theyre even good stories. The thing that fascinates me is how educated people who make rational decisions in their life everyday can simply set aside science, facts and what they know about how the world works for this one particular thing. And what bothers me is that they are 100% sure they are right. As in, no question about it whatsoever. Nevermind the other religions or countries or time that they were born- they definitely chose the right one.

It's unreal to me. I need to know more about these people to understand them. Thats why I poke and prod and many times make fun of them. I'm not trolling here either. These are my true feelings and intentionsABL, I used to be an atheist just like you. I laughed at religion. I called them wimps and pansies. I thought it was ridiculous. I was a staunch science guy, believed in evolution hook line and sinker.

The thing that fascinates me is how educated people who make rational decisions in their life everyday can simply set aside God and what they know about how the world works for this one particular thing.

I really suggest you rethink your Belief in science, because it is lacking. And if you think that you are above religion, think again. You are a firm believer in one of the most false religions known to man, and Christians shake their head and wonder how people can be so duped into believing this stuff. Come on? Life from pond scum? Evolved from apes? Please! You really believe this stuff?

I guess we all believe in something huh?

I am glad you have shared your feelings and you true intent here. I don't mind discussing my faith, but don't be surprised if I don't respond.

ABrownLamp
11-04-2008, 01:29 PM
ABL, I used to be an atheist just like you. I laughed at religion. I called them wimps and pansies. I thought it was ridiculous. I was a staunch science guy, believed in evolution hook line and sinker.

The thing that fascinates me is how educated people who make rational decisions in their life everyday can simply set aside God and what they know about how the world works for this one particular thing.

I really suggest you rethink your Belief in science, because it is lacking. And if you think that you are above religion, think again. You are a firm believer in one of the most false religions known to man, and Christians shake their head and wonder how people can be so duped into believing this stuff. Come on? Life from pond scum? Evolved from apes? Please! You really believe this stuff?

I guess we all believe in something huh?

I am glad you have shared your feelings and you true intent here. I don't mind discussing my faith, but don't be surprised if I don't respond.

Ya. I know. We've been over your highly doubtful atheist past before. I remember that line. We've also been over what is and is not actual proof.

From a true atheist's perspective you pretty much encompass exactly what we feel is wrong with being religious. For those years when I would regularly post here, myself along with sevral other posters would completely breakdown your argument, show you how proof in the Bible is not the same as evidence and predictability in science. You would regularly ignore certain parts of the posts that you couldnt answer as the rest of us tried to answer everything you wrote down as evidence of Biblical proof.

That part didnt bother me. What bothered me is that after we sat here and tore apart everything you said to the point where you had nothing left to say---a month later youd post the exact same thing! It's like you learned nothing! And this is the part about the religious that irritate me. The info is out there, and even when they do get a hold of it, they just completely discard it! It's part of what makes talking about religion and science to you guys so interesting because its like your brain doesnt work the same way mine does.

Dolphan7
11-04-2008, 02:08 PM
Ya. I know. We've been over your highly doubtful atheist past before. I remember that line. We've also been over what is and is not actual proof.

From a true atheist's perspective you pretty much encompass exactly what we feel is wrong with being religious. For those years when I would regularly post here, myself along with sevral other posters would completely breakdown your argument, show you how proof in the Bible is not the same as evidence and predictability in science. You would regularly ignore certain parts of the posts that you couldnt answer as the rest of us tried to answer everything you wrote down as evidence of Biblical proof.

That part didnt bother me. What bothered me is that after we sat here and tore apart everything you said to the point where you had nothing left to say---a month later youd post the exact same thing! It's like you learned nothing! And this is the part about the religious that irritate me. The info is out there, and even when they do get a hold of it, they just completely discard it! It's part of what makes talking about religion and science to you guys so interesting because its like your brain doesnt work the same way mine does.This post is actually pretty funny, because I took every evolutionist proof and tore it down completely, and then a month later those same individuals would be offering up the same false and inconclusive proof of evolution. :sidelol:

Go figure!:)

Face it ABL, you are a man of faith just like anyone who believes in a diety. And it actually takes more faith to believe there is no God then there is to believe there is a God.

It all boils down to - How did we get here?

Science stumbles all over itself trying to explain that question without God, with no conlusive proof.

Meanwhile Christianity sits very well within the science that we do know and understand.

ABrownLamp
11-04-2008, 04:03 PM
This post is actually pretty funny, because I took every evolutionist proof and tore it down completely, and then a month later those same individuals would be offering up the same false and inconclusive proof of evolution. :sidelol:

Go figure!:)

Face it ABL, you are a man of faith just like anyone who believes in a diety. And it actually takes more faith to believe there is no God then there is to believe there is a God.

It all boils down to - How did we get here?

Science stumbles all over itself trying to explain that question without God, with no conlusive proof.

Meanwhile Christianity sits very well within the science that we do know and understand.

Please dont make me search for the numerous thread of you getting owned. I hate using that juvenile word but theres no better description for it. I'd like to see th thread that youre talking about though. For very obvious reasons I dont trust your selective memory.

And faith in science is different than faith in religion, as, once again, has been shown to you one million times.

How did we get here is a question we arent absolutely sure of yet. But I'm certainly not willing to say it was a Christian god. The evidence of the origins of life on earth might not be fully understood, but there are tenets behind what we do know that are irrefutable. Things like evolution which does not need to exist in a Godless world. The two are not mutaully exclusive- although a God who did not evolve from a lower lifeform would.

I'd like to see the scientific articles that describe how a woman can be born from a mans rib by the way.

Dolphan7
11-04-2008, 05:41 PM
Please dont make me search for the numerous thread of you getting owned. I hate using that juvenile word but theres no better description for it. I'd like to see th thread that youre talking about though. For very obvious reasons I dont trust your selective memory.

And faith in science is different than faith in religion, as, once again, has been shown to you one million times.

How did we get here is a question we arent absolutely sure of yet. But I'm certainly not willing to say it was a Christian god. The evidence of the origins of life on earth might not be fully understood, but there are tenets behind what we do know that are irrefutable. Things like evolution which does not need to exist in a Godless world. The two are not mutaully exclusive- although a God who did not evolve from a lower lifeform would.

I'd like to see the scientific articles that describe how a woman can be born from a mans rib by the way.

ABL, no one got owned. Not on any side. It just came to an empasse, and sometimes there is no point in continuing the debate. People get tired. And people get personal. Remember Pagan? Couldn't really have a decent debate with that guy, or with him around.

Many times I just don't engage anymore, that does not mean I don't have anything to say, because I do, it is just pointless to debate with anyone who really doesn't see the other side for what it is. They don't have to agree or accept it, but at the end of the day when after all my good efforts, to be called unintelligent and stupid, really kills the debate ferver, ya know?

Take you for instance. I don't think you are dumb or unintelligent. I respect your opinions and beliefs, I just don't agree with them. You have it all figured out in your mind that religion is bunk, and all the neurons are connected in your mind in such a way to allow that viewpoint. Now because of that I may or may not elect to continue what I feel will be a pointless debate, and please don't take that as I am being owned. It is just that there are certain issues that I won't discuss with certain individuals. It really depends on how they approach the subject. I refer to Matthew 7:6 as a guideline with these type of people.

Emeraldfin, Marino613 and I and a couple others have had good discussions on religion in here, without all the "who owned who childish antics". We simply discuss, exchange thoughts and ideas, and we move on. That is how it should be.

And there are others that just come in to throw a bomb every now and then, and those individuals are really not interested in anything but throwing bombs, and attacking and ridiculing etc....

So ABL there really isn't winning or losing when it comes to discussing religion verses science/evolution. Unless someone claims to accept Jesus as a result of it, or renounces his faith becomes an atheist, it is just a discussion.

Maybe if you approached it this way you would begin to understand people of faith, and maybe even not feel so indignant, even angry, about them.

Dolphan7
11-04-2008, 06:00 PM
And faith in science is different than faith in religion, as, once again, has been shown to you one million times.

How did we get here is a question we arent absolutely sure of yet. But I'm certainly not willing to say it was a Christian god. The evidence of the origins of life on earth might not be fully understood, but there are tenets behind what we do know that are irrefutable. Things like evolution which does not need to exist in a Godless world. The two are not mutually exclusive- although a God who did not evolve from a lower lifeform would.

I'd like to see the scientific articles that describe how a woman can be born from a mans rib by the way.

I wanted to address this separately. Faith in science is really not very different than faith in God. I believe God exists, and is who he claims to be and will do what he says he will do.

Faith in science works similarly - faith in the establishment of science, that it has some answers to complex questions, and if not will someday find them.

You yourself just posted this "How did we get here is a question we arent absolutely sure of yet".

That is an amazing statement of faith my friend.

Science really hasn't answered the question of Origin of Life. It has some ideas, and they keep changing, but they are still stuck at the very beginning. Yet.....you discard religion to embrace science based on this.

The problem with science is that it automatically begins with a limited scope - by eliminating the God Factor, and thus miraculous supernatural events. Granted they cannot be measured by scientific standards, but that does not mean they don't exist. Many of sciences foundational basis for the origin of life and evolution cannot be proved using it's very own scientific method.

So if you are looking for scientific support of how a woman could be made from a man's rib, you won't find any - It was a supernatural event, as many events in the bible are.

Science/Evolution verses God may not be mutually exclusive, but they are the two competing explanations. Unless you have another possibility? Or are you blending the two? Are you leaning toward theistic evolution possibly?

emeraldfin
11-04-2008, 06:23 PM
I think you need to refresh yourself on the meaning of hearsay.

I easily discount the Bible because the stories contained within it are absurd- written in a time when we didnt know anything from anything. When I think of times 1000s of years ago- i think its much more likely that this book was written by people who used metaphors and fables to teach lessons than it is that the world was filled with magic. Of course, if Jesus comes back to Earth (pffffffttttt) then wont I have egg on my face- but I am confident this wont happen.

I discard the Bibles word just like I do with any other religion. Theres nothing meaningful or useful in it to me. And with the life Ive lived, I dont see or feel the need to start believing in a higher power. What am I supposed to do, force myself to believe in God? I always find it amusing that people with brains no bigger than mine are going to tell me about the afterlife, like theyve got special powers. Its absurd. No one knows. We're all just living organizms like anything else.

Everything you have said ABL could well be true, I'm not going to argue against you on that. All I'm going to say is that I think you are mis-understanding the point of the Bible. Many of the stories in the Bible dont have to be taken as written truth (and many are not), its what they teach, its how you interpret them, what you can take out of them to make yourself a better person and what you can learn from them. The Bible gives people guidence on many moral and ethical issues (IMO not them all) but it does with many others.

You dont have to believe in God or whatever any religion preaches, but IMO as long as religions spread messages that teach its members to be good humans in society, I really dont see any problem.

Marino613
11-05-2008, 01:28 AM
Personally, I find this all fascinating. I have been to dialogues between faith groups, religious and non-religious people, "intrafaith" dialogues (between denoms of the same faith), and I love coming here because the people who choose to go to an interfaith meeting are a self selecting group. The people who choose to come here are Dolphins fans who happen to have an interest in religion in one way or another. It makes it all the more gritty and real.

nuttie_buddie
11-08-2008, 11:34 PM
it is interesting reading some of these comments about jehovahs witnesses...first jehovahs witnesses dont vote cause of the reason mention about being no part of this word...aslo..i believe its in proverbs that man can not direct their own step..and also in psaml that man has dominated man to his own injuries..i believe its in psalms..which would reason that men sould not be leading men...in any thing

also there are scriptures in the new test..."the world is laying in the power of the wicked one" that would reason that satan is controling the goverments..also the fact that satan use the government as a tempation to jesus,when temping him in the wilderness, if jesus kno that satan didnt control or rule the government it would not have been a true tempation...

jehovahs witnesses are not a cult either...they are in fact in 235 different lands...also they do believe in the jesus from the bible...

shula_guy
11-09-2008, 03:34 AM
A better question is Why Do They Stop By My house every single saturday?



I just tell them that i just laid out some lines of cocain and invite them in to partake with me and discuss our differing views of god, that ussaully gets them to run from my house. Now on the rare occasion that i get a cute female one at my door I'll ask her if she would be willing to sacrafice her virtue to me in exchange for me to convert to her religion, that one works very well also.

The best part is when I have company at the house and they hear me saying this to them, allthough I have to admitt most of the time my friends are all like you got coke? and you were going to share with them but you aint offered us any

I swear I need to find better friends :sidelol:

eger
11-14-2008, 06:22 PM
You want to hear something ironic?

Jehova's witnesses do not celebrate Christmas or Hanukkah, but if given a Christmas bonus at work they will accept it.