Something someone submitted to my website:

"I've noticed recently that most practising christians know almost nothing about the technicalities of their religion. For instance: the Bible never, ever says that Jehovah is all-powerful or even the only god in existence, merely that you shouldn't worship other ones instead. And that of all the names most people would give for the Devil, only Azazel the least well known (to the point of obscurity) could actually be considered a malign being from what is given in the bible. Satan is in fact an Angel who's job is to report the indescretions of mankind to Jehovah (incidentally implying he isn't all-powerful), and Lucifer is never, ever mentioned in any biblical text. There's a good reason for this, it's the name of a Roman god. But ask any christian and I bet they'll give you one of the above names.

And of course, the word Hell is never mentioned since that too was stolen. And there are rather more than 10 commandments, several hundred in fact, especially if you include the repititions which are scarily common.

Oh and there are absolutely NO eye-witness accounts of any event in Jesus' life. None. Everything that was written about him was at least 60 years later, which was about 3 generations back then.



Random ranting. At least I posted something."

So, is it true?

quote:Originally posted by Haddock:

...and Lucifer is never, ever mentioned in any biblical text. There's a good reason for this, it's the name of a Roman god.

Close.

I'm fairly certain the name Lucifer is mentioned in Isaiah 14:12. The kids at home with their copies of the King James will find this:

quote:12. How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

13. For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:

14. I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.

15. Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

This single passage is the entire basis for the concept of "Lucifer" as the Devil in the Christian bible. The message of somebody (whoever "Lucifer" may be) aspiring to surpass or at the very least pass himself off as equal to god is clear. What is not clear, however, is exactly who this Lucifer person is. Various rabbinic bickerings hold the popular notion that Lucifer is the Devil (or more correctly, the Satan), originally one of the angels of heaven who pissed off god and got cast into hell.

However, this isn't supported by any literature that I know of.

Historical scholars believe that the passage refers not to any supernatural entity but merely a Roman king by that or a similar name who... well, pissed off gog and got cast into hell.

You can take your pick. But it's all the supporting literature out of the canon that we've got.

You're correct in your statement that most of what the modern world imagines when they think of hell and the Devil/Satan is primarly made up after the fact, either through word of mouth and preachings or non-canonical literature (like Dante's Inferno, among oodles of others).

quote:Satan is in fact an Angel who's job is to report the indescretions of mankind to Jehovah (incidentally implying he isn't all-powerful),

Partially correct.

Satan is a term to mean against God, or disagreeing with God. There is an angel that plays "devils advocate" as it were with God and is thus satan.

quote:and Lucifer is never, ever mentioned in any biblical text. There's a good reason for this, it's the name of a Roman god. But ask any christian and I bet they'll give you one of the above names.

Incorrect. Lucifer is mentioned in isaiah 14. Although most christians don't seem to have read the chapter as we discover Lucifer is the nickname of an evil king and not a supernatural being or angel.

The famed fall of the angel lucifer from heaven to hell is not biblical.

quote:Originally posted by Haddock:

Oh and there are absolutely NO eye-witness accounts of any event in Jesus' life. None. Everything that was written about him was at least 60 years later, which was about 3 generations back then.

John was the caretaker of Mary and one of the twelve apostles. Matthew was an apostle. Mark was a close follower of Jesus and is present throughout the Gospels.

quote:Originally posted by King_Cotton:

John was the caretaker of Mary and one of the twelve apostles. Matthew was an apostle. Mark was a close follower of Jesus and is present throughout the Gospels.

I think he was refering to the new testament being written which was infact generations later.

quote:Originally posted by Aft3r ImaGe:

I think he was refering to the new testament being written which was infact generations later.

Those are three of the gospelwriters. They were first-generation Christians. http://www.totse.com/bbs/rolleyes.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/rolleyes.gif)

I can't find a bit of truth in any of it.

quote:Originally posted by Haddock:

Something someone submitted to my website:

"I've noticed recently that most practising christians know almost nothing about the technicalities of their religion.

I would not say "most" but a small minority do not know the technicalities of Christianity but, not knowing every single detail is not a condition of salvation nor faith.

quote:

For instance: the Bible never, ever says that Jehovah is all-powerful or even the only god in existence, merely that you shouldn't worship other ones instead.

Incorrect, Rev. 1:8 I am the Alpha and the Omega." says the Lord God, "who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty"

WHat is meant by other gods is idol worship not that there are other Gods but other things that compete with God.

"There you will worship man-made gods of wood and stone, which cannot see or hear or eat or smell. 29 But if from there you seek the LORD your God, you will find him if you look for him with all your heart and with all your soul." Deuteronomy 4:28-29 (read the entire chapter for a better understanding)

quote:

And that of all the names most people would give for the Devil, only Azazel the least well known (to the point of obscurity) could actually be considered a malign being from what is given in the bible.

This isn't very clear but there are many names given to the devil throughout the bible.

quote:

Satan is in fact an Angel who's job is to report the indescretions of mankind to Jehovah (incidentally implying he isn't all-powerful), and Lucifer is never, ever mentioned in any biblical text.

I have no idea where this is in the bible, I can't find anywhere that says the devil is working for God but everything says that the devil is working against God. Satan is in fact a fallen angel but stands as an enemy to God and to those who are His. The bible does say he accuses the breatheren night and day but nothing about being a spy for God.

"How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!"Isaiah 14:12 KJV

quote:

There's a good reason for this, it's the name of a Roman god. But ask any christian and I bet they'll give you one of the above names.

Didn't the Roman's have many gods? Jupiter, Juno, Mars, Venus, Minerva, Neptune, Ceres, Vulcan, Diana, Bacchus, Mercury, vesta...but no Lucifer.

quote:

And of course, the word Hell is never mentioned since that too was stolen.

Proverbs 9:18 But he knoweth not that the dead are there; and that her guests are in the depths of hell.

Proverbs 23:14 Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell.

Isaiah 5:14Therefore hell hath enlarged herself, and opened her mouth without measure: and their glory, and their multitude, and their pomp, and he that rejoiceth, shall descend into it.

Just to name a few....

quote:

And there are rather more than 10 commandments, several hundred in fact, especially if you include the repititions which are scarily common.

Almost true. The first of the 10 commandments were treated seperatly from the rest as they lay down the morale laws of God. They were the first 10 that were written on the tablets. It is true that God gave more then the first 10 commandments afterwards but they were referred to as laws and statutes as well. Some consider them to be the civil and ceremonial laws for the Jews.

quote:

Oh and there are absolutely NO eye-witness accounts of any event in Jesus' life. None. Everything that was written about him was at least 60 years later, which was about 3 generations back then.

It is plain to see that Jesus called the 12 disciples to follow Him. Matthew was a tax collector and was a discple of Jesus. It is the first hand gospel account -

Mark was not a disicple but accompanied Paul on his first missionary trip. This doesn't say that Mark was not a first hand witness, it just says he wrote it 30 years after the fact. Luke was a doctor who researched the events by having access to the discples. He traveled with Paul and recorded the accounts of the disciples. Luke 1:1-4 tells us his testimony of his research.

John is an apostle and is an eyewitness to the miracles performed by Jesus.

quote:

Random ranting. At least I posted something."

So, is it true?

No, it is not.

The traditional Church has portrayed the authors as the apostles Mark, Luke, Matthew, & John, but scholars know from critical textural research that there simply occurs no evidence that the gospel authors could have served as the apostles described in the Gospel stories. Yet even today, we hear priests and ministers describing these authors as the actual disciples of Christ. Many Bibles still continue to label the stories as "The Gospel according to St. Matthew," "St. Mark," "St. Luke," St. John." No apostle would have announced his own sainthood before the Church's establishment of sainthood. But one need not refer to scholars to determine the lack of evidence for authorship. As an experiment, imagine the Gospels without their titles. See if you can find out from the texts who wrote them; try to find their names.

Even if the texts supported the notion that the apostles wrote them, consider that the average life span of humans in the first century came to around 30, and very few people lived to 70. If the apostles births occured at about the same time as the alleged Jesus, and wrote their gospels in their old age, that would put Mark at least 70 years old, and John at over 110.

quote:Originally posted by King_Cotton:

Those are three of the gospelwriters. They were first-generation Christians. http://www.totse.com/bbs/rolleyes.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/rolleyes.gif)

Actual they were 60 years later, written by the apostles of the apostles, because, well the apostles probably could not write.

quote:I have no idea where this is in the bible, I can't find anywhere that says the devil is working for God but everything says that the devil is working against God.

Read Job

You will see that when God calls his angels together satan comes with them and is part of Gods court. However unlike the other angels he seeks out the sins of people and the hypocritical actions.

quote:"How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!"Isaiah 14:12 KJV

I said earlier: "Although most christians don't seem to have read the chapter as we discover Lucifer is the nickname of an evil king and not a supernatural being or angel."

maybe read the entire chapter and not just single verses. In context we see that Lucifer was a king who wanted to become so powerful he would ascend to heaven and take the throne, but God cut him down from this dream and destroyed him.

According to some of the New Testament, some of the Old Testament is bogus.

What's more, there are at least twenty other gospels besides the ones that made the cut, so to speak.

Trying to make sense of the whole mess is a waste of time.

The original point--that Christians tend to be ignorant--is fairly obvious, I should think.

quote:Originally posted by ArmsMerchant:

According to some of the New Testament, some of the Old Testament is bogus.

What's more, there are at least twenty other gospels besides the ones that made the cut, so to speak.

Trying to make sense of the whole mess is a waste of time.

The original point--that Christians tend to be ignorant--is fairly obvious, I should think.

Decidedly true.

quote:Originally posted by Beta69:

I said earlier: "Although most christians don't seem to have read the chapter as we discover Lucifer is the nickname of an evil king and not a supernatural being or angel."

maybe read the entire chapter and not just single verses. In context we see that Lucifer was a king who wanted to become so powerful he would ascend to heaven and take the throne, but God cut him down from this dream and destroyed him.

This doesn't very well fit in your translation -

"12How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!"



How is it then a human king will fall from heaven?

"how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! "

An exclamation that matches the account of Revelation 12-

7And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, 8And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. 9And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. "

and

12Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.

Also, in the Message bible - Revelation 2:4-5

4"But you walked away from your first love--why? What's going on with you, anyway? 5Do you have any idea how far you've fallen? A Lucifer fall!"

It is a question asked so that an answer can be given. "A Lucifer fall" is the standard God uses for a wayward people in this case.

It is part of a letter written for the Church of the Ephesus. In context it is comparing the church of Ephesus to the fall of Satan who is Lucifer. As Lucifer is the father of sin and death so he is also the measure God often uses against people and nations. Which is what He has done in Isaiah 14 to the people of Babylon. He has not saying the King is Lucifer but that they have fallen like Lucifer.



[This message has been edited by Interest (edited 05-03-2006).]

quote:Read Job

You will see that when God calls his angels together satan comes with them and is part of Gods court. However unlike the other angels he seeks out the sins of people and the hypocritical actions.

You have also misunderstood the scripture here as well -

I can only ask for the actual scripture that you are referencing. As I'm assuming it is Job 1:6-12 " 6 One day the angels came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came with them. 7 The LORD said to Satan, "Where have you come from?"

Satan answered the LORD, "From roaming through the earth and going back and forth in it." 8 Then the LORD said to Satan, "Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one on earth like him; he is blameless and upright, a man who fears God and shuns evil." 9 "Does Job fear God for nothing?" Satan replied. 10 "Have you not put a hedge around him and his household and everything he has? You have blessed the work of his hands, so that his flocks and herds are spread throughout the land. 11 But stretch out your hand and strike everything he has, and he will surely curse you to your face." 12 The LORD said to Satan, "Very well, then, everything he has is in your hands, but on the man himself do not lay a finger."

Then Satan went out from the presence of the LORD."



Overall the story is God made an agreement withe devil to test the faith of Job and handed Job over to Satan to do whatever it is he can to shake Job's faith short of death.

I'm not sure the Devil was an invited member of God's court of angels as you say but, more so an univited guest as it appears.

quote:However unlike the other angels he seeks out the sins of people and the hypocritical actions. Where do you get this from and what exactly are you saying as it isn't clear? Are you getting it from this verse?

Rev 12:10 "For the accuser of our brothers, who accuses them before our God day and night, has been hurled down. "





[This message has been edited by Interest (edited 05-03-2006).]

IF you actually read isaiah you might find,

"Isa 14:4

That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say, How hath the oppressor ceased! the golden city ceased!"

"Isa 14:16

They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, [and] consider thee, [saying, Is] this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;"

The reference to Lucifer in rev 2:5 doesn't exist in the bible, but was added in the message version. Isa 14 is the only biblical reference to "Lucifer."

quote:Originally posted by Beta69:

IF you actually read isaiah you might find,

"Isa 14:4

That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say, How hath the oppressor ceased! the golden city ceased!"

"Isa 14:16

They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, [and] consider thee, [saying, Is] this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;"

The reference to Lucifer in rev 2:5 doesn't exist in the bible, but was added in the message version. Isa 14 is the only biblical reference to "Lucifer."

I'm not sure you undestand what you presented here as it agrees with what I said - look at how I concluded the post:

"In context it is comparing the church of Ephesus to the fall of Satan who is Lucifer. As Lucifer is the father of sin and death so he is also the measure God often uses against people and nations. Which is what He has done in Isaiah 14 to the people of Babylon. He has not saying the King is Lucifer but that they have fallen like Lucifer."

look again -

"[That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say, How hath the oppressor ceased! the golden city ceased!"

Like I said - he was comparing the people of Babylon to the fall of Lucifer as the "proverb" is "the fall of Lucifer". Again, he wasn't calling the King of Babylon Lucifer. in context, the word Lucifer is used as a measure against the people. I don't know what else to say on the matter.

"Isa 14:16

They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, [and] consider thee, [saying, Is] this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;"

There is a dual comparison going on throughout Isaiah. Babylon was a great kingdom and the king of Babylon had great power over the world. The verse does reference "man" but you are making the mistake of seeing the word "lucifer" and "man" and concluding they are one in the same. When in fact in context the the fall of the king of Babylon is being compared to the fall of Lucifer.

Again, I'm not sure what else to say on the matter.

[This message has been edited by Interest (edited 05-05-2006).]

quote:And there are rather more than 10 commandments, several hundred in fact, especially if you include the repititions which are scarily common.

This is true, the ten Mitzvot are only a part of 613 mitzvot that are observed by Jews, you can find out more here: http ://en.wiki pedia.org/ wiki/613_M itzvot (http: //en.wikip edia.org/w iki/613_Mi tzvot)

[This message has been edited by Sharule (edited 05-05-2006).]

The "Ten Commandments" are typically taken as categories of commandments. This is a result of the fact that the ten are not refered to as "commandments" or mitzvah (see http://jewfaq.org/10.htm for further explanation).

As for the satan thing, I could go into it but it was originally a Zoroastrian idea (duality) that was adopted after the Babylonian exile. Therefore, it is probably a false concept added because of the fact that most people couldn't accept a G-d composed of all good and all evil. It just made things easier, especially after being exposed to those ideas for such a long period.

The gospels of John and Matthew are probably eyewitness accounts (though most likely exagerated)... however those of Mark and Luke clearly are not. Furthermore anything written by Paul should be discarded as it is worthless and has driven billions of christians away from the originally intended path. Also, stop using revelations as a source... it was written long after the death of John and most likely was used as a piece of revolutionary fiction.

Seriously though, Christianity was intended to be a Messianic sect of Judaism... men like Paul openly stating that you can disobey the 613 Mitzvah is simply ludicrious. G-d himself said that the commandments can neither be added to nor taken away from...

A couple of points.



quote:Those are three of the gospelwriters. They were first-generation Christians.

Not quite. At least, books were written in their names. The earliest copy of any of those books we have is from about 170 AD, the next earliest in the 200's, and the other two in the 300's. They could have actually been written at any point up until then.



quote:WHat is meant by other gods is idol worship not that there are other Gods but other things that compete with God.

"There you will worship man-made gods of wood and stone, which cannot see or hear or eat or smell. 29 But if from there you seek the LORD your God, you will find him if you look for him with all your heart and with all your soul." Deuteronomy 4:28-29 (read the entire chapter for a better understanding)

Except Judeaism was originally polytheistic. All that "no other Gods" is most likely a carryover from that. And I may be wrong on this, but I think in Leviticus (whichever details the genocide Moses oversaw after Egypt), God mentions the other gods of neighboring tribes.

quote:Originally posted by Haddock:

Something someone submitted to my website:

"I've noticed recently that most practising christians know almost nothing about the technicalities of their religion. For instance: the Bible never, ever says that Jehovah is all-powerful or even the only god in existence, merely that you shouldn't worship other ones instead. And that of all the names most people would give for the Devil, only Azazel the least well known (to the point of obscurity) could actually be considered a malign being from what is given in the bible. Satan is in fact an Angel who's job is to report the indescretions of mankind to Jehovah (incidentally implying he isn't all-powerful), and Lucifer is never, ever mentioned in any biblical text. There's a good reason for this, it's the name of a Roman god. But ask any christian and I bet they'll give you one of the above names.

And of course, the word Hell is never mentioned since that too was stolen. And there are rather more than 10 commandments, several hundred in fact, especially if you include the repititions which are scarily common.

Oh and there are absolutely NO eye-witness accounts of any event in Jesus' life. None. Everything that was written about him was at least 60 years later, which was about 3 generations back then.



Random ranting. At least I posted something."

So, is it true?

What was your question?



Anyways,

i think if you get too involved in specific aspects of the bible you'll never get a concluding point.

For example you talked about Jehovah and multiple Gods. The Bible says there is one God and he is Our Lord. However there is mention of many gods who appear to be reverent but inferior. There are clearly commandments right through out the Bible, there is need for judgement on ones own situation surely?

At the beginning of each scripture it clearly says

The Gospel According To...

this would mean that someone sat down and wrote it for you and me as a MESSAGE

there is oblviously going to be contradictions on subject matter and perspective on events.

Interest, your fucking mad

you don't even make any sense.

quote:Originally posted by kenwih:

you don't even make any sense.

me?

quote:Originally posted by Interest:

Didn't the Roman's have many gods? Jupiter, Juno, Mars, Venus, Minerva, Neptune, Ceres, Vulcan, Diana, Bacchus, Mercury, vesta...but no Lucifer.

Hey! Look at this list of minor Roman gods (http://www.unrv.com/culture/minor-roman-god-list.php). Lucifer is the god of the morning star.

Edit: Oh and...

quote:Originally posted by Interest:

No, it is not.



You're mother wasn't very true in bed last night. Ha! What now?

[This message has been edited by niggersexual (edited 05-06-2006).]

i think i have the answer to all of these statements and questions, the FACT is that despite what we've been taught and led to believe with blind faith is that the word of god is a written text that was actually created by man and not god directly. If the bible is the word of god and "he" is in fact infallible then why are there so many contradictions and inconsistencies, this is because the stone of our faith was written hundreds of years ago by an imperfect being...MAN...so as delightful as it is to argue about faith and myths, it doesn't make sense to use a source that is for lack of a better word...irrelevant

Beside's the idea of a Religion using something from another religion is nothing new(Lucifer being a roman god), just ask the Hindus,Pagans,Wiccans,Buddhists, and pretty much every single other religion that has existed and they'll tell you how most of christianity is either stolen or adapted in the sake of progress

quote:Originally posted by Original_Pranksta89:

i think i have the answer to all of these statements and questions, the FACT is that despite what we've been taught and led to believe with blind faith is that the word of god is a written text that was actually created by man and not god directly. If the bible is the word of god and "he" is in fact infallible then why are there so many contradictions and inconsistencies, this is because the stone of our faith was written hundreds of years ago by an imperfect being...MAN...so as delightful as it is to argue about faith and myths, it doesn't make sense to use a source that is for lack of a better word...irrelevant

Obviously it is not irrelevant since it is the source of all this confusion and debate. What is better, to keep things which would benefit others to yourself or to share them?

If someone has first hand knowledge of the existence of God then it would be better for them to share it with others. Hence the scriptures. You can freely accept it or reject but to marginalize it and destroy it is another.

You claim there are contradictions and inconsistancies throughout the bible but you haven't presented anything in particular.

If you believe there is a contradiction then please present it. Maybe somebody here who has knowledge of these things can help you understand it.

quote:Originally posted by Lou Reed:



Interest, your fucking mad

(although I was wondering if you could be more specific as to why you said this I'll at least bable on some more about spirituality)

Have you ever ventured into the deepest parts of your soul and understand the complexity of a single thought? Have you ever looked at your hand and realize you exist? I stair down my nose at my keyboard and don't even understand why it is I even put these words on the screen. I mean, why do I even care? Why do I even advocate my experience?



Sometimes I think it takes a little insanity to understand the bible and spirituality.

Sometimes I think studying the stories of the bible can twist ones mind to madness. I've seen a few people lose their minds because of being unable to understand the scriptures. It's a very real and desperate thing - trying to understand the mind of God that is.

The greatest intellectual among us will never understand the simplest of things of God. The ever elusive and hidden God among us will never reveal Himself to those who look to Him with temporal eyes.

I like the movie Matrix for only one reason - it stands as the best allagory to spirituality I have ever seen. We are plugged into a world that is designed as a great void to keep us seperate from God.

At some point, we all are aware of another level to our being. It is an underlying thing within us that drives us and directs our ways. None of it can be seen nor heard or known in the temporal world. It only manifests itself through our actions and words.

So it is to understand what is going on deep within us that leads us to understand the hidden things of this world. Until we find our way through our own conflicted existence and find peace within the question of the purpose of life will we even have the stillness of heart and humblness to hear the very whisper of God's voice on our hearts.

Madness my friend is just another perspective on life.

I'm feeling delightfully evil tonight. http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif)

quote:Originally posted by Interest:

Have you ever ventured into the deepest parts of your soul and understand the complexity of a single thought? Have you ever looked at your hand and realize you exist? I stair down my nose at my keyboard and don't even understand why it is I even put these words on the screen. I mean, why do I even care? Why do I even advocate my experience?

"Soul"? What is this "soul"? What are the parts of my "soul" and how do I venture into the "deepest parts"?

The complexity of a single thought? 'Tis really not that complex at all. "I am hungry; I am tired; Interest is crazy." What about the simplicity of the fact that we can't think 2 thoughts at the exact same time (lest we possess two minds, and in turn, be two people http://www.totse.com/bbs/eek.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/eek.gif) )?

You understand perfectly why you put those words on your screen. You put them there to justify your perspective. You justify your perspective because it was challenged, and we are defined by compilations of our various perspectives. So a challenge to your perspective is a challenge to you, and we often feel inclined to defend ourselves should we feel we have the ability.

quote:Sometimes I think it takes a little insanity to understand the bible and spirituality.

QFT.

quote:Sometimes I think studying the stories of the bible can twist ones mind to madness. I've seen a few people lose their minds because of being unable to understand the scriptures. It's a very real and desperate thing - trying to understand the mind of God that is.

Studying the bible can drive people mad when they try to rationalize it while maintaining logic and reason. Haha. It can quite easily be rationalized illogically (as can the Flying Spaghetti Monster), but logically it is impossible.

It's a "desperate thing" because...people don't want to die! They have a book telling them "you will live forever" (speaking in the terms of their conciousness), and they accept it and say "I will live forever". They realize that if the book is lying, they won't really live forever, and some people don't like to face that reality. So they have this ficticious fountain of eternal life they cling to and try to rationalize even though there is no physical evidence that eternal life exists. It's wishful thinking.

quote:The greatest intellectual among us will never understand the simplest of things of God. The ever elusive and hidden God among us will never reveal Himself to those who look to Him with temporal eyes.

I have some bad news: we only possess 'temporal eyes'. That dumb bastard of a god, if he really wants people to know him, needs to quick jacking off in heaven and show himself. He says "every knee will bow, every mouth will confess". I doubt it considering how shy he is. Why won't he rain mana down from the skies on poor starving african orphans like he did for the hebrews when they wandered the desert? Because he "works in mysterious ways"? Or is it...because he doesn't exist?

quote:I like the movie Matrix for only one reason - it stands as the best allagory to spirituality I have ever seen. We are plugged into a world that is designed as a great void to keep us seperate from God.

OMG teh Matricks it real now?! OMG! http://www.totse.com/bbs/eek.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/eek.gif)

quote:At some point, we all are aware of another level to our being. It is an underlying thing within us that drives us and directs our ways. None of it can be seen nor heard or known in the temporal world. It only manifests itself through our actions and words.

Really? What's this other level like? It drives us and directs us? What drives and directs it?

Furthermore, you need to realize, Interest, that speaking of things "unknown to the temporal world" are non-sensory. Non-sensory = nonsense. Superstition. Fantasy. Delusion. Nonsense.

quote:So it is to understand what is going on deep within us that leads us to understand the hidden things of this world. Until we find our way through our own conflicted existence and find peace within the question of the purpose of life will we even have the stillness of heart and humblness to hear the very whisper of God's voice on our hearts.

Madness my friend is just another perspective on life.

Madness is a perspective of life...a distorted perspective.

Your existence is only conflicted if you make it conflicted yourself, on your own accord. My existence doesn't stand in conflict.

The purpose of personal life is easy. To live.

The purpose of the comsos, of all life? To exist. If it didn't exist, there would be nothing.

While we're at it, why not wonder the purpose of "god"? Guess what...he (if he existed) would have the same 'purpose' as the universe itself, just to exist.

That's it.

And one more fun question: what does the whisper of god sound like? Does he have an accent of sorts? And why whisper in your heart? Why not in your ear?

Ok. I'm done. http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

[This message has been edited by Elephantitis Man (edited 05-07-2006).]

Using the bible to make an enlightened descision about the reality of god is like having Bush tell us why we're at war right now, it doesn't make sense and most of it's just handfed bullshit

quote:Originally posted by Interest:

Obviously it is not irrelevant since it is the source of all this confusion and debate. What is better, to keep things which would benefit others to yourself or to share them?

If someone has first hand knowledge of the existence of God then it would be better for them to share it with others. Hence the scriptures. You can freely accept it or reject but to marginalize it and destroy it is another.

You claim there are contradictions and inconsistancies throughout the bible but you haven't presented anything in particular.

If you believe there is a contradiction then please present it. Maybe somebody here who has knowledge of these things can help you understand it.

The benefits of the bible are undoubtedly very great and yet think of the persecution and horror that it has caused: Witch Trials,The Crusades,La Purga,Gay Bashing(I won't lie im just throwing this in,i don't really care about the gays)and of course the support that the church had towards the slave trade. Also do we share our beliefs or bury them in the foreheads of others like an axe. As for the contradictions i believe there is a list of them on this very site

quote:Originally posted by Original_Pranksta89:

The benefits of the bible are undoubtedly very great and yet think of the persecution and horror that it has caused: Witch Trials,The Crusades,La Purga,Gay Bashing(I won't lie im just throwing this in,i don't really care about the gays)and of course the support that the church had towards the slave trade. Also do we share our beliefs or bury them in the foreheads of others like an axe. As for the contradictions i believe there is a list of them on this very site

WHat you are talking about is the error caused by spiritual blindness. Some people claim to know but their actions testify against them. There are plenty of evils done in the name of religion I do not deny it. But, I do deny any of it is done to advance the "kingdom of God"

All I see is man forging ahead in destruction for the purpose of his own ideals and not the ideals of God.

If you know God then you know He advances His kingdom by love. Which is patient, kind, forgiving, merciful, etc. Not a single sword can be raised to change the heart and mind of man.

Man and his ideals are to blame for all the atrocity that you see. Because it is done under the name of "religion" means nothing. It just helps man justify his own selfish desires.

I just want to talk about the true God and His true believers. Not one will ever come at you with a sword demanding you follow His way unless it is like the one that is swinging at you now.

You have to understand that there is a spiritual war being waged behind our very eyes every second of the day. The military calls this, "winning of hearts and minds".

The volley's are fired every second of the day between truth and lies, fact and fiction and right and wrong in our hearts and minds. It is the war of information which by it's very nature creates our evnironments and understanding of the world around us.

If all you have is false information so you will only be mislead. Somewhere among it all is a beacon of truth and it is wise for us to chase after it.