Re: Each generation moves further and further from religion
Adonis
"monkfish" <monkfish@nowhere> wrote in message
news:lLKdnX_if6-cl7LV...@ptd.net...
> Thom Madura wrote:
>
>> monkfish wrote:
>>> santosh wrote:
>>>
>>>> monkfish wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Toon wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 07 May 2008 11:50:25 -0400, monkfish <monkfish@nowhere>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thom Madura wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> monkfish wrote:
>>>>>>>>> You are not reading me carefully enough.
>>>>>>>>> Just forget about all the archaic facts and rules
>>>>>>>>> and figure out the policies recommended by God.
>>>>>>>>> You are recommended to love your neighbor
>>>>>>>>> and even love your enemies.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There is no need to be obsessed
>>>>>>>>> with the old misunderstandings of such clear policies.
>>>>>>>>> Just try to apply them properly now.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What YOU are saying is that the bible is NOT the perfect inspired
>>>>>>>> words of god - I agree - thank you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Let's just put it this way.
>>>>>>> Without God, there would be no Bible.
>>>>>>> Without the Bible, we would not know God.
>>>>>> Nonsense. Many people knew god before there was a bible. Many other
>>>>>> religions exist without the bible. There'd be a whole lot less
>>>>>> people without various books (Bible, Torah, Koran) knowing god, but
>>>>>> it'd
>>>>>> still happen. Still spread. Slowly.
>>>>>
>>>>> With 'God' we are talking about the Christian God.
>>>> There can only be one god. Multiple gods are merely man's usual
>>>> propensity to be divisive.
>>>
>>>
>>> I sure hope that is the case.
>>
>> At lest you admit you cannot prove it
>>
>>> Still we need to talk about Jesus Christ sooner or later.
>>
>> Meaning that the Christ is not god obviously.
>>
>>
>> Off topic - His name was not Jesus Christ. The word Christ is a title -
>> meaning the annointed one. Correctly said in our language - he would be
>> called - Jesus - the Christ. His name was Yashua (Or Yeshua - both
>> spellings are good - which means son of Yahweh) of Nazareth - there
>> being no last names in the Era he supposedly lived.
>>
>>
>>> Anyhow, let's do some basic theology first.
>>>
>>> What language does your god speak?
>>
>>
>> What proof do you have that your god speaks?
>
>
> People heard Him.
> Are you calling them liars?
What people? Bakker? President Bush? Bin Ladden? David Koresh? Herbert W
Armstrong? The pope? Jim Jones? Margaret McDonald? Yes.
> People talk to Him.
> Are you calling them crazy?
>
Maybe not crazy, but there are some issues there. Talking to ones self does not
always make you crazy.
> Do you listen to your conscience?
>
>
> --
> monkfish
> * Kindly note that the followup-to header is
> set to alt.christnet.theology.
Adonis
"monkfish" <monkfish@nowhere> wrote in message
>> hundred myself. Even Christianity has recognized its gods' son as a god
>> - plus a dove and a ghost and a spirit as well. Since they are not of
>> the same mind (Numerous quotes in the Christian Bible prove this), they
>> are separate of thought - which means they are not ONE.
>>
>> WE have proof of the existence of lots of gods - through their remains
>> in Egypt and Central and South America-= so even you cannot question
>> their existence.
>
>
> We have many pictures of gods.
> That does not mean there are many gods.
>
Yes, there are more gods than you can shake a stick at.
> You are presuming that God is
> something out there in time forever.
Well; you do say that "god is prior to existence".
> If you understand what it means
> for God to be prior to existence,
See? You said it again.
> you would realize that God does not have to exist
> in any mode fathomable by human beings
> except when He reveals Himself to us at His pleasure.
When would his pleasure be?
> On those occasions, yes, God has to exist in a mode
> comprehensible to that particular human being(s)
> getting the revelation.
>
So god is a shape shifter?
> Do you believe in the historicity of Jesus Christ?
The only "historical" evidence of jesus is the bible, so no.
monkfish
Do you ever listen to your conscience?
--
monkfish
* The followup-to header is set to alt.christnet.theology.
** alt.atheism is removed from the groups header.
monkfish
> "monkfish" <monkfish@nowhere> wrote in message
>
>> Do you believe in the historicity of Jesus Christ?
>
> The only "historical" evidence of jesus is the bible, so no.
[quote]
Most scholars in the fields of biblical studies and history agree that Jesus
was a Jewish teacher from Galilee who was regarded as a healer, was
baptized by John the Baptist, was accused of sedition against the Roman
Empire, and on the orders of Roman Governor Pontius Pilate was sentenced to
death by crucifixion.
[/quote]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
So, you don't trust scholars.
Do you trust scientists?
How about yourself;
do you trust yourself?
What makes you so sure that
you would know what is true or not?
Adonis
"monkfish" <monkfish@nowhere> wrote in message
> Adonis wrote:
>
>> "monkfish" <monkfish@nowhere> wrote in message
>>
>>> Do you believe in the historicity of Jesus Christ?
>>
>> The only "historical" evidence of jesus is the bible, so no.
>
>
> [quote]
> Most scholars in the fields of biblical studies and history agree that Jesus
> was a Jewish teacher from Galilee who was regarded as a healer, was
> baptized by John the Baptist, was accused of sedition against the Roman
> Empire, and on the orders of Roman Governor Pontius Pilate was sentenced to
> death by crucifixion.
> [/quote]
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
>
Being that scholars in the biblical field are being taught by people believing
in the history of jesus, it's no wonder.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
"Scholarly opinions on the historicity of the New Testament accounts are
diverse. At the extremes, they range from the view that they are inerrant
descriptions of the life of Jesus,[7] to the view that they provide no
historical information about his life.[8] As with all historical sources,
scholars ask: to what extent did the authors' motivations shape the texts, what
sources were available to them, how soon after the events described did they
write, and whether or not these factors lead to inaccuracies such as
exaggerations or inventions."
By the way the wikipedia is not recognized in the academic world as a resource
that can be used for research papers.
monkfish
I find it usually reliable enough.
Feel free to find other reliable sources.
Even Bishop Spong appears to believe
in the historical Jesus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Shelby_Spong
Pastor Frank
> Adonis wrote:
>>
>> Maybe not crazy, but there are some issues there. Talking to ones self
>> does not always make you crazy.
>>
>>> Do you listen to your conscience?
>
> Do you ever listen to your conscience?
>
listen to your conscience.
thow...@gmail.com
Is that so Frank? So our conscience is a two way communication device?
Can we use it like a cell phone? Does your conscience ever bother you
when you degrade people you rant at?
Pastor Frank
news:d5d98a67-d247-47d9...@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com ...a
However it is you who rants at Christians who praise their God in our
Christian news groups.
Adions
"Pastor Frank" <P...@christfirst.edu> wrote in message
news:700b0$483156fd$d1d89a68$10...@PRIMUS.CA...
remarks, however I have not belittled you, or ranted at you. I have called you
out on what I would call a glaring mistake, but I have not ranted at you.
Pastor Frank
news:O6mdnddmotk43q_V...@comcast.com...
Christian groups to a trash and flame the friends of God. There is no
atheist group in the header.
Thom Madura
There need be no atheist group in the header. The newsgroups are open to
all - and discussion of the validity of Mythology include both sides -
those that believe and those that do not - and those in between.
If you want a private conversation supporting your religion where there
is no Dissent - try a Sunday School - where the kids dare not question
the teachers.
Each generation moves further and further from god (The stated topic
above) is simple to understand. AS science progresses - it exposes more
and more of the support material for religion to be either downright
wrong (Even the Roman Catholic Church has recognized Evolution as the
origin of the species - and they lead the majority of Christians) - or
questionable enough as to lack foundation.
The progress of science is also accompanied by the progress of Education
- there is simply a lack of stupid uneducated people who will allow
themselves to be herded into a direction without questions. The reason
why religion still plays a part in much of the third world is that
education there has not yet caught up. It is funny that much of the
undoing of religion - higher education - was through Catholic and
Christian educational institutions.
THe problem with having a church that is only expanding in the third
world and has been mortally wounded by scandal in its bread basket is
lack of funds combined with lack of priests and ministers.
monkfish
I am still waiting for you
to prove that your love exists.