#269533 - 15/11/2005 21:24
Re: My take...
[Re: DWallach]
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Do not feed the troll...
So when someone says something you donīt agree with, theyīre a troll? Arenīt trolls just people who call names instead of discussing the topic at hand?
If you read my posts, Iīm quite clearly discussing the topic. You on the other hand have resorted to childish name-calling.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269534 - 15/11/2005 21:27
Re: My take...
[Re: jpt]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 25/08/2000
Posts: 2413
Loc: NH USA
|
Quote:
a single piece of 2000-year-old technology you use in your daily life
The fire in my furnace that keeps my butt warm all night.
The woven fibers in all my cloth products.
The leather in my belt that holds my pants up.
All those lovely fermented beverages.
The water that comes out of my tap delived by plumbing & pipes.
The walls and roof structure that keep the rain off.
The wheels on my car that make it roll better.
The improved road surfaces I used to roll on.
The glass that lets the light through my walls.
The gold ring on my finger.
Some ideas are just classics.
[/wiseass mode]
Not commenting either way on your position. Just sniping off a few low flyers...I couldn't resist.
-Zeke
_________________________
WWFSMD?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269535 - 15/11/2005 21:39
Re: My take...
[Re: jpt]
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Don't knock evolution till you've seen it in action over a few generations of fruit flies.
Iīm not saying I believe evolution is nonsense. Iīm just saying that no matter what you believe about our existence, itīs based on faith. Even if I see something with my own eyes, I still have to put faith in my ability to perceive. Have you ever tried LSD?
Quote:
But you still cling to the same outmoded fairy tale book like it's the only thing that matters.
Science is amazing, and I love to study it. But religion is something different, something you feel in your soul, not something you can study with a magnifying glass. Donīt cling on to the latest scientific study like itīs the only thing that matters.
Quote:
Bonus trivia question: how many years after the death of Jesus the Nazarene did the doctrine of his divinity become generally accepted?
Super Double Bonus trivia question: When was the town of Nazareth founded, and by whom?
Let me guess, you read the answers in some ancient, outmoded fairy tale book?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269536 - 15/11/2005 21:52
Re: My take...
[Re: Ezekiel]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
Fire: Not technology. The methods of producing it: technology. I don't even think that furnaces existed 2000 years ago, much less any of the common methods we use to fire furnaces in the 21st century.
Woven fibers: The fibers themselves are not technology. You might be able to claim that the cloth itself is, but I don't see many people making cloth on handheld looms any more. Certainly the methods for cloth production have improved.
Leather: Not a technology. Again, the process of refining it might be, but, again, many improvements have been made in that arena, from mass production to tanning agents, to aniline dyes.
Fermented beverages: This seems like it ought to be your closest contender, but it's probably further away than lots of your other ones, as the fermented beverages available 2000 years ago were wildly different than those we drink now, even wine. If you narrowed it down to 1000 years ago, you might be a lot closer.
Water: Not technology, again, but that plumbing sure was a godsend. Er, I mean massive technological improvement.
Walls and roof: I suppose the concepts remain the same, that living in a box is helpful, but there are certainly a variety of new technologies beyond what was available 2000 years ago. Many people choose adobe, though.
Wheels: Again, concept, but I don't think they had tubeless belted radials back then.
Improved road surfaces: I don't know. Did asphalt and concrete exist 2000 years ago? Reflective paint definitely didn't.
Glass: Massive improvements in the last 100 years obviously invalidate this, from production methods, to improved doping chemicals (read: Pyrex).
Gold ring: You got me on this one. My ring turns me no more invisible than the ring of 2000 years ago would have.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269537 - 15/11/2005 21:54
Re: My take...
[Re: ]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
Quote:
But religion is something different, something you feel in your soul
I shouldn't be responding, but:
No. You're wrong. I feel nothing of the sort in my soul. I don't even have any notion that I have a soul.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269538 - 15/11/2005 22:07
Re: My take...
[Re: wfaulk]
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Quote:
But religion is something different, something you feel in your soul
I shouldn't be responding, but:
No. You're wrong. I feel nothing of the sort in my soul. I don't even have any notion that I have a soul.
Then what is the point of living? Canīt you for just one moment consider that there might be a reason that weīre all here?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269539 - 15/11/2005 22:12
Re: My take...
[Re: ]
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
There is absolutely no scientific evidence that there is intelligent life outside of the planet earth. Yet almost any scientist and any person will entertain the idea that there could be life out there. Why be so adamant about not considering that there could be a higher reason to your existence?
Iīm not saying sell your house and devote your life to african missionary trips. Just be open-minded and consider the possibilities. Why do some people refuse to give it any thought? Are you afraid youīll become a believer?
People find the possibility of aliens existing a fascinating subject. Wouldnīt it be amazing if it turns out they really did build the pyramids in Egypt? Why isnīt there the same fascination about the possible existence of God? Instead, many people get embarrased, scared, offended, or angry.
Edited by Billy (15/11/2005 22:22)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269540 - 15/11/2005 23:42
Re: My take...
[Re: wfaulk]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 14/01/2002
Posts: 2858
Loc: Atlanta, GA
|
Quote:
One of my problems with your faith is that you claim that you feel some personal revelation that God exists, which I think is weird, but that's beside the point, and that you have this suppsedly personal relationship with him, but then you believe everything that everyone else has written. You're not just taking God on faith, you're taking on faith that every piece of literature written about it is also accurate, even when you know that the people involved were not divinely inspired. I can understand the first part, sort of, but I cannot begin to understand the second.
I don't believe that every piece of literature written about God is accurate, only those pieces canonized in the Bible. It was not a simple process and there was specific criteria by which the books were chosen. There is plenty of material available on how the canonization process took place, if you are interested. Safe to say, there were a lot of people with a lot of different motives, but ultimately I (and other Christians like me) believe that God worked in this process to give us His inspired Word. And while the authors themselves were fallable, we believe that God worked through those individuals to give us the Bible so that we may know Him better.
I believe the heart of your question is that if I have a personal relationship with God, why do I need further information beyond my personal experience? The answer is that I am a sinful human whose interpretation of experience is very fallable. It is not safe to rely on experience alone, as experience is more easily twisted than scripture to mean whatever we want it to mean. And not all experiences are from God, either. It is true that the scripture can be twisted, but it is still much more objective than the subjective experiences of a believer. Thus, anything I experience I must test against scripture, which I believe is God's absolute rule of faith to guide me. Of course, my interpretation of scripture is equally fallable, but that is why there is a community of believers to help guide one another in doctrine and belief.
One of the HUGE differences between Catholics and Protestants is that Protestents believe that scripture is the absolute rule of faith by which everything must be tested while Catholics believe that the scripture and church are equal. This what was know as the "formal cause" of the reformation (the "material cause" being the issue of salvation by faith alone). The Protestant view is that both humans and the church itself are corruptable, but that the Bible is not.
_________________________
-Jeff
Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings; they did it by killing all those who opposed them.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269541 - 16/11/2005 00:11
Re: My take...
[Re: bonzi]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 14/01/2002
Posts: 2858
Loc: Atlanta, GA
|
Quote:
If one 'talks with God', one is usually categorised in one of three groups:
# If the God in case is 'ours', the person in question is deeply religious
# If it is some other established religion's God, especially one prevalent in countries we are at odds with at the moment, the guy is a religious fanatic or something similar
# If nobody ever heard of the God in question, the chap has nice chances of ending up in a psychiatric institution
And yet, I don't see any difference.
There is no difference, except between those who are right and those who are wrong. Between two people of differening faiths, either one of them is right or neither are. Both cannot be, though it is nice to think so (and often accepting both contrasting views as right gets labled as "tolerant"- a misuse of the word I think).
Of course, there are religions that accept other faiths as true. Like Mormanism, sort of. I once talked at length to a Morman coworker and he was convinced that we both could be right because I was very sincere. In their view as long as you are a good person and did good things, you are pleasing to God. This is a point of view where both can be right- of course since Christ claimed exclucivity, it doesn't work the other way around.
As far as "religious fanatics" go, it's a label and you're right that it gets applied differently depending on the beliefs of the labeler. Those "fanatics" who go around killing people in the name of their religion are not fanatics to those who share their beliefs. Understanding that, however, will not stop me from defending myself and my loved ones if a person's faith demands violence.
Quote:
what makes your particular religion more, for lack of a better word, probable (or true) than others?
Because it IS true, whether I can prove it to others or not. My life experience, my reading of the Bible, and my examination of the claims of other faiths all tell me the Christianity is true. Of every teaching I've encountered, the notion that man is fallen and need of redemption rings truer to me than any other philosophy, and as I've walked in Christ's footsteps this has been confirmed over and over.
If you're after scientific proof (or any other kind, for that matter), I can't offer any. But just because I can't prove it doesn't mean it isn't true. My testimony is that Christ has transformed me and is continuing to do so every day that I'm on this earth. If my testimony is not compelling, you are convinced in your heart that you are not a sinner and that you have no need of redemption, or if you read through the Bible and it doesn't ring true to you, then I have very little to offer.
But truth is not dependent on anything we do, including our ability to prove or even understand it.
_________________________
-Jeff
Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings; they did it by killing all those who opposed them.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269542 - 16/11/2005 00:19
Re: My take...
[Re: bonzi]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 14/01/2002
Posts: 2858
Loc: Atlanta, GA
|
Quote:
Quote:
I'm an atheist but I can still answer this question. In Exodus, the commandments were given specifically to the Jews. There were other laws meant for non-Jews that were less stringent.
Hm, yeah, 'chosen people' and all that. But does that mean that Jahve was willing to coexist with other peoples' gods?
This question is exactly on target. While the OT law was given to God's chosen people (and therfore does not apply in the new covenent ushered in by Jesus Christ), there are aspects about God which have not changed. It is not likely that God suddenly became ok with worshiping of other gods; thus, we may take it as a principle that God does not want us worshiping other gods. For other pieces of the law, such as weaving two threads of different colors together, we are not bound to follow because it does not pertain to the character of God (though the symbolism of setting one's self apart is still very real in the believer's life).
_________________________
-Jeff
Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings; they did it by killing all those who opposed them.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269543 - 16/11/2005 00:21
Re: My take...
[Re: ]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
Why must there be a point? Is there a point to the wind blowing, or the Earth orbiting? It is your desire for there to be a point that created your God (and every God) in the first place.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269544 - 16/11/2005 00:26
Re: My take...
[Re: ]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
I'm not sure why you're asking yourself these questions, other than it tends to support my theory that you're all schizophrenic to begin with, but I'll intervene and answer them for you.
There might be a God. I won't deny it. I have no way to know what exists outside our universe, or if there is an "outside our universe". At the same time, living my life based around a book claiming to know something about the unknowable seems particularly absurd. I base my life on what I can see and feel, not on the hopes of pleasing a "person" for whom there is no evidence of existance.
Same can be said of extraterrestrial beings, though many fewer people base their lives around little green men.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269545 - 16/11/2005 00:29
Re: My take...
[Re: JeffS]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
Well, actually, Mormons believe that you have to have a password to get into Heaven, so they're probably not going to be seeing you there. Unfortunately, you have to pay up in order to get your password, so they won't be seeing a lot of their own, either.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269546 - 16/11/2005 00:31
Re: My take...
[Re: wfaulk]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 14/01/2002
Posts: 2858
Loc: Atlanta, GA
|
Not being well versed in Morman theology, I'll trust you on that one. However, my understanding is that they have seperate levels of "Heaven" and you have to be truly awful not to make it into the lowest one.
_________________________
-Jeff
Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings; they did it by killing all those who opposed them.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269547 - 16/11/2005 00:36
Re: My take...
[Re: wfaulk]
|
old hand
Registered: 01/10/2002
Posts: 1033
Loc: Fullerton, Calif.
|
Quote:
Fire: Not technology. The methods of producing it: technology. I don't even think that furnaces existed 2000 years ago, much less any of the common methods we use to fire furnaces in the 21st century.
The Ancient Engineers
I highly recommend reading this book. It's amazing how far back some of the technology goes. There was a developer from around 2,000 years back that converted houses to central heat for profit.
Quote:
Improved road surfaces: I don't know. Did asphalt and concrete exist 2000 years ago? Reflective paint definitely didn't.
The Colosseum is made of concrete and nearly 2,000 years old. Most of ancient Rome was made of concrete. Many of the roads built by the Romans are still in use. The book linked above has the specs they used.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269548 - 16/11/2005 00:39
Re: My take...
[Re: larry818]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
That's pretty snazzy stuff. That said, the notion that none of those things have seen improvement in 2000 years is untrue. The fact that some of them are still being used and the fact that some things we think of as inventions of the last hundred years are pretty remarkable though.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269549 - 16/11/2005 00:47
Re: My take...
[Re: Ezekiel]
|
new poster
Registered: 10/11/2005
Posts: 35
|
Zeke: I was going to answer all of those, but Bitt beat me to it  Your (possibly unintentional) point -- that we seldom throw out ideas altogether, though they do experience substantial revision as we build on our knowledge -- is taken, but it doesn't invalidate mine. Quote:
(in response to my trivia questions) Let me guess, you read the answers in some ancient, outmoded fairy tale book?
Nope. You won't find the answer to either in the bible. But you will on the internet. Right here on the internet, if you give me a minute.
Quote:
Quote:
No. You're wrong. I feel nothing of the sort in my soul. I don't even have any notion that I have a soul.
Then what is the point of living? Canīt you for just one moment consider that there might be a reason that weīre all here?
Who cares why? Stop worrying so much! We're here, so let's enjoy it and dedicate outselves to making life (for everyone) better! And anyway, how could the answer "I'm here because something I can't interact with nor understand put me here" be satisfying?
Quote:
There is absolutely no scientific evidence that there is intelligent life outside of the planet earth. Yet almost any scientist and any person will entertain the idea that there could be life out there. Why be so adamant about not considering that there could be a higher reason to your existence?
If there are aliens, there aren't any close enough to matter (i.e. to communicate with us in my lifetime), so I don't let the possibility affect my life. In this respect, my views on extraterrestrials are roughly equivalent to my views on gods. However, gods are even less meaningful, because by their very definition they can *never* have a measurable impact on my life. Essentially, even if gods do exist, for practical purposes, they don't.
Quote:
People find the possibility of aliens existing a fascinating subject.
Not really, at least not as anything more than fodder for decent science fiction. And the only reason it's even good for science fiction is that in stories, the aliens are actually there and can interact with the story, giving them the same appeal as unicorns, gnomes, Morlocks, or any other kind of fantastic character. Even as a hypothetical fantasy story, a god who can't be seen, never takes observable action of any kind, and doesn't talk to any of the main characters just doesn't have gripping power.
Quote:
The Protestant view is that both humans and the church itself are corruptable, but that the Bible is not.
What about translations of the bible, by the way? I'm guessing here that you probably don't read Greek, and even the Greek texts were translations of older texts that have not been preserved. What if something super important got left out or mangled?
_________________________
MkIIa #40104178, 22GB
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269550 - 16/11/2005 01:18
Re: My take...
[Re: jpt]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
Yeah. What if "amen" actually means "sucker!"?
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269551 - 16/11/2005 01:23
Re: My take...
[Re: jpt]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 14/01/2002
Posts: 2858
Loc: Atlanta, GA
|
Quote:
What about translations of the bible, by the way? I'm guessing here that you probably don't read Greek, and even the Greek texts were translations of older texts that have not been preserved. What if something super important got left out or mangled?
I believe I mentioned earlier in this thread that translations are not considered infallible, only the origional text. The super important stuff is not isolated to only one or two passages, though, so we can be fairly certain that they are accurate.
But even at that, the Bible has been remarkably preserved with many early copies still in existence that can be studied today. Even where there are discrepencies, there are enough copies to determine with a high reliability what the origional text said and the discrepencies alter no doctrine significanly (things like "Christ Jesus" instead of "Jesus Christ"). There are two passages that are not found in the earliest texts we have, and both of these are almost always noted in the translations.
Of course, any time you read a translation you need to be aware of how that translation was done- some types of translations are better suited to specific purposes than others. For instance, the some translations attempt to translate sentences and concepts, reordering words to make the meaning more clear, where others try to be more literal and translate word for word. With the former you are depending on the interpretation of the translator to some extent, but they can be easier to understand than the latter.
_________________________
-Jeff
Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings; they did it by killing all those who opposed them.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269552 - 16/11/2005 01:28
Re: My take...
[Re: JeffS]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
Completely off topic, why is it that you always misspell "original" as "origional"? Is it just one of those confused finger things?
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269554 - 16/11/2005 03:55
Re: My take...
[Re: JeffS]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/07/1999
Posts: 5539
Loc: Ajijic, Mexico
|
Between two people of differening faiths, either one of them is right or neither are. Both cannot be,
I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said "Stop! don't do it!"
"Why shouldn't I?" he said.
I said, "Well, there's so much to live for!"
He said, "Like what?"
I said, "Well...are you religious or atheist?"
He said, "Religious."
I said, "Me too! Are you Christian or Buddhist?"
He said, "Christian."
I said, "Me too! Are you Catholic or Protestant?"
He said, "Protestant."
I said, "Me too! Are you Episcopalian or Baptist?"
He said, "Baptist!"
I said, "Wow! Me too! Are you Baptist Church of God or Baptist Church of the Lord?"
He said, "Baptist Church of God!"
I said, "Me too! Are you original Baptist Church of God, or are you Reformed Baptist Church of God?"
He said,"Reformed Baptist Church of God!"
I said, "Me too! Are you Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1879, or Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1915?
"He said, "Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1915!"
So I said, "Die, you Godless heretic", and pushed him off the bridge.
-- Emo Phillips
 tanstaafl.
_________________________
"There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch"
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269555 - 16/11/2005 05:55
Re: My take...
[Re: JeffS]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 13/09/1999
Posts: 2401
Loc: Croatia
|
But what makes you so sure that original texts were indeed God-inspired? I suppose, because they, as you said, 'ring true' to you. Having decided that, you use them to affirm your belief. A bit circular, isn't it?
_________________________
Dragi "Bonzi" Raos
Q#5196
MkII #080000376, 18GB green
MkIIa #040103247, 60GB blue
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269556 - 16/11/2005 06:21
Re: My take...
[Re: JeffS]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 13/09/1999
Posts: 2401
Loc: Croatia
|
Quote:
Between two people of differening faiths, either one of them is right or neither are.
My point exactly. This was response to 'voting' argument for truth of religion(s): at most one of them can be true, and since I don't feel or see presence of any of their gods, the fact that there is a number of them with many adherents cary no weight with me, and can only assume none of them is true.
Quote:
Understanding that, however, will not stop me from defending myself and my loved ones if a person's faith demands violence.
I was not talking about violence, and I think there is hardly any religion, however peaceful and tolerant, that has been entirely free of violence being commited in its name.
Quote:
...you are convinced in your heart that you are not a sinner and that you have no need of redemption...
I am far from being as good a person I wish to be (and probably from being what I imagine I am), but my 'sins' are against other human beings, and when I need redemption or forgiveness, it is from them.
Quote:
Because it IS true, whether I can prove it to others or not.
[...]
But truth is not dependent on anything we do, including our ability to prove or even understand it.
I understand you feel this. I hope you can, on the other hand, see why it looks completely absurd to me, and why it depresses me to see perfectly nice people base their existence on what I see as utter nonsense.
_________________________
Dragi "Bonzi" Raos
Q#5196
MkII #080000376, 18GB green
MkIIa #040103247, 60GB blue
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269557 - 16/11/2005 06:32
Re: My take...
[Re: bonzi]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 14/01/2002
Posts: 2858
Loc: Atlanta, GA
|
Quote:
I hope you can, on the other hand, see why it looks completely absurd to me, and why it depresses me to see perfectly nice people base their existence on what I see as utter nonsense.
I do understand that faith looks like foolishness to you; however, I do not see why it would depress you. Frustrate, perhaps, since it creates an impass over certain political issues. That is frustrating to me at least. But depressing I don't see. From your perspective, it seems the worst thing is that I believe in a lie that makes me happy- and if there is no God (or anything else beyond us and this life) then none of what we do ends up being of real consequence anyway, so whatever makes us happy, lie or not, is good enough.
_________________________
-Jeff
Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings; they did it by killing all those who opposed them.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269558 - 16/11/2005 06:34
Re: My take...
[Re: JeffS]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 13/02/2002
Posts: 3212
Loc: Portland, OR
|
Quote:
Quote:
what makes your particular religion more, for lack of a better word, probable (or true) than others?
Because it IS true, whether I can prove it to others or not. My life experience, my reading of the Bible, and my examination of the claims of other faiths all tell me the Christianity is true. Of every teaching I've encountered, the notion that man is fallen and need of redemption rings truer to me than any other philosophy, and as I've walked in Christ's footsteps this has been confirmed over and over.
If you're after scientific proof (or any other kind, for that matter), I can't offer any. But just because I can't prove it doesn't mean it isn't true.
Have you heard the expression "calling a tail a leg doesn't make it so?"
Just because you think it's true, doesn't make it true. It may be true, but then, it may not be.
Every time I've been to Florida, it was raining. Therefore, based on my experience, it is true that it is constantly raining in Florida.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269559 - 16/11/2005 06:51
Re: My take...
[Re: bonzi]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 14/01/2002
Posts: 2858
Loc: Atlanta, GA
|
Quote:
But what makes you so sure that original texts were indeed God-inspired? I suppose, because they, as you said, 'ring true' to you. Having decided that, you use them to affirm your belief. A bit circular, isn't it?
It's a building process. I didn't just decide one day that the Bible was true and infallible and there you go. I'd been brought up with a certain form of Christiantiy and that got me interested in religion in general. The church I was attending used the scriptures but didn't appear to consider them infallible, which was alright with me at the time. I got the basic concept of needing redemption for sin and trusting Christ and that, above all things, made real sense to me. I did look at other religions and their teachings, but if they had teaching about redemption, it was about earning it through good works and keeping to strict rules, which Christiantiy argues falls short of appeasing a perfect and holy God. The argument of Christianity won out and so Christiantiy is what I chose. Once again, at this time I'd not have said the Bible was infallible. This was the way I was raised (I was also raised Pro-Choice, btw).
My parents were always very supportive of me choosing my own faith, however, and as soon as I was old enough to drive they let me choose whatever church I wanted. Initially, the first church I attended on my own was much more liberal in its interpretation of the Bible and doctrine than the one I grew up in. However, as I grew into my faith, and studied things for myself, my beliefs began to form differently than the church I was attending and my trust in the scriptures grew as well. I read things like the book of Daniel, which is very compelling prophecy that predicits historically verifiable events with amazing clarity. I left that church to find a more conservative church of like minded individuals. I found that these Christians believed that the Bible was infallible and they adressed a lot of my concerns about various so-called contradictions. Utlimately, I came to believe that the scripture was more reliable than my own experience, which tended to be swayed by emotions without accountability. I accepted the Bible as the infallible rule of faith that God had given us to know Him better and to guide our lives.
That is my particular story and how I came to believe what I do. Certainly it is a different process than what some of the other Christians here went through, but it's about the best way I know to answer your question. It doesn't seem circular to me, but more of a process of spiritual growth.
_________________________
-Jeff
Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings; they did it by killing all those who opposed them.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269560 - 16/11/2005 07:02
Re: My take...
[Re: canuckInOR]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 14/01/2002
Posts: 2858
Loc: Atlanta, GA
|
Quote:
Just because you think it's true, doesn't make it true. It may be true, but then, it may not be.
Yes, I understand this, of course. Belief does not make truth and truth is what it is irrespective of our belief. But I believe that Christiantiy is true, so it makes sense for me to claim that it is true. I also believe that I am a living, breathing human being and not a computer simulation (or a trapped Thetan)- just believing it doesn't make this true either. We do our best to line our beliefs up with what we preceive to be true and then act according to how certain we are. I'm as certain as I can be about faith in Christ- there are other beliefs I have that I am less certain about.
Quote:
Every time I've been to Florida, it was raining. Therefore, based on my experience, it is true that it is constantly raining in Florida.
But a little research would tell you differently, wouldn't it? I have not based my belief in Christ on only a few experiences but upon years of studying theology and considering alternatives in addition to personal experience.
Edited by JeffS (16/11/2005 07:10)
_________________________
-Jeff
Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings; they did it by killing all those who opposed them.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269561 - 16/11/2005 07:09
Re: My take...
[Re: JeffS]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 14/01/2002
Posts: 2858
Loc: Atlanta, GA
|
I should also note to my overall personal spiritual journey that my father was an Athiest, so that was a certain influence on how I looked at religion. My mother was the primary spiritual force in my life and it turns out that she and I have very different outlooks on faith.
_________________________
-Jeff
Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings; they did it by killing all those who opposed them.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269562 - 16/11/2005 07:26
Re: My take...
[Re: tanstaafl.]
|
addict
Registered: 23/12/2002
Posts: 652
Loc: Winston Salem, NC
|
Quote:
So I said, "Die, you Godless heretic", and pushed him off the bridge.
Unfortunately, this rings far too true. 
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous Topic
Index