sorry, just aggitated... everything that is said, including from you, a post is made from him trying to prove it wrong or unlikely... =/
what was that about open mindedness?
Christina & Duki-
Sorry, methinks I overreaced, not you guys. ;)
-No, not everything from me is defending 1 side. Just look at the earlier part of the discussion, when I bashed Chrstiana and Josh pretty heavily.
Josh- I wouldnt really consider it 1v3. Mabe 1v2 with me as the centrist. :)
how old is every1 here?
well, i'm sorry if you feel like you're being attacked... you're not. Personally, I'm doing this because I care about your soul, as does God. Try not to close your mind around me being an ignorant extremist for false religion... just please think about the whatifs, just like in every theory discussed; all began with a whatif.
I'm going to bed, but I'll reply more tomorrow. Josh, I'm praying for you... not praying, "OH HOLY MIGHTY GOD ON HIGH, SMITE THIS IGNORANT FOOL WHO DENIES YOUR THRONE!! GRAB HIM AND SHOW HIM YOUR PRESENCE OH GREAT CREATOR!!"... no... I will simply be praying that God allows you to have an open mind to whatif there is a Father who cares for you... if you focus, you can feel his prensence; for the sake of theory, try it? Sleep well.
night all.
*i'm 19
(17)
Oh, and Josh, just to spur up some rational debate, what's your view of Universal Moral Law?
I am 17
well, i'm sorry if you feel like you're being attacked... you're not. Personally, I'm doing this because I care about your soul, as does God. Try not to close your mind around me being an ignorant extremist for false religion... just please think about the whatifs, just like in every theory discussed; all began with a whatif.
I'm going to bed, but I'll reply more tomorrow. Josh, I'm praying for you... not praying, "OH HOLY MIGHTY GOD ON HIGH, SMITE THIS IGNORANT FOOL WHO DENIES YOUR THRONE!! GRAB HIM AND SHOW HIM YOUR PRESENCE OH GREAT CREATOR!!"... no... I will simply be praying that God allows you to have an open mind to "whatif there is a great creator who cares about me?"
night all.
keep in mind that I converted from catholicism, and I know just as much, if not more about god then all of you. I went to a catholic private school until 6th grade, and I memorized all the books of the bible as well as many scriptures and such...
*I'm 18
"and I know just as much, if not more about god then all of you."
I wouldn't say THAT...as I myself attended Catholic school longer then you. My guess is that Christina knows what she's talking about as well, and Duki too.
(17)
Oh, and Josh, just to spur up some rational debate, what's your view of Universal Moral Law?
There is no true universal moral law, as is logical. Humans act in their own self-interest; however, society has created moral law.. If society collapsed, say errupted in complete anarchy.. people would care nothing of each other, only of their own primitive needs of survival...
But, I do believe people should have some morals to relate to.. Christianity is a great religion in establishing strong morals..
I hope this is what you mean by 'Universal Moral Law':cool:
keep in mind that I converted from catholicism, and I know just as much, if not more about god then all of you. I went to a catholic private school until 6th grade, and I memorized all the books of the bible as well as many scriptures and such...
*I'm 18
I don't think Duki was trying to mock you or anything... he's just trying to be nice. I should know since he's my boyfriend. ;)
"and I know just as much, if not more about god then all of you."
I wouldn't say THAT...as I myself attended Catholic school longer then you. My guess is that Christina knows what she's talking about as well, and Duki too.
ohhic.. are there many catholics in tennesse? I live in probably one of the most conservative, christian cities of the entire u.s.! We were even number one under the google trend search "Christian" for a little bit.
jw.. what are your views of the afterlife?
There is no true universal moral law, as is logical. Humans act in their own self-interest; however, society has created moral law.. If society collapsed, say errupted in complete anarchy.. people would care nothing of each other, only of their own primitive needs of survival...
But, I do believe people should have some morals to relate to.. Christianity is a great religion in establishing strong morals..
I hope this is what you mean by 'Universal Moral Law':cool:
Here's an example. Rape is considered morally wrong in virtually every human society (ranging from city life to remote tribes). However, rape isn't looked down upon in the animal category, and actually can have the advantage in natural selection (due to an increased passing of its allelles).
I don't think Duki was trying to mock you or anything... he's just trying to be nice. I should know since he's my boyfriend. ;)
haha icic.. well tell him 'thank you' for caring.. i hope i didnt sound to rude or forceful to any1
Don't worry about it :)
ohhic.. are there many catholics in tennesse? I live in probably one of the most conservative, christian cities of the entire u.s.! We were even number one under the google trend search "Christian" for a little bit.
jw.. what are your views of the afterlife?
Haha I think your city wins. Knoxville, TN doesn't have the largest Catholic population, but that is changing somewhat with the influx of immigrants...
Afterlife> the truth is, I'm not really sure. What I will say, however, is that my belief does not follow Catholicism in this aspect.
Here's an example. Rape is considered morally wrong in virtually every human society (ranging from city life to remote tribes). However, rape isn't looked down upon in the animal category, and actually can have the advantage in natural selection (due to an increased passing of its allelles).
ohhic haha... well I basically see it as 'survival of the fittest' as you said. All animals do what they must to survive.. whereas humans rely more on civilization and their supreme intellect, most other animals are not intelligent enough to form 'civilizations' and therefore depend on their natural instincts..
I believe without such a globalized and well-developed society, humans would act very similar to other animals.
Afterlife> the truth is, I'm not really sure. What I will say, however, is that my belief does not follow Catholicism in this aspect.
I dont think the Catholic church has much of an elaberate idea of heaven.. what exactly do you believe? jw
hah this is like the first time that I have really used this forum.. I created this account a while back to get help with java, but 2day is the first time I have really used it much.. How do you become a "team Colleague"?
...i gotta go to bed, but I'll answer the questions tmr.
Team Colleague> Basically, you're a retired mod. :)
Interesting.... A few comments -- opinions, to be sure (except the first):
Theories are not facts. The are based on observations and seem to hold true, but aspects of the theory still have not been proven. That's why they are called theories instead of facts.
Creationism: According to Isaac Asimov, based on scientific evidence (carbon dating for one) Creationism could only be true if the world was created by a deceitful creator. The proven age of the world does not coincide with the 'stated' or 'created' age, therefore the scientifically provable data had to be manufactured and is therefore a lie. It's an interesting thought...
Evolution: An alternate 'subtheory' is that we did not evolve from apes. Instead, apes and humans have a common ancestor farther back that split into what eventually became us on one line and apes on another.
As for other current species eventually becoming human, not likely. No more so than the egg that evolves into a cake could eventually become an omelet. Their current path has taken them away from the possibility of being human.
Genesis: Possibility is that it was written to explain where we came from in terms that were understandable to the population at the time (1600-400 BC, somewhere in there -- see http://mb-soft.com/believe/txs/genesis.htm)
Six-day/24 hour debate. C'Mon, it's poetic license. That means in 144 hours the world was created. But Jupiter would have been created in 60 hours, Mars in 147.72 hours... Day in Genesis is (probably) an ambiguous term, used because at its writing the people would be able to understand it rather than aeon or millions of years. Heck, they barely had writing back then.
Bible: So far has been relatively accurate historically, where the places events are mentioned. As for the individuals many (most?) have not been proven to have existed. Doesn't mean they haven't, it's just very hard to prove. Allegedly, JC has one mention outside of the Bible pointing to his existence. As for specific events surrounding his life and exploits, little to nothing has been found that I'm aware of to prove he (or most others for that matter) existed outside of the Biblical records. Not being a historian, I may be uninformed of documentation that proves otherwise.
you would rather believe we came from a single organism than a loving creator?
Didn't the loving creator create the single organism that eventually evolved into us? I for one don't have a problem with this idea. ;)
We do not believe in a lie.
Sure we do! Every day we believe lies because we don't know any better. ;) Luckily, it doesn't hurt us most of the time.
At least we have hope after death.
Isn't this true in the teachings of most religions? So nothing special about us...
I believe everything is insignificant. Our puny planet is nothing compared to the Universe
Reminds me of a song by Yakko of the Animaniacs... :mrgreen:
But, I do believe people should have some morals to relate to.. Christianity is a great religion in establishing strong morals..
The purpose of most religions are to instill morals. Their morals just don't always coincide with Christianity's set of morals. But they make sense for their believers. Or their brainwashed masses -- take your pick. ;)
Didn't the loving creator create the single organism that eventually evolved into us? I for one don't have a problem with this idea. ;)
If by organism you mean adam and eve, then sure... me either :)
I'm not aware of any historical evidence that disproves the credibility of the Bible. You may want to take a look at my reasearch paper, as it is an in-depth look at historiagraphy as applied to The New Testament.
Creationism: According to Isaac Asimov, based on scientific evidence (carbon dating for one) Creationism could only be true if the world was created by a deceitful creator. The proven age of the world does not coincide with the 'stated' or 'created' age, therefore the scientifically provable data had to be manufactured and is therefore a lie. It's an interesting thought...
That my friend is also a theory. It's based on just another irrelevant thought "according to Issac Asimov." Just because he found something to be somewhat "relevant" does not mean Creationism is a "lie." Sorry.
Bible: So far has been relatively accurate historically, where the places events are mentioned. As for the individuals many (most?) have not been proven to have existed. Doesn't mean they haven't, it's just very hard to prove. Allegedly, JC has one mention outside of the Bible pointing to his existence. As for specific events surrounding his life and exploits, little to nothing has been found that I'm aware of to prove he (or most others for that matter) existed outside of the Biblical records. Not being a historian, I may be uninformed of documentation that proves otherwise.
What individuals are you trying to reveal that have not been proven to have existed? Jesus Christ is the greatest phenomenon that has ever crossed the horizon of this world. He's the centerpiece of civilation. He is the loftiest idea in literature. He's the highest personality in philosophy. He's the fundamental doctrine of true theology. So with those thoughts, I do not believe that I would follow a Savior who I thought never existed...
Another thought, this one I got from my pastor when he spoke about it a few weeks ago....
What about the disciples that were martyred for the cause of Christ? James and Paul were beheaded. Andrew was crucified on an "X" - shaped cross which is now known as St. Andrew's Cross. Philip was crucified. Simon the Zealot was killed. Mark was dragged to pieces by the people of Alexandria. Mattias (who replaced Judas Iscariot) was stoned at Jerusalem and then beheaded. Peter was crucified upside down as a request because he did not feel he was worthy enough to die in the same manner as his Savior. As you can see, most of these were disciples of Jesus... why would there be historical records of their deaths if you supposedly say that "they have not been proven to exist?" That is vague and irrelevant. Also, why would they die horrible deaths for absolutely no reason? They were not wealthy, they were persecuted for everything they did, and they were killed for spreading the gospel of their friend. Did you read that? They were persecuted and killed for witnessing to people about Jesus Christ. He certainly must have lived because this was only a short time after His death and resurrection when they were being martyred. Again, they were also disciples of Him. Which meant that most of them walked and talked with Jesus. This is history, not simply just a belief of mine.
That my friend is also a theory. It's based on just another irrelevant thought "according to Issac Asimov." Just because he found something to be somewhat "relevant" does not mean Creationism is a "lie." Sorry.
Of course it's a theory. Creationism and Evolution are both theories. There is no proof of either. But there is evidence to support them. The thought is not irrelevant. It's an honest interpretation of the facts as he understood them. Keep in mind, many people are critical of Creationism because it's simply unscientific. This fact is not irrelevant. Many people are critical of evolution because they don't like the idea of coming from monkeys. This is irrelevant. But there are other ideas that support Creationism that are not irrelevant. But neither have been proven. Each is just as likely as my pet theory:
The Earth and it's creatures took billions of years to evolve from the formation of the planet, cells splitting, evolving, advancing life. Then Adam and Eve crash landed on the planet from another civilization and were lost to their people, given up as dead. They survived and here we are... :)
What individuals are you trying to reveal that have not been proven to have existed? Jesus Christ is the greatest phenomenon that has ever crossed the horizon of this world. He's the centerpiece of civilation. He is the loftiest idea in literature. He's the highest personality in philosophy. He's the fundamental doctrine of true theology. So with those thoughts, I do not believe that I would follow a Savior who I thought never existed...
If you believe the press... But Christianity is very close to another religion that came just before, by about 500 years, called Mythraism. And there is nothing really new in Christianity -- all it's teachings and concepts have been in other previous religions. I am not saying that JC wasn't important. What I'm pointing out is that to people that do not believe in Christianity, they have valid reasons. Whether true or not, they can claim that Christianity simply borrowed bits and pieces from other religions and made it personal to themselves and their life in that time. Since then, they had great PR.
Another thought, this one I got from my pastor when he spoke about it a few weeks ago....
What about the disciples that were martyred for the cause of Christ? James and Paul were beheaded. Andrew was crucified on an "X" - shaped cross which is now known as St. Andrew's Cross. Philip was crucified. Simon the Zealot was killed. Mark was dragged to pieces by the people of Alexandria. Mattias (who replaced Judas Iscariot) was stoned at Jerusalem and then beheaded. Peter was crucified upside down as a request because he did not feel he was worthy enough to die in the same manner as his Savior. As you can see, most of these were disciples of Jesus... why would there be historical records of their deaths if you supposedly say that "they have not been proven to exist?"
#1) The were put to death because they were, in that time, troublemakers -- fighting the approved religion of that time. They were radicals.
#2) I never said they didn't exist. I said there is not proof that many of the people in the bible existed. You mention 13. I'm talking about the other 2-3000 -- Job, Ruth, etc. There's no proof they existed.
I'm not personally aware of historical records outside of the Bible that the disciples existed, but that means nothing. I may be simply unaware of these documents. Can you point to non-Biblical documentation? I'd be very interested to see it.
That is vague and irrelevant.
Why is a dissenting opinion vague and irrelevant. If you are going to decide the irrelevance simply because you hold a different belief, you are being very closed minded. I am not trying to prove Christianity is wrong. I'm simply pointing out that for those that do not believe, they have reasons. Their reasons and beliefs do not alter the facts, and there are few facts in religion. It's a system of beliefs that can (and have) alter someone's own inner perceptions. This can be a very good thing.
Also, why would they die horrible deaths for absolutely no reason? They were not wealthy, they were persecuted for everything they did, and they were killed for spreading the gospel of their friend. Did you read that? They were persecuted and killed for witnessing to people about Jesus Christ.
Yes, I read that. I also read Stranger in a Strange Land, too. He was also persecuted. And to his followers, so was Hitler. Do you think the British have the same view on the American Revolution that we do? We won our freedom from the persecutors. From their view the rabble started an uprising and overthrew the established government.
The disciples died because to the powers at the time they were causing trouble. To the followers that made them martyrs. To non-followers, they were simply dead. Two sides. Two views.
He certainly must have lived because this was only a short time after His death and resurrection when they were being martyred. Again, they were also disciples of Him. Which meant that most of them walked and talked with Jesus. This is history, not simply just a belief of mine.
As I said, to prove it is history, there must be outside documentation to substantiate it, for example public records. Just because someone believes in something does not make it fact. And please, read that statement for what it really says. Which is that a belief does not make fact, but that does not mean the belief is false. Simply that the facts are missing. Galileo died because he stated a belief. That belief was actually proven a fact a long time after his death.
In summary, beliefs are a very good thing. But claiming them as facts simply because you believe them does not make them facts. Evidence makes them facts. I have no problem with Christianity, it is a wonderful belief system. But the facts are not overly compelling. The belief in JC and his followers have done many wonderful things for people and civilization. They may have existed. They may not. Either way, a lot of good came out of the belief in them. This is true for most religions. Did Buddah exist? Or Vishnu? Who knows. They live in the followers hearts. That's where their real strength lies.
If you believe the press... But Christianity is very close to another religion that came just before, by about 500 years, called Mythraism. And there is nothing really new in Christianity -- all it's teachings and concepts have been in other previous religions. I am not saying that JC wasn't important. What I'm pointing out is that to people that do not believe in Christianity, they have valid reasons. Whether true or not, they can claim that Christianity simply borrowed bits and pieces from other religions and made it personal to themselves and their life in that time. Since then, they had great PR.
Mythraism doesn't exist today does it? Of course not...
But tell me why has Christianity made such an impact in the society? Why is it the biggest religion in the world?
Jesus Christ did not "simply borrow bits and pieces from other religions." What other religion had a man lay down His life for His friends. The ultimate sacrifice? Jesus did the one thing that no religion can match. That's what seperates the Power and the Divinity in my faith from a simple belief.
#1) The were put to death because they were, in that time, troublemakers -- fighting the approved religion of that time. They were radicals.
#2) I never said they didn't exist. I said there is not proof that many of the people in the bible existed. You mention 13. I'm talking about the other 2-3000 -- Job, Ruth, etc. There's no proof they existed.
1. They stood up for something they believed in. They were persecuted for the sake of their King. But they would not have done something so "radical" if Jesus had not rose from the dead. They had hope and they carried that until their death.
2. The Bible itself is used as a history book. It is historically accurate. The places are real, the people are real. The Bible is an ancient collection of writings, comprised of 66 seperate books, written over approximately 1,600 years, by at least 40 distinct authors. It began with the Jewish Scriptures. The historical record of the Jews was written down on leather scrolls and tablets over centuries, and the authors included kings, shepherds, prophets, and other leaders. The first five books are called Law, which were written or edited primarily by Moses in the early 1400 BC. Thereafter, other scriptural texts were written and collected by the Jewish people during the next 1,000 years. About 450 BC, the Law and other Jewish Scriptures were arranged by councils of Rabbi's, who then recognized the complete set as the inspired and sacred authority of God (Elohim). At some times during this period, the books of the Hebrew Bible were arranged by topic, including The Law (Torah), The Prophets (Nebiim), and The Writings (Ketubim). The first letters of these Hebrew words form the name of the Hebrew Bible - The Tanakh. Beginning as early as 250 BC, the Hebrew Bible was translated into Greek by jewish scholars in Alexandria, Egypt. It was during this process that the order of the books was changed to the order we have in today's Bible: Historical (Genesis - Esther), Poetic (Job - Song of Songs), and Prophetic (Isaiah - Malachi). As far as manuscript accuracy, the recent discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls has confirmed remarkable reliability of the scribal system over thousands of years.
After approximately 400 years of scriptural silence, Jesus arrived on the scene in about 4 BC. Starting in about 40 AD, and continuing to around 90 AD, the eye-witnesses to the life of Jesus including Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, James, Peter wrote the Gospels, letters, and books that became the Bible's New Testament. Which is written in Greek.
The Bible can be proven relevant.
This is true for most religions. Did Buddah exist? Or Vishnu? Who knows. They live in the followers hearts. That's where their real strength lies.
Wrong.
Buddah did exist. His real name was Siddhartha Guatama. Buddha simply means the awakened or enlightened one, this title was given to him. The goal in the teachings of Buddha are to become "enlightened" and achieve Nirvana.
Vishnu is one of the main gods in Hinduism. It isn't a human.
Yes, most of what you said seems accurate to me. But, who is to say that all the writings are accurate? They are very old, and were translated into Greek. Anyone could have changed the stories to whatever they liked...
And correct me if I'm wrong, but Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John all came way after the time of jesus. Their gospels were written long after jesus had died, and therefore, were not completely accurate. Parts of the bible have been proven true, parts have been proven false.. but for the most part, everything is unclear.
josh, have you read my document I attached? 60% of the questions people are asking are answered in it.
The entire New Testament was written within 70 years of Jesus's death.
No, where is this doucment you keep speaking of?
And correct me if I'm wrong, but Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John all came way after the time of jesus.
Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John walked and talked with Jesus. They were all eye-witnesses to His life, death, and resurrection.
No, where is this doucment you keep speaking of?
http://www.daniweb.com/techtalkforums/thread74236-2.html
Page 2.
oh ok, i guess i'll read that 7 page monster
Lol, I know it is quite long.
We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.