261 replies to this topic

[MikePetersSucks]

This is, of course, just speculation, but it seems, from observation, that the universe cannot "create" anything not of itself. Matter comes from matter; energy comes from energy; et cetera, et cetera. I would think that "life" (the stuff of life, that which makes something alive as opposed to the mechanical and chemical components of beings). And the same for intelligence, emotion, and so on.

God, then, you could say, is rather ordinary. He is the life from which all life springs; the intelligence from which all intelligence was born; the emotions from which all emotions came.

Not unnecessarily true. Some interpretations of the universe hold that everything is of one fundamental particle (such as strings) that can arrange in any damn order they like to create, basically, anything. And of course, then there's people developing kidney stones, so life is "creating" nonorganic matter. Ooooh.

And aside from all that, some Panspermia theories hold that, even in an atheistic, Big Bang-originated universe, life could've existed since the very beginning and spread out to other planets.

I just believe same universe is like a rubber band that keeps expanding and expanding till it can't expand anymore and snaps back on itself and starts all over again from the Big Bang. Who knows how many times our universe has done this. It could've always done this.

What about Entropy? The Universe can only oscillate a finite number of times before it's no longer able to do so, so either way, you have an "original" version of this universe that must of originated somewhere.

So where did they come from?

Panspermia, abiogenesis, a wizard, who knows?

And for Freak's sake, it's a debate, try to use a Teensy weensy bit of empircal proof, and try not to sound like you're just pulling it all out of your ass as you type. You're really not making a good case for Christianity. And to be fair, SOAP is utterly pwning you right now.

Wow, and that's coming from Reflectionist. *highfive*

Did you ever stop and think how utterly restrictive it would be if we took that to mean that one actually has to believe in Christ Jesus and His sacrifice? Did you ever stop to think how this must necessarily exclude those people who have never heard of Him, and those people who have never come to understand the truth of the matter, even if those people have essentially, through their actions and conduct, followed Him to the end anyway?

Isn't our God merciful? Then why would He condemn people who have done as much as they can be expected to do?

Which is precisely the problem here, in my opinion. Either Christianity is false, or God isn't merciful, omnibenevolent, etcetera.

[CID Farwin]

I must ask to stop with labeling things as "Christian doctrine," because there's Christian faiths that believe contrary to the fact that "only those who accept Christ will be saved, everyone else goes to hell" among other things. Please, if there's one particular sect of Christianity that says stuff you don't agree with, don't blame all of us, because we might not agree with it either.

Kapeesh?

[LionHarted]

Not unnecessarily true. Some interpretations of the universe hold that everything is of one fundamental particle (such as strings) that can arrange in any damn order they like to create, basically, anything.

i.e., God.

Which is precisely the problem here, in my opinion. Either Christianity is false, or God isn't merciful, omnibenevolent, etcetera.

Or not all Christianity is the same.

[TheAvengerLever]

I like how people believe that God isn't merciful.

Yeah, so he's given us a way to save our souls from condemnation. All I hear from people who reject Christianity nowadays is "eww, Jesus died for my sins. I don't like Jesus. God isn't merciful because he's sending me to hell."

[SOAP]

And to be fair, SOAP is utterly pwning you right now.

Wow, and that's coming from Reflectionist. *highfive*

I'm not here to pwn anyone. It would be arrogant for me to believe I am in any way winning this debate. I've hardly provided anymore facts than than he has.

I must ask to stop with labeling things as "Christian doctrine," because there's Christian faiths that believe contrary to the fact that "only those who accept Christ will be saved, everyone else goes to hell" among other things. Please, if there's one particular sect of Christianity that says stuff you don't agree with, don't blame all of us, because we might not agree with it either.

Kapeesh?

Not all sects agree when the Bible states it in black in white, on more than one occasion I might add? Does the original Greek or Hebrew text allow more wiggle room than I am aware of? Or do different sects get to pick and chose what parts of the Bible are true and which entirely incorrect? And how is the world supposed to take Christianity seriously when all the sects as a whole can't even settle such a very important issue as that? We're talking about people's souls here, c'mon.

I like how people believe that God isn't merciful.

Yeah, so he's given us a way to save our souls from condemnation. All I hear from people who reject Christianity nowadays is "eww, Jesus died for my sins. I don't like Jesus. God isn't merciful because he's sending me to hell."

Haven't you ever stopped to think that maybe there are other religions in the world, all with their own way to get to heaven and most of them claiming their way is the only way? Haven't you ever stopped to think the people of those religions believe their way is just as much the only way to them as Jesus Christ is to Christians and that the idea of accepting Christ would be just as offensive to them as the idea of you having to accept Buddha or Muhammad? Or worse still, being a grown man and being told you can't enter heaven with an uncircumcised penis? With so many religions with their own requirements into Heaven, why should we believe Christianity is any truer? It's not so much Jesus himself that disgusts people. He's just either not part of other people's faith or is the main requirement.

And some people, like me, aren't even convinced that the man ever existed and even if he did, that he was not supernatural being, but just brilliant man with with really good ideas. It's not the ideas of the man I find disgusting. I find nothing disgusting about him at all. I just think his ideas are more important than whether he was the Son of God or ever existed at all. That's the key to his immortality right there. Even if he was a man who died and never rose again, his ideas lived on and changed the world and that essentially makes him a god, right there. I don't care if he was crucified and got resurrected or the whole thing was some made up story written three or four decades after his supposed death. Regardless of where the idea came from, it's the ideas we all should focus on.

Not everyone thinks Jesus existed. Not everyone thinks he was the Son of God. Not everyone thinks he was the Messiah. Not everyone believes in Heaven or Hell and could acre less about rest. But I think we can all agree things like "Loving your neighbor as yourself" is a good thing. Well unless you're Satanic, in which case you only love those who love you first, a total fallacy that will never lead them anywhere.

Edited by SOAP, 06 August 2007 - 06:02 PM.

[CID Farwin]

Not all sects agree when the Bible states it in black in white, on more than one occasion I might add? Does the original Greek or Hebrew text allow more wiggle room than I am aware of? Or do different sects get to pick and chose what parts of the Bible are true and which entirely incorrect? And how is the world supposed to take Christianity seriously when all the sects as a whole can't even settle such a very important issue as that? We're talking about people's souls here, c'mon. rolleyes.gif

I'ts a matter of interpretation. The Bible's doctrine is very rarely "black and white." Two people can look at the same sentence and get completely opposite meanings out of it. That's how these different sects form. Some people are just more vocal than others.

[LionHarted]

SOAP is pwning me? He seems to be operating from extremely different assumptions about what Christianity entails.

Not all sects agree when the Bible states it in black in white, on more than one occasion I might add?

Faith in Jesus Christ need not come only in the most radical and literal of forms. Not when salvation is catholic, that is, universal. Faith in Jesus Christ, in the most radical form, is simply the most effective solution. True faith will lead to true moral rightness; moral rightness may be arrived at invariably through less-than-perfect faith. We are human, after all.

But I think we can all agree things like "Loving your neighbor as yourself" is a good thing.

Do we all behave in keeping with that idea, though? In principle, the Christian is one who acts in accordance with what is good, not merely someone who agrees with what is good.

Edited by LionHarted, 06 August 2007 - 07:05 PM.

[SOAP]

I'ts a matter of interpretation. The Bible's doctrine is very rarely "black and white." Two people can look at the same sentence and get completely opposite meanings out of it. That's how these different sects form. Some people are just more vocal than others.

But there needs to be something more concrete than that. How can salavation be truth if it's based on speculation and two different churches give you two entirely different versions of the so-called "truth?"

Faith in Jesus Christ need not come only in the most radical and literal of forms. Not when salvation is catholic, that is, universal. Faith in Jesus Christ, in the most radical form, is simply the most effective solution. True faith will lead to true moral rightness; moral rightness may be arrived at invariably through less-than-perfect faith. We are human, after all.

But I think we can all agree things like "Loving your neighbor as yourself" is a good thing.

Do we all behave in keeping with that idea, though? In principle, the Christian is one who acts in accordance with what is good, not merely someone who agrees with what is good.

Do all Christians behave in keeping with that idea? Are all those that do act accordingly exclusively Christian? You can find simmilar saying Islam, Buddhism, the Baha'i Faith, ect, as well as people in those faiths that follow those sayings. Even athiests can live by those words, not just approve of the idea. You don;'t need to subscribe to a specific belief system to live according to what is good. This is the point I'm trying to make.

Edited by SOAP, 06 August 2007 - 07:41 PM.

[LionHarted]

I would say that it's immensely easier to live a good moral life when you subscribe to the goodness and morality handed down by God rather than trying to figure it out for yourself.

But that's just me.

Of course, that doesn't mean that it's easy by any stretch, just easier.

Edited by LionHarted, 06 August 2007 - 07:55 PM.

[SOAP]

I would say that it's immensely easier to live a good moral life when you subscribe to the goodness and morality handed down by God rather than trying to figure it out for yourself.

But that's just me.

Of course, that doesn't mean that it's easy by any stretch, just easier.

You act like morals are this obscure, esoteric thing that is somehow easier to grasp by believing in a higher power. It's not.

[wisp]

I would say that it's immensely easier to live a good moral life when you subscribe to the goodness and morality handed down by God rather than trying to figure it out for yourself.

But that's just me.

Of course, that doesn't mean that it's easy by any stretch, just easier.

You act like morals are this obscure, esoteric thing that is somehow easier to grasp by believing in a higher power. It's not.

Very true. I know plenty of atheists who are perfectly moral people simply because without the belief in a higher power, the human condition becomes even MORE important. This is the only life we have, so we should do our best to make the most of it, for ourselves and others. Belief in God or something like him is not necessary for moral behaviour, nor does it make it any easier.

I'm no atheist (I consider myself an agnostic theist of sorts), but the morals that I hold are there because it's really not hard to sit down and think "hey, I wouldn't want someone doing wrong to me, so I shouldn't do it to someone else." I do good things for others because it makes ME feel good, not because some man in the sky told me to. If anything, it's easier to subscribe to morals and keep to them when you've worked them out on your own rather than believing that you'll be punished for NOT doing it - threats of that nature just make it even easier to question why exactly what's right is right. Incidentally, I also feel that using God as a reason for morality just makes it simpler to add in extra "sins" that aren't morally wrong at all - if you can't justify why it's wrong except that "it makes me feel uncomfortable" or "well, it seems unnatural" it's just easier to say that it's wrong because "God said so."

Someone who does good things for the right reasons doesn't need the promise of eternal rewards in heaven - simply doing right is reward enough.

[TheAvengerLever]

Haven't you ever stopped to think that maybe there are other religions in the world, all with their own way to get to heaven and most of them claiming their way is the only way? Haven't you ever stopped to think the people of those religions believe their way is just as much the only way to them as Jesus Christ is to Christians and that the idea of accepting Christ would be just as offensive to them as the idea of you having to accept Buddha or Muhammad? Or worse still, being a grown man and being told you can't enter heaven with an uncircumcised penis? With so many religions with their own requirements into Heaven, why should we believe Christianity is any truer? It's not so much Jesus himself that disgusts people. He's just either not part of other people's faith or is the main requirement.

And some people, like me, aren't even convinced that the man ever existed and even if he did, that he was not supernatural being, but just brilliant man with with really good ideas. It's not the ideas of the man I find disgusting. I find nothing disgusting about him at all. I just think his ideas are more important than whether he was the Son of God or ever existed at all. That's the key to his immortality right there. Even if he was a man who died and never rose again, his ideas lived on and changed the world and that essentially makes him a god, right there. I don't care if he was crucified and got resurrected or the whole thing was some made up story written three or four decades after his supposed death. Regardless of where the idea came from, it's the ideas we all should focus on.

Not everyone thinks Jesus existed. Not everyone thinks he was the Son of God. Not everyone thinks he was the Messiah. Not everyone believes in Heaven or Hell and could acre less about rest. But I think we can all agree things like "Loving your neighbor as yourself" is a good thing. Well unless you're Satanic, in which case you only love those who love you first, a total fallacy that will never lead them anywhere.

The reasons I don't believe in other religions, or want to, is that Christianity seems so much more than what they prescribe in doctrine. Besides, if I'm correct, Christianity is the only one with a "free ticket" to heaven and I wanna save my ass, scoundrel that I am.

I consider myself a man of good faith, and I love my God. I don't need virgins, or nirvana. I just need Him.

[SOAP]

Haven't you ever stopped to think that maybe there are other religions in the world, all with their own way to get to heaven and most of them claiming their way is the only way? Haven't you ever stopped to think the people of those religions believe their way is just as much the only way to them as Jesus Christ is to Christians and that the idea of accepting Christ would be just as offensive to them as the idea of you having to accept Buddha or Muhammad? Or worse still, being a grown man and being told you can't enter heaven with an uncircumcised penis? With so many religions with their own requirements into Heaven, why should we believe Christianity is any truer? It's not so much Jesus himself that disgusts people. He's just either not part of other people's faith or is the main requirement.

And some people, like me, aren't even convinced that the man ever existed and even if he did, that he was not supernatural being, but just brilliant man with with really good ideas. It's not the ideas of the man I find disgusting. I find nothing disgusting about him at all. I just think his ideas are more important than whether he was the Son of God or ever existed at all. That's the key to his immortality right there. Even if he was a man who died and never rose again, his ideas lived on and changed the world and that essentially makes him a god, right there. I don't care if he was crucified and got resurrected or the whole thing was some made up story written three or four decades after his supposed death. Regardless of where the idea came from, it's the ideas we all should focus on.

Not everyone thinks Jesus existed. Not everyone thinks he was the Son of God. Not everyone thinks he was the Messiah. Not everyone believes in Heaven or Hell and could acre less about rest. But I think we can all agree things like "Loving your neighbor as yourself" is a good thing. Well unless you're Satanic, in which case you only love those who love you first, a total fallacy that will never lead them anywhere.

The reasons I don't believe in other religions, or want to, is that Christianity seems so much more than what they prescribe in doctrine. Besides, if I'm correct, Christianity is the only one with a "free ticket" to heaven and I wanna save my ass, scoundrel that I am.

I consider myself a man of good faith, and I love my God. I don't need virgins, or nirvana. I just need Him.

And I love Athena. Too bad she's totally underated as far as gods go. Oh well. I don't need golden mansion or streets paved in gold. I just need her.

[MikePetersSucks]

i.e., God.

So God is a subatomic particle? Kickass. He go squish now. *squish*

I like how people believe that God isn't merciful.

Yeah, so he's given us a way to save our souls from condemnation. All I hear from people who reject Christianity nowadays is "eww, Jesus died for my sins. I don't like Jesus. God isn't merciful because he's sending me to hell."

More like "So God is merciful, but he designed things so that there was only one, vague, barely coherent path into hell that's not available to people who never heard of Jesus, including children, people from remote parts of the world, and people who lived before him? What a jerk."

The reasons I don't believe in other religions, or want to, is that Christianity seems so much more than what they prescribe in doctrine. Besides, if I'm correct, Christianity is the only one with a "free ticket" to heaven and I wanna save my ass, scoundrel that I am.

And if Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Taoism, Shinto, etc., etc., you only have a "Free ticket" to Hell/Rotting in the Ground/Unfavorable Reincarnation/Whatever.

The odds are not in Christianity's favor, unfortunately, so what makes it so special? Almost ALL religions are "more than what they prescribe in doctrine." There is absolutely nothing that makes Christianity more special/true than any other religions. People just get this vague feeling that it's right, which could be chalked up to anything.

[LionHarted]

You act like morals are this obscure, esoteric thing that is somehow easier to grasp by believing in a higher power. It's not.

If there really is a higher power, why wouldn't it be?

More like "So God is merciful, but he designed things so that there was only one, vague, barely coherent path into hell that's not available to people who never heard of Jesus, including children, people from remote parts of the world, and people who lived before him? What a jerk."

You do mean heaven, correct?
And you do realize that that's rather contrary to the picture presented by the apostolic tradition, correct?

Edited by LionHarted, 06 August 2007 - 11:11 PM.

[TheAvengerLever]

And I love Athena. Too bad she's totally underated as far as gods go. Oh well. I don't need golden mansion or streets paved in gold. I just need her.

I'm pretty sure you're mocking me. But oh well if you are or not.

More like "So God is merciful, but he designed things so that there was only one, vague, barely coherent path into hell that's not available to people who never heard of Jesus, including children, people from remote parts of the world, and people who lived before him? What a jerk."

First off, I believe you mean heaven, second, just because there are people who don't hear about The Message in remote parts of the world doesn't mean that God isn't doing anything about it. Besides, how would you know?

The odds are not in Christianity's favor, unfortunately, so what makes it so special? Almost ALL religions are "more than what they prescribe in doctrine." There is absolutely nothing that makes Christianity more special/true than any other religions. People just get this vague feeling that it's right, which could be chalked up to anything.

Well, Christianity is the only religion that's true. And don't any of you dare fuss about me saying that, that's just what I believe. There's no way to prove I'm right or wrong. Besides, I'd rather believe a guy with some background to his beliefs preaching the salvation of my soul than a few people that seem to just pull stuff out of their asses. At least with Jesus [img]http://forums.legendsalliance.com/public/ALOT.png[/img] of his teachings were grounded in Judaism.

[Wolf O'Donnell]

God and worship are not belief systems, either. They are tools used to attain eternal salvation.

So, in short, your entire post is a giant straw man, or you just misunderstood.

Nope. Neither God nor worship are belief systems. Religion is a belief system, but God is not, worship is not. God is a concept. God exists, now that's a belief. But God, that's not a belief. Worship, that's not a belief. It's something you do.

I have not misunderstood. Perhaps it is you that has misunderstood?

Science does not rely on beliefs, at all. Beliefs can become far too dogmatic that it is necessary to put aside all beliefs when tackling scientific problems. That scientists only accept empirical proofs is a matter of practicality, not belief. If they do anything else, they cease to become scientists and suddenly become philosophers.

[LionHarted]

Science does not rely on beliefs, at all.

Belief in logic, rationality, and the scientific method, actually.

[Wolf O'Donnell]

Science does not rely on beliefs, at all.

Belief in logic, rationality, and the scientific method, actually.

Thing is, no belief is required. You can use logic, rationality and the scientific method without believing in them.

What I despise is this attempt by religious people to equate science with religion, to make them seem as if they're on equal footing. They're not. They're two different species. They're not equals. They cannot be compared. One is severely lacking in belief and faith, whereas the latter is not.

There is no place for belief in science. Even the scientific method must not be believed in and must be approached with a sceptical mind. Practicality dictates that you must use the scientific method, but no belief is required to use it. This is not the same with religion, where belief is required.

[LionHarted]

Thing is, no belief is required. You can use logic, rationality and the scientific method without believing in them.

Precisely. You can use the salvation of Jesus Christ without believing in Him.

Scientists believe that logic, rationality, and the scientific method are the perfect tools with which find the answers they seek.
Christians believe that faith, reason, and the Holy Spirit of God are the perfect tools with which to find the answers they seek.

Practicality dictates that you must use the scientific method, but no belief is required to use it.

Besides a belief that the method will typically lead to really correct conclusions.

[Oberon Storm]

Thing is, no belief is required. You can use logic, rationality and the scientific method without believing in them.

Precisely. You can use the salvation of Jesus Christ without believing in Him.

I've heard and read enough Christians say that belief and faith in Jesus as the lord and savior are required. That's the only way you can use him as a toll for salvation. By believing in him.

Scientists believe that logic, rationality, and the scientific method are the perfect tools with which find the answers they seek.
Christians believe that faith, reason, and the Holy Spirit of God are the perfect tools with which to find the answers they seek.

No. No scientist will ever tell you that their tools are perfect. What Christians would beleive about the perfection of their tools I don't know.

Practicality dictates that you must use the scientific method, but no belief is required to use it.

Besides a belief that the method will typically lead to really correct conclusions.

More nonesense.

[LionHarted]

I've heard and read enough Christians say that belief and faith in Jesus as the lord and savior are required. That's the only way you can use him as a toll for salvation. By believing in him.

I'm Catholic, so I'm obviously arguing from the Catholic perspective, which, to many other sects, is "pure heretical nonsense."

You can read through this page to see that what "enough Christians say" is actually contrary to the teaching of the ancient Church (dating back at least to the Council of Trent), which, I would imagine, represents more closely the original faith of the Apostles. Justification by faith/grace alone is, at least as a teaching approved by clergy, a more modern development.

No. No scientist will ever tell you that their tools are perfect. What Christians would beleive about the perfection of their tools I don't know.

By "perfect", I mean "best."

More nonesense.

Scientists do not believe their methods are best? Then why do they waste their time employing them?

Edited by LionHarted, 07 August 2007 - 10:59 AM.

[Oberon Storm]

I've heard and read enough Christians say that belief and faith in Jesus as the lord and savior are required. That's the only way you can use him as a toll for salvation. By believing in him.

I'm Catholic, so I'm obviously arguing from the Catholic perspective, which, to many other sects, is "pure heretical nonsense."

You can read through this page to see that what "enough Christians say" is actually contrary to the teaching of the ancient Church (dating back at least to the Council of Trent), which, I would imagine, represents more closely the original faith of the Apostles. Justification by faith/grace alone is, at least as a teaching approved by clergy, a more modern development.

Faith in Jesus as the lord and savior is not needed to get to heaven. Check.

No. No scientist will ever tell you that their tools are perfect. What Christians would beleive about the perfection of their tools I don't know.

By "perfect", I mean "best."

It's the only real tool. Otherwise you're shooting blindfolded in the dark.

More nonesense.

Scientists do not believe their methods are best? Then why do they waste their time employing them?

Like I said, it's the only tool. If you don't make a hypothesis and test it you only making guess. That's how you get fairytales.

[LionHarted]

t's the only real tool. Otherwise you're shooting blindfolded in the dark.

"It's the only real tool" is a belief, whether correct or not. It is untestable, so we cannot say it is a fact.

"Logic is the only logical means of reaching conclusions" is circular reasoning.

Edited by LionHarted, 07 August 2007 - 12:21 PM.

[Picman]

I've heard and read enough Christians say that belief and faith in Jesus as the lord and savior are required. That's the only way you can use him as a toll for salvation. By believing in him.

I'm Catholic, so I'm obviously arguing from the Catholic perspective, which, to many other sects, is "pure heretical nonsense."

You can read through this page to see that what "enough Christians say" is actually contrary to the teaching of the ancient Church (dating back at least to the Council of Trent), which, I would imagine, represents more closely the original faith of the Apostles. Justification by faith/grace alone is, at least as a teaching approved by clergy, a more modern development.

Faith in Jesus as the lord and savior is not needed to get to heaven. Check.

No. No scientist will ever tell you that their tools are perfect. What Christians would beleive about the perfection of their tools I don't know.

By "perfect", I mean "best."

It's the only real tool. Otherwise you're shooting blindfolded in the dark.

More nonesense.

Scientists do not believe their methods are best? Then why do they waste their time employing them?

Like I said, it's the only tool. If you don't make a hypothesis and test it you only making guess. That's how you get fairytales.

First off, I would say that fairytales usually have at least a kernel of truth at the core. But most of the rest I agree with. You can worship at least ALMOST ANY DEITY and go to Paradise! Sorry, to dissapoint you, LionHarted, but I agree with the idea that I've already stated, about worshiping ALMOST ANY DEITY AND STILL GOING TO HEAVEN OR ANY OTHER PARADISE, AS LONG AS YOU ARE A GOOD PERSON! Salvation does NOT need, and is impeded by blind faith!

[Oberon Storm]

t's the only real tool. Otherwise you're shooting blindfolded in the dark.

"It's the only real tool" is a belief, whether correct or not. It is untestable, so we cannot say it is a fact.

"Logic is the only logical means of reaching conclusions" is circular reasoning.

It is testable. And observable. It's use alone is a test. It is a tried and true method.

[Reflectionist]

For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only SON that whoever believes in Him will not perish but have everlasting life.

And have you ever read "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father but by me." ??

Did you ever stop and think how utterly restrictive it would be if we took that to mean that one actually has to believe in Christ Jesus and His sacrifice? Did you ever stop to think how this must necessarily exclude those people who have never heard of Him, and those people who have never come to understand the truth of the matter, even if those people have essentially, through their actions and conduct, followed Him to the end anyway?

Isn't our God merciful? Then why would He condemn people who have done as much as they can be expected to do?

"For all have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God?"
"I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the father but by me?"

Do you realize how utterly stupid it is to say you're a CHRISTian, when, you know, you don't believe in Christ? And God is merciful, that's why we are allowed to be Saved through Grace. Through Jesus. And do you expect that our Perfect God would restrict someone access from heaven when they don't even know the Way? Like, if a baby dies?


Anyway, I'm in the middle of Dialysis, so I'm gonna go. See ya.

[vodkamaru]

The reasons I don't believe in other religions, or want to, is that Christianity seems so much more than what they prescribe in doctrine.

I don't know if you're a convert to Christianity or what so I don't want to assume about you personally (all I have to go by is middle-class, white male which says a lot to me...), but the reason that the majority of Christians are Christians is because it's tradition. I was raised Catholic because my parents were Catholic. They're Catholic because their parents were Catholic and so on all the way back to Ireland and the English missionaries.

I've been through the Catholic school system, and I've lived the indoctrination process. When you're raised in a specific culture with specific "game rules" you are brought up to fit that system. Kids brought up Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Muslim, racist, sexist, capitalist, communist, socialist, anarchist, etc. most likely will end up subscribing to that particular belief system. This is where the problem lies for me. You have these impressionable children with sponge brains that soak up anything you tell them, and you start treating these local, cultural truths as the absolute Truth. It's completely unmeasurable and ultimately unprovable, yet within these borders it's touted around as the only truth. Just as within another culture there's a completely different truth which is so obvious to them as Christianity is here. Of course, you can just tell me to fuck off and that you think the way you do because you choose, but I have to ask if you were born in India are you absolutely sure you wouldn't be saying these same things about Hinduism? If you can say yes then that's great for you, but unfortunately we're still in the minority. I'd love to see a majority of free thinkers who can remain somewhat agnostic at least until they can buy beer or vote or something.

Edited by vodkamaru, 07 August 2007 - 04:01 PM.

[LionHarted]

"I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the father but by me?"

"No one comes to the Father but by [the way, the truth, and the life]."

i.e., by "Christian" conduct.

Edited by LionHarted, 07 August 2007 - 05:14 PM.

[Goose]

"No one comes to the Father but by [the way, the truth, and the life]."

i.e., by "Christian" conduct.

No. It plainly means by Jesus Christ.

The thing that unites christians of most denominations is that the truth that Jesus died on the cross for our sins, and through beleivng and accepting him into our lives, we can spend eternity with God in heaven.

It does not mean that if we live a godly life, without Jesus, we get in anyway. You have accept Jesus Christ as your saviour.